# Reinventing the wheel



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

_By Janice Nickerson, Enterprise correspondent_

HALIFAX - Selectmen agreed to enter into a contract with the Southeastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council after meeting at the police station Tuesday with Police Chief Michael Manoogian to discuss the proposal.

The contract with SEMLEC will provide the town with regional resources, including police officers from other towns, if needed in incidents requiring specialized training or equipment.

Several towns in the region have already committed their police departments, Manoogian said.

Manoogian said Halifax passed an article at town meeting in 1994 that allows him to enter into reciprocal aid agreements, but the SEMLEC contract requires the approval and signatures of selectmen.

The regional mutual aid response team will also give officers the ability to make arrests in towns other than their own when called upon to provide aid by the chief of the requesting community.

*The organization is relatively new, Manoogian said Tuesday, and will need some time to further develop the specialized units and sort out what towns will be purchasing the various types of equipment needed to provide regional support*.

Manoogian said several towns south of Halifax have signed into mutual aid agreements by adopting state Chapter 40, Section 8, as have many communities outside Boston, including Gloucester, Lexington, Carlisle and Lincoln. Those towns have agreed to be part of the response of the Northeastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council.

Manoogian said it is probable that the region will have a marine unit, including trained divers.

Halifax officers will have to be trained in some of the specialized units over the next few years, Manoogian said.

*Manoogian said the training will require some overtime pay,* but said the return on the services from other departments in emergencies will benefit the town.

*"If I have word that there is going to be a protest, and several hundred people are expected, I would only have to make one phone call to the SEMLEC" and they would know which departments within the area have officers specialized in crowd control, he said.*

*Now, Manoogian said, if that kind of situation were to take place he would call around to area departments one by one requesting help.*

Manoogian said he does not anticipate this all coming together overnight, but it is a relatively easy process that will help bring departments together, he said.

"This allows the officers a venue to train together, and bring the officers closer together, through cooperation and knowledge," Manoogian said.

Being the northern most department for SEMLEC, Manoogian said he hopes neighboring departments, including Plympton and Bridgewater, are able to sign the agreement.

Manoogian said that would require voters in those towns to adopt Chapter 40, Section 8, at their spring town meetings.

Because God Forbid you call the FREE services of the existing, highly trained, SERT Unit of the Massachusetts State Police, based out of Norwood, that has actual experience in riot control.......forget even bringing his own cops in on OT...


----------



## jackryan (Apr 11, 2004)

"Because God Forbid you call the FREE services of the existing, highly trained, SERT Unit of the Massachusetts State Police, based out of Norwood, that has actual experience in riot control.......forget even bringing his own cops in on OT...."

It's all about the Benjamins....the only way anyone is going to get any grant money these days is through regionalization - it's the "in" thing - just ask the Cape Cod Regional Accident Recon Team.........


----------



## dh18 (Mar 4, 2003)

USMCTrooper said:


> Because God Forbid you call the FREE services of the existing, highly trained, SERT Unit of the Massachusetts State Police, based out of Norwood, that has actual experience in riot control.......


Troopers work for free? I would have thought the state would have to at least pay some sort of hourly wage and / or purchase equipment...


----------



## s1w (Sep 12, 2005)

What can SERT do that a regional team cannot, I don't see the problem with these regional teams. I'd also like to know how long it takes SERT to mobilize if needed.


----------



## lawdog671 (Sep 20, 2005)

MSP Sert has troopers on all shifts, all across the state, on STRAIGHT time. Response time is usually travel time as all gear is in take home cruisers. As a taxpayer its disappointing to see such a waste of money so the 3 guys in every PD that cant accept their job description that they signed on for. If youre a local cop, be a great local cop and serve your community. If youre state, do the right thing for the commonwealth. My understanding was Mutual aid was supposed to be an immediate response for assistance with like barfights and things. I really dont wanna think that Im paying my police to work for another towns benefit. And god forbid should something happen to my family when Im working and theres a regional call out and my town PD bails on the town. No offense intended by this but theres so much more involved than doin the swat/motorcycle/crowd control thing. Theres one guy on my town thats assigned to the motorcycle/swat and whatever else team. Where does it end? And who pays for these teams when Fed money dries up?


----------



## Curious EMT (Apr 1, 2004)

You cant blurt out "free" and bold out three lines and expect anyone to just fall for it...

SERT guys on duty? Same with SEMLEC. Requires OT to cover them when they go play Special Forces. Whos pocket does that come from? TAXPAYERS. State, federal, local, its still coming out of their (our) pockets.

Who cost more to pay OT, local's or staties? 

"They have experience in riot control". Im sure the OIC will think of that when he activates SEMLEC in Halifax, or westport, or wherever else they're going to serve a warrant, look for a missing person, or, well, play Special Forces....


Its really too bad the MSP doesnt want to play well with anyone else. One of these days they'll realize they're working on a mystique that burned out years ago because of their own self-induced problems.


----------



## Curious EMT (Apr 1, 2004)

When you stop and assess it, rather than just blurt out / believe liberal-like statemtns such as "its cheaper, bla bla bla", its far from the case.

Expenses effect everyeone in the same way.

Hey, here's an idea!
Why dont we tell hodgsson and his worcester county companion they doenst need a boat and a motor unit! WOOO there's. Let's go after the bottomless moneypits that are trying to be something they arent.

MSP saying local's cant do special work is the same ignornat statemnt as saying MSP doesnt belong anywhere other than highways.... Or heck, if you wanna play special-forces, dont do patrol! No need to have troopers chasing taillights anywhere except B troops! Why do the taxpayers need patrol redundancy? ITS A WASTE!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

Curious EMT said:


> MSP saying local's cant do special work is the same ignornat statemnt as saying MSP doesnt belong anywhere other than highways.... Or heck, if you wanna play special-forces, dont do patrol! No need to have troopers chasing taillights anywhere except B troops! Why do the taxpayers need patrol redundancy? ITS A WASTE!!!!!!!!!!


Locals are Police in the town or City they work in. State Police are police in the entire state. That's the way it is. If you want to be a cop and have statewide powers, take the MSP test.

If you were hired as a Peabody cop, what about that made you think you should be responding to incidents in Billerica?

Mutual aid is one thing, if a guys in trouble, go help out. But planned, regional teams (Accident Recon, Detectives, etc...) are a joke.


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

> Hey, here's an idea!
> Why dont we tell hodgsson and his worcester county companion they doenst need a boat and a motor unit! WOOO there's. Let's go after the bottomless moneypits that are trying to be something they arent.


Brilliant idea.....wonder why no one thought of it sooner.



> Or heck, if you wanna play special-forces, dont do patrol! No need to have troopers chasing taillights anywhere except B troops! Why do the taxpayers need patrol redundancy? ITS A WASTE!!!!!!!!!!


Since you have very little knowledge of the MSP Tac -Ops, I will educate you.

K-9's are fulltime and patrol when they are not actually on a K-9 call. That would mean they do twice the work for same pay. They are not assigned to a barracks.

The airwing flies patrol so it isn't sitting idle when something occurs in addition to being called out. Those pilots don't chase tailights and then fire up the helicopter when the bell rings.

Accident Recon is fulltime and any patrol work done is usually during commute back and forth. They do not work out of a barracks and do not patrol. Again two for the price of one....

The STOP team has Troopers working in Field who carry their gear and respond from home or work direct. However, there are Troopers assigned fulltime to the STOP team ready to deploy and not on patrol. They are not assigned to a barracks. Making the entire unit full time is a terrific idea.....meeting resistance in implementation and most importantly funding from....guess who???
The same guy who hands out regionalization grants.

Dont you think (its a rhetorical question) the MSP would want to provide fulltime, 24/7 tac ops? WE are not the ones holding back.....we are being held back.

My town wants a K-9 unit! GREAT...go for it....when you can fully staff 4 districts 24/7 and I didn't have to respond myself when my family dialed 911 because of only 3 cops working and no one could come to my house for an intruder


----------



## Irish Wampanoag (Apr 6, 2003)

Gil,

close this thread its another my gun is bigger than your gun thread, it gets really old!


----------



## Piper (Nov 19, 2004)

I guess on my shift we are lucky enough to have between 12-18 guys on the road so we can "cover" most of the incidents we get called for. But I'll tell you, as a Supv. I prefer to see other cops from neighboring communities respond in my town to assist us than MSP's. They do no more than are asked and I know where to find them after an event has occured that could later be called into question.
I even find that some of my guys are using their MDTs/cell phones to contact each other so as to not alert area MSP's that are scanning our town. 
I wish it wasn't so, but there will always be that "Us vs Them" mentality out there. It might very well be a jealously thing, but whatever the cause it seems like an a difficult hurdle to get over. Maybe if the LEC's were expanded to allow some Troopers to participate (but not run!) in their organizations it might draw area agencies closer together. I know STOP or SERT or whatever the MSP cool acronym won't let locals participate.

-Sorry to keep perpetuating this old online arguement.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

Hate to tell ya, but the guys from the other towns don't work in your town. It makes no sense to have cops from other towns responding to your town for routine calls. There are a host of jurisdictional and liability issus. That is what the State Police are for.

As far as only doing what is asked, have you called for an MSP Unit before? The local PD runs the show, and 99% of the time, if you read the paper you would never even know they were there. The locals get all the credit. Unlike the Lecs that call the papers and toot their own horn every time a cat is rescued from a tree.

I'm sorry if you have some sort of "jealousy" or whatever it is, but that's how things are supposed to work. The growth of these Lecs is largely a by-product of the Romney /Flynn administration and will soon be gone.


----------



## dh18 (Mar 4, 2003)

Why doesn't anyone cry foul at another reinvention of the wheel, the MSP marine unit? Don't we already have a statewide marine patrol force, the MEP? Every time I drive by the locks I see more and more boats. Why not fund the MEP to their full staffing levels and let them do their job?


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

dh18 said:


> Why doesn't anyone cry foul at another reinvention of the wheel, the MSP marine unit? Don't we already have a statewide marine patrol force, the MEP? Every time I drive by the locks I see more and more boats. Why not fund the MEP to their full staffing levels and let them do their job?


You do realize that the MSP have had Marine Patrols since the 1900's, right?

The EPO's are very small in number and even if fully staffed would no be able to handle the job.

Before you go popping off, learn your material.

I take it you are one of the yahoos that aren't satisfied with being a cop in your own City or Twon and you want to play State Cop without taking the test?


----------



## chief801 (Dec 8, 2004)

I tried to stay out of this, but I just can't help myself...This long standing argument is B.S. I have the utmost respect for MSP STOP Team, Crisis Negotiators, etc. I had to call on them as recently as two weeks ago, and I must say, the interagency cooperation (two local pd's, MSP, two local ambulances, and a local fire dept.) was outstanding. Everything went like clock work, and they made it very clear, I had final decision making authority for any action taken in our town because my ass would be the one in a sling if something went wrong. In the C.P., we had brass from all agencies involved collectively analyzing the situation and the information received from the troops on the ground and sound decisions were made resulting in a positive resolution. But...I still think that there is room for LEC's. Remember folks, this is being done in the name of LOCAL PREPAREDNESS! If the crap hits the fan and the MSP is stretched from Boston to Springfield dealing with multiple terrorist threats, where will the locals turn to for assistance? I don't believe the LEC's should replace the MSP units. It is a matter of training larger numbers of personnel to be able to deal with a large scale, multi-target situation! Call NYPD and ask how much help they needed from EVERYWHERE! Redundancy? Maybe? But what is wrong with having a "Plan B" for emergencies. Waste of money? Well, I for one, never consider increasing skills of officers to protect the public a waste of money. 

Let's call it what it is. This is a turf/ego issue much more than its a money/redundancy/liability issue. Let me translate the liability argument..."Locals aren't as good as we are, so they are going to screw up and get the town sued." There are some very capable leaders and operators on the local level. MSP may be more proficient due to more/better training opportunities, however, in a pinch, I'll take an adequate LEC as opposed to waiting for the more proficient team if they are not available immediately. Once again I ask the question...Why does the state, local, county response work in other parts of the country but not here in the good Commonwealth? There is plenty of room in the sandbox for all of us boys!


----------



## Piper (Nov 19, 2004)

You can throw around all the insults you want, but the reality of things is such that if as a Supv. I don't call you to come help, regardless of all the cool gear/training/bodies your agency might have access to, you'll be reading about the incident in the Herald the next day. 
Not to stick with the MEP, but I was an EPO for 4 yrs and I learned a hard lesson in that if I was not liked/respected/needed/whatever by the Pd's in the 9 towns I covered that incidents that I should have been activley involved in, if not directing (poaching, missing persons, etc), were ones that I learned about days later by an upset Lt.
I will say that I do understand smaller local PD's calling in the SP's for assistance in that they are looking to deflect liability away. Why get sued when you can have someone else's K9 make the bite?


----------



## dh18 (Mar 4, 2003)

the Dept of Conservation (previous name of the MEP) was formed in 1919, during a reorg of various state natural resource depts. so they've been around the block a while as well. 

towns must see some value in joining their LEC's or else the town selectmen wouldn't be signing these contracts. i'm sure the town managers and administrators aren't jumping into these agreements blindly and are aware of the services offered by the state. 

and no, i'm not part of a LEC, nor am i a town or city yahoo.


----------



## irish937 (Sep 13, 2005)

Time to pull the plug on this one........there was no point to even starting it in the first place. Too many egos, no wonder we get further detached from the public we serve. Been argued over and over.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

chief801 said:


> Let me translate the liability argument..."Locals aren't as good as we are, so they are going to screw up and get the town sued."


Nope, bad translation. Try "Local from Town A shoots guy in Town B. Who gets sued?"

"Local from Town A gets in a crash in Town B while traveling to Town C for a minor call. Said Officer is operating like an idiot at excessive speeds in the breakdown lane of a highway in his personal call with a stupid bubble light on the dash. Which Town do I sue?"


----------



## Otto (Nov 18, 2003)

bbelichick said:


> "Local from Town A gets in a crash in Town B while traveling to Town C for a minor call. Said Officer is operating like an idiot at excessive speeds in the breakdown lane of a highway in his personal call with a stupid bubble light on the dash. Which Town do I sue?"


I thought "professional" police officers would never do this... only sheriffs. Which is it?


----------



## Guest (Jan 27, 2006)

bbelichick said:


> "Local from Town A gets in a crash in Town B while traveling to Town C for a minor call. Said Officer is operating like an idiot at excessive speeds in the breakdown lane of a highway in his personal call with a stupid bubble light on the dash. Which Town do I sue?"


One rather big problem with that scenario; no municipality would call for mutual aid for a "minor call".

I'll be the one to acknowledge the elephant in the living room.....the state police has a very poor historical track record in their treatment of other law enforcement agencies. They've gotten a lot better in the last 10-15 years, but a reputation like that does not die easily, and there is still the occasional HUA trooper that doesn't help matters much.


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

* YODA SAID*
 FEAR LEADS TO ANGER (Fear of LECs taking OT)
 ANGER LEADS TO HATE (Angry MSP guys for no longer getting OT, leads to Hatred towards LECs and Locals)
 HATE LEADS TO THE DARK SIDE (This hate leads MSP alone in the Sand Box or Dark Side)
:mrgreen:


----------



## chief801 (Dec 8, 2004)

The liability issue is completely spelled out in the inter-agency agreement. It is a simple risk/benefit analysis. Each town is responsible for the actions of its own officers. That is part of the agreement, and towns know that going in. Those that choose to become part of an LEC believe that the benefit outweighs the risk, which is a decision for them to make. Not the decision of those from another agency who really have nothing at stake in the equation on the liability front. Small towns live and breathe with the help of mutual aid. We choose the officers who will be part of any LEC action, and hopefully, the ones chosen will not put their respective towns in jeopardy due to inappropriate action.

bbelichick - your translation is saying the same thing as mine! You are assuming that the local does not have the sense to not operate his vehicle like an idiot, while a trooper would NEVER do that enroute to a call-out! The scenario you described is easily addressed through proper policies, training, and supervision. Deal with the "idiot" who responds that way appropriately, do not do away with LEC's because one "idiot" might respond in such a fashion. You paint an inaccurate picture of a large number of untrained no brains jumping into their cars, driving like hell, to play SWAT. Like any organization, you are going to find a couple of knuckleheads, but for the most part, these folks are carefully selected by their agencies, just like your STOP Team. In theory, they should be some of the most disciplined individuals employed by their agencies.


----------



## Buford T (Feb 12, 2005)

Well said, Chief801. Smaller communities often times do not have the luxury of calling out specific k-9, B.C.I., air support or accident recon. Any help is appreciated and in my experience with both State/METRO/B.C.I./Sheriff/ k-9, all have been an asset to the situation they responded to and the extra help was much appreciated. Remember we all wear the white hats.


----------



## Guest (Jan 27, 2006)

chief801 said:


> But what is wrong with having a "Plan B" for emergencies. Waste of money? Well, I for one, never consider increasing skills of officers to protect the public a waste of money.


There is no problem with a plan "B". The problem is that there is a dark force in EOPS and some chiefs who only want plan "B" and to see MSP go bye-bye. Yea, I'll admit there are some guys on my job w/ ego trips. Just as there are on yours. The problem is the politician in EOPS, the High Sheriffs, and the professional politicians posing as police chiefs. I would love to have a good working relationship, but not as pawn.


----------



## Guest (Jan 28, 2006)

MSP75 said:


> There is no problem with a plan "B". The problem is that there is a dark force in EOPS and some chiefs who only want plan "B" and to see MSP go bye-bye.


Do you really think the Massachusetts Legislature is ever going to zero-fund the state police?


----------



## lawdog671 (Sep 20, 2005)

Chief801,
Ill agree with some of the things that youve said but have one or two open ended questions, which, as a taxpayer bothers me. And as we all know theres a lot of the Alpha mentality going on "mines bigger than yours". However, I like to think of myself as a reasonable person. Troopers respond to these incidents in cruisers with their gear, and lets face it, they have more opportunity to train. And as you said its on the town to "cover" their own in cases of liability. My first question would be why should I, as a taxpayer, want to pay for an accident for my town officer in Town B? We all know the deep pockets theory, and the road guy has substantially less money than the town. IF my family was ever injured by a LEC guy responding in a PC or WORSE an out of town cruiser to a call out, cop or no cop, someone is gonna pay big time. As a taxpayer I dont see the fiscal responsibilty there. Secondly, someone earlier mentioned "playing SWAT". In a controlled environment ie barricaded suspect, accident requiring recon etc., is a LEC response time that much quicker that it justifies the cost to taxpayers to support? For example, the MSP Recon total package system with the laser measuring devices etc. Substantial cost that is already available at REQUEST. Why burden me with higher taxes so some LEC guy can use it once and a while? Who would be more proficient, the trooper assigned to accident recon who does that and that only? Or the LEC recon guy who does it occasionally? I guess it comes down to money for me in the long run, not who has the bigger crank. Why spend money buying services that are already available when some towns still don't buy their officers vests and decent cruisers, basic items they need to do their job safely. I think its a kind of selfish attitude on the side of the LECS to suck up all this money for occasional use items when MSP has it readily available and unused because attitudes or yahoos want to do it themselves. Spend the money on things for the PUBLIC we all serve and I think that we'd all be better off for it. I would refer to the supervisor who stated that his guys use cell phones to circumvent MSP response. WHY? Theres plenty of scmubags out there for all of us. I would question the mentality of ANY supervisor who would deny his people assistance, especially with an US vs. Them attitude. ANd it exists on both sides of the fence. It's not a MSP attitude thing only. 
Just my two cents.


----------



## j809 (Jul 5, 2002)

> IF my family was ever injured by a LEC guy responding in a PC or WORSE an out of town cruiser to a call out, cop or no cop, someone is gonna pay big time


And what is the difference if a trooper responding to a call injures your family? Remember something, towns have a cap of $100K for liability while the MSP has $1MIL. So it's better to sue MSP as you get more $.


----------



## chief801 (Dec 8, 2004)

Lawdog - the reason to spend money on services already available is to INCREASE the number of personnel to handle situations when the crap hits the fan. I'll agree, a recon guy who does nothing but recon is naturally going to be more proficient than someone who does it part time. My question is why limit the number of qualified personnel? As you said, there is plenty to go around, and if our concern lies with providing the best services to the public, we should want as many qualified, trained people out there as possible. 

The reason you, as a taxpayer, would assume the risk of paying for your officer out of town, is that you would also enjoy the benefit of being able to double or triple your staffing in a crisis. Everyone keeps throwing out the liability thing, but to date, I can't recall any town backing out of an LEC because their town was sued for out of town action. Until it happens the benefit clearly outweighs the risk.


----------



## chief801 (Dec 8, 2004)

Wolfman said:


> Why not? All they need to do is call the closest barracks or Troop HQ and ask, and it won't cost them or their taxpayers one cent and they assume zero liability should things go down the crapper. It's a no-brainer.


Wolfman - Even if MSP responds, the town will still be held responsible for any action taken. The way it works now is that in my town, I call the shots. If the STOP Team goes in and muffs something up, I am ultimately held responsible for giving them the "GO". We just went through this two weeks ago. STOP Team was there, but they made it very clear to me that the order to make entry was on me. We discussed our options and they basically said "Chief, tell us what you want". MSP has come full circle in that regard. If the town they respond to is squared away, they do not take over. They are there to help. If it is a gaggle bang, well, that's another story, and I would expect them to take over. As you well know, there is no such thing as zero liability. We are all getting sued!


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

Delta784 said:


> One rather big problem with that scenario; no municipality would call for mutual aid for a "minor call".


Well, there have been several instances of the exact scenario described above. Some for legit calls, others for BS calls.

Is it ok if the Officer drives up the BDL and weaves around like a jerk in his personal vehicle with a bubble light to get to "good" call?


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

chief801 said:


> bbelichick - your translation is saying the same thing as mine! You are assuming that the local does not have the sense to not operate his vehicle like an idiot, while a trooper would NEVER do that enroute to a call-out! You paint an inaccurate picture of a large number of untrained no brains jumping into their cars, driving like hell, to play SWAT. Like any organization, you are going to find a couple of knuckleheads, but for the most part, these folks are carefully selected by their agencies, just like your STOP Team. In theory, they should be some of the most disciplined individuals employed by their agencies.


Point #1 Troopers respond in fully marked State Police cruisers. LEC guys respond in, no sh*t here now, unmarked utility vans with ladders attached and a goofy bubble light on the dash.

Point #2 You can stick your head into the sand all you want, but wait for a LEC callout, and then go to any MSP Barracks that covers the road these yahoos are responding on. That way, you can get first hand all the cell calls from motorists of "maniacs going 100+ mph with a tiny blue light" and various other reports of complete lunacy in their response ie BDL at 80+, swerving, etc. The picture I am painting is completely accurate.

It's funny how Springfield, Worcester and Boston don't belong to LECs. WHy? Because they have enough going on in their towns that they don't need to go get their jollies elsewhere.

Wait until Evil Eddie is gone, and watch his vision go with him.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

j809 said:


> And what is the difference if a trooper responding to a call injures your family? .


Trooper = full sized, fully marked Crown Vic with emergency lights and siren responding with STATEWIDE jursidiction.

LEC= 1999 Ford Aerostar with a $20 light he bought from Galls responding 3 towns away from the actual town he is employed in.

Ya, no difference at all.](*,)


----------



## topcop14 (Jul 13, 2004)

bbelichick said:


> It's funny how Springfield, Worcester and Boston don't belong to LECs. WHy? Because they have enough going on in their towns that they don't need to go get their jollies elsewhere.


I was going to sit this one out but what the hell.
Currently the Team in the Worcester Area is CMLEC. Worcester does not belong as far as I know. However Worcester does have mutual Aid Agreements with many LOCAL departments. Mine included. So far we have not called them for help. But I have been told by a LT on my job that all services that they offer are available for us if we need them. While I said we have not called them for help Worcester had called us. We were put on standby about a year ago as they were planning to turn the valley upside down during a reported kidnapping. They were looking for all available officers we could send if needed. Shortly after the call we were called back as the situation had resolved itself. My point Is Worcester is one of the Largest Police Departments in New England but they realise that they can't go it alone.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

topcop14 said:


> I was going to sit this one out but what the hell.
> Currently the Team in the Worcester Area is CMLEC. Worcester does not belong as far as I know. However Worcester does have mutual Aid Agreements with many LOCAL departments. Mine included. So far we have not called them for help. But I have been told by a LT on my job that all services that they offer are available for us if we need them. While I said we have not called them for help Worcester had called us. We were put on standby about a year ago as they were planning to turn the valley upside down during a reported kidnapping. They were looking for all available officers we could send if needed. Shortly after the call we were called back as the situation had resolved itself. My point Is Worcester is one of the Largest Police Departments in New England but they realise that they can't go it alone.


Of course. The point isn't the "all hell breaks loose" or the "Help I need a backup" it's the regular incursions, such as Tactical callouts, Detectives, Computer , Acc Recon, etc. Regional Accident Recon? Come on.


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

The fact is that MSP cannot adequately offer its support services statewide as needed. For example, there are usually only 2 K-9 officers on Shift from the MSP for the whole state. The Regional Accident Recon Team down the Cape is one of the best trained and equipped around. BArnstabel has full-time guys from the traffic unit assigned to Recon. They are getting a shitload of $$$ from grants as they formed regional teams and got total workstations,computers etc. Before you say, but they are not as good as MSP, they are better. Parka,a former Barnstable PD officer teaches all levels of crash recon throughout New England at the local PDs as MSP no longer allwoed IPTM to teach at New Braintree. I know you guys(MSP) are pissed because you feel that you are losing ground and OT, but you really are not. MSP still does its own thing and they have so much specialized units that there is so much work even for MSP to handle. You can say all you want, but ultimately the CHiefs of the local PDs and the feds including the EOPS Secretary had set the stage for regionalization and not only will it happen but it is happening. I don't think it's going to push the MSP out at all, I think they will havea greater role and should work together with the LECs. Now as fas as the lawsuit arguement goes, not piss off any troopers, but the MSP settled more lawsuits than all the local PDs in Massachusetts put together, ultimately US the taxpayers are paying for it. Every year at in-service we go over new bad case law that was created due to some troopers that did not understand the application of search and seizure law. Even if I shoot some guy lawfully in my city, I am still going to get sued regardless, it happens, and they always settle. Besides just about every community has insurance policies that pay for these and no one is going to see any major tax increase in their property taxes to pay for the mishaps. Reality is , that MSP is qorried about $$$$$$$ and absolutely nothing else, no matter how you put it how you try to rationalize it and twist it and screw it and play with it , its all about the $$$$ and nothing else.


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

> The fact is that MSP cannot adequately offer its support services statewide as needed. For example, there are usually only 2 K-9 officers on Shift from the MSP for the whole state. The Regional Accident Recon Team down the Cape is one of the best trained and equipped around. BArnstabel has full-time guys from the traffic unit assigned to Recon. They are getting a shitload of $$ from grants as they formed regional teams and got total workstations,computers etc.


You just made our point.

EOPS Eddie is not giving grant $$ to non LEC cities or the MSP because he wants the communism form of police. As I said before, its not the MSP denying these services, its the MSP being held back. Nice game he plays isn't it?


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

Someone here asked about a city or town being sued as a result of a LEC incident or a town pulling out of a LEC due to cost. 

My town of just under 30,000 had two of its detectives in an unsanctioned drug task force. Let me explain, there was the task force set up by the DA and one by the DEA. This unit was a few smaller towns making a third. So my town sends 2 guys to this. 

Problem 1: The town paid two salaries for two detectives who worked everywhere else yet this "task force" never did work here. That's no BS, its fact. There were never any raids or busts made by this "task force" in my town. Period. What benefit did I get??

Problem 2: These two detectives on this "task force" operated unchecked and under cover so nobody knew, from their dept., where they were or what they were doing. Nobody including the Chief knew if they actually worked or were screwing off. They hardly ever were in the station and again, produced very little results (on their own-not as a team) within their own town.

Problem 3: Crime did not take a holiday in my town. During the seveal years in this "task force", the drug problem in my town went virtually unchecked. I can't say for certain this is why, but my town just made the news as having a significant drug problem in its schools.

I am very glad finally someone had the nuts to yank these guys and get back to basics. 

You can win the liability argument, you can give them LEC pool cruisers, you can give them grant $$$ to be better trained than Force Recon Marines......my bitch is simple. If MY police department can't protect ME and MY family in MY town and MY schools and MY streets 24/7, LIKE I PAY YOU TO DO.........why should I pay you to play somewhere else, occassionally or not.


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

> My town of just under 30,000 had two of its detectives in an unsanctioned drug task force. Let me explain, there was the task force set up by the DA and one by the DEA. This unit was a few smaller towns making a third. So my town sends 2 guys to this.


WEB Task Force,perfect example, West Bridgewater,Bridgewater,East Bridgewater. Many more do that, it's part of their committment to drug fighting.



> Problem 1: The town paid two salaries for two detectives who worked everywhere else yet this "task force" never did work here. That's no BS, its fact. There were never any raids or busts made by this "task force" in my town. Period. What benefit did I get??


And we pay money for troopers to be everywhere but the highways. You guys run barracks staffed with two troopers on the road, one on the desk and everyone else is specialized, doing what towns already formed and are doing.



> Problem 2: These two detectives on this "task force" operated unchecked and under cover so nobody knew, from their dept., where they were or what they were doing. Nobody including the Chief knew if they actually worked or were screwing off. They hardly ever were in the station and again, produced very little results (on their own-not as a team) within their own town.


So say you, do you have the inside scoop on this. Were you part of the task force. If it was so secret then how do you know what they accomplished. Just because they weren't in front of the camera smiling with a big bust doesn't mean they didn't do their job.



> Problem 3: Crime did not take a holiday in my town. During the seveal years in this "task force", the drug problem in my town went virtually unchecked. I can't say for certain this is why, but my town just made the news as having a significant drug problem in its schools.


So does everybody else. It's hard to combat drugs but I am sure that because two guys were assigned to a regional drug team is not the reason for a dramatic increase in drugs in your community.

You can win the liability argument, you can give them LEC pool cruisers, you can give them grant $$$ to be better trained than Force Recon Marines......my bitch is simple.


> If MY police department can't protect ME and MY family in MY town and MY schools and MY streets 24/7, LIKE I PAY YOU TO DO.........why should I pay you to play somewhere else, occassionally or not.


They are protecting your community and you and I am sure when you dial 911 you get an officer there very quickly. The Towns DO NOT want to play with the MSP anymore, it's a fact of life. The problem is bad attitudes and towns want to be independent of the MSP. My bitch is simple, I want the MSP to patrol the highways and not show up like puppy dogs to all the major calls in my PD when we already have 10 of our own cruisers there. I pay you to patrol the highways and make sure those roads are safe not to show up in our cities and towns unwanted. If we want you, WE will call you.

As you can see this arguement is very simple and can be argued to favor either side. It's all about the $$$ the MSP is losing money and they also have a sense of fear due to perceived diminshed authority and power, pure and simple. STOP Team was asked to work with NEMLEC and Boston PD but they refused during the DNC and got left out only to guard one building and do the highways. It's time for MSP to come together and work with the LECs, there is so much work for everyone and they can come aboard and share the wealth. The LECs are not going anywhere, TRUST ME, I am on the inside scoop with the grants and communities, don't listen to SPAM , they are very wrong. Regionalization is huge and it is expanding exponentially. It is the future and the powers that be , 351 Police Chiefs vs 1 Colonel(he wants in too) have more juice up on the hill with all the politicians. If I was on the MSP, I'd be on your side with this issue because my $$$ would be affected and if you were on our side then you would see it our way. One recent example, was a trooper stopping the NEMLEC Command Vehicle as it was going to a Call-Out lights and siren. The trooper ran the cops for warrants and called their PD. You guys did more damage to yourselves with that then you can ever imagine. Chiefs got involved, called the Colonel and got Flynn involved. This childish behavior has got to stop and let's come together and work as an effective fighting team. At the end of the day, we all still have our jobs and duties.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

popo said:


> The Towns DO NOT want to play with the MSP anymore, it's a fact of life. The problem is bad attitudes and towns want to be independent of the MSP. My bitch is simple, I want the MSP to patrol the highways and not show up like puppy dogs to all the major calls in my PD when we already have 10 of our own cruisers there. I pay you to patrol the highways and make sure those roads are safe not to show up in our cities and towns unwanted. If we want you, WE will call you.


You see, that's your problem. The MSP may have primary responsibility on the highway, but they have jurisdiction EVERYWHERE. So, for you to say "stay on the highway", well I guess that's your mistake.

If they want to set up and run radar on your Main Street, they can. It has been done in the past.

And I am trying to understand this : The MSP should "stay on the highways" but it's ok for a PD to send a few of their guys screaming up the Highway to a town 30 miles away for a call? Hilarious.

If an MSP cruiser shows up at a call of yours, it's likely because he wants to make sure you are all set and then he will either offer assistance or leave. It just shows what an inferiority complex you have if that bothers you.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

popo said:


> One recent example, was a trooper stopping the NEMLEC Command Vehicle as it was going to a Call-Out lights and siren. The trooper ran the cops for warrants and called their PD. You guys did more damage to yourselves with that then you can ever imagine. Chiefs got involved, called the Colonel and got Flynn involved. This childish behavior has got to stop and let's come together and work as an effective fighting team. At the end of the day, we all still have our jobs and duties.


You mean an unmarked van with a bubble light? THAT "Command Vehicle"?

As far as that incident, you are gravely misinformed.


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

> If they want to set up and run radar on your Main Street, they can. It has been done in the past.


Great , come and work together with our traffic unit or by yourself. We don't care. I understand that you have jurisdiction everywhere but that is your primary responsibility and duties. I don't have a complex and I welcome some of the specialized guys, Gang & Drug Units,see we get along, no problem there, plenty of work for everybody, let's do it as a whole. I am trying to show you in the previous post about how the arguement can be swayed to favor the other parties.


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

bbelichick said:


> You mean an unmarked van with a bubble light? THAT "Command Vehicle"?
> 
> As far as that incident, you are gravely misinformed.


No I am greatly informed, it was a major incident, trust me on this, it was the NEMLEC fully marked Command Vehicle, I won't say the troopers name or barracks but you can find out.

P.S. I am not a member of any LEC but I have plenty of brother officers that are. I believe in working together. The Sheriff is the only one I worry about.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

popo said:


> The LECs are not going anywhere, TRUST ME, I am on the inside scoop with the grants and communities, don't listen to SPAM , they are very wrong. Regionalization is huge and it is expanding exponentially. It is the future and the powers that be , 351 Police Chiefs vs 1 Colonel(he wants in too) have more juice up on the hill with all the politicians.


Your Inside Scoop is wrong; maybe you missed where EOPS stated that they would not continue awarding grants to these LECs?

As far as the Colonel, his boss is Flynn. Whether he "wants in" or is being ordered in, I will let you decide.

Flynn will be gone with Romney. Don't hitch your wagon to him, either.

If the Chiefs of Police are so powerful, why didn't THEY save your Quinn Bill? Why did SPAM have to lobby to protect it when it was under serious attack when Romney took over?


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

You guys endorsed Romney not US. In our contract we have it that even if the state does away with the QUinn, we get 100% forever.

P.S. Our union said and will say nothing about the MSP Gang & Drug unit working with us. Those positions could have been fileld by our guys but we dont bitch, we work together.


----------



## GARDA (Dec 30, 2003)

popo said:


> Now as fas as the lawsuit arguement goes, not piss off any troopers, but the MSP settled more lawsuits than all the local PDs in Massachusetts put together, ultimately US the taxpayers are paying for it. Every year at in-service we go over new bad case law that was created due to some troopers that did not understand the application of search and seizure law.


As cops, we are all benefiting from this too. There's nothing wrong with working in the gray area of search and seizure law. In fact it can be equally commended and encouraged as aggressive and innovative criminal enforcement, not as "some trooper that did not understand the application of search and seizure law". 
"Only those who risk going too far, can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Eliot


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

popo said:


> You guys endorsed Romney not US. In our contract we have it that even if the state does away with the QUinn, we get 100% forever.
> 
> P.S. Our union said and will say nothing about the MSP Gang & Drug unit working with us. Those positions could have been fileld by our guys but we dont bitch, we work together.


The MSP Contract has it as well, HOWEVER if the Legislature doesn't fund it...You're DONE.

As for SPAM endorsing Romney, that's likely the only reason that Mass still has the Quinn Bill. That was on the chopping block HARD and for some strange reason Romney came out in support of it...Hmmm...??

The MSP has their own Gang and Drug Units...Why would those be staffed by "your guys"?


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

> So say you, do you have the inside scoop on this. Were you part of the task force. If it was so secret then how do you know what they accomplished. Just because they weren't in front of the camera smiling with a big bust doesn't mean they didn't do their job.


Yes. I do say so. I know so. Their own patrolmen informed me andI have seen myself. I live and work in that community. You do not.



> So does everybody else. It's hard to combat drugs but I am sure that because two guys were assigned to a regional drug team is not the reason for a dramatic increase in drugs in your community.


The reason for the dramatic increase was, in part, because instead of focusing on drugs in their town, they were anywhere but. Since you will no doubt challenge my basis of knowledge, I will again refer to direct conversation with patrolmen of the town, the Union steward and first hand observations ...like the day myself and 4 Troopers and one local officer surrounded a subject standing on a street corner within site of the station in a major city. Reason, he was spotted by a local to have warrants held by the PD. Out of the shadows appear these two "task force" guys who were using a convicted felon, wanted by another agency, in an undercover buy, out of their jurisdiction, without the knowledge of the PD whose city they were in, without their involvement whatsoever, in view of the station. The policy of the department is when you find/get drug cases, turn them over to the DB. How can the DB (at the time) be expected to do anything about work in the town when the only two drug guys in the DB, were hardly ever working IN town??? This comes from their own coworkers!



> They are protecting your community and you and I am sure when you dial 911 you get an officer there very quickly.


Twice 911 rang and nobody came. I handled it myself. Not because the patrolmen are lazy and don't care. They were understaffed and couldn't send anybody. No money for OT to fill 4 districts. I know this because I see it monthly, I hear it first hand from the guys working and experienced the shortage first hand. They do a great job and should be fully staffed, with OT for shortages and have good equipment before there is any thought given to extending themselves into another community. An additonal FYI, one of there command staff wanted money for a command vehicle and some tac gear. The Union vehemently opposed because their people had no contract and were running short handed.



> Regionalization is huge and it is expanding exponentially. It is the future and the powers that be , 351 Police Chiefs vs 1 Colonel(he wants in too) have more juice up on the hill with all the politicians.


This form of communist policing seems to be the thing in eastern mass.....talk to the local cops here. I haven't heard anything positive or guys buying it.

The basic principle applies in any aspect....would you buy boats, extra cars, jewelry, go on vacations while unable to pay for food, clothing and a mortgage? Of course not.....


----------



## Guest (Jan 29, 2006)

bbelichick said:


> You see, that's your problem. The MSP may have primary responsibility on the highway, but they have jurisdiction EVERYWHERE. So, for you to say "stay on the highway", well I guess that's your mistake.


There's a difference between having jurisdiction, and how you use it. By mutual pact, we have jurisdiction one mile into Braintree, Milton, and Weymouth (and vice-versa), but you won't see us there, unless we're asked. The primary responsibility of the uniformed MSP are state roads & highways, correct?



bbelichick said:


> If they want to set up and run radar on your Main Street, they can. It has been done in the past.


And who is going to cover the three-car accident on a state road while your guy is poaching on a city/town street? You like screwing other cops, just to make the point that you can do it?



bbelichick said:


> If an MSP cruiser shows up at a call of yours, it's likely because he wants to make sure you are all set and then he will either offer assistance or leave.


As someone mentioned, if we need help, we'll ask for it. And, if we do ask for it, we'll call the surrounding towns first, because they'll show-up quicker, in bigger numbers, and they'll most likely be familiar with the area, anyway.



bbelichick said:


> It just shows what an inferiority complex you have if that bothers you.


And that statement shows what a pompous ass you are. When we get stuck with your accidents on Quincy Shore Drive on a regular basis in the summer, that's not inferiority. "The state police have no one to send". In the entire state? It must be very convenient to just punt your responsibility to someone else. I wouldn't know.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

What a ridiculous area you must work in. In certain parts of the State, the locals are more than happy to see the MSP, call them for assistance, and love having them around because they are short staffed and need the help. 

Strangely enough, they are actually friends with these guys, on and off duty and don't consider it "poaching" if an MSP cruiser is in Town...How bizarre.


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

> "The state police have no one to send". In the entire state?


When the phone rings and the answer from the State Police is "we cant help you, or we have no one to send, I see red. That is not the answer. It should never be the answer. We get the same answer ourselves when WE ask for something from our own people.

WHY?

Who controls our money..........Eddie.

Who wants communist policing.............Eddie

Who said he couldn't find $$$$ to further fund the MSP operating in conjunction with Springfield.......Eddie

Who wanted the MSP to remain in Springfield? The Police Commissionar, Mayor, City Council, Springfield's State Rep and State Senator. Who didn't...............Eddie

Who "found" the money to keep additional MSP in the City until the end of the fiscal year?

The Legislature............not Eddie


----------



## Guest (Jan 29, 2006)

USMCTrooper said:


> When the phone rings and the answer from the State Police is "we cant help you, or we have no one to send, I see red. That is not the answer. It should never be the answer. We get the same answer ourselves when WE ask for something from our own people.


I attended a training seminar down the Cape about 6-7 years ago (pre-Romney & pre-Flynn), where then-Colonel Reed Hillman was a guest speaker. Back then, he said almost 70% of the MSP was in specialized units. That's absurd, and Hillman said one if his priorities was to get more uniformed patrols on the road. Needless to say, not much has changed.

I don't blame the troopers on the road for the short staffing, but they need to realize they can't tie themselves up with things that aren't their primary responsibility. When the Mets were around, they'd have 10-15 cops on a shift out of the Old Colony station, and there was plenty for them to do. The same area is now covered by (usually) two troopers. Do the math.


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

> es. I do say so. I know so. Their own patrolmen informed me andI have seen myself. I live and work in that community. You do not.


Sound like some pissed off guys that didn't make the drug unit and are bitter.



> The MSP has their own Gang and Drug Units...Why would those be staffed by "your guys"?


Because they couldn't do jack shit in our City without us, you kinda have to know the bad guys in the community you work and not work with a street map on your lap.



> Who wanted the MSP to remain in Springfield? The Police Commissionar, Mayor, City Council, Springfield's State Rep and State Senator. Who didn't...............Eddie


Good I am glad Eddie didn't want MSP in Springfield, then maybe the City Council and Mayor got off their asses and fill the positions it lost. If your main BOSS doesn't want you to take city police officers positions away from Springfield, your own BIG BOSS wants you on the highways, why fight it, it's your primary responsibility.

On another note, I know quite a few troopers, normal ones, the ones that were locals or were merged in, and they tell me that the STOP team guys are their own breed and won't even talk to other troopers at cookouts, they sit by themselves, so why are you guys kissing their ass so much, as they could care less about you.


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

popo said:


> Good I am glad Eddie didn't want MSP in Springfield, then maybe the City Council and Mayor got off their asses and fill the positions it lost. If your main BOSS doesn't want you to take city police officers positions away from Springfield, your own BIG BOSS wants you on the highways, why fight it, it's your primary responsibility.


No, it's not. We both know it's not. But if it makes you feel like more of a man to say that, knock yourself out.

Eddie is not the "Big Boss" of the MSP. It's a temporary situation that will soon be rectified. You can bet whoever takes over for Romney, be it Reilly or Healy, will say ta-ta to Eddie and his wonderful disappearing Grant Money.


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

I would love to see Springfield rehire every cop that lost their job. I don't think, personally, we should be in Springfield....that wasn't the point. 

We didn't ask to go there...Eddie was asked to send us.

There is alot more at stake here than money too.......eddie has a hidden agenda that is widely the talk of the town. Wait to see who the next "commissioner of police" in Springfield is.

I will be sure to tell the patrolmen you consider their opinions to be nothing more than rantings from those who couldn't make the cut.....does the same apply to you and your disdain for the MSP?


----------



## SPD3 (Feb 1, 2005)

popo said:


> My bitch is simple, I want the MSP to patrol the highways and not show up like puppy dogs to all the major calls in my PD when we already have 10 of our own cruisers there. I pay you to patrol the highways and make sure those roads are safe not to show up in our cities and towns unwanted. If we want you, WE will call you.
> 
> Posted By popo
> Re: 78th RTT
> ...


Personally I don't get all hot and bothered by the LEC's. It does disturb me greatly however to see someone ridicule officers willing to back them up at the cost of nothing more than a nod of the head. True widsom comes almost solely from experience and I will tell you in no uncertain terms that anyone who has ever been in the shit would never make such an ignorant statement. I have never been nor will I ever be anything but grateful to those members of my profession, be they from ANY agency, who take the time to stop and check on my well being whatever the task at hand at 0300 dark. We can argue all day long about funding issues but the first and last concern must always be that everyone goes home at the end of the shift.

I hope you have changed your mind about the MSP. I mean no offense but you have a bad attitude and on the point that we have too many of those already you and I agree.


----------



## popo (Apr 1, 2005)

Got promoted, so yes I did change my mind, however my statement was one where the arguement was reversed to see the issue from both sides, not just taking a small portion of it and quoting. My deparment is not a member of any LEC however I do not believe that a PD should not join an LEC if they want to share their resources. Key word here is SHARE. The MSP was asked numerous times to join and work together but they refuse (STOP team only). The Recon Team and other MSP Divisions work great with other PDs. I know some great officers that are on NORSTAR and NEMLEC which are just great cops with a good head on their shoulders, ex-military, the cream of the crop in their departments, and it pisses me off to see them getting bashed on because they were selected and are members of an elite team.


----------



## HOTLUNCH (Sep 13, 2005)

I dont know anything about these LECs they appear to the hot button issue in Massachusetts. I have a few questions. Who has overall supervisory/tactical command in an incident? Chief of town? Tac supervisor? Who assumes command when an incident crosses out of one council's jurisdiction into another? Hostage/vehicle pursuit or whatever- Where does the LEC's jurisdiction end? Or does it? Also, what duties, other than critical incidents, does a LEC respond to/address? Narco? Homicides? Evidence collection?


----------



## lawdog671 (Sep 20, 2005)

Popo, couple of questions. Where were you stationed during the DNC? I was assigned next to the Fleet Center, and we had quite a few STOP team guys with us. I also saw the NORSTAR tac vehicle drive BY a few times, but they werent in my area, only MSP, Boston PD and a couple Sheriffs guys assigned to transport any prisoners we locked up. 
As someone who has worked in Springfield, WITH Springfield PD, know this. MSP does not want to be there, in fact the Union waited to get the approval of Springfield's before they assigned anyone. It was an unwelcome assignment as most troopers I know wanted the city to rehire their own people so they can do the job they want to do, in their city. We are not in the job stealing business. And last I knew there was approx 6 troopers working out of the Springfield barracks assigned to the Community Action Team. Hardly taking any jobs from Spfld and there with their approval from the top down. Theyre smart enough to know when they need help and not so arrogant to pass on assistance when they need it. Oh and for the record, my last count on the CAT team had at least 3 of the 6 or 7 troopers assigned, that were Springfield cops before getting on MSP. I can tell you from personal knowledge the others live in the area, and know their way around VERY well. Not fair to assume troopers dont know their way around. We ALL live in the state too, maybe even your city. However the Springfield has NO money to do this, and they need help. And the troopers working there work under an MSP supervisor, who consults with an SPD supervisor as to where EVERYONE will be working that night for the entire MSP/SPD TEAM.
As far as highways being MSP primary enforcement, where did you get that? Poll B Troop areas (western mass for those who don't know) and look at their patrols. MSP are STATE POLICE officers not highway patrolmen as Sec Flynn would like. Often case out west they are the ONLY police. So when they go in "your" city, they have as much authority as you to be there. For all the people who say MSP are arrogant and afraid of losing their OT etc to LECS, I would offer this. How many of you took our test and look and see how many of us were local cops before we got on MSP. Nobody is knocking anyone for wanting to do more, I just want my town guys to take care of MY town. When there is NO more crime in my town then offer services to neighboring communities. I think we all know that is not the case. In the meantime call MSP for help. If we can we will, and if youre all set then we leave. Just brothers looking out for each other that's all, and its sad you don't see that for what it is. Poaching?
As far as liability, has there been a lawsuit from a use of force or accident due to a call out yet? I'm curious when it happens, goes civil etc, whats going to happen. I have no personal beef with any of these officers on LECS, but the idea of paying for something we already have and are not using just troubles me.


----------

