What's Going On In Boston Right Now (Gladstone Street)?

Lowbird said:
View attachment 179563
Click to expand...

Ch. 5 6:30 Snews mentioned something about him running under a number of aliases.

He certainly worked in a lot of states for his 33 years. I'm betting once he was "uncovered" he fled for another state and another scam.

When they check his fingerprints and run a III on him, I'll bet the print-out will be several pages long.
 
M1911 said:
This clown claimed to have some experience in the Army. If that is actually true (admittedly a very big if), then he might actually have some marksmanship skills.
Click to expand...

Poser.
https://www.armytimes.com/articles/...ritically-injuring-two-boston-police-officers

A Boston man who was killed Wednesday evening in a shootout that left two police officers in critical condition claimed on his website that he served eight years as an Army Reserve military police soldier, but he never even attended basic training, Army Times has learned.

Mr. Figueroa never attended basic training or advanced individual training. He did enlist in the U.S. Army Reserve in February 2003, but received a hardship discharge five months later," Wayne Hall said in a statement.
Click to expand...
Those discharges can be Honorable or General.
 
Last edited:
otasan56 said:
It IS the LEO's choice whether to wear BA or not. I am not an LEO and I have BA that I do not often wear. Level IIIA weighs a ton.
Click to expand...

Yes. I'm aware it's the LEO's choice. That's why I said that. [thinking]

You said it yourself. You're not an LEO. You don't have that dangerous job. Would you wear it if you patrolled East Boston? I would hope so.
 
modnaru said:
.

Mandatory or not, wouldn't it be a good practice to wear them anyways?
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Upon second thought, if the officer isn't mandated to wear it that's fine. I just didn't realize Boston, of all places, wouldn't require it. It's equipment for safety at work. That being said, I would certainly hope that officers would choose to wear it. It's like choosing not to carry a real gun. I guess you could get away with it, but I wouldn't take that chance.
 
BREWINZ said:
Absolutely.

Upon second thought, if the officer isn't mandated to wear it that's fine. I just didn't realize Boston, of all places, wouldn't require it. It's equipment for safety at work. That being said, I would certainly hope that officers would choose to wear it. It's like choosing not to carry a real gun. I guess you could get away with it, but I wouldn't take that chance.
Click to expand...

Its the same reason a lot of our boys overseas don't put plates in the carriers. They are heavy, make you less mobile and slow you down. If you need to chase after a perp that few extra pounds makes a difference. Now if I was knowingly going to a house for a DV call id be sure to throw it on.
 
Old school cops didn't hate guns. It used to be common for police officers to participate in pistol matches. That includes many big city departments.

Sadly, that has declined and the number of cops who are interested in guns, at least in this part of the country, is very low.

Bob P said:
He's an old school cop who hates guns. Yes he could be
Click to expand...
 
Sawicki1991 said:
Its the same reason a lot of our boys overseas don't put plates in the carriers. They are heavy, make you less mobile and slow you down. If you need to chase after a perp that few extra pounds makes a difference. Now if I was knowingly going to a house for a DV call id be sure to throw it on.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about plates. If you read my previous posts, I wasn't commenting on this particular situation. I was more surprised by the policy. I think that going with nothing is a poor choice. Most police encounter handguns. I would hope you'd wear a ballistic vest of some kind while on duty.
 
If this guy had an arrest record and supposedly was "checked" by BPD as part of the constable certification process in Boston, how the Hell did they fail to notice his shadiness?
 
Waher said:
If this guy had an arrest record and supposedly was "checked" by BPD as part of the constable certification process in Boston, how the Hell did they fail to notice his shadiness?
Click to expand...

I think Evans said that it was a "civil" position and he passed because he didn't commit any crimes in MA. Which, of course, is bullshit.

I was at work during the press conference. Perhaps someone else has more details.
 
Waher said:
If this guy had an arrest record and supposedly was "checked" by BPD as part of the constable certification process in Boston, how the Hell did they fail to notice his shadiness?
Click to expand...

Rock solid FBI background check. It's worked so well so far. If only we made it universal, maybe then, nobody else would ever go full retard.
 
Waher said:
If this guy had an arrest record and supposedly was "checked" by BPD as part of the constable certification process in Boston, how the Hell did they fail to notice his shadiness?
Click to expand...

As I stated in either this or the other related thread, I know of someone who it is alleged (by other Constables that know him) that he was a convicted felon, appointed as a Boston Constable. Boston Glob Spotlight did an expose on the fact that ~50% of Boston Constables had criminal records, some of them rather serious. It's all who you know and who you donate to wrt how to be a Boston Constable.

I know that the Selectmen in my town had my police chief do a BOP and III background on me and I had worked for the guy for a number of years. Not every city/town does due diligence! They do the appointments and if they really truly want to appoint an axe murderer, nobody can really stop them.
 
Waher said:
If this guy had an arrest record and supposedly was "checked" by BPD as part of the constable certification process in Boston, how the Hell did they fail to notice his shadiness?
Click to expand...

What law is broken by "shadiness"?

He was a no go for LTC, OKd for constable ( no ****ing idea what standard those guys need to meet), and had a clean MA record. You want cops to be informed by dispatch of possible "shadiness"?
Unfortunately, the 2 BPD officers were dispatched to the worst case scenario call. Yes, it sucks, but unfortunately its
part of the job.
There seems to be a disconnect here lately, or maybe its just me? Responding to "normal" calls for service with patrol rifles and wondering why the cops didnt know about the "shadiessness" of a guy, is this becoming the norm?
 
71olds442 said:
I hope they get rid of LEO exception I think that's the only way this bull will stop and we can get LEO's on our side because it doesn't effect them
Click to expand...

So sick of this argument, because it's so out of touch with the political reality.

I'm with you that the law should apply to all equally, but the pipe dream some gun rights advocates have of getting all the police lobbies on board will never happen. Removing the AWB exemption will NEVER get the police lobby to petition for an AWB repeal. Instead, MCOPA will just petition for the exemption back. Why? Because guys like Evans, all the Chiefs inside the 128 beltway, et al., can never survive politically if they did.

Bear in mind, a bunch of us were at the State House over the summer, petitioning our legislators at the end of the session--myself included.
 
BREWINZ said:
Absolutely.

Upon second thought, if the officer isn't mandated to wear it that's fine. I just didn't realize Boston, of all places, wouldn't require it. It's equipment for safety at work. That being said, I would certainly hope that officers would choose to wear it. It's like choosing not to carry a real gun. I guess you could get away with it, but I wouldn't take that chance.
Click to expand...

Boston PD is still a very old school department. They're considered progressive from the standpoint of their community policing tactics, but that itself is actually an old-school concept.
 
Last edited:
GPP said:
What law is broken by "shadiness"?
Click to expand...

If a guy has a record of arrests across the country, and his employment and military service record are spotty at best, it would behoove the licensing authorities to ask more questions before handing out even limited arrest powers like candy.
 
Waher said:
If a guy has a record of arrests across the country, and his employment and military service record are spotty at best, it would behoove the licensing authorities to ask more questions before handing out even limited arrest powers like candy.
Click to expand...

I believe he had one arrest in Georgia for arson? Possibly another charge.
Employment records arent something the PD gets to see.
Military records arent something the PD gets to see.

You want your local licensing authority to have access to employment and military records prior to handing out LTCs like candy?

Either he met the parameters to be a constable, or he didnt, right?
 
Ya he does look like he has the Karen Carpenter thing going on ,somebody break out the bacon already !efsemperfi;5246680]"Commissioner Evans looks like the poster child for AIDS" - My wife


God I love this woman.[/QUOTE]
 
OfficerObie59 said:
Boston PD is still a very old school department. They're considered progressive from the standpoint of their community policing tactics, but that itself is actually an old-school concept.
Click to expand...

It is and it's the best way to go IMO. The people will be more likely to speak with you.

EDIT: When I went to the PT academy there was an instructor that said in the 70's he was part of a crew that wore leather jackets with badges "on the corner" that beat people down. Probably not the best idea.
 
Last edited:
GPP said:
I believe he had one arrest in Georgia for arson? Possibly another charge.
Employment records arent something the PD gets to see.
Military records arent something the PD gets to see.

You want your local licensing authority to have access to employment and military records prior to handing out LTCs like candy?

Either he met the parameters to be a constable, or he didnt, right?
Click to expand...

As long as you understand that Boston's "parameters" are that you are connected (or put up a great BS story . . . and this guy sounded like he was a pro) and your check clears (Boston charges either $400 or $700 IIRC, plus similar amounts for "special training" to get certified to carry a gun or OC or cuffs). In other words, Boston regularly appoint people with serious criminal records as Constables.

Here you can read some of what I stated above and previously wrt Boston Constables.

http://archive.boston.com/news/specials/debt/part3_main/

For the record, I refused to do car seizures even though it is quite lucrative . . . I was offered $600/car seized. Also, if a Constable accepts a paper to serve, it is his/her legal obligation to make that service (or arrest that individual and bring him/her to court). It is illegal for us to "pass judgment" on whether the claims in a case are legit or not.
 
Last edited:
Not trying to be a prick here, and I am glad the shooter was dealt with, but one of the wounded cops was clearly morbidly obese. Is there no physical fitness requirement at all with the BPD ?

I can't help but wonder if one of the reasons there was no vest worn was that the guy was 100 pounds overweight. Body Armor sucks to wear when you are fit, but it's got to be a whole lot worse when you are way over weight.
 
fencer said:
Not trying to be a prick here, and I am glad the shooter was dealt with, but one of the wounded cops was clearly morbidly obese. Is there no physical fitness requirement at all with the BPD ?

I can't help but wonder if one of the reasons there was no vest worn was that the guy was 100 pounds overweight. Body Armor sucks to wear when you are fit, but it's got to be a whole lot worse when you are way over weight.
Click to expand...

The body armor is built in lol
 
WBZ news said that the shooter had an assault rifle...about a dozen times in one broadcast.

The media SUCKS.
 
fencer said:
Not trying to be a prick here, and I am glad the shooter was dealt with, but one of the wounded cops was clearly morbidly obese. Is there no physical fitness requirement at all with the BPD ?

I can't help but wonder if one of the reasons there was no vest worn was that the guy was 100 pounds overweight. Body Armor sucks to wear when you are fit, but it's got to be a whole lot worse when you are way over weight.
Click to expand...

Haha, there isn't a day that goes by almost anywhere I go that I don't have that thought when I see average police officers directing traffic, or on regular patrols. There must be NO fitness requirement at all anymore, other than the initial one to get hired![rofl]
 

Similar threads

Rifle Found on Berlin, NJ Street
Replies
8
Views
292
MaroonedinMA
MaroonedinMA
Up Next - Going after Police Trade-In guns.
2
Replies
34
Views
816
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
Boston gang member who posed with guns on Snapchat goes to prison
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
1sern
1
4000 More Machineguns Are Now Transferable
Replies
1
Views
526
Yosemite Sam
Yosemite Sam
Washington state high-capacity magazine ban remains on books for now
Replies
1
Views
128
pastera
pastera
Back
Top Bottom