IL - Officer loses gun, last seen on top of his car


PDA






illinisnare
February 4, 2008, 09:37 PM
This happened on Thursday last. They still haven't found it, but are spending a few hours each day looking along the 5.5 mile trip he took with k9 units and metal detectors. 8-10 inches of snow aren't helping matters.

I'm content in knowing that I am protected in my home, and hope that no children find it.

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/courts_crime_fire/2008/02/03/officers_issue_warning__about_lost

*edit* They are now reporting he was headed to a security gig. Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?

If you enjoyed reading about "IL - Officer loses gun, last seen on top of his car" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ilbob
February 5, 2008, 09:18 AM
I wonder what really happened.

Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?Its simple. Their lives are valuable to the state and ours are not. They need LEOs to control the rest of us.

WayneConrad
February 5, 2008, 02:27 PM
Who should we write to?

Blackfork
February 5, 2008, 02:30 PM
Law Enforcement is burning its reputation as being just, fair, logical, or even rational.

This is disasterous for the country at large.

bakerj
February 5, 2008, 03:29 PM
Well, all the snow melted last night and thats right behind my house. Wonder if there is:D a reward?

wheelgunslinger
February 5, 2008, 03:32 PM
Urbana Police still answer to the county level officials.

http://www.co.champaign.il.us/COUNTYBD/cbmembers.pdf

^
There is a list of all the Champaign County Board officials including e-mail and home street address, etc.

If you want to make this a hot button topic, there's no better way than to make the old axiom about what rolls downhill work to your advantage.

The wheels of justice may turn slowly with regard to court cases, but the court of public opinion moves awfully fast when you get the people on your side. And, make the elected officials realize they have to protect their phony baloney jobs.

Be aware though: Any communication with a public official with regard to public affairs can be seen as public record in most places.

Anonymous Coward
February 5, 2008, 03:58 PM
If you don't live in Urbana, Ill., I would suggest minding your own business.

*edit* They are now reporting he was headed to a security gig. Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?


Why do you think off-duty law enforcement are allowed to carry firearms?

Old Dog
February 5, 2008, 04:11 PM
This thread is not about activism.
Quote:
Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?

Its simple. Their lives are valuable to the state and ours are not. They need LEOs to control the rest of us.
Actually, if those of you in Illinois want to campaign against off-duty and retired cops being able to carry, good luck with ever getting concealed carry for all the rest of you non-LEO citizens.
Day in, day out..

Law Enforcement is burning its reputation as being just, fair, logical, or even rational.

This is disasterous for the country at large.
All righty, then.

WayneConrad
February 5, 2008, 06:49 PM
Well. I didn't ask who to write to because I thought we should write. Was more pointing my finger up at the title of this here section and wondering if the OP meant to post this in general and goofed. Should have been more direct, I guess. Sorry.

illinisnare
February 5, 2008, 07:39 PM
I posted in Activism so the other IL users could see this prior to IGOLD next month.

illinisnare
February 5, 2008, 07:41 PM
If you don't live in Urbana, Ill., I would suggest minding your own business.

Quote:
*edit* They are now reporting he was headed to a security gig. Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?
Why do you think off-duty law enforcement are allowed to carry firearms?

I thought they were allowed to carry firearms to protect themselves and their families. I think the rest of us should have the same right.

Neo-Luddite
February 5, 2008, 07:54 PM
At least the guy admitted his rather serious mistake; he has been nicely de-pantsed for everyone and will likely see a job change in his future.

Concealed carry will 'happen' in Illinois when citizens decide the time is right and enough is just enough.

ilbob
February 6, 2008, 12:08 PM
At least the guy admitted his rather serious mistake; he has been nicely de-pantsed for everyone and will likely see a job change in his future.
What makes you think that?

Neo-Luddite
February 6, 2008, 01:06 PM
Losing a weapon is not something easily forgotten about. Depending on the politics of the situation, he is probably being pinned to a board like a frog awaiting dissection being made to squirm.

Or maybe he's well-connected. In either case I can't see an activism angle to this story apart from joining a mob of angry citizens filled with indignation but (as said) not being from Chambanna I'm not so worried about it.

ilbob
February 6, 2008, 01:21 PM
my guess is he will get some grief from it from fellow officers, maybe some kind of reprimand. thats about it.

if it is a department issued gun he might have to pay to replace it. or not.

Barr
February 6, 2008, 01:25 PM
I think the real concern is if a child gets hurt with it along the side of the road etc. The antis will make hay with that all week long. Also, if some criminal picks up the gun and uses it in a crime. I am certain that the anti crowd will find some way to place a negative slant on it. As in, "Police officers shouldn't carry guns either, just like Britain."

coyotehitman
February 13, 2008, 06:15 AM
I did not pay to read the whole archived article, but...

Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?

I bet it is because he has dealt with the decay of western civilization for a number of years and earned it.

Day in, day out..

Law Enforcement is burning its reputation as being just, fair, logical, or even rational.

This is disasterous for the country at large.


The guy could have just reported his gun stolen and saved potential ridicule, discipline, and scrutiny.

my guess is he will get some grief from it from fellow officers, maybe some kind of reprimand. thats about it.

if it is a department issued gun he might have to pay to replace it. or not.


Reprimand, that's about it???

1. Discipline in an officer's file can last from 6 months to indefinitely
2. Discipline can/will prevent an officer from being promoted or securing employment with another LE agency for any length of time from 1 year to forever
3. If progressive discipline is utilized by this department or harm occurrs because of this incident, this officer could be fired
4. If the department owns the gun, I'm sure he will pay for it


How would some of you feel if you lost your job or had a permanent black mark in your employment record because you made a mistake?

ilbob
February 13, 2008, 09:39 AM
How would some of you feel if you lost your job or had a permanent black mark in your employment record because you made a mistake?
That kind of thing happens to people every day. You screw up bad, and it has negative effects on your career. Why should a subset of government employees be exempt from reality?

People are fired for making innocent comments that are later considered to not be PC enough. Or for making a private phone call while at work. Is that fair?

I am not calling for this guy to be beheaded or anything. Only pointing out that he is extermely unlikely to receive any kind of substantive punishment for his trangression. I am not even sure he should. From the legal side, his transgression should be treated exactly the same way that it would be treated if he was not a cop. And what he did might not be against his agency's rules, or might warrant a minor penalty under those rules.

coyotehitman
February 14, 2008, 01:09 PM
You probably do not realize this ilbob, but LE departments are some of the most discipline happy, political, blackballing institutions on earth. It is a well kept secret, but we endure some downright abusive work environments. Civilian jobs are much less strict, on average. Screwing up severely on a civilian job or being terminated without cause, in most cases, will not preclude you from ever working in that profession again. Get suspended, get a few reprimands or write ups, you are good to go. If any of this happens to an LE officer, he will never work in LE again. Heck, most civilian employers will only provide your dates of employment during a background check, in LE it is public record and everything in your file, with the exception of personal identifying information, is laid on the table.

Consider the following:

Bob the machinist will not be fired for getting an OVI, Bob the cop will.

Bob the florist will not get suspended for sitting on his deck in his work trousers, after work, drinking a Bud Light, Bob the cop will.

Bob the banker will not receive a written reprimand for having too many wrinkles in his slacks, Bob the cop will.

Bob the accountant will not be removed from his position because his wife made an allegation that he pushed her during a domestic altercation two weeks prior with no proof evident, Bob the cop will.

Bob the production manager gets drunk on his own time at a party in a private residence, passes out, pees himself, and has a photo taken during his stupor which someone posts on the web, his boss ribs him over it. The same thing happens with Bob the cop and he is suspended or terminated for conduct unbecoming an officer.

Most folks do not understand this stuff. Living life in a glass house is not fun when folks are constantly throwing rocks.

wheelgunslinger
February 14, 2008, 01:13 PM
good points, Coyotehitman.

ilbob
February 14, 2008, 02:09 PM
You probably do not realize this ilbob, but LE departments are some of the most discipline happy, political, blackballing institutions on earth.Actually, I recognize that many LE agencies are very strict about things that matter little, while at the same time being very lax on things that do.

back when I lived in Chicago, it was reported (by Royko IIRC) that any cop in uniform shown in the newspaper or on TV without his hat on got an automatic 5 day suspension. didn't matter why. At the same time, CPD officers almost routinely engaged in criminal activity that the department was well aware of, and no action at all was taken.

more recently, the Rockford, IL police chief ordered two of his officers to destroy evidence and perjure themselves, they did so, and were then promoted. another officer is about to be fired for using department computers to post unflattering comments about the chief on a blog.

HonorsDaddy
February 14, 2008, 02:16 PM
You said:


Actually, if those of you in Illinois want to campaign against off-duty and retired cops being able to carry, good luck with ever getting concealed carry for all the rest of you non-LEO citizens.


Not terribly high road of you, and in case you forgot, you serve those non-LEO's.

I would strongly suggest you remember who works for whom sir. Your attitude is why a good chunk of the nation has lost respect for law enforcement.

I find your ill-formed opinion to be quite offensive and insulting - not to mention pretty damned arrogant.

ilbob
February 14, 2008, 02:46 PM
Actually, if those of you in Illinois want to campaign against off-duty and retired cops being able to carry, good luck with ever getting concealed carry for all the rest of you non-LEO citizens.
Ironically, the post he was referring to never suggested doing this at all. It does show you the depth of entitlement many cops do feel though.

alsaqr
February 14, 2008, 03:03 PM
Another man made a boo-boo and left a gun on top of his car: Happens all the time to hunters and shooters. Happened to me; luckily, I had to open a gate and saw the long gun on top the truck box. Found a nice Weatherby rifle along the road once. Put an ad in the paper and the very happy guy came and got his slightly scratched gun. He had laid it on top of his Jeep.

The fact that the man is a policeman should not matter. In many states he would be verbally reprimanded and given a pass: But this is in PRIL.

ilbob
February 14, 2008, 03:09 PM
The fact that the man is a policeman should not matter. +1

Old Dog
February 14, 2008, 03:09 PM
I find your ill-formed opinion to be quite offensive and insulting - not to mention pretty damned arrogant.Then please accept my sincere apology; my remark was not at all intended to be offensive nor insulting, and I'm somewhat amazed that you found it arrogant. I simply intended to point out the quite realistic -- and very common to the anti faction -- notion held by many that if the cops are not all qualified to carry firearms, or firearms are not necessary for all cops (whether off-duty or retired), private citizens don't need firearms either. You have noticed the Brady campaign, and others, using similiar arguments, I would assume?

Ironically, the post he was referring to never suggested doing this at all. It does show you the depth of entitlement many cops do feel though.And you are accusing me of reading something into a post? It has nothing to do with entitlement -- please refer back to the post I commented on:
Quote:
Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?

Its simple. Their lives are valuable to the state and ours are not. They need LEOs to control the rest of us. This to me indicated a level of misunderstanding as well as a distinct prejudice masked by a snide comment (which, in reality is pretty off-base in itself). My point being that if some of you, presumably on the pro-gun side, advance the argument that cops don't really need firearms any more than private citizens, regardless of whether we consider this to be true or not, it will affect the battle for all citizens to maintain the right to bear arms. This position is simply an acknowledgement of our current reality, it has nothing to do with a "sense of entitlement" or arrogance.

ilbob
February 14, 2008, 03:21 PM
Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?

Its simple. Their lives are valuable to the state and ours are not. They need LEOs to control the rest of us.

This to me indicated a level of misunderstanding as well as a distinct prejudice masked by a snide comment (which, in reality is pretty off-base in itself). My point being that if some of you, presumably on the pro-gun side, advance the argument that cops don't really need firearms any more than private citizens, regardless of whether we consider this to be true or not, it will affect the battle for all citizens to maintain the right to bear arms. This position is simply an acknowledgement of our current reality, it has nothing to do with a "sense of entitlement" or arrogance.

no prejudice or misunderstanding at all.

and in fact the reason cops are allowed off duty carry in Illinois is exactly because the state values their lives more than they value the lives of common citizens. look at all the laws mandating extra punishment for crimes against cops. its quite clear the state values them more then the rest of us.

i did not advance an argument that cops should be disarmed, or that they don't need guns. thats something you brought to the argument out of nowhere. in fact, other than a few tongue-in-cheek comments here and there, i have not heard a serious argument for disarming cops put forth on this board.

I will admit to having stated my opinion that congress exceeded its constitutionally authorized powers by enacting the 50 state cop carry bill. but that was not an argument that cops should not have guns. it was an argument against congress enacting something into law it has no constitutional authority to do.

coyotehitman
February 14, 2008, 11:27 PM
Actually, I recognize that many LE agencies are very strict about things that matter little, while at the same time being very lax on things that do.

I wish I knew what they were lax about. What I recognize is that most departments are overly critical of EVERYTHING.


look at all the laws mandating extra punishment for crimes against cops. its quite clear the state values them more then the rest of us.


The actual reasoning behind the enhanced penalties for crimes against law enforcement personnel actively engaged in the performance of an official duty is based on this theory: LE personnel come into repeated daily contact with people that can, and often will, harm them. The enhanced penalties were enacted as a deterrent for those who would otherwise attempt to harm LE officers. While some might argue that enhanced penalties will not deter an offender, it has been proven to do so. Many offenders apprehended for violent crimes against the public and subsequently arrested without incident have admitted to researchers that the only reason they did not kill the arresting officer is because they "...knew they would fry for killing a cop."

These enhanced penalties are neither automatic nor guaranteed. There are some cases where courts ruled the enhanced penalties did not apply. I was involved in one of these instances where someone attempted to murder an LE officer and a charge of simple assault was all the prosecutor would approve. For this crime, along with 10+ burglaries, several counts of safecracking, and felony domestic violence charges, the perpetrator received 13 months. He was out in 11 for being such an upstanding inmate. Six months after his release, he got tired of beating his on again/off again girlfriend and stabbed her. That was two years ago and as far as I know, he has already been released from prison again.

If enhanced penalties were the norm, I believe they would lose effectiveness. I agree that everyones life is equally valuable, but the logic makes sense to me. Besides, enhancing the penalties for the worst offenders and putting them away for longer periods does offer benefits to society as a whole.


I have noticed a handfull of folks on this forum who simply hate cops for no other reason than their status. A damned if they do, damned if they don't mentality. Over the years, I have also noticed that most cop haters fall into a few categories: criminals, folks who tried to become cops and couldn't make the cut (jealous folks), and folks who may have been wronged by the absolute minority of bad cops who have not yet washed out. Regardless, I encourage the folks who come here to bash LE to try to take a more neutral look at things. You might just find that your negative contacts with the police are a direct result of your attitude. If you look past your prejudices--and they are prejudices--you might find that we are hard working, caring, dedicated individuals who make many sacrifices to serve the public.

Don't let our military haircuts and clean shaven faces fool you, we are no different than most law abiding citizens: we are human, have good days and bad, and the same concerns as most of the level headed folks on here. Forced rules and regulations govern our behavior on and off duty, however, and everyone holds us to a higher standard.

My last post on this topic.

billdeserthills
February 16, 2008, 01:06 AM
Well people do make mistakes, fact that this guy is a cop should mean he has to carry his gun with a lanyard attached to it from now on!:D

Really guys, we all share many things in common just for the fact that we all belong to this forum. I can't see any point in getting all pissed off about a current event happening.

Sapper771
February 16, 2008, 03:23 AM
Coyotehitman: Thank You for explaining the big picture. +1

Sixtigers
February 20, 2008, 02:24 PM
+1 to Coyotehitman.

I'm a 20 year Navy veteran (God, that makes me feel old to say that).

I ride (Harleys), and some of the people I ride with are cops/ex-cops. I've had a lot of fun relaxing with some of these guys.

How can any pro-gunner/pro-shall-issue CCW'er worth his salt suggest that ex-cops/retired LE not get to carry CCW?

Last time I checked, they were citizens--just like the rest of us.
Good cause? Oh, hell yes. I should think so. These guys have pissed off a LOT of malcontents just by doing their jobs. Sometimes, malcontents hold grudges, and cops/ex-LE have families too.

There are bad apples in every field of employment; unfortunately, with cops, these bad apples get some really horrendous PR. I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between cop bashers and anti-gunners, when it comes to the virility of their (oftentimes illogical) hatred. I've had bad pizzas delivered before. Didn't mean that I thought the delivery driver shouldn't be allowed to have CCW.

When the point was made that denying ex/retired LE CCW would possibly limit/negate the chances of an average citizen getting CCW, I did not find that arrogant at all. In fact, I think there's a whole lot of truth there. If the average non-gunner Joe Citizen doesn't feel that an ex/retired cop should carry, what chance the average citizen?

The RKBA applies to everyone. Everyone, or it's all crap. I would even submit that ex-cons should be able to carry, once they've paid their dues. Yeah, I said it. To not allow them to is a continuation of punishment that seems severe. Will some commit crimes again? Yeah. With guns? Yeah...and when they do, let's lock 'em up for a lot longer. It's called punishment.

I'm a firm believer in liberty, and the RKBA, and the COTUS. I'm also aware that liberty isn't always easy.

No, I'm not a cop, a cop groupie, or involved in any form of LE.

cyclist
February 20, 2008, 02:45 PM
....

chrlefxtrt
February 20, 2008, 03:09 PM
My grandfather was a Police Lt. in Wichita Falls TX back in the day. He told new officers that they were not required to carry off duty, BUT if they were to witness a crime taking place while off duty and were unable to help because they were unarmed they would be in deep trouble.

I have found that many depts sometimes require their officers to carry when not working becasue they are in a sense always on the job.

Brian Dale
February 20, 2008, 03:32 PM
Officer loses gun, last seen on top of his car Huh. So far, I only do that with coffee cups.

The actual reasoning behind the enhanced penalties for crimes against law enforcement personnel actively engaged in the performance of an official duty is based on this theory: LE personnel come into repeated daily contact with people that can, and often will, harm them.I believe that that's the real reason. However, it's the wrong reason.

I love you guys as much as anybody, but all of our lives are worth having epoxified into law (yes, that's a word; I just invented it—use it if you wish) the principle that
predation on one's fellow human beings will not be tolerated here.

We don't exact additional penalties for criminals who perpetrate crimes against law enforcement officers "because the officers face danger by doing their jobs."

We exact additional penalties for criminals who perpetrate crimes against law enforcement officers because
They. Are. All. Of. Us,
and the principle of What Law Is, as well.

That's what that badge means.

Now, with regard to the lost gun; in a perfect world, it would be found and returned like a misplaced book.

We're not there yet.

jimbob86
February 20, 2008, 03:33 PM
Bob the machinist will not be fired for getting an OVI, Bob the cop will.

Bob the florist will not get suspended for sitting on his deck in his work trousers, after work, drinking a Bud Light, Bob the cop will.

Bob the banker will not receive a written reprimand for having too many wrinkles in his slacks, Bob the cop will.

Bob the accountant will not be removed from his position because his wife made an allegation that he pushed her during a domestic altercation two weeks prior with no proof evident, Bob the cop will.

Bob the production manager gets drunk on his own time at a party in a private residence, passes out, pees himself, and has a photo taken during his stupor which someone posts on the web, his boss ribs him over it. The same thing happens with Bob the cop and he is suspended or terminated for conduct unbecoming an officer.


Sounds, to me, like a micromanaged, top-heavy bureaucracy. To many layers of managers coming up with rules and regs to justify their positions and personal power.......... just my Opinion- what do I know? I've never been to Chicago, nor am I likely to go..........

Just keep in mind, all those layers of power provide cover for the corruption all that power breeds.

Phil DeGraves
February 20, 2008, 03:52 PM
"How can any pro-gunner/pro-shall-issue CCW'er worth his salt suggest that ex-cops/retired LE not get to carry CCW?"

The only one that suggested that was Old Dog.

"Can anyone tell me why retired/off duty LEO can carry in IL and I can't?"
This post does not say anything about not letting cops carry. I don't know why Old Dog thought it did.

"Last time I checked, they were citizens--just like the rest of us."
And that is precisely NOT the case as off duty and ex-cops are exempt from laws that prevent the regular law abiding citizen from carrying. That is the point being made; not disarming cops but applying the carry laws to any law abiding citizen that wishes to carry.

Henry Bowman
February 20, 2008, 04:16 PM
This thread has declined into a debate -- which is not appropriate in the Activism forum. In fact, I really don't see any proposed activism early in the thread either.

Brian Dale
February 20, 2008, 04:22 PM
Good heavens. I'd thought that I'd come across this in General Gun Discussions.

:confused:

If you enjoyed reading about "IL - Officer loses gun, last seen on top of his car" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!