• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

P'town police investigate missing firearm

Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
3,271
Likes
2,948
Location
SE Mass
Well, I must say that you have completely misread my attitude completely. I have never had an anti-LEO bone in my body. I know the job well, the good times and the bad. Frankly, if you want to have me banned, take it up with the site owners. In the meantime, I suggest that you go back over my posts and look at them carefully. I have not disparaged anyone. I asked some questions which were ultimately answered by Halfcocked. His answer affirmed one of the two possibilities I surmised. At worst, the only thing you can say about my posts is that I did state that a LEO should be held to a higher standard. I stand behind that statement, just as we expect a higher standard medically from a doctor or a higher legal standard from a lawyer. If you want to debate that point, fine. We can agree to disagree, but please don't accuse me of executing a personal attack here. Thanks to Halfcocked for ultimately setting the record straight.
You are new to the forum. You have repeatedly made such unjustified personal attacks with no justification whatsoever. If you want to stick around, stop it. And in the meantime, stop grinding your anti-cop axe. It's getting tiresome (and I'm not even a cop).
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
3,271
Likes
2,948
Location
SE Mass
GSG, you make some good points here. I, too, believe the storage laws in the Commonwealth are a sham meant more for tripping up decent folks than truly being about safety. It would probably be more helpful if the PD's and the police unions would quietly work to change or eliminate these laws, as I don't think the pols will listen to the NRA, GOAL, etc.

Hey, I can remember growing up in the 50's and 60's. My father was a Boston cop and his gun belt always sat on top of the dresser when he was home. And God help anyone who even went near it. You'd get the belt alright. A couple of whacks with it maybe. I guess times are different now.

I disagree with your opinion that it does no good to even talk about incidents like this. On the contrary, I think lessons can be learned by others for the future.








People in this very thread have made remarks about people getting guns stolen that weren't all over the news and who weren't charged for the "crime."



In my post, I wasn't trying to be unkind. Tone can be hard to convey in writing, I'm sorry if you were offended.

My point is that a detailed explanation of how his gun was stolen isn't going to help anyone in this situation.

A gun is simply property, no different than anything else (or shouldn't be seen that way, but I digress). If someone breaks into my house and steals my flatscreen TV, I don't want anyone knowing how the security of my home was successfully violated. That's all.
 

GSG

Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
5,825
Likes
557
GSG, you make some good points here. I, too, believe the storage laws in the Commonwealth are a sham meant more for tripping up decent folks than truly being about safety. It would probably be more helpful if the PD's and the police unions would quietly work to change or eliminate these laws, as I don't think the pols will listen to the NRA, GOAL, etc.

Hey, I can remember growing up in the 50's and 60's. My father was a Boston cop and his gun belt always sat on top of the dresser when he was home. And God help anyone who even went near it. You'd get the belt alright. A couple of whacks with it maybe. I guess times are different now.

I disagree with your opinion that it does no good to even talk about incidents like this. On the contrary, I think lessons can be learned by others for the future.

I'm not suggesting that we don't talk about them. The good thing about discussing things like this is we get to learn from other's mistakes or other's bad situations that they've been through, even if they didn't make a mistake.

I think someone anonymously saying what took place in a situation is a great way to learn, but if this cop were to come on here and get into details, or to do so on the news, I think he'd be making a big mistake. Once that info's out, it's out, and especially where he was the victim of a crime once, he doesn't want to fall victim to the same thing twice.
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
3,271
Likes
2,948
Location
SE Mass
I'm sorry if my questions appeared designed to extract that level of detail because they were not. It is occasionally difficult to have these types of conversations via keyboard. I think it is very important that the general details concerning this being perpetrated by someone with legitimate access to the property are publicly available, if only to get folks thinking about their own firearm security situation. When I first went on the Sheriff's Dept years ago, and prior to these storage laws, my .357 went up on a high shelf in my closet. When the kids got old enough and tall enough to reach that high, I started to teach them firearms safety and the requirement to stay out of my closet, enforced with punishment if necessary. Simpler times, I guess. I can easily see now why you misconstrued my intent and I blame my own words. In going back over my posts, I see that I stated that the COP and officer should make a complete, honest disclosure of the storage circumstances. That was a poor choice on my part, as it could easily be assumed that I wanted every last detail, including his address, where he stored his firearms, etc. I assure you that was not my intent. My intent was merely to draw out whether this was a storage issue or someone with inside knowledge and access. Ultimately, it turned out to be the latter.
I'm not suggesting that we don't talk about them. The good thing about discussing things like this is we get to learn from other's mistakes or other's bad situations that they've been through, even if they didn't make a mistake. I think someone anonymously saying what took place in a situation is a great way to learn, but if this cop were to come on here and get into details, or to do so on the news, I think he'd be making a big mistake. Once that info's out, it's out, and especially where he was the victim of a crime once, he doesn't want to fall victim to the same thing twice.
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
3,271
Likes
2,948
Location
SE Mass
I'm sorry if my questions appeared designed to extract that level of detail because they were not. It is occasionally difficult to have these types of conversations via keyboard. I think it is very important that the general details concerning this being perpetrated by someone with legitimate access to the property are publicly available, if only to get folks thinking about their own firearm security situation. When I first went on the Sheriff's Dept years ago, and prior to these storage laws, my .357 went up on a high shelf in my closet. When the kids got old enough and tall enough to reach that high, I started to teach them firearms safety and the requirement to stay out of my closet, enforced with punishment if necessary. Simpler times, I guess. I can easily see now why you misconstrued my intent and I blame my own words. In going back over my posts, I see that I stated that the COP and officer should make a complete, honest disclosure of the storage circumstances. That was a poor choice on my part, as it could easily be assumed that I wanted every last detail, including his address, where he stored his firearms, etc. I assure you that was not my intent. My intent was merely to draw out whether this was a storage issue or someone with inside knowledge and access. Ultimately, it turned out to be the latter.
I'm not suggesting that we don't talk about them. The good thing about discussing things like this is we get to learn from other's mistakes or other's bad situations that they've been through, even if they didn't make a mistake. I think someone anonymously saying what took place in a situation is a great way to learn, but if this cop were to come on here and get into details, or to do so on the news, I think he'd be making a big mistake. Once that info's out, it's out, and especially where he was the victim of a crime once, he doesn't want to fall victim to the same thing twice.
 

M1911

Moderator
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
39,570
Likes
7,814
Location
Near Framingham
In the meantime, I suggest that you go back over my posts and look at them carefully. I have not disparaged anyone.
Oh really? Let's look at them together, shall we?

Well, I thought we were having a logical discourse here. My mistake. There is no need to be facetious. What part of my comments could possibly be construed this way? All I've said is if the firearm was properly secured, but was pilfered by someone with access to the premises, then say so. No need for obfuscation.

And I agree with much of what you state here. Again, I reiterate that I take issue with that additional comment about the lack of forced entry. Don't blame the messenger here.

We can agree to disagree, but please don't accuse me of executing a personal attack here.

Reread your own posts above. Those are sarcastic, personal attacks that were completely unnecessary, unprovoked, and flat-out incorrect.

The purpose of the police investigation into the crime is to find the perpetrator(s) and bring them to justice. The purpose of the investigation is NOT to satisfy our curiosity. If and when the investigation is complete and the prosecution takes place, then AND ONLY THEN will the evidence rightly be put in the public domain.

And once the information comes out, then you can find out the details and start pushing to have the victim punished, as seems to be your intention.
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
3,271
Likes
2,948
Location
SE Mass
We will have to agree to disagree then. My words were designed, and I believe the average person on this board will agree, to keep the discourse civil. If you read that post as a response to the prior post from GSG, I think it is plain that his post could very well, on the surface, be construed as condescending. That is how I initially took his post. I believe that GSG and I have found common ground and I no longer consider his response inflammatory, especially in light of the fact that he subsequently stated that he did not intend to be unkind. I believe him.

For some reason, you seem bent on attacking me at every turn. Flame away. Take it to the mods. Do whatever you think you have to do. If I offend you that much, I would even suggest that you just IGNORE my posts. I let everyone else enjoy their views, whether I agree or disagree. Please extend the same courtesy to me.







Oh really? Let's look at them together, shall we?







Reread your own posts above. Those are sarcastic, personal attacks that were completely unnecessary, unprovoked, and flat-out incorrect.

The purpose of the police investigation into the crime is to find the perpetrator(s) and bring them to justice. The purpose of the investigation is NOT to satisfy our curiosity. If and when the investigation is complete and the prosecution takes place, then AND ONLY THEN will the evidence rightly be put in the public domain.

And once the information comes out, then you can find out the details and start pushing to have the victim punished, as seems to be your intention.
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
3,271
Likes
2,948
Location
SE Mass
And BTW. What constitutes a personal attack in the sections of my quote that you highlighted? I said there was NO NEED to be facetious. Saying there is no need for obfuscating the facts of the case are NOT personal attacks. Jeepers, I think it is plain throughout that post that I was calling for reason.

I didn't see you come to my defense when my experience was called into question, which could also be interpreted as a personal attack, if we are going to get picky.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
663
Likes
8
Location
MANNING SC
stolen gun

from what I have read the officer passed a lie detecter test.if he did, which ed did.then he is clear.he would have been asked a bout many things.
I have had guns stolen. and usually it is some one you know or some one who knows you have them.as to locked doors and boxes.they are easy to open.I can open any box in a minute safes take time but I have done it.as to the kid he is a reciever of stolen property,not the thief. I dont care for cops as a group but am friends with individuals.like all othe sites this one has a tendency to get carried away.no dept would give out but the basics.for two reasons,making statements accusing some one and it turns out false costs big time,giving out information as to what you know gives a smart perp an opportunity to change direction.
all these post are speculation.no one knows what happened.
it does not take much to carry the locked box off,and open it later.
and I repeat the LEO passed the TEST.
 

GSG

Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
5,825
Likes
557
I'm sorry if my questions appeared designed to extract that level of detail because they were not. It is occasionally difficult to have these types of conversations via keyboard. I think it is very important that the general details concerning this being perpetrated by someone with legitimate access to the property are publicly available, if only to get folks thinking about their own firearm security situation. When I first went on the Sheriff's Dept years ago, and prior to these storage laws, my .357 went up on a high shelf in my closet. When the kids got old enough and tall enough to reach that high, I started to teach them firearms safety and the requirement to stay out of my closet, enforced with punishment if necessary. Simpler times, I guess. I can easily see now why you misconstrued my intent and I blame my own words. In going back over my posts, I see that I stated that the COP and officer should make a complete, honest disclosure of the storage circumstances. That was a poor choice on my part, as it could easily be assumed that I wanted every last detail, including his address, where he stored his firearms, etc. I assure you that was not my intent. My intent was merely to draw out whether this was a storage issue or someone with inside knowledge and access. Ultimately, it turned out to be the latter.

Sounds reasonable to me. [grin]
 
Top Bottom