Originally Posted by USMCTrooper

By Jenna Wolf
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Note to self: Gun in holster, coffee on car roof. A Quincy police officer apparently could use that little reminder - he ditzily left his gun on top of his car and drove off last month.
Declan Breslin received just a slap on the wrist for losing his firearm, being placed on desk duty for several days, according to the Patriot Ledger.
The gun was found less than 30 minutes later by officers investigating a car crash in Quincy Center.
This is the second time in a month a Bay State officer has misplaced his weapon. A part-time Plymouth County sheriff’s deputy was fired last week after leaving his gun in a Pembroke Dunkin’ Donuts. Deputy Robert Greek could not find the gun when he returned to the shop 45 minutes later. It was later recovered by Scituate police, who revoked his gun license. The sheriff’s office then fired him, the Ledger reported.
State law requires gun owners to keep their weapons secure at all times. Local police have a right to revoke an owner’s gun license if the law is violated. But Quincy police Chief Robert Crowley told the Ledger Breslin wasn’t fired because he is a “superb” cop.
A Quincy Police Department employee said Crowley was unavailable to comment yesterday.

Originally Posted by shark1

Why does this have to make the paper? Who tells the news media? This incident was over a month old!

Originally Posted by Irish Wampanoag

LOL Now it's the media's fault !!!!
I didnt hear any criticisms of the media when the sheriff lost his gun in the bathroom. That poor fool lost his job. This jack ass got a 3 day vacation

Originally Posted by 94c

and why is the deputy a poor fool and the QUINCY officer a jack ass?

Originally Posted by mpd61

Seriously,

The main DIFFERENCE between Quincy Cop and Plymouth Deputy is status:

One is Tenured Civil Service/Union guy= protection
One is Part-time political position= bye bye!

Aside from that, Irish you old dog you....You know somebody who left his gun out too huh!?

Originally Posted by Pacman

We are our own worst enemies, how did the media get a hold of this info? Think on that.

Originally Posted by chief801

A couple of days off does not sound unreasonable...

Originally Posted by shark1

Why does this have to make the paper? Who tells the news media? This incident was over a month old!

Originally Posted by Ron816

The reason why it was leaked to the media was because of Chief Crowleys stance on holding the general public to a higher standard than his own men. Since Crowley took over as licensing authority,his was downgrading people from all lawful to target and hunting or business use only. He said publically that a citizen must have a better reason than claiming self defense before he will issue a LTC for all lawful purposes. He revoked licenses even though there were no statutory disqualifications, he simply used the unsuitable clause which is in the law. Do you remember several Quincy Police Officers where disciplined for discharging there firearms in 2003 at Quincy's Marina Bay, only to result in suspensions.There is no doubt that Declan is a good cop, but you cannot have a double standard when it comes to issues like this. You can say whatever you want , but the fact is that if this was a civilian they would have lost there license and would have been charged.

Originally Posted by jo

I am not kicking the poor guy who ended up in the media for forgetting his weapon. That just sucks, and could be done by any one of us who carry day in and day out. But if it had been a deputy, guys like j809 and 94c would have been all over the deputy with their "making the cut" and "sixth sense" comments.

Originally Posted by Delta784

Ron.....we don't like Crowley any more than you do. A lot less, in fact. You do yourself no favors when you take a shot at us, thinking you're going to get to Crowley.

Remember the old saying...."Any enemy of my enemy is a friend of mine".

Originally Posted by Ron816

I'm not taking shots at you guys I'm just stating facts. Why is it every time a situation like this happens, an officer is given the benefit of the doubt when a civillian is not? I think that these officers where treated fairly, I would like to see the same consideration given to a civilian. Here's another example of double standards. If a civilian is subject to a 209A he/she must immediately surrender their firearms as well as there license. If an officer is subject to a 209A he is not required to turn in his firearms/license immediately, he can have a review with the chief and the chief may allow him to carry on the job. Tell me this isn't a double standard. Civilian is gulity until proven innocent, officer is innocent until proven guilty.

Originally Posted by Delta784

Know what you're talking about. Police officers most certainly are required to surrender all firearms upon being served with a protective order. I've been there when police officer's firearms have been confiscated.

ANYONE (civilian or police) served with a protective order, whose employment is dependent on carrying a firearm or having an LTC, is entitled to a court hearing within 3 days of being served.

Originally Posted by Ron816

You are 1/2 right, yes you are entitled to a court hearing civilian or officer, but the difference is if the chief feels the officer is suitable in his eyes and the officer has not been charged, the chief can under his power allow under certain circumstances the officer to keep his weapon. Ron Gliddon is chief in Lee MA and he sits on the firearms review board and has written a book on interpreting Massachusetts firearms laws and during a presentation this very question came up and indeed the chief can allow the officer to keep possesion of his firearm while on duty. I am not here to agitate anyone just giving my opinion and stating facts,so before you jump down my throat get your facts straight.

Originally Posted by Delta784

Get YOUR facts straight.

A Chief of Police cannot overrule a judge's order, which is exactly what a protective order (208 or 209A) is. The only way a police officer who is served with a protective order can possess a firearm is if a judge amends the order.

Originally Posted by Ron816

It's great when a cop doesn't know the law.

Originally Posted by popo

Hey Delta, you seem to know everything on every subject. Hell, why don't you become Chief. With all that knowledge, you think that maybe you would have made Sergeant by now.

Originally Posted by Ron816

You are 1/2 right, yes you are entitled to a court hearing civilian or officer, but the difference is if the chief feels the officer is suitable in his eyes and the officer has not been charged, the chief can under his power allow under certain circumstances the officer to keep his weapon. Ron Gliddon is chief in Lee MA and he sits on the firearms review board and has written a book on interpreting Massachusetts firearms laws and during a presentation this very question came up and indeed the chief can allow the officer to keep possesion of his firearm while on duty. I am not here to agitate anyone just giving my opinion and stating facts,so before you jump down my throat get your facts straight.