MassCops - Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network, A Mass Police Web Portal

Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network

Massachusetts Police News, Information and Discussions on MassCops

Pages: 1

Main Page Racial Profiling Forms
(Click here to view the original thread on the MassCops Message Board)

Posted by: bbelichick

Are any departments in Massachusetts still filling out the Data Forms?

If so, why?

Posted by: OCKS

Quincy, Why, cause the chief tells us to. Who knows why.

Posted by: GodblessThearmy

cambridge does also.

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by OCKS

Quincy, Why, cause the chief tells us to. Who knows why.

Because they'll most likely be used against us somehow in the future.

Posted by: Mitpo62

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbelichick

Are any departments in Massachusetts still filling out the Data Forms?

If so, why?

We quit doing those late last summer. None of those issues exist in sparkling Taunton.

Posted by: bbelichick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta784

Because they'll most likely be used against us somehow in the future.

Were you guys under mandate by law to do so?

Has anyone been disciplined for failing to fill them out?

What reason does the Chief give to the rank and file for the continued requirement if you are no longer mandated to fill them out?

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbelichick

Were you guys under mandate by law to do so?

Yes, we were one of the "trial" departments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbelichick

Has anyone been disciplined for failing to fill them out?

Nothing beyond a "don't forget to submit a data collection form for each traffic stop".

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbelichick

What reason does the Chief give to the rank and file for the continued requirement if you are no longer mandated to fill them out?

None given, but because of the climate of fear of retribution we work under, everyone goes by the last order, which was to fill out a form for every traffic stop.

Posted by: OutOfManyOne

I wiped my ass with the last book i had a year ago. We don't do them anymore.

Posted by: Wolfman

They make good groin protectors when playing paintball.

Posted by: Gil

Attleboro is still filling them out, no reason given on why we still have to. But I hear the cites are down from last year..... wonder why

Posted by: SOT

You guys have to fill out forms when you racially profile? BUH! I would love to see the forms you fill out when you sexually harass!
Do they check to make sure you do it well?

Posted by: DPD6860

My department stopped the Data Collection Forms about 8 months ago, the chief sent a memo stating that we have met the requirements for filling them out and we didn't need to do it anymore.

Posted by: Edmizer1

Years ago when the RMV moved to a CJIS based system to request revoked reg/lic certs my dept kept filing out the paper forms for years even though they became 100% useless. I tried to bring up this fact and was told that our court officer needed them for court. I asked the court officer and he said the admin secretary need them to send to the RMV. I asked her and she said the court officer needed them for court. Basically, once a form comes into use, some depts mandate them because they are "policy".

Posted by: sdb29

Ya we still do them. We held off for a long time, but apparently our chief (small "c" on purpose) was told that if we don't do them horrible things will happen. Famine! Locusts!

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOT

You guys have to fill out forms when you racially profile?

I know that was made tongue-in-cheek, but for anyone who doesn't know what we're talking about;

Posted by: SOT

So what's the point of this form? To see if you are racially profiling? to stop you from racially profiling? or to build a racial profile of what people prolly are carrying drugs etc?

Short version: Cops pulls me over, it's prolly for something dumb I did...and to that end, if I have nothing to hide why should I care if they search me?

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOT

So what's the point of this form? To see if you are racially profiling? to stop you from racially profiling? or to build a racial profile of what people prolly are carrying drugs etc?

The data was turned over to the Institute on Race & Justice at Northeastern University, what they did with it no one seems to know.

Posted by: Crvtte65

Just filled out three... do it cause they tell me to

Posted by: phuzz01

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOT

So what's the point of this form? To see if you are racially profiling? to stop you from racially profiling? or to build a racial profile of what people prolly are carrying drugs etc?

Maybe it is to build a racial profile OF the racial profilers!

Posted by: SOT

What a waste of time. I'd rather the police fill out more tickets than some forms.
(As long as I'm not getting the ticket)

Posted by: sdb29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta784

The data was turned over to the Institute on Race & Justice at Northeastern University, what they did with it no one seems to know.

Well what they do with it is simple. It provides jobs for a bunch of people at the Institute on Race & Justice, probably funded through grants.

Posted by: wgciv

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOT

So what's the point of this form? To see if you are racially profiling? to stop you from racially profiling? or to build a racial profile of what people prolly are carrying drugs etc?

Short version: Cops pulls me over, it's prolly for something dumb I did...and to that end, if I have nothing to hide why should I care if they search me?

There is no point, it is a complete waste of time... almost all of the information on the data sheet can be obtained directly from the citation itself. Quite redundant if you ask me.

Posted by: MM1799

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOT

So what's the point of this form?

There is no point. It's about useful as the Globe "special reports" on the police. I'll find the specific link.

Here it is: http://www.boston.com/globe/metro/packages/tickets/

Posted by: SOT

Something that is of interest to me....they talk about percentages, but they really don't talk about the numbers of stops.
I'd be curious to see if there was some sort of increased percentage of tickets (or decreased) if a certain racial profile was stopped more. Also the demographics of the area would have a lot to do with the racial mix.

Posted by: GD

Get ready because special interest groups want this to be permenant!! There is no chief with a set nuts to go up against them for fear of being criticized by these groups. Good luck!!

Posted by: OutOfManyOne

it is permanent, its on the freaking citation now. no need to do another form.

Posted by: JARCOUETTE

Belchertown is still doing them too however we are only providing them with verbal warnings and we use the racial profile tab in IMC for that.

Posted by: MARINECOP

We just stopped doing them approximately 2 months ago. What a waste of time.

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by GD

Get ready because special interest groups want this to be permenant!! There is no chief with a set nuts to go up against them for fear of being criticized by these groups. Good luck!!

WRONG ANSWER! The Chief's were against the forms from the start. The problem was that they were mandated by the Secretary of Public Safety. There was no choice in the matter. MA. Chief's Association fought pretty hard, to no avail...

Posted by: JeffC

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

what authority does the secretary of public safety have over a police chief? what if the chiefs just refused to issue the books to their officers?

Posted by: mikemac64

Quote:

Originally Posted by wgciv

the data sheet can be obtained directly from the citation itself. Quite redundant if you ask me.

But if you don't issue a cite (warning/money/crim app), then there is no written record to refer to. One of the things they were looking for was cops who were allegedly on fishing expeditions. Guys who stopped a ton of cars and never wrote a V until they found something more than a CMVI.

I didn't like the forms either, I am just stating part of the thinking behind the seperate form.

Posted by: Irish Wampanoag

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbelichick

That was my reply when on May1st we will start filling them out. I said wait until we are ordered to fill them out.

Posted by: wgciv

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikemac64

You mean to say that police officers actually look for people driving around with drugs and guns, etc. Oh my, what is the world coming to??????

Posted by: rwinerlaw

Last time I checked, we already fill out race and gender on the citation itself so why the additional form. Weymouth still does em.

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeffC

what authority does the secretary of public safety have over a police chief? what if the chiefs just refused to issue the books to their officers?

THE MASSACHUSETTS RACIAL PROFILING LAW

During the summer of 2000, the Massachusetts legislature enacted “An Act Providing for the Collection of Data Relative to Traffic Stops.” Joining about nine other states plus the federal government, this legislation was aimed at identifying and eliminating racial profiling by law enforcement officers.
The new law consists of ten sections. It defines racial and gender profiling, mandates data collection and analysis, calls for policy development, requires training and includes a public awareness campaign. The following is a description of each section.
Section 1 – Definition

This defines racial and gender profiling as:
The practice of detaining a suspect based on a broad set of criteria which casts suspicion on an entire class of people without any individualized suspicion of the particular person being stopped.

Section 2 – EOPS Mandate

This instructs the Executive Office of Public Safety to work with the State Police and municipal police departments to ensure that adequate efforts are being made to identify and eliminate any instances of racial and gender profiling by police officers.
Comment
During the Fall of 2000, the Secretary of Public Safety assembled an ad hoc Advisory Committee on Racial and Gender Profiling, chaired by the General Counsel of EOPS. Consisting of a score of individuals, the committee was composed of several chiefs and State Police officials, as well as representatives from the Attorney General’s office, the Registry of Motor Vehicles (and its Merit Rating Board), the Boston Police Department, EOPS staff, a university researcher, and the General Counsel of the Chiefs of Police Association. Meeting roughly every other week, the group tackled a host of topics associated with implementing the new law.
Section 3 – Training

The State Police and the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association were required to develop policies and procedures on how to identify and prevent racial and gender profiling by police officers. These were submitted to the Secretary of Public Safety for review as required by the statute by March 1, 2001.
The Secretary approved such policies and procedures, and has directed the Criminal Justice Training Council to include them in training for:
· recruits;
· in-service for veteran officers;
· supervisor training for all superior officers (including chiefs); and
· dispatchers and communication officers.
Comment
Because the Training Council conducts its in-service training program from September through May, it arranged for the production of a curriculum on Racial Profiling and started including a course on the topic in classes starting in September 2000. Since the Council already had a contract with the Municipal Police Institute, Inc. (MPI) to conduct training for chiefs, the Council was able to obtain the in-service curriculum – as well as train-the-trainer support – at no additional cost.
Training for chiefs took place on December 5, 2000. Those attending the seminar received a copy of a manual entitled “The Chief’s Guide to Racial Profiling”. The manual is available on the Chief’s Association website (www.masschiefs.org) All chiefs in the state will also receive a copy of this and the other two manuals produced by MPI under this year’s contract with the Training Council in June on a CD-Rom.
The law also requires the Council to provide racial and gender profiling training to supervisors, dispatchers and communication officers. Presumably this will take place during 2001, subject to funding and the development of the appropriate curriculum and instructor training.
Section 4 – Public Awareness Campaign

The EOPS is required to put in place a public awareness campaign for April 1, 2001. It will emphasize the responsibility of the police and citizens to focus on illegal conduct, rather than race or gender, before taking action.
The law also calls on EOPS to establish a toll-free citizen complaint line (1-866-6RACIAL) and to share the information received with the appropriate law enforcement agency.
Comment
Unfortunately, the new law did not contain any funding provisions. Any public awareness campaign and toll-free line(s) will be expensive. Unless other funds can be identified and diverted for this purpose, which appears unlikely, with the exception of the toll-free line, these components of the new law may have to be deferred until the legislature provides funding.
Section 5 – Search Notation

The Registry of Motor Vehicles (or its Merit Rating Board), as required, has revised the Uniform Motor Vehicle Citation to include a field that allows officers to note whether a search of a vehicle occurred at the time a citation was issued.
Comment
The new form has a “search” block with two parts. The first is a “no” or “yes” check-off portion. This must be completed. The second is an optional area for a department’s internal use. If a department is so inclined, it may direct its officers to fill in this area with a locally-developed code, e.g. R= Reasonable Suspicion; P= Probable Cause; C= Consent. The RMV/Merit Rating Board will not tabulate the latter information.
It will take some time before everyone agrees on what constitutes a reportable “search.” It appears that the following would not be included:
· inventory search (at scene, at station or at impound area);
· plain view observation through window, open door, etc. (without a resulting search); and
· search (of the person only, not the vehicle) incident to lawful arrest.
Included as “yes” in the search box would be all searches that precede an arrest whether undertaken with consent, reasonable suspicion or probable cause.
Section 6 – Motor Vehicle Citation Protocol

The Executive Office of Public Safety has issued a uniform protocol for state police and municipal police officers on how to use the Motor Vehicle Citation to record the race and sex of each individual and whether or not a search occurred.
The following race categories must be used:
A= Asian or Pacific Islander
B= Black
H= Hispanic
I= American Indian or Alaskan Native
M= Middle Eastern or East Indian
W= White
Without asking motorists, officers must fill in the space at the time citation is completed.
SECTION 7 – DRIVER EDUCATION MANUAL

The Registry, in consultation with the State Police, is to include in future “driver education manuals” (although that is not what they are called), a section on how motorists should respond if they are stopped by the police, including what they can do if they believe they were stopped as a result of racial or gender profiling.
Comment
The Colonel of the Massachusetts State Police has been advocating for this provision for some time. That is one reason it was inserted in the legislation.
SECTION 8 – RMV DATA COLLECTION

The Registry (or more properly its Merit Rating Board) will collect data from Motor Vehicle Citations regarding:
· identifying characteristics (but not the name, address, or other information that may reveal the person’s identity) of the individuals who receive a warning or citation or who are arrested, including their race and gender;
· the traffic infraction;
· whether a search was initiated as a result of the stop; and
· whether the stop resulted in a warning, citation or arrest.
The Registry is to transmit monthly copies of the statistical information to the Secretary of Public Safety, who shall determine when it is also appropriate to transmit such data to the attorney general.
SECTION 9 – INDIVIDUAL DATA PROHIBITED

The information collected is to be used for statistical purposes only. It may not contain information that may reveal the identity of any individual who is stopped or any law enforcement officer.
Comment
This section makes it clear that the data will not be used to discipline or hold an officer liable for alleged racial and/or gender profiling. As will be clear in subsequent sections, the department as a whole, rather than individual officers, will suffer the consequences if profiling appears to be taking place.
SECTION 10 – DATA ANALYSIS; PENALTIES

Within a year of the law’s effective date, the Secretary is to send the RMV’s data to a university in this state with experience in the analysis of such data, for annual preparation of an analysis and report of its findings. The Secretary is to send such report to the:
· Attorney General;
· State Police;
· Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association; and
· the Clerks of the House of Representatives and the Senate.
The Executive Office, in consultation with the Attorney General, will, if the data “suggests that a state police barracks or municipal police department appears to have engaged in racial or gender profiling”, require such barracks or department for one year to collect information on all traffic stops, including those not resulting in a warning, citation or arrest. This information will also include the reason for the stop.
The Colonel or a municipality may appeal to the Attorney General for a determination that collecting such information is not required.
Comment
It is premature to discuss any details on how the university will be selected or the data analyzed. However, it is clear that the scope of the data collection is not as broad as some would like. There is likely to be a great deal of debate in the coming months on this issue. Some speculate that it will be very difficult for a researcher to identify instances of racial or gender profiling based on the available data.
In any event, should the Secretary issue a one-year collection order, the burden on a police department or barracks will be severe. The law does not specify how the additional data will be collected nor how it will be analyzed. It is fair to say that the ACLU and other potential plaintiffs will be seeking copies of such information.
NOTE: Chiefs should consult the Chief’s Association’s website for updating information at www.masschiefs.org

* * * * *

John M. Collins, Esquire
Collins & Weinberg
47 Memorial Drive
Shrewsbury, MA 01545-4028
(50

842-1556
(50

842-3703 Fax
MPIShrews@aol.com

Many chief's feel that even if they even if they are no longer mandated to fill out the forms, this issue will not go away and the forms serve to show that their department does not engage in racial profiling. It is a proactive measure. I think the forms are pretty useless, but in the big scheme of things, what's the big deal? A couple of extra minutes per stop to fill the thing out...remember guys, its all by the hour! The "I'm not going to write tickets now" approach is pretty immature. "I don't like this form so I won't do my job", puhleeze!

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

The "I'm not going to write tickets now" approach is pretty immature. "I don't like this form so I won't do my job", puhleeze!

As James Carnell of the BPPA succinctly put it, cops don't like to participate in the manufacture of their own noose.

Posted by: bbelichick

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Many chief's feel that even if they even if they are no longer mandated to fill out the forms, this issue will not go away and the forms serve to show that their department does not engage in racial profiling. It is a proactive measure. I think the forms are pretty useless, but in the big scheme of things, what's the big deal? A couple of extra minutes per stop to fill the thing out...remember guys, its all by the hour! The "I'm not going to write tickets now" approach is pretty immature. "I don't like this form so I won't do my job", puhleeze!

Then many Chiefs have no sack. The information is available on the cite and from Merit Rating. Why have your guys fill out the same form twice?

As far as the "what's the big deal" and "A couple of extra minutes per stop to fill the thing out" comments...spoken like someone who doesn't have to fill them out. Typical manager mentality. "I don't have to fill them out, so who cares."

A few extra minutes per stop (say 3) and your guy writes 30 tickets (no hard task with a Lidar) you just added 90 minutes of utterly useless crap onto your guy's plate and subtracted 90 minutes of other things he could be doing. Think of all the sh*theads that drove by him while he was sitting in the cruiser filling out a redundant and utterly useless piece of garbage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta784

As James Carnell of the BPPA succinctly put it, cops don't like to participate in the manufacture of their own noose.

Ya know, Delta...I was going to go back and edit my post to reflect that same sentiment. You beat me to it. Spooky.

Posted by: SinePari

I love this topic. It clearly shows who has cobbles and who doesn't. Any department that panders to the Northeastern University study should also take into account the following quote from a PUBLIC government website:

Drug Situation: Cocaine and heroin continue to be the primary drugs of abuse in the state of Massachusetts as Colombian and Dominican traffickers dominate the distribution throughout the state. OxyContin® remains extremely popular and has been seen as a “gateway drug” to heroin use.

Now, taxpayers have paid some nerd in some office with a bunch of stats, figures, computers and tarot cards to come up with this information. What, by God, would they like us to do with this information?

Posted by: SOT

Racially profile it....

Posted by: chief801

[quote=bbelichick]Then many Chiefs have no sack. The information is available on the cite and from Merit Rating. Why have your guys fill out the same form twice?
This issue has NOTHING to do with "sack". We all seem to forget that we don't make the rules! We expect the public to follow rules, but when applied to us they are "useless" and a "waste of time"
As far as the "what's the big deal" and "A couple of extra minutes per stop to fill the thing out" comments...spoken like someone who doesn't have to fill them out. Typical manager mentality. "I don't have to fill them out, so who cares."
You make some incorrect assumptions here. I do care. I just don't understand the whining. I've always done what I am paid to do. If the powers that be want me to fill out a form, so be it. Over the last 17 years I have done MANY things that I would consider useless, but it was decided by someone higher on the food chain that they wanted it done. Its called following orders...
A few extra minutes per stop (say 3) and your guy writes 30 tickets (no hard task with a Lidar) you just added 90 minutes of utterly useless crap onto your guy's plate and subtracted 90 minutes of other things he could be doing. Think of all the sh*theads that drove by him while he was sitting in the cruiser filling out a redundant and utterly useless piece of garbage.
I would buy this if officers (myself included) didn't easily spend 90 minutes or more during a shift doing things other than searching for bad guys. I'm sure you always take exactly 30 minutes for a meal break, don't shoot the breeze with your buddies, make personal phone calls, catch the 4th quarter of the Pats game, or some other non-law enforcement activity during the course of a shift. Once again...puhleeze.

Posted by: 94c

spoken like a true chief.

Posted by: Deuce

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

This issue has NOTHING to do with "sack". We all seem to forget that we don't make the rules! We expect the public to follow rules, but when applied to us they are "useless" and a "waste of time"

We expect the public to follow the law just as we do. No where in that post of yours did that "law" fall under a MGL chapter and section. So as far as I'm concerened it's a bullshit survey adding more paperwork. Yes it's useless and a waste of time and if a chief had a sack he wouldn't order the troops to entertain this nonsense..

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

You make some incorrect assumptions here. I do care. I just don't understand the whining. I've always done what I am paid to do. If the powers that be want me to fill out a form, so be it. Over the last 17 years I have done MANY things that I would consider useless, but it was decided by someone higher on the food chain that they wanted it done. Its called following orders...

That's right put your blinders on and march right off the cliff cuz you were ordered to. Typical nearsighted managment. The public questions EVERYTHING we do, but when we do it's whining. Dinosaur. Remind me not to follow you into combat..

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

I would buy this if officers (myself included) didn't easily spend 90 minutes or more during a shift doing things other than searching for bad guys. I'm sure you always take exactly 30 minutes for a meal break, don't shoot the breeze with your buddies, make personal phone calls, catch the 4th quarter of the Pats game, or some other non-law enforcement activity during the course of a shift. Once again...puhleeze.

Yes, 30 minutes then it's back to humping calls. No we don't have time for all that other crap cuz can't cunt managment like yourself (allegedly) cowtow and pile on more shit for us to do...

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by 94c

spoken like a true chief.

Thanks!!!

Easy Deuce!!! Try decaf man...why the name calling? Imagine that...trying to have a civil, intelligent discussion about a silly form has spiralled down the crapper to the point of calling people "cunts". You got issues brother...I'm sure you're the pride of your department with your impressive communications skills and your ability to ponder alternate viewpoints. Is it really that hard to respectfully agree to disagree?

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

The view of the world from behind the wheel of a marked cruiser is dramatically different than the one from behind the chief's desk.

Posted by: SinePari

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Thanks!!!

In my little world I've noticed there are MANAGERS, then there are LEADERS. You are a MANAGER with a nice title. The "I do what I'm paid to do" attitude is why you will never be a LEADER.

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta784

The view of the world from behind the wheel of a marked cruiser is dramatically different than the one from behind the chief's desk.

Which is precisely why I get out and check that view and ask my team if they are seeing the same things I'm seeing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SinePari

In my little world I've noticed there are MANAGERS, then there are LEADERS. You are a MANAGER with a nice title. The "I do what I'm paid to do" attitude is why you will never be a LEADER.

What I "Manage" is the fact that certain things need to be done, for whatever reason. Sometimes I am not in the position to determine that need. As a "Leader" my job is to get my team to not get bogged down in the minutiae and keep their eyes on the big picture. The fact that some of you are so focused on these forms tells me that your leaders aren't having a positive influence on you.

If you have the ability to determine that I am a MANAGER in your book based on this discussion so be it. My feelings aren't hurt. I can assure you that you don't want to get into a leadership debate. I'LL EAT YOU ALIVE.

Posted by: justanotherparatrooper

'duck and cover'....this is gonna go downhill

Posted by: SinePari

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Which is precisely why I get out and check that view and ask my team if they are seeing the same things I'm seeing.

What I "Manage" is the fact that certain things need to be done, for whatever reason. Sometimes I am not in the position to determine that need. As a "Leader" my job is to get my team to not get bogged down in the minutiae and keep their eyes on the big picture. The fact that some of you are so focused on these forms tells me that your leaders aren't having a positive influence on you.

If you have the ability to determine that I am a MANAGER in your book based on this discussion so be it. My feelings aren't hurt. I can assure you that you don't want to get into a leadership debate. I'LL EAT YOU ALIVE.

YOU opened yourself up to being piled on by making (albeit, typing) the stupid remark of "doing what I'm paid to do". I don't need to taste shit if I see it or smell it. Granted, as a "chief", one must first be a politician, and police officer is somewhere down the bottom after baby sitter, community relationship builder, accountant, and a host of other things I have no desire to do.

Our leaders have nothing to do with these stupid collection data forms. It comes from the "either you do this, or you lose federal money" garbage that we've all come to know and love. The big picture is what our union does so I don't have to. They're our elected members who's sole purpose is to have our best interests met. That means money, equipment, contractual fairness, and officer safety.

If we can't have a debate and bitch about crap that we as patrol officers see as an unnecessary burden, then we're all robo-cops. As far as being eaten alive, if you want to measure dicks since your insecurities have arisen, I'll put my resume up against anyone here. Reading Stephen Covey books or going to Tony Robbins seminars doesn't count.

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by SinePari

For the record, we don't do the forms...

, Just me kicking the beehive again! Man its easy to fire you guys up!

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

I can assure you that you don't want to get into a leadership debate. I'LL EAT YOU ALIVE.

The fact you seem to think these ridiculous profiling forms are a good idea is very damning evidence of your leadership qualities.

Posted by: bbelichick

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

For the record, we don't do the forms...

, Just me kicking the beehive again! Man its easy to fire you guys up!

Who's "we"? I've never seen a Chief or anyone above the rank of Sgt fill those things out anyway.

Posted by: Mitpo62

"We?" Might be that mouse in his pocket.

Posted by: 94c

A chief of a five man department. Impressive indeed.

Posted by: bbelichick

Chief
Capt
Lt
Sgt
Officer

Must suck to be the one low guy. I once saw a 5 man PD that had a Staff Sgt. They had a Chief, a Capt, an Lt , A Staff and ONE Officer. That is just ridiculous.

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta784

The fact you seem to think these ridiculous profiling forms are a good idea is very damning evidence of your leadership qualities.

I never said they were a good idea! But if I did, that would have absolutely no reflection on leadership qualities. Disagreement on an issue doesn't equate to lack of leadership, its lack of agreement...

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbelichick

Who's "we"? I've never seen a Chief or anyone above the rank of Sgt fill those things out anyway.

THAT is a lack of leadership...

Quote:

Originally Posted by 94c

A chief of a five man department. Impressive indeed.

9 officers get it right if you are going to try to slam me

And for the record, I didn't take the job to impress you or anyone else...its a great gig! I'd rather work in a 9 person department surrounded by good people than a large department full of malcontents bitching about a form...

The advantage of a small department is that I get to build relationships with my team. I am lucky, its the best of both worlds...If I feel like taking a break from the chief thing, I can hop in a car and shag calls with them.

Wait a minute...how did this go from profiling forms to picking on me and Deputy Fife! Aunt Bee and Opie aren't going to like this!

I gotta run, we changed the lock on the cell and Otis needs a new key and Ernest E. Bass is throwing rocks downtown again...

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Okay, fair enough.

However, you (and every other chief) could have been a hero to your patrol officers if you simply said "I don't see a problem with racial profiling, so we're not going to use these forms". You would have been carried away from that press conference on the shoulders of your officers. Instead, you seemed to choose the all-too-typical chief's route of just going with the flow, regardless of how much it damages morale.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

I'd rather work in a 9 person department surrounded by good people than a large department full of malcontents bitching about a form...

Once again....typical chief's attitude. You label patrol officers as "malcontents" because they complain about something, regardless of how valid their complaints might be. We call that the "How Dare They" reflex.

A suggestion.....if your patrol officers are complaining about something, why not look further into it? Chances are, there's a very good reason for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

The advantage of a small department is that I get to build relationships with my team. I am lucky, its the best of both worlds...If I feel like taking a break from the chief thing, I can hop in a car and shag calls with them.

That's certainly admirable, but believe me when I tell you....no patrol officer who's not a suckass wants the chief showing-up at one of their calls, unless they're in deep shit and there's no other option.

Posted by: MM1799

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta784

That's certainly admirable, but believe me when I tell you....no patrol officer who's not a suckass wants the chief showing-up at one of their calls

I can see it now:
Officer: chief, we need to fill out these forms.
Chief: why? we already wrote all this down on the citation.
Officer: it's so some 3rd party phDs can analyze us from a far
Chief: (^*& THAT, IM NOT FILLING THIS CRAP OUT!
Officer: oh thank you god...
Chief: No, I'm not. Here, fill it out for me.
And then the chief drives off to the next community meeting to tell everyone how well the forms are working.

I wont even comment on what happens when the chief shows up to a serious call.

Posted by: chief801

Wow, I'm glad I never worked anywhere like what you guys are describing! And Delta...malcontent means "not happy". The fact that they are complaining, by definition, makes them malcontents...

Whether or not the Chief is welcomed by officers on a call is completely dependent on the actions of said Chief when he gets there. I can't think of the last time I wasn't thanked for showing up. I'm sure they didn't mind me booking an accident for them the other day in the storm...

Do you guys really all hate your bosses that much? If so, it must be a crappy work environment...

Posted by: bbelichick

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

And Delta...malcontent means "not happy". The fact that they are complaining, by definition, makes them malcontents...

Do you guys really all hate your bosses that much? If so, it must be a crappy work environment...

Actually, your majesty, in this situation and by your context, a "malcontent" is one who is chronically unhappy. As Delta said, it seems you label your guys as malcontents because they are unhappy about filling out a redundant and ridiculous form. Why does that make them malcontents? I would say they have a right to be unhappy about it.

It would also seem that they would be unhappy with the lack of testicular fortitude by their Chief for failing to tell the powers that be to shove the form.

Posted by: MM1799

I love my job and some of my bosses are great and "get it" and others I doubt even remember how to speak into the cruiser radio..

By continually appeasing the outsiders (phDs, civil rights activists..) who think they know how are job is done, better than us, certain chiefs send a crystal clear message to the rank and file. You got a great pinch? 4 gangbangers are in jail? That's all fine and good but make sure you fill out those racial profiling forms!

The fact that the chiefs around here have no "sack" (as bbelichick so lovely put it), they sent a message to every anti-LE organization on the planet saying that they [the chiefs] think monitoring the officers is better than trusting them to do the job which we were hired to do. THANK YOU CHIEF!

Posted by: BLUE LINE

I am still looking for the box to check of what race the Officer is. In my opinion it seems like a waste of time collecting all these figures if you don't know what race the Officer is. This is only my opinion, but I have asked this question to many class instructors and Chief's and no one has the answer, may be someone from Northeastern knows !!!

Posted by: 94c

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLUE LINE

I am still looking for the box to check of what race the Officer is. In my opinion it seems like a waste of time collecting all these figures if you don't know what race the Officer is. This is only my opinion, but I have asked this question to many class instructors and Chief's and no one has the answer, may be someone from Northeastern knows !!!

All cops are blue. That makes them racists or Uncle Tom's. I've worked with some sharp minority officers and they take more heat in certain neighborhoods than the white officers.

Here you have a guy trying to clean up an area and he is seen as a traitor.

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbelichick

Re-read my posts Bill, I've never said my folks were malcontents, I said they were a great group. And my counter to your testicular fortitude comment is that it takes a great deal of testicular fortitude to make an unpopular decision. The flip side of your scenario is that EOPS says, "That Chief doesn't have the testicular fortitude to stand up and do the right thing". It's a no win for the Chief (as usual).

I don't recall who mentioned it earlier, but personally, I would want to coooperate with EOPS since they control the grants. It would hurt my guy's wallets to loose grant money, not mine. I tend to want to stay on the good side of EOPS so my guys can get PAID YO'.

Posted by: j809

We didn't have to do them and we don't do them now as Chief801 said, and he is one of the few Chiefs around that stood by his guns. And I want to get paid some MO.

Posted by: PBC FL Cop

The fact his officers are defending him, should speaks volumes!!!

Posted by: Deuce

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Over the last 17 years I have done MANY things that I would consider useless, but it was decided by someone higher on the food chain that they wanted it done. Its called following orders...

So by your own admission you disobeyed orders. Not really setting a good example for the troops chiefy.

Still waiting on the chapter/section..

And the "cunt" comment was more of a general description of all chiefs based on my training and experience.. Nothing personal, besides I'm sure you've been called worse...

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuce

You lost me on the disobeying orders...

I know it was an act passed by the legislature, I'll get you a more specific cite.

And I have been called worse...by some skell...not a "brother" officer.

Posted by: Delta784

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Wow, I'm glad I never worked anywhere like what you guys are describing!

You should be, apparently.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

And Delta...malcontent means "not happy". The fact that they are complaining, by definition, makes them malcontents...

I don't disagree with you on the accuracy of the term, my point is that if there are a significant number of "malcontents" in the patrol officer ranks, that should set-off all sorts of alarms and whistles in a chief's head. It shouldn't be dismissed with a statement such as this;

I'd rather work in a 9 person department surrounded by good people than a large department full of malcontents bitching about a form...

Large police departments tend to have very experienced patrol officers, usually much more experienced that those of a 9 person department. If these very seasoned veterans see a major problem that seriously effects morale, causing them to be "malcontents", shouldn't that issue be seriously examined by the people who have made a career of hiding from real police work while they digest Iannone and Trojanowicz?

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Whether or not the Chief is welcomed by officers on a call is completely dependent on the actions of said Chief when he gets there. I can't think of the last time I wasn't thanked for showing up.

I can't think of the last time anyone above the rank of sergeant came to one of my calls, and I'm very grateful for that. If my chief showed at one of my calls, I'd invite him to take the entire paperwork....soup to nuts. Otherwise, go away.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

I'm sure they didn't mind me booking an accident for them the other day in the storm...

That would be the day........

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

Do you guys really all hate your bosses that much? If so, it must be a crappy work environment...

Yes, we do. And yes, it is. The saddest thing of all is that it doesn't have to be like that.

You seem like an okay guy, and most likely your cozy working environment has kept your head out of the clouds. Just keep in mind that for every MA chief such as yourself, there is probably a dozen or more that have the ingrained "How Dare They" reflex towards patrol officers.

Posted by: SinePari

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief801

I don't recall who mentioned it earlier, but personally, I would want to coooperate with EOPS since they control the grants. It would hurt my guy's wallets to loose grant money, not mine. I tend to want to stay on the good side of EOPS so my guys can get PAID YO'.

Well, since you're counting beans, be it known that during some past Enforcement Grants, I wrote dozens of violations in your utopia town of Harvard. So, the town should be getting "a cut" of the pie, none of which I'll ever see, and your guys didn't have to write one single data collection form. You're welcome

Posted by: OutOfManyOne

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuce

Still waiting on the chapter/section..

Chapter 228 of the Acts of 2000

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF DATA RELATIVE TO TRAFFIC STOPS.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. As used in this act, "racial and gender profiling" means the practice of detaining a suspect based on a broad set of criteria which casts suspicion on an entire class of people without any individualized suspicion of the particular person being stopped.
SECTION 2. The executive office of public safety shall work with the department of state police and municipal police departments to ensure that adequate efforts are being made to identify and eliminate any instances of racial and gender profiling by police officers in the performance of their official duties.
SECTION 3. The department of state police and the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, shall develop policies and procedures on how to identify and prevent racial and gender profiling by police officers, and shall submit them to the secretary of public safety for review not later than December 31, 2000. If the secretary approves such policies and procedures, the secretary shall direct the criminal justice training council to include them in (a) the new recruit basic training curriculum under section 116A of chapter 6 of the General Laws; (b) any in-service training for veteran officers; (c) any supervisory training for all superior officers; and (d) any dispatcher and communication officer training.
SECTION 4. The executive office of public safety shall initiate a public awareness campaign on racial and gender profiling not later than January 1, 2001. The campaign shall emphasize the responsibility of public safety officials and residents of the commonwealth to identify unlawful or potentially unlawful behavior by an individual, as opposed to the individual's race or gender, before taking any action. As a part of this public awareness campaign, the executive office of public safety shall establish a procedure whereby motorists who allege that an incident of racial or gender profiling has occurred may register a complaint by calling a toll-free telephone number. The executive office of public safety shall periodically analyze such complaints, and shall share the data with the appropriate state or local police departments.
SECTION 5. The registry of motor vehicles shall revise the Massachusetts Uniform Citation to include a field that allows officers to note whether a search of a vehicle occurred at the time a citation was issued.
SECTION 6. The executive office of public safety shall develop a uniform protocol for state police and municipal police officers on how to use the Massachusetts Uniform Citation to record the race and sex of each individual cited by an officer for a motor vehicle violation, and whether or not a search occurred. The protocol shall be put into effect not later than January 1, 2001.
SECTION 7. The registry of motor vehicles shall, in consultation with the department of state police, incorporate in any driver education manual prepared by the registry a section on how motorists should respond if they are stopped by police officers, including what they can do if they believe they were stopped as a result of racial or gender profiling.
SECTION 8. The registry of motor vehicles shall collect data from any issued Massachusetts Uniform Citation regarding the following information:
(1) identifying characteristics of the individuals who receive a warning or citation or who are arrested, including the race and gender of the individual;
(2) the traffic infraction;
(3) whether a search was initiated as a result of the stop; and
(4) whether the stop resulted in a warning, citation or arrest.
The registry of motor vehicles shall maintain statistical information on the data required by this section and shall report that information monthly to the secretary of public safety, who shall determine when it is also appropriate to transmit such data to the attorney general. The data collection shall commence not later than January 1, 2001.
SECTION 9. Individual data acquired under this section shall be used only for statistical purposes and may not contain information that may reveal the identity of any individual who is stopped or any law enforcement officer.
SECTION 10. Not later than one year after the effective date of this act, the secretary of public safety shall transmit the necessary data collected by the registry of motor vehicles to a university in the commonwealth with experience in the analysis of such data, for annual preparation of an analysis and report of its findings. The secretary shall forthwith transmit the university's annual report to the department of the attorney general, the department of state police, the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, the executive office of public safety and the clerks of the house of representatives and the senate. The executive office of public safety shall, in consultation with the attorney general, if such data suggest that a state police barracks or municipal police department appears to have engaged in racial or gender profiling, require said state police barracks or municipality for a period of one year to collect information on all traffic stops, including those not resulting in a warning, citation or arrest. This information shall include the reason for the stop in addition to the other information already required under the Massachusetts Uniform Citation. Upon appeal by the colonel of state police or the municipality, respectively, the attorney general may determine that collecting such information is not required.
Approved August 10, 2000.

Massachusetts Legislation and Study In August 2000, Chapter 228 of the Acts of 2000, “An Act Providing for the Collection of Data Relative to Traffic Stops” was signed into law. Among other things, the law required that the Registry of Motor Vehicles collect data from all citations and written warnings issued in Massachusetts beginning April 1, 2001. This data included:

Identifying characteristics of the individual who received the warning or citation, or who was arrested, including race and gender;
The traffic infraction;
Whether a search was conducted as a result of the stop; and
Whether the stop resulted in a warning, citation or arrest.

The law further mandated that the Executive Office of Public Safety hire a university in Massachusetts with expertise in racial profiling data analysis to analyze the Massachusetts citation data and prepare a report. The EOPS hired Northeastern University’s Institute on Race and Justice to conduct this study. Northeastern published its report on May 4, 2004, with significant input from a working group comprised of community organizations and advocates, state and local law enforcement agencies, state agency stakeholders, and researchers. A preliminary draft of the report was also shared with communities across Massachusetts through several regional forums.
The report analyzed citation and written warning data from 366 law enforcement agencies in Massachusetts. Under the statute, this phase of data collection did not include all traffic stops. Moreover, the analysis conducted by Northeastern was limited to race. After consultation with the sponsoring legislators, gender was not included in the analysis because the data being collected could not identify or quantify inappropriate interactions between officers and women drivers – the understood purpose of the gender component of the law.
The law empowered the Secretary of Public Safety to determine whether the data for a particular police department suggested an appearance of racial profiling and if so to order the department to collect data on all traffic stops. Based on the analysis performed by Northeastern, the Secretary concluded that for 249 police agencies (68%) there was statistically significant evidence to suggest racial disparities. The Secretary emphasized that the existence of racial disparities does not mean that a department has engaged in racial profiling, but rather that more data is needed to explore the reasons for the disparity.
In accordance with his statutory mandate, the 249 police agencies were notified that they were required to collect racial profiling data on all traffic stops. Of the 249 agencies mandated to collect more data, 130 filed appeals with the Office of the Attorney General, as permitted under the statute. In late October 2004, the Attorney General issued a decision upholding the Secretary in 128 out of the 130 appeals.

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by SinePari

Thanks for the help, even us utopians can use a hand from time to time! Ya'll come back now, ya hear?

Posted by: Deuce

MGL Chapter 228 relates to Survival of Actions and Death and Disabilities of Parties...
But since you're insistent it's a "law", what's the punishment? Is it a misdemeanor,felony or civil? Hell, even wilful failure to arrest someone w/ a warrant is a punishable offense. I don't see anything like that in your "law". Give me something dude, otherwise stop feeding me shit and telling me it's pate...
Cmon chief keep track of what you're throwing out. And of course you haven't been called that to your face,guys wanna keep their jobs. Again not a personal attack on you, clean the sand out. It's my opinion of chiefs,nothing more so you shouldn't really give a damn what I think.. Those that are political monsters last long enough to make a career of being a manager and I observe enough info to form an opinion. Those that are not but are true leaders that stand up for the troops do not. That's reality, "brother".....

Posted by: 94c

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuce

MGL Chapter 228 relates to Survival of Actions and Death and Disabilities of Parties...
But since you're insistent it's a "law", what's the punishment? Is it a misdemeanor,felony or civil? Hell, even wilful failure to arrest someone w/ a warrant is a punishable offense. I don't see anything like that in your "law". Give me something dude, otherwise stop feeding me shit and telling me it's pate...
Cmon chief keep track of what you're throwing out. And of course you haven't been called that to your face,guys wanna keep their jobs. Again not a personal attack on you, clean the sand out. It's my opinion of chiefs,nothing more so you shouldn't really give a damn what I think.. Those that are political monsters last long enough to make a career of being a manager and I observe enough info to form an opinion. Those that are not but are true leaders that stand up for the troops do not. That's reality, "brother".....

FYI

Session laws are different than Mass. Gen. Laws. (regarding the use of the word "Chapter".)

Posted by: chief801

Quote:

Originally Posted by 94c

FYI

Session laws are different than Mass. Gen. Laws. (regarding the use of the word "Chapter".)

You beat me to the keyboard 94c...

Deuce - I didn't post the cite...and I did leave one job because I wasn't a political "monster" and stood up for the guys...If it happens again, I'll do it again. I love my job, but will never compromise myself to keep it...

Posted by: j809

Quote:

Large police departments tend to have very experienced patrol officers, usually much more experienced that those of a 9 person department.

Although I agree that they will have more call volumes than smaller PDs, officers on my PD and surrounding PDs have alot of experience from the fact that they do everything. Nothing gets passed to another guy, like a detectives in major PDs and you end up following through your cases, from rapes, to fatals to B&Es and all the MV stuff you can handle. Also on smaller PDs, officers tend to get alot of more extra training than officers on largers PDs. I've got some buddies on larger PDs that can't even attend a three day seminar. We get sent to just about any training you want to attend from 1 day classes to two-week training classes.

Posted by: SinePari

Well that just about wraps this thread up...

Posted by: chief801

The horse has been beaten to death...I I enjoyed the debate!

ma police, boston ma police, massachusetts police, massachusetts police, mass state police, mass police, ma, mass, massachusetts, massachusetts, massachutes, massachusetts law, massachusetts polece, police, officer, police officer, cops, police gear, law enforcement, police duty gear, state police, sheriff, law, police supply, police agency directory, police agency, police department, traffic officer, police dept, state trooper, dispatcher, massachusetts county sheriff, massachusetts sheriff, massachusetts department of corrections, ma doc, doc, dept of corrections, police information, civil service, ma civil service, massachusetts crime, police training, police academy, ma police academy, massachusetts officers, masscop, masscops, mpa, bpa, ibpoa, police association, massachusetts police news, massachusetts crime news, mass most wanted, police career information, police patrol, police administration, police books, crime scene training, police discussion, crime discussions, cops

About MassCops, the home for Massachusetts law enforcement.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network opened in 1998 and is now a part of the New England Police Network The site is a pro-police discussion forum intended for sworn police officers and civilian law enforcement officials as well as those interested in pursuing a career in law enforcement here in Massachusetts.

The goal of The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network is to provide an informal network of law enforcement officials here in Massachusetts for educational and informational purposes.

The forum covers many topics such as Police Related News Articles, Agency & Profession Discussions, Police Training as well as Law Enforcement Career Information.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network and The New England Police Network (NEPN) and it's network sites are privately owned websites/domains and are not affiliated with or endorsed by any government association or agency.

MassCops (masscops.com) and (masscop.com) are privately owned are not affiliated with or endorsed by the Massachusetts Coalition of Police (masscop.org)

3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 49 50 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108