Reed Hillman is not our friend

[mark056]

I know Reed Hillman, I worked for Reed Hillman and dealt with him on at least a weekly basis during my first year at MSP General Headquarters. He is a very decent man, who has good intentions and one whom I believe to be dedicated and honest. He is not, however, a true friend of gun owners, nor is he very firearms oriented.

This is anecdotal, and I don't have time to research it, but several years ago, the Boston Globe interviewed him with regard to a story on firearm ownership. At the time, he said that once he had retired from the MSP, he no longer carried , nor saw a need to carry. What does that tell you ?

For those of you who reside outside the Commonwealth of Mass, Hillman is gubernatorial candidate Kerry Healy's running mate for Lt. Governor on the Republican ticket. He is the former Colonel of State Police and was a state representative for several years after he retired from the Job.

Once again, my friends, those of us in Mass will be forced to choose the lesser of the evils with regard to voting for candidates for governor and lt governor. It is unclear to me, at this time, just who is the most damaging with regard to firearms issues. It would be easy to say Riley, but I am not sure that Healy would really be that much different, and I know where Hillman stands. For what it is worth, Hillman, also has a law degree although he has never practiced.

Mark

 

[Lynne]

Thanks Mark (and nice to see you finally made it over here. ). Do you think that if a number of folks contacted him, saying, "I'm a gun owner, and if you want my vote, I need to know your stance on the Right to Self Defense and firearms ownership." - would that do any good? Or is he still politician enough to BS his way through the answer just to get the vote?

 

[Admin]

At the time, he said that once he had retired from the MSP, he no longer carried , nor saw a need to carry.

That's all I needed to hear.

 

[mark056]

Lynne,

That is a very good question. I think he needs to know where we stand as gun owners, and I also believe that Healy needs to get the message too. We have to somehow collectively remind ourselves that Republican does not necessarily equate to Pro-gun.

My best guess is that when pressed, he will mouth some platitude about supporting the legitimate ownership of guns by sportsmen and law abiding citizens, but not necessarily the right of citizens to use firearms for personal protection, I think he will try to skate over that part.

We have to let the Republican candidates know right off the bat that we will support them, but that they have to earn our support, that it is something not to be taken for granted.

A Tom Riley (whom I met last Saturday night) governor and a Martha Moakely AG would be total disaster for gun owners, but I am not sure that Healy/Hillman ticket with a Moakley AG wouldn't be equally disasterous.

Mark

 

[Lynne]

I'll still contact him and Healy. Thanks Mark.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I'm not sure who said it first, but a political comment was passed that countries do not have "friends", they have "interests". I contend that much the same can be said of politicians! They have no "true friends" but people who have "similar interests" . . . so if it takes an anti-gun position in this state to get elected and get legislation passed, that is what the politician (aka "chameleon") will support. If we were in a state where gun ownership would mean winning/losing the election, a politician will be out there "hunting" (for the cameras) to gain those votes. It really (IMNSHO) is that simple! [And the vast majority of MA gun owners are oblivious to the laws and bleat fully vote for the pork-belly Dems at each election.]

Mark, I dare say that very few municipal/state LEOs in MA carry off-duty (almost nobody that I know personally . . . I can actually only think of one person and he is now retired). Backup guns in a PD are basically unheard of around these parts, the higher echelons only grudgingly allow their officers to even carry guns on duty! Thus, it is only natural that when they "hang up their spurs" for the last time, they take a position that there is no need for them to ever carry or even own a gun again in their lifetime.

I'm not sure that I'd take Hillman's comment as being "anti gun" towards the masses, but just that he feels insulated from any malicious person coming after him for revenge.

Truly anti-gun people wouldn't be seen within 5 miles of a GOAL Banquet/Annual Meeting! Reed has been there, I've seen him there and I think he received an award or two over the years from GOAL.

On the other hand, he's a politician and NO politicians can be trusted. If the polls tell him to be hard on gun ownership, that's where he'll be!!

Mark, it is nice to see you back, you were missed here!

 

[JonJ]

It will be interesting to see where Healy, Hillman, Coakly and Mihos all come out on this.

Mark, I dare say that very few municipal/state LEOs in MA carry off-duty (almost nobody that I know personally . . . I can actually only think of one person and he is now retired). Backup guns in a PD are basically unheard of around these parts, the higher echelons only grudgingly allow their officers to even carry guns on duty! Thus, it is only natural that when they "hang up their spurs" for the last time, they take a position that there is no need for them to ever carry or even own a gun again in their lifetime.

Len, I know that about half of the guys I work with do carry off duty.
Back up guns are a No-No. The reason for this is departments have a standardized firearm. Everyone carries the same gun and same ammo. Makes it safer for the officers because everyone can share ammo and mags and if need be, an officer can use a downed officer firearm if his is rendered in operable for some reason when the SHTF.
Departments do not want to certify officers on their own back-up weapons nor would they purchase them for every officer so that they too were standardized, money issue. I'm sure officers still do carry back-ups but no one knows that they do. The officer wouldn't be in violation of any law if it were a legal shoot with the back-up but he'd face disciplinary action of some form I'm sure. But hey, better to use a back-up and go home to my home than a funeral home.

I've never heard of any chief in this state say that he wanted his officers to be like Bobbies in the UK. Sure there are some who don't want citizens to carry or posses but never have I heard that a chief wanted unarmed officers on the street. If there was a chief like that somewhere in the state, we'd know about it and he'd be vilified.
As far as I know, most chiefs have been progressive with arming their officers. Issuing semi-autos, shotguns and patrol rifles.

Mark, it is nice to see you back, you were missed here!

Ditto!

 

[MrsWildweasel]

I too missed you Mark and wondered where you'd been. Glad you made it back.

 

[Nickle]

We have to somehow collectively remind ourselves that Republican does not necessarily equate to Pro-gun.

Truer words have never been spoken! Part of the reason I'm an issue voter. I keep my options open, and vote for the person that will best see through my wishes.

 

[Coyote33]

Thanks Mark (and nice to see you finally made it over here. ). Do you think that if a number of folks contacted him, saying, "I'm a gun owner, and if you want my vote, I need to know your stance on the Right to Self Defense and firearms ownership." - would that do any good? Or is he still politician enough to BS his way through the answer just to get the vote?

Maybe GOAL should do that on behalf of all MA gun owners.

That's all I needed to hear.

...and then what? Does that change how you will vote? We don't have many choices here.

 

[Admin]

...and then what? Does that change how you will vote? We don't have many choices here.

If those two get the republican nod, no it won't change the way I will vote. I will be voting for the lesser of two evils.

 

[JonJ]

If those two get the republican nod, no it won't change the way I will vote. I will be voting for the lesser of two evils.

+1

 

[TY43215]

I have lived in the Commonwealth for all of my life so far. What difference does a Lt Governor make in the whole scheme of things? Unless the Governor leaves, the LT is as useless as well, you know the rest.

The concentration should be on the candidates in the Governor's race. We, as a group, should work hard to get definitive answers from the candidates. I have a problem with someone who joins a gun club just before announcing candidacy. Not very genuine and honest but many do.

Maybe GOAL could sponsor local "Meet the Candidate" events along with local clubs to get these people on record with a stance.

Just my thoughts from watching the decline in MA for nearly 55 years.

Regards,


PS: My Revolutionary war ancestors were the smart ones and stayed in NH and VT

 

[Len-2A Training]

Jon,

This is one area that I'd like to be proven "full of it"! I'm glad that the guys on your department are different than my personal experiences here.

Over my 18 years as a Special PO here I worked with probably 40 different FT POs, only one of whom CCW'd all the time off-duty. A few others would CCW when going to places like Boston or Brockton, but that is it.

Our last two chiefs cut back the qualification shooting from 2x/year plus 1x/year night shooting to 1x/year with no night shooting at all. The current chief told me directly that he'd prefer not to even have to carry a gun ever, and his predecessor NEVER carried a gun during his years as a Lt. or Chief!!

We were standardized on caliber with the FT officers as Special POs for the exact reasons you stated, until they went to 9mm semis and the anti-gun chief asked us (Special POs) to qualify with both if we owned a 9mm. He even offered to get us in on the group purchase price, but we'd have to buy them with our own money (no problem, probably 50% would have done this). THEN he gave an edict (after we qualified)! All Special POs were forbidden from carrying 9mm on duty, we had to stay with the .38 wheelgun while the FT POs carried 9mm! He later gave in to the union and gave away our right to work paid shifts . . . when they were short, they'd call us to fill in . . . later he told me directly that "it was a mistake to have given that away to the union", but it was too late to do anything about it. [Ironically they were usually short on holidays when everyone wanted "off", the policemen's ball or a couple of PD weddings that occurred. They should have been glad we were available so they could get the time off.]

The current chief came in and disarmed us completely, took away our arrest powers and then proceeded to ask us to work with the FT POs as two-person patrols!! Half the 35 Special Police force resigned almost immediately and the majority of the rest of us only served one year under this "new program" before quitting.

The anti-gun attitude is pervasive in this area amongst chiefs and legislators. Maybe it's something in the air as you get closer to the stench of Boston politics?

I just don't see any of these candidates being "in our corner" if/when we need them. There is a tendency for these folks to talk out of both sides of their mouths at the same time!

As has been stated, the Lt. Gov is a "figurehead" position with no authority or weight in decision-making policies. They go to official funerals and otherwise have no duties unless the Gov runs off to bigger and better things!

 

[Lynne]

We need to find out if GOAL actually has presented him with an award or two. Since we have a couple BOD members here....yo....guys??????

 

[MrsWildweasel]

It will also be the same for me voting for the lesser of two evils. I don't vote party lines, but issues.

 

[Len-2A Training]

We need to find out if GOAL actually has presented him with an award or two. Since we have a couple BOD members here....yo....guys??????

Lynne,

Only useful for it's historical value (none)!

What's important today is where does he stand TODAY, now that he's playing in the "big league politics"? Lots of zebras paint over their stripes to "blend in" with the herd!

 

[JonJ]

Jon,

This is one area that I'd like to be proven "full of it"! I'm glad that the guys on your department are different than my personal experiences here.

Over my 18 years as a Special PO here I worked with probably 40 different FT POs, only one of whom CCW'd all the time off-duty. A few others would CCW when going to places like Boston or Brockton, but that is it.

I don't know many if any people that carry "all the time". I don't carry all the time off duty. Off duty carry for me is the exception rather than the rule. The majority of off duty carry is to and from work because of being in uniform and the other case you mention.
They made a personal decision not to carry at work, not because they're anti and think that LEO's should not be armed. It's what's comfortable for them.
If a guy never carries again after retirement, so be it. Chances are it's not because he's anti, it could be that he's tired of babysitting it and the weight is now off him.
BTW: I got to fondle a brand new Glock G27 today that a guy just got yesterday for off duty carry and another guy has just ordered another.

Our last two chiefs cut back the qualification shooting from 2x/year plus 1x/year night shooting to 1x/year with no night shooting at all. The current chief told me directly that he'd prefer not to even have to carry a gun ever, and his predecessor NEVER carried a gun during his years as a Lt. or Chief!!

The training issues you mention we've discussed before. Budgetary.
Most Chiefs in the bigger towns and cities are nothing more than administrators anyway. I'm a firm believer that a chief need not be a LEO but someone with administration experience. Most sit in an office behind security doors and don't wear uniforms unless there is a TV camera around and then they play dress up with all the gold and stars. They become General Pattons when they have a chance to look good.
There are a couple of Admin SGT's that I know don't carry at work either. Again, they're in plain clothes and behind security doors.
Same with the majority of shift commanders. Not carrying but safely stowed in a cabinet in his office.
Because they don't carry for whatever reason they have, I have never heard one utter that he didn't want LEO's to carry while working.

We were standardized on caliber with the FT officers as Special POs for the exact reasons you stated, until they went to 9mm semis and the anti-gun chief asked us (Special POs) to qualify with both if we owned a 9mm. He even offered to get us in on the group purchase price, but we'd have to buy them with our own money (no problem, probably 50% would have done this). THEN he gave an edict (after we qualified)! All Special POs were forbidden from carrying 9mm on duty, we had to stay with the .38 wheelgun while the FT POs carried 9mm! He later gave in to the union and gave away our right to work paid shifts . . . when they were short, they'd call us to fill in . . . later he told me directly that "it was a mistake to have given that away to the union", but it was too late to do anything about it. [Ironically they were usually short on holidays when everyone wanted "off", the policemen's ball or a couple of PD weddings that occurred. They should have been glad we were available so they could get the time off.]

The current chief came in and disarmed us completely, took away our arrest powers and then proceeded to ask us to work with the FT POs as two-person patrols!! Half the 35 Special Police force resigned almost immediately and the majority of the rest of us only served one year under this "new program" before quitting.

Len you know all too well that Special Police Officers are somewhere between security guards and Constables in the food chain.
Looks like the Chief was looking for way to drop the program which is/was a liability and nothing but problems for the Chief, Union and collective bargaining agreement. You all facilitated his purpose by quiting.
Quiting was the best thing to do. Someone would have to be crazy to go on patrol unarmed.

You made this comment in an earlier post:

the higher echelons only grudgingly allow their officers to even carry guns on duty!

If these people are still working and you have personal knowledge of this that you'd like to share with me, PM me. I'd love to contact the guys that work them and let them know how their "bosses" feels about their safety.

 

[mark056]

I tend to agree that the office of Lt Governor is not really big on the food chain, but it can be a stepping stone to higher office (John Kerry) or a Lt Governor can find him/herself in the top job when the governor moves on to something bigger and better or at least tries to. Jane Swift, who was both a GOAL and NRA poster child, did absolute NOTHING for gun owners while she occupied the corner office and I think that many would argue that she did NOTHING for the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts except steal our oxygen and misuse State Police Helicopters.

I don't know what the effect will be with regard to Mihos running, and whether enough Republican votes will be siphoned off to ensure a Democratic victory. I don't see any big changes in the AG office, Coakly is no better than Riley in my opinion.

Even if the Republicans do win the Governor and Lt Governor offices, I think that we will be engaging in a holding action at best. If your lifestyle can support it, and gun ownership is one of your top priorities, this may very well be the time to move to Vermont or New Hampshire.

I've really missed everyone on the Forum and I appreciate your greeings and salutations. Things have been very busy for me at work and I have been involved in several major projects so I haven't had too much time to spend at the Forum.

Mark

 

[Lynne]

Lynne,

Only useful for it's historical value (none)!

What's important today is where does he stand TODAY, now that he's playing in the "big league politics"? Lots of zebras paint over their stripes to "blend in" with the herd!

That's very true Len, however, depending on his answers now, we can use that as a "Gee, Mr. Hillman, back in XXXX, you received an award/grade - whatever - from GOAL for your stance and voting record, so, how come it's changed?"

If he knows that we'd only support him because of his voting record, that could make him think.

I know, I know...I'm still the f'ing optimist!!

 

[MrsWildweasel]

We'll let you have your delusions Lynne.

 

[Garys]

I have lived in the Commonwealth for all of my life so far. What difference does a Lt Governor make in the whole scheme of things? Unless the Governor leaves, the LT is as useless as well, you know the rest.

It probably depends. I know that Healy has been very active on certain health care issues. In her case, she also spends a fair amount of time as "acting Governor" because Romney spends so much time out of state. Some Lt Gov's are little more than seat warmers, some aren't.

Gary

 

[TY43215]

I know that Healy has been very active on certain health care issues. In her case, she also spends a fair amount of time as "acting Governor" because Romney spends so much time out of state.
Gary

This is a case where they are both furthering their political agendas. Still, the focus needs to remain on Lt Gov Healy and she needs to be pinned down on issues related to lawful posession of firearms.

Regards,

 

[guywithglasses]

Reed was my State Rep.

FWIW - Here are some responses to emails I've sent him over the years:

In response to my email to urge the Committee on Public Safety to release bills S.2061 (lifetime licenses and FID cards) and H.3682 (to grandfather in those who lost their licenses in 1998 due to old misdemeanor convictions) with a favorable report:

Dear XXXXXX - I'm with you on these issues and will continue to do all I can to get these bills enacted.

Thanks for writing!
Reed

In response to my email asking him to sign Steve Brewer's "Dear Colleague" letter urging the Committee on Public Safety to release H.3682 (grandfather old misdemeanor convictions) and H.814 (I forget which gun bill this was... maybe to clarify definition of loaded muzzleloader?):

I have already signed onto Steve's letter, and I am happy to do so. Maybe this will be the year we can fianlly right some of these wrongs!!

Thanks again,
Reed

In response to my email asking him to work with GOAL to repeal the increase in FID/LTC fees to $100:

Dear XXXX - You can count on my complete support for a quick repeal of this unfair and discriminatory increase.
Thanks for writing, and please keep in touch.
Reed

In response to my email that he wasn't listed on GOAL's website as a cosponsor of S.2061 "An Act Providing For Better Management For The Issuance Of Firearm Licenses":

Dear XXX - That should be all set. Let me know if you don't see my name up there over the next day or two. AND, remember that I voted AGAINST this to begin with!

Reed

In response to my email urging him to support constitutional marriage amendment: (not gun-related, but shows what he thinks of judicial fiat)

Dear XXXX - I believe that an issue as controversial and divisive as
this should properly be put before the voters. At this point, the only
way to allow the voters input on this issue is to vote for H3190, which
will define marriage as being between a man and a woman. The Supreme
Judicial Court has left us no other choice. That is how I will vote
today.

Thanks for writing!
Reed



I haven't seen anything in my contacts with Hillman that indicates he's not on our side. As far as him not carrying, many of my shooting buddies choose not to carry... but they're still on our side. (I think )

 

[Skald]

The thing is, they can write one thing and vote another. Thats why I check to see how they voted. I mean, you just need to look at Flip Flop over in Cogress, he sent a lady two 'offiical' letters saying he was first in opposition to a bill and then very shortly after got one in favor of it!

In your local community paper there is a little section called 'Beacon Hill Roll Call' and tells you how your rep voted on bills before them in the House and Senate. Its actually now the first thing I read in the paper.

 

[Nickle]

Never trust what a Politician says. Always look to see what they've done in the past, and judge them on that.

Pay very close attention to Skald. He's 100% right.

 

[Lynne]

The thing is, they can write one thing and vote another. Thats why I check to see how they voted. I mean, you just need to look at Flip Flop over in Cogress, he sent a lady two 'offiical' letters saying he was first in opposition to a bill and then very shortly after got one in favor of it!

In your local community paper there is a little section called 'Beacon Hill Roll Call' and tells you how your rep voted on bills before them in the House and Senate. Its actually now the first thing I read in the paper.

I keep track of that for the bills that I email my Rep and Sen about. So far, they've held to their word in the emails. I sincerely hope that Mr. Hillman will at least be open minded and willing to not "follow the crowd" when it comes to assinine gun bills.

Thanks for posting his responses to your emails, GWG.

 

[JonJ]

http://news.bostonherald.com/localPolitics/view.bg?articleid=131761&format=text

Lt. gov hopeful asked Romney: Pardon my OUI buddy
By Dave Wedge
Thursday, March 23, 2006 - Updated: 05:37 PM EST

While talking tough on drunken driving on Beacon Hill, gubernatorial hopeful Kerry Healey’s running mate Reed Hillman went to bat for a political pal seeking a governor’s pardon for three OUI busts, among other crimes, records show.
Hillman, an ex-state representative and state police colonel, wrote a letter recommending a pardon for former state Senate candidate James W. Mitchell, whose rap sheet includs three OUI arrests, an assault on a cop and another minor driving offense. Mitchell, now 72, was hoping to wipe his record clean but was denied a pardon by Gov. Mitt Romney on May 24, 2004, state records show.
Hillman, who is running for lieutenant governor on the GOP ticket with Healey, admitted last night that he knew about the drunken driving arrests but still supported Mitchell’s pardon bid. He said he wrote the letter recommending Mitchell’s pardon after checking with the Palmer police chief who gave Mitchell “two thumbs up.”
Mitchell’s OUI arrests were in 1972, 1977 and 1982. The 1972 charge was dismissed, the 1977 charge was continued for six months and later dismissed, and he was found guilty on the 1982 charge and fined $100.
“He had one conviction. If he had three convictions, I would have never done this,” Hillman said. “One conviction, 20 years old. He was an elderly guy who essentially wanted to go to his grave with a clean record.”
Letters of recommendation on Mitchell’s behalf also were written by Ware District Court Clerk Magistrate James Bloom and Palmer Clerk Magistrate E. Donald Riddle.
Hillman, a Republican from Sturbridge, was outspoken on highway safety as the state’s top cop and pushed for tougher OUI laws as a lawmaker. In 2003, he sought to extend OUI license suspensions and make it more difficult for repeat drunken drivers to get hardship licenses. He also led the fight to make Massachusetts recognize a blood alcohol level of .08 as proof of intoxication.
Mitchell sought the pardon after he was denied a gun license renewal because of the assault conviction but said he wanted all the charges erased from his record. “It was a few minute things I wanted to get off my record,” Mitchell said last night from his Palmer home.
Mitchell told the parole board in 2003 his “buddy Reed Hillman was talking to the Governor’s Chief Counsel and he gave (Mitchell’s) whole record to the governor,” a transcript states. Mitchell, who lost a 1976 bid for state Senate, donated $100 to Hillman’s campaign in 2003 while the case was pending. He called Hillman “one of the best representatives we’ve ever had,” adding, “I would vote for him for anything.”

 

[Len-2A Training]

Jon, as you know this is SOP. Those that are connected get special breaks.

 

[Coyote33]

Hillman also spoke about the need to reduce crime by control gun trafficking. "One of the things that's not happening that should be happening is that people caught with illegal guns are not getting that mandatory one year sentence," he said. "We need to do what we can to convince judges and prosecutors to uphold that. That would send a message."