Stolen gun - loaded while stored in the car - Oops!

[ChargingCharlie]

Are you serious?

Yes, I was. I didn't see where it said he found it in a locked briefcase in his house. If I did see that, then it would have been a waste of my time to actually post a response asking where he saw that the officer forgot where he put the gun. Don't ya think?

 

[Jamie]

Yes, I was. I didn't see where it said he found it in a locked briefcase in his house. If I did see that, then it would have been a waste of my time to actually post a response asking where he saw that the officer forgot where he put the gun. Don't ya think?

Do I really need to tell you to read the thread before posting?

 

[ChargingCharlie]

Do I really need to tell you to read the thread before posting?

Do I really need to tell you to stop being a dick? I did read it, I just somehow missed that part. I missed something and asked a question in a polite way. My question was answered. Is it really that hard to just leave it at that?

 

[pdm]

At least it wasn't stolen. Maybe the guy will see the light and stop leaving his guns in briefcases and get a proper safe. At least that way you have a fighting chance of organizing your crap.

 

[OfficerObie59]

The same cop would probably take our rights with a smile on his face if he had the power to do so. Personally, I think you reap what you sow, this is karma's magic wand slapping the LE community with a taste of its own medicine. F*** this thin blue line B.S....you screw up, doesn't matter if you're a cop or not, we're all held accountable equally. It's about time they realize they aren't immune to the same laws us "subjects" are accustomed to. I hope he gets the 9th degree, loses his gun rights, and crashes on the head of the department. Maybe then the cops will say "ehh maybe we should make this absurd restriction on the 2nd a priority to get rid of before we get caught going full retard again".

To the cop, welcome to our world...the one that you need to walk on egg shells 24/7 in order to express a guaranteed constitutional right.

Nice to know if I ever had an issue that involved me losing my gun rights to me I would have your full support just because of my chosen profession. Nice to know you're so pro RKBA except when you assume and generalize based solely on one's professon what positions they might have in relation to ALL OF OUR rights to keep and bear arms. Remember, we're all individual human-beings here.

Don't get me wrong, I think that officers following the same laws as everyone else is an absolute necessity when it comes to ensuring a free society. But the absolute glee some here take when it comes to an cop losing his rights is hypocritical, and shows not simple pleasure that the law is being enforced equally, but enjoyment it because it simply feels good in some retributive manner. If you ask me, such revelry pushes back the 2nd Amendment cause instead of advancing it, and furthers the tension between law enforcement and the law abiding public.

As far as I'm concerned, someone lossing their RKBA is a horrible result, no matter whether it's a cop, carpenter, or criminal, nor should we as a society rejoice or take pleasure when it occurs whether or not the result may be positive for society in the long term. It's the simple loss of that natural right to a particular manner of self-defense (whether that be defense vs. criminals or the .gov) that saddens me, not the reason, cause, or attendant circumstances for the loss. Necessary in some circumstances? Perhaps--that's a debate for another thread. But is it ever a reason to celebrate? Certainly not.

And if you rejoice in it, I happen to think that makes one little better than those they criticize for the same actions, as the rejoicing comes from the same sinister part of the human condition as the that's claimed to be abhored.

[/rant]

 

[DavidC77]

I wonder if we will ever get the whole story.

Was it in the vehicle and was it stolen, did they recover the gun and came up with this story to CHA. We will never know. If it was in his house all this time and it was never stolen, boy does he have egg on his face.

All I can say is it sounds like he was not storing the gun as the law says you should, if he had it in his center consel that is not stored proberly acorrding to the law, unless it was a locking center consel. Then you can get into the storage law were it says a gun should not be loaded unless it is under your control, he wasn't in the vehicle so it wasn't under his control.

It will be intresting to see what happens, my vote is nothing will happen except a letter in his file for causing a false police report, or something like that.

One thing I can say for sure, is that he feels real dumb right now. OH sorry, I just found my gun at home, op's.



EDIT: I just looked, they could say that Chapter 140 Section 131C Part D could apply to him and that by that he can carry a loaded stored gun in his car that is not under his control.

 

[cekim]

Nice to know if I ever had an issue that involved me losing my gun rights to me I would have your full support just because of my chosen profession. Nice to know you're so pro RKBA except when you assume and generalize based solely on one's professon what positions they might have in relation to ALL OF OUR rights to keep and bear arms. Remember, we're all individual human-beings here.

I agree, in that I am not rejoicing regardless of outcome here. I don't think this warrants firing, resignation or any sanction at all. It's a dumb mistake and he did the right thing by reporting it. Would you rather people report right away or keep it quiet for fear of the fall out until it's too late?

It's worth pointing out though that, as with many of the "cop bashing" comments, your profession has brought this on themselves because civilians frequently don't get the benefit of a "we're all individual human-beings" standard in this state. This is not a matter of perception - there is plenty of precedent to back it up...

"I didn't write the law" is not a valid excuse for violating the Constitution...

As with the court decision today I heard on the radio regarding suppression of evidence obtained under false pretenses (officers lying to suspects), LEOs need to think long and hard about the unintended consequences of their and their fellow officer's actions, department policies, etc... and how it will make it harder to do their job in the long run.

 

[Dench]

. Nice to know you're so pro RKBA except when you assume and generalize based solely on one's professon what positions they might have in relation to ALL OF OUR rights to keep and bear arms.

As a Police Officer its your job to enforce gun laws. The police in MA are enforcing unconstitutional laws and bringing people to jail to be prosecuted for asinine fire arms "violations."

I don't find myself playing on the same team of those who are obligated to bring those to jail for laws which are not constitutional.

I don't have anything against you personally, but i do have problems with a state .gov that refuses to acknowledge my birth rights as a citizen and i have problems with organizations (the police) who enforce these laws.

 

[OfficerObie59]

It's worth pointing out though that, as with many of the "cop bashing" comments, your profession has brought this on themselves because civilians frequently don't get the benefit of a "we're all individual human-beings" standard in this state. This is not a matter of perception - there is plenty of precedent to back it up....

Perhaps, but no matter how you try to frame it, these assumptions rely on generalizations that we all act in lock step and that we have the same beliefs. I would think in forum full of libertines we'd be able to see past those generalizations and realize everyone is an individual with different opinions and beliefs. Just because those in a particular profession wear a uniform does't mean the all think, feel, or act in a uniform way. And if you refer to the post I was replying to, the poster was assigning an individual assumption upon a particular person simply based on what they do for work.

And just like we shouldn't assume becuase someone went to Harvard that they're a liberal lunatic, I don't think it's right or proper to lambaste a single individual just because of he happens to be a police officer.

"I didn't write the law" is not a valid excuse for violating the Constitution...

That makes absolutely no sense if you're talking about a law passed by a constitutional body prior to judicial review.

As a Police Officer its your job to enforce gun laws. The police in MA are enforcing unconstitutional laws and bringing people to jail to be prosecuted for asinine fire arms "violations."

I don't find myself playing on the same team of those who are obligated to bring those to jail for laws which are not constitutional.

I find these points to be ones of inherenet contradictions, and thus fatally flawed. In the words of John Adams, we are a government of laws not of men, and refusing to obey or follow laws you personally believe are unconstitutional elevates you above the law, which is the very argument commonly lodged against the police.

Let's step back for a second and think this through. Who's opinion of what is constitutional determines what is in fact constitutional? Yours? Mine? The nieghbor on the corner? Believe or not, the Constitution itself sets forth methods for interpreting whether or not something is in fact constitutional. It's called Due Process. And it seems to me officers have a duty to abide by those determinations of constitutionally-appointed tribunals, whether they personally agree with them or not. Not only do those interpretations--however flawed I may myself believe them to be--set legal standards in tort of which could cause me great personal loss, but they indeed protect the greater good. Just think about it: If every cop went around as his own little court determining what was constitutional and what is not with no recourse whatsoever, the result would be far more dangerous to the principles of freedom than any argument you've both put forth so far.

And if you don't like the interpretations of a court, you have a number of options at your disposal. Pass a new law or, better yet, a constitutional amendment. Or take you grievance back to court and try your hand there. If all else go ahead and try using your natrual right to revolution. Whetever the case, focusing you anger the police is blaming the symptom, not the cause.

 

[cekim]

Just because those in a particular profession wear a uniform doesn't mean the all think, feel, or act in a uniform way.

Absolutely agreed. My point was that you aren't going to convince people predisposed to jump to make such generalizations by complaining that you are being lumped in with the bad apples.

The PR problem you are complaining about stems from some gross abuses of power we are seeing on a daily basis. Juxtaposed many times with civilians being treated much more harshly for the same or very similar offenses (aka "the thin blue line").

What I am telling you (from the outside) is that if you don't have a personal relationship with a LEO(s) (as I do) it's pretty hard to read the daily news, court decisions, etc... and not be left with a very bad taste in your mouth and, given their position of power, lump them together. Heck, I've heard this from LEOs in other states when they hear about what goes on in this state.

If you want to change perception, you should seek to change the behavior of the bad apples. Otherwise, people aren't going to see the good apples because they don't get press very often.

That makes absolutely no sense if you're talking about a law passed by a constitutional body prior to judicial review.
...
Let's step back for a second and think this through. Who's opinion of what is constitutional determines what is in fact constitutional? Yours? Mine? The nieghbor on the corner? Believe or not, the Constitution itself sets forth methods for interpreting whether or not something is in fact constitutional. It's called Due Process.

Yes, within limits... as I said, the Nuremberg defense doesn't work even though it often places the "low guy on the totem pole" in an awful position of having to contradict a law or order because "it isn't right."

The issues I am talking about include violations of due process. Often including violations of "settled law."

To quote the director of the FRB/CHSB: "It may not stand up in court, but that's our interpretation."

Or the SJC when they said "we don't follow the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court."

That's the culture we are dealing with in this state. It's not a matter of just not liking the laws, we have regulatory bodies, Judges and officers violating settled law. Sometimes under the guise of the SJC who itself in violation of SCOTUS rulings, but often times not.

By your standard, the state and its agents should feel free to do anything they like unless there's a specific ruling against it. That sort of behavior is how we got here and why there is so much cop bashing going on.

 

[Dench]

I was going to write a long reply to this, but eh its a waste.

I'm not Anti-cop. I'm anti-officerobie59.

 

[cekim]

I was going to write a long reply to this, but eh its a waste.

I'm not Anti-cop. I'm anti-officerobie59.

I'm not, I understand his frustration too. There are plenty of good cops, departments, etc... out there. He's also correct that there are a bunch of fair weather libertarians here who forget their belief in the constituion and limits of government power, when it gets messy.

I just think his rant is wasted on the public, he should focus his rage at LEOs, unions, and departments making the profession look bad...

 

[OfficerObie59]

I just think his rant is wasted on the public, he should focus his rage at LEOs, unions, and departments making the profession look bad...

I think we've reached that natural point in an argument where we can agreee to disagree.

As for my rant here, in the words of terraformer, you need to work from multiple perspectives. FWIW, if you've ever seen some of my postings over on the MC forum or been in a conversation with me and other cops, you'll find I'm often in the minority. For example, I think the court correctly decided the case regarding public employee union evergreen clauses and, from pure rights perspective got the recent ruling on "off the record" statements incorrect.

I was going to write a long reply to this, but eh its a waste.

I'm not Anti-cop. I'm anti-officerobie59.

Please do tell, I'd be happy to debate further.

Also, my barbs can hurt but they're in no may meant as ad hom insults or affronts.

"I attack ideas, I don't attack people, but some very good people have some very bad ideas." - Antonin Scalia

 

[Dench]

Please do tell, I'd be happy to debate further.

Also, my barbs can hurt but they're in no may meant as ad hom insults or affronts.

"I attack ideas, I don't attack people, but some very good people have some very bad ideas." - Antonin Scalia

Honestly I'm not looking for a debate. My opinions set.

 

[namedpipes]

Nice to know if I ever had an issue that involved me losing my gun rights to me I would have your full support just because of my chosen profession. . . Don't get me wrong, I think that officers following the same laws as everyone else is an absolute necessity when it comes to ensuring a free society. But the absolute glee some here take when it comes to an cop losing his rights is hypocritical, and shows not simple pleasure that the law is being enforced equally, . . .

One of "us", losing a gun, reporting it stolen and later finding it could easily lose our license. You, maybe but probably not.

I got to use this twice in one night: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

You should WELCOME being held to higher standard.

 

[OfficerObie59]

Honestly I'm not looking for a debate. My opinions set.

I guess not. I'm just curious why you're anti-me. That was kind of a drive-by without explaination.

One of "us", losing a gun, reporting it stolen and later finding it could easily lose our license. You, maybe but probably not.

My employer also happens to be my licensing authority, and you assumption couldn't be further from the truth.

I'd wager they'd likely treat me harsher than a member of the general public to avoid any appearance I was getting special treatment.

You should WELCOME being held to higher standard.

I'm for equal standards across the board, particularly when it comes to things that don't involve an officer acting within the scope of his job. It seems to me holding officers to a higher standard places them into a position where they can claim greater privilege and responsibility for such sacrifice.

As in, "We're held more responsible when it comes to guns, thus we're inherently qualified to license the general public." We all know how absurd that statement is.

 

[namedpipes]

My employer also happens to be my licensing authority, and your assumption couldn't be further from the truth.

I'd wager they'd likely treat me harsher than a member of the general public to avoid any appearance I was getting special treatment.

Based on the available information (biased by the media, then re-biased here) there are numerous cases where officers committed some egregious act, often involving improper use of or storage of a gun, sometimes get a slap, generally get off. You *DO* enjoy a greater protection from investigation, prosecution and punishment than the general public.

Completely aside from the cases of simple abuse like the current "Dash Cam Maniac" or the "Manchester BTS Unabomber" (to pick extremes), wasn't there a case not so long ago where an officer left his loaded handgun in a dresser in his home, son used it for some kind of meyhem and the officer got off essentially scott free? (would someone with more memory cells fill in the blanks?)

I'm for equal standards across the board, particularly when it comes to things that don't involve an officer acting within the scope of his job. It seems to me holding officers to a higher standard places them into a position where they can claim greater privilege and responsibility for such sacrifice.

You actually make a fairly good point there, so how about this: WE hold you to the same standards while you hold YOURSELVES to a higher standard?