User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:10:14 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I said "prove it." You can't take that kind of anecdotal nonsense to a jury as proof. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What makes it any more bad than if he had misplaced a AR 15? Your all looking at this wrong, some of you are acting as if that's some kinda fucking evil gun than need's to have a qualified person to have... like a gun hating dem. What makes it any more bad than if he had misplaced a AR 15? ..... Well for starters its obvious he didnt "forget" about it. More importantly if any non cop here magically ended up with a select fire weapon in their possession the atf would be foaming at the mouth to send us to prison for 10 years for violating the NFA. It's obvious? Really? Prove it. And as a cop, especially a SWAT cop, he had the legal right to be issued the weapon. Sorry you don't like cops or the law, but it is what it is. Sorry but you dont just "forget" about weapons, especially ones that dont belong to you. Even moreso if youre a member of the military and have had weapons retention drilled into your head since bootcamp. I said "prove it." You can't take that kind of anecdotal nonsense to a jury as proof. Lol prove it? Anyone with a shred of rational thought in their head can see this for what it is. You dont need a tape recording of him telling his best friend how he loves getting away with stealing a M16 to see what he did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:10:48 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are right. We never investigate cases where people say someone stole something when they actually had a legal right to possess it. No crime & case is closed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If this was a case of a security guard that suddenly turned up with a company-owned Glock seven years later when he heard about an investigation of missing weapons, you guys would probably be booking him into the county intake, not saying that his excuse seems plausible. You are right. We never investigate cases where people say someone stole something when they actually had a legal right to possess it. No crime & case is closed. You are probably right about this guy not being chargeable, but if you don't think there is a high chance that this guy had that rifle for seven years after "borrowing it for training" with the intent of never giving it back, you have a remarkable lack of cynicism for a cop. In fact, assuming that you are a gun culture guy, I'm astounded that you've never encountered the concept that a lot of DoD firearms have found their way into private hands by this exact route. Cops are people too, and that is a tempting situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:12:08 AM EDT
[#3]
...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:15:00 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For the last time, THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED. The deputy alerted his department, not the other way around. But why let pesky facts interfere with a typical ARFCOM cop bashing fest? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yea, bullshit "Return the rifle we caught you with or you'll be prosecuted"...."oh yea, I totally forgot about that!" 
Lol. Perfect. For the last time, THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED. The deputy alerted his department, not the other way around. But why let pesky facts interfere with a typical ARFCOM cop bashing fest? Because the feds were eventually going to follow the trail to him? If the feds caught him first he would of been fucked. Turn the rifle over to the department first he just gets a strongly worded letter in his record. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:15:05 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For the last time, THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED. The deputy alerted his department, not the other way around. But why let pesky facts interfere with a typical ARFCOM cop bashing fest? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yea, bullshit "Return the rifle we caught you with or you'll be prosecuted"...."oh yea, I totally forgot about that!"
Lol. Perfect. For the last time, THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED. The deputy alerted his department, not the other way around. But why let pesky facts interfere with a typical ARFCOM cop bashing fest? By his own claim, the guy alerted his department after reading about the investigation in the newspaper, including statements from the Sheriff threatening prosecution. We can split the difference on that one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:15:07 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So by your logic, if I am given a brand new patrol car, it should sit in my driveway until i get back. The same with any radios, laptops, tazers, or mobile fingerprint devices. Yes, you are still an employee, but you are going to be half the world away. Someone else at the agency could be using that taxpayer funded equipment. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What about personal responsibility? I know if I was going away for an extended peroid, I would turn in ALL issued equipment for two reasons. First, so I am not responsible if it disappears, and Second so it could be issued to someone else if they need it while I am gone. So, you would turn in your badge, gun, and police ID? For what reason? You are still employed. You would also turn in all of your gear. Why? You are still an employee. And, if I turned in some of my weapons, I know I wouldn't get them back. They were a pain to get as it was. So by your logic, if I am given a brand new patrol car, it should sit in my driveway until i get back. The same with any radios, laptops, tazers, or mobile fingerprint devices. Yes, you are still an employee, but you are going to be half the world away. Someone else at the agency could be using that taxpayer funded equipment. Depends if it pool equipment or individual officer equipment. Pool equipment would be turned in at the end of each work day or work week. (or assigned to a car and never turned in) Individual officer equipment would be turned in only upon seperation from employment. To us its an M16. To cops its one of those that antique rifles they got for a buck. My local cops are issued M16A2's which have the burst feature removed. They call them "muskets" because they are so long and they would prefer personally owned carbines with lights and optics to the A2s. Like their handgun they retain it until they no longer work for the department. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:22:26 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Depends if it pool equipment or individual officer equipment. Pool equipment would be turned in at the end of each work day or work week. (or assigned to a car and never turned in) Individual officer equipment would be turned in only upon seperation from employment. To us its an M16. To cops its one of those that antique rifles they got for a buck. My local cops are issued M16A2's which have the burst feature removed. They call them "muskets" because they are so long and they would prefer personally owned carbines with lights and optics to the A2s. Like their handgun they retain it until they no longer work for the department. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What about personal responsibility? I know if I was going away for an extended peroid, I would turn in ALL issued equipment for two reasons. First, so I am not responsible if it disappears, and Second so it could be issued to someone else if they need it while I am gone. So, you would turn in your badge, gun, and police ID? For what reason? You are still employed. You would also turn in all of your gear. Why? You are still an employee. And, if I turned in some of my weapons, I know I wouldn't get them back. They were a pain to get as it was. So by your logic, if I am given a brand new patrol car, it should sit in my driveway until i get back. The same with any radios, laptops, tazers, or mobile fingerprint devices. Yes, you are still an employee, but you are going to be half the world away. Someone else at the agency could be using that taxpayer funded equipment. Depends if it pool equipment or individual officer equipment. Pool equipment would be turned in at the end of each work day or work week. (or assigned to a car and never turned in) Individual officer equipment would be turned in only upon seperation from employment. To us its an M16. To cops its one of those that antique rifles they got for a buck. My local cops are issued M16A2's which have the burst feature removed. They call them "muskets" because they are so long and they would prefer personally owned carbines with lights and optics to the A2s. Like their handgun they retain it until they no longer work for the department. The M16 wasnt an personal issue weapon  , pretty fucking obvious form the article.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:25:04 AM EDT
[#8]
AT work I am issued a FN P90 w/200 rds of SS190 AP ammo. I have to sign for it when I go thru the checklist I have to do at the start of my shift. The S/N has be double checked that it is the weapon assigned to that car. It does happen where the wrong gun gets put back in the wrong car but it is usually found out pretty quick.
Even the ammo is quickly counted in the mags...w/that said we have had them lost...some female ofc left hers at the range one day. The next shfit came on and the guy that got her car was like..ummm where is the machine gun that usually sits here 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:27:46 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Vehicles are different. Vehicles need to be driven, especially with the liberal gas we have now. The laptops are with the vehicle. Same with the fingerprint devices. Radios, tasers, etc. are all issued to a person. We have spares. These items don't degrade or change over time. Same for badges, ammo, guns, and so on. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So by your logic, if I am given a brand new patrol car, it should sit in my driveway until i get back. The same with any radios, laptops, tazers, or mobile fingerprint devices. Yes, you are still an employee, but you are going to be half the world away. Someone else at the agency could be using that taxpayer funded equipment. Vehicles are different. Vehicles need to be driven, especially with the liberal gas we have now. The laptops are with the vehicle. Same with the fingerprint devices. Radios, tasers, etc. are all issued to a person. We have spares. These items don't degrade or change over time. Same for badges, ammo, guns, and so on. Now you are trying to justify stupidity. Turn in all of your equipment, and we will issue you all new stuff when you get back. Say Deputy Smith doesn't store his weapon correctly, what happens? Rust, theft, unauthorized use. Say Deputy Smith gets killed in action. Wouldn't it be easier to just go and help the family, then have to try and find a way to be tactful and retrieve said equipment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:28:00 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
bullcrap. he was hoping it was forgotten about, and now his to keep. It seems like they lost track of it and he turned it back in |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:30:42 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What kind of scope mount is on it? Beowulf X prototype! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:34:36 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A year or so ago, a cop buddy was looking into acquiring DRMO M16s for his department and found the DOD has suspended all loans while conducting a thorough audit of all weapons loaned out due to abuse and incomplete accounting by LEAs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That may be what the article says, but that isn't the whole story. The Feds came around last year and wanted all of the M-16s back. You showed up to work one day and had to turn the weapon in right then and there. Everyone knew of this last year. Was he deployed then? Where did they come asking for the M16s back? I have never heard of this occurring ABSENT major abuse. A year or so ago, a cop buddy was looking into acquiring DRMO M16s for his department and found the DOD has suspended all loans while conducting a thorough audit of all weapons loaned out due to abuse and incomplete accounting by LEAs. Sounds possible. Every year we have to account for the loaned rifles. In years past, we had a list of serial numbers that we had to certify that we still had ("Scout's honor"). This year they wanted digital photos of the serial numbers. As far as the topic at hand, I dunno. It seems odd to me that the SO wouldn't have wanted the rifle back before the deputy deployed. On the other hand, it sounds like their accounting was jacked up, so they probably didn't know that he (still) had it. I learned a long time ago to not ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence. (shrug) I will say that I found his statement that he "forgot" he had it.... unlikely. However, in practical terms, I don't think that any prosecutor is going to be able to show intent; especially since it nobody knew who had it and it was the deputy who came forward. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:35:32 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It seems like they lost track of it and he turned it back in Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
bullcrap. he was hoping it was forgotten about, and now his to keep. It seems like they lost track of it and he turned it back in Seven years later, after the investigation to find it appeared in the newspaper and the Sheriff threatened prosecution... so um, yeah. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:45:48 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Now you are trying to justify stupidity. Turn in all of your equipment, and we will issue you all new stuff when you get back. Say Deputy Smith doesn't store his weapon correctly, what happens? Rust, theft, unauthorized use. Say Deputy Smith gets killed in action. Wouldn't it be easier to just go and help the family, then have to try and find a way to be tactful and retrieve said equipment. I am telling you what agencies do. Now, if you want to run an agency, then do that and have it your way. The officer would turn in everything, so it could be reissued. Now, when the officer returns, you have to buy new items for him. If I returned and needed my equipment back, they would be replacing quite a bit. When you are issued something, it has a longer life than a pool item. Not only is that item taken better care of, it also will be kept in service when it should be replaced. Uniforms are a prime example. All of my pants have some form of damage that should require replacement. At $120 each, that adds up. Never mine the shirts, which are $65 and you can't reuse patches. Let's not even talk about gas masks, helmets, tac gear, and other items. If you are paranoid about theft, maybe he has a locker at work to store the stuff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:47:43 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But why would he think it was missing? As far as he knows, the agency signed it out to him, and he's still with the agency, and no one has ever asked him to return it to the armory or count it during an inventory...so for what reason would he suspect that he needed to do a damn thing with it? Again, this all comes back to a complete and utter fucking lack of inventory management and oversight on the part of the agency. They should have known who it was originally signed out to. They should have conducted annual audits. They should have notified the deputies before initiating a full scale investigation, and informally inquired around with them as to the whereabouts of the rifle. Instead they did none of the above, and now get to choose between scapegoating the deputy or having even more egg on face for the agency. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did you guys read the article? 1. Guy borrows rifle from department. 2. Guy puts it in his safe 3. Guy deploys to AFG twice in looks like 4 years totaling 2.5 years deployed. 4. While he is deployed, Dept notices gun is missing, looks for it. Guy never knows about it, since he's overseas. 5. When guy comes home, sees the missing rifle story on the news and calls his supervisor and says he has one. And it's it. Department fucked up by not knowing who they gave the rifle to obviously, but I don't see the outcry. I thinks it's about the 7 year time frame and the fact that it was only produced after an investigation was started. I do understand that originally is was a misunderstanding but after 7 years..........even this guy goes thru all his gun stuff every year or two and "US Property" marked M16s are not easy to overlook, especially since he KNOWS what they are, he can't really blame ignorance on that. But why would he think it was missing? As far as he knows, the agency signed it out to him, and he's still with the agency, and no one has ever asked him to return it to the armory or count it during an inventory...so for what reason would he suspect that he needed to do a damn thing with it? Again, this all comes back to a complete and utter fucking lack of inventory management and oversight on the part of the agency. They should have known who it was originally signed out to. They should have conducted annual audits. They should have notified the deputies before initiating a full scale investigation, and informally inquired around with them as to the whereabouts of the rifle. Instead they did none of the above, and now get to choose between scapegoating the deputy or having even more egg on face for the agency. I think both the deputy AND the department have blame. WTF goes on tours and keeps A department owned M-16 in his house? If ANYONE else has a key, he does not have complete control of that weapon, nor can he check on it personally. Flippin nuts if you ask me. We are not talking about a department owned handgun [which still should be turned in to the armory IMHO because it's not his property and if he happened to be killed while serving...........] we are talking about a controlled item that should not be kept in a officers house while deployed for years if for no other reason then the ability to issue it out to someone else in the meantime. [not to mention it "disappearing." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:57:19 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seven years later, after the investigation to find it appeared in the newspaper and the Sheriff threatened prosecution... so um, yeah. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
bullcrap. he was hoping it was forgotten about, and now his to keep. It seems like they lost track of it and he turned it back in Seven years later, after the investigation to find it appeared in the newspaper and the Sheriff threatened prosecution... so um, yeah. The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:15:16 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:20:22 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. That's how I see it. It's obvious he did not intend to steal it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:21:48 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am telling you what agencies do. Now, if you want to run an agency, then do that and have it your way. The officer would turn in everything, so it could be reissued. Now, when the officer returns, you have to buy new items for him. If I returned and needed my equipment back, they would be replacing quite a bit. When you are issued something, it has a longer life than a pool item. Not only is that item taken better care of, it also will be kept in service when it should be replaced. Uniforms are a prime example. All of my pants have some form of damage that should require replacement. At $120 each, that adds up. Never mine the shirts, which are $65 and you can't reuse patches. Let's not even talk about gas masks, helmets, tac gear, and other items. If you are paranoid about theft, maybe he has a locker at work to store the stuff. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Now you are trying to justify stupidity. Turn in all of your equipment, and we will issue you all new stuff when you get back. Say Deputy Smith doesn't store his weapon correctly, what happens? Rust, theft, unauthorized use. Say Deputy Smith gets killed in action. Wouldn't it be easier to just go and help the family, then have to try and find a way to be tactful and retrieve said equipment. I am telling you what agencies do. Now, if you want to run an agency, then do that and have it your way. The officer would turn in everything, so it could be reissued. Now, when the officer returns, you have to buy new items for him. If I returned and needed my equipment back, they would be replacing quite a bit. When you are issued something, it has a longer life than a pool item. Not only is that item taken better care of, it also will be kept in service when it should be replaced. Uniforms are a prime example. All of my pants have some form of damage that should require replacement. At $120 each, that adds up. Never mine the shirts, which are $65 and you can't reuse patches. Let's not even talk about gas masks, helmets, tac gear, and other items. If you are paranoid about theft, maybe he has a locker at work to store the stuff. Aren't you the one who said the inventory control guys should take the fall? How am I supposed to audit the equipment you have if you are half the world away? When our SOT(Sheriff's Office Training) classes graduate, they get a box with all the equipment they are to be issued, already sized and inventoried. Uniforms are a single person issued item. And when did Gucci start making duty uniforms? The rank and file wear $25 pants and $20 shirts. Even the "uniform" I wear is no more $40 for both the embroidered polo and cargo pants. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:25:33 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Plenty of time to return it. Only when he saw trouble on the way did he remember to give it back. He borrowed it 7 fucking years ago. Give me a fucking break dude. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Did you guys read the article? 1. Guy borrows rifle from department. 2. Guy puts it in his safe 3. Guy deploys to AFG twice in looks like 4 years totaling 2.5 years deployed. 4. While he is deployed, Dept notices gun is missing, looks for it. Guy never knows about it, since he's overseas. 5. When guy comes home, sees the missing rifle story on the news and calls his supervisor and says he has one. And it's it. Department fucked up by not knowing who they gave the rifle to obviously, but I don't see the outcry. Plenty of time to return it. Only when he saw trouble on the way did he remember to give it back. He borrowed it 7 fucking years ago. Give me a fucking break dude. When I came back from my first tour in Iraq after 15 months I forgot a 2006 CBR600RR which I had bought three months prior in a storage unit. When the manager called me about not paying my monthly fees almost a year later, after I had PCS'd, I then remembered a bike I had spent over $7500 on. Without going into detail, I had been preoccupied in the interim and it slipped my mind. And trust me, the last thing I did after getting back was go digging through my guns and finger fucking them. I had enough of guns to tide me over for just a bit. Just because this M16 might be the holy grail of ARFCOM circle jerking doesn't mean this guy didn't have other things going on during that time that were more important. I'll give him a break. Especially when by all accounts, no one told him they were looking for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:32:55 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. Integrity would have been returning the rifle when the training was over. How long was the training? If the rifle was signed out for training, it should have been returned as soon as the training was complete. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:41:42 PM EDT
[#22]
I'm so glad the thin blue line crowd had time to clear this issue up. I feel much safer knowing this PD saw no need for weapons accountability or familiarization and training on their inventoried assault rifles for over 7 years.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:45:42 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The rank and file wear $25 pants and $20 shirts. Even the "uniform" I wear is no more $40 for both the embroidered polo and cargo pants. I have no idea where you are going to get uniforms for $20/25. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:46:41 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Integrity would have been returning the rifle when the training was over. How long was the training? If the rifle was signed out for training, it should have been returned as soon as the training was complete. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. Integrity would have been returning the rifle when the training was over. How long was the training? If the rifle was signed out for training, it should have been returned as soon as the training was complete. I agree, he should have turned the rifle over when he was done with it. It must be amazing to live in your world where you have NEVER FORGOTTEN ANYTHING, especially during a period of your life where you were under great stress. Integrity happened when the deputy swallowed his pride, ate crow, and called his superior. Ratting on yourself when you have done something wrong is integrity, you do the right thing, regardless of the consequences. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 12:56:31 PM EDT
[#25]
Why does it say the investigators found it when in reality the deputy saw the news story of it and decided to return it on his own?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 1:12:54 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
sounds like nobody even noticed it missing til 2013. This is what astounds me. Some armorer should be in deep shit over this as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 1:30:53 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who would go to jail if they forgot about a firearm in the back of their safe? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did you guys read the article? 1. Guy borrows rifle from department. 2. Guy puts it in his safe 3. Guy deploys to AFG twice in looks like 4 years totaling 2.5 years deployed. 4. While he is deployed, Dept notices gun is missing, looks for it. Guy never knows about it, since he's overseas. 5. When guy comes home, sees the missing rifle story on the news and calls his supervisor and says he has one. And it's it. Department fucked up by not knowing who they gave the rifle to obviously, but I don't see the outcry. It's kind of like pussy on a pedestal. It's an OMG M-16! Ehhh, just another rifle to folks who are use to them. no, it's not there are lots of people on this site that have pew pew pew guns that they're required to keep track of or go. to. jail. others, apparently, not so much Who would go to jail if they forgot about a firearm in the back of their safe? dude, I shoot full auto shit all the time so I have no idea where that post sample M16 I last saw in 2006 might be |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 1:33:50 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. I could be way off here but what you're calling integrity I see as, "oh shit, somebody noticed and I need to cover my ass as well as it can get covered" throw something in a river that might get traced directly back to your or instead stumble across it all of a sudden, which would get you in more trouble? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 3:16:18 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
AT work I am issued a FN P90 w/200 rds of SS190 AP ammo. I have to sign for it when I go thru the checklist I have to do at the start of my shift. The S/N has be double checked that it is the weapon assigned to that car. It does happen where the wrong gun gets put back in the wrong car but it is usually found out pretty quick. Even the ammo is quickly counted in the mags...w/that said we have had them lost...some female ofc left hers at the range one day. The next shfit came on and the guy that got her car was like..ummm where is the machine gun that usually sits here 
Holy fuck. Was the p90 recovered? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 3:21:15 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am telling you what agencies do. Now, if you want to run an agency, then do that and have it your way. The officer would turn in everything, so it could be reissued. Now, when the officer returns, you have to buy new items for him. If I returned and needed my equipment back, they would be replacing quite a bit. When you are issued something, it has a longer life than a pool item. Not only is that item taken better care of, it also will be kept in service when it should be replaced. Uniforms are a prime example. All of my pants have some form of damage that should require replacement. At $120 each, that adds up. Never mine the shirts, which are $65 and you can't reuse patches. Let's not even talk about gas masks, helmets, tac gear, and other items. If you are paranoid about theft, maybe he has a locker at work to store the stuff. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Now you are trying to justify stupidity. Turn in all of your equipment, and we will issue you all new stuff when you get back. Say Deputy Smith doesn't store his weapon correctly, what happens? Rust, theft, unauthorized use. Say Deputy Smith gets killed in action. Wouldn't it be easier to just go and help the family, then have to try and find a way to be tactful and retrieve said equipment. I am telling you what agencies do. Now, if you want to run an agency, then do that and have it your way. The officer would turn in everything, so it could be reissued. Now, when the officer returns, you have to buy new items for him. If I returned and needed my equipment back, they would be replacing quite a bit. When you are issued something, it has a longer life than a pool item. Not only is that item taken better care of, it also will be kept in service when it should be replaced. Uniforms are a prime example. All of my pants have some form of damage that should require replacement. At $120 each, that adds up. Never mine the shirts, which are $65 and you can't reuse patches. Let's not even talk about gas masks, helmets, tac gear, and other items. If you are paranoid about theft, maybe he has a locker at work to store the stuff. Why can't patches be reused? I only ask because when I was an EMT I had the disgusting job of removing patches from about 5 years' worth of ruined and turned-in stank-ass shirts, caps, and coats for reuse. They always give the shitty jobs to the overnight dispatcher  .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 3:22:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I could be way off here but what you're calling integrity I see as, "oh shit, somebody noticed and I need to cover my ass as well as it can get covered" throw something in a river that might get traced directly back to your or instead stumble across it all of a sudden, which would get you in more trouble? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. I could be way off here but what you're calling integrity I see as, "oh shit, somebody noticed and I need to cover my ass as well as it can get covered" throw something in a river that might get traced directly back to your or instead stumble across it all of a sudden, which would get you in more trouble? No. Your assumption is wrong. I'm talking about the actions he took to CORRECT his fuck up after it was brought to his attention. I believe the facts are: He borrowed the weapon for training. He was deployed over 2 tours to a stressful environment. He missed departmental comminique about the missing gun (assumption is they asked their department members about it while he was gone), once he realized he had the missing weapon he did the right thing and made notification. It is obvious after seven years the department had no clue who had the weapon (hence it not being traced back to him when he was deployed). He could have distanced himself from it very easily and lied when asked but he did not (which the article doesn't intimate that he was even asked). He told his department what happened. My assumption, based on the limited evidence I have, is that it was not his intent to steal the weapon. Your assumption is that it was. Logic dictates that if he was intending to steal the weapon and had gotten away with it for seven years, he would not throw himself on his sword when its disappearance was discovered, he would have lied his way out of it. Like I said originally, deputy fucked up, department fucked up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 3:45:47 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's kind of like pussy on a pedestal. It's an OMG M-16! Ehhh, just another rifle to folks who are use to them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Did you guys read the article? 1. Guy borrows rifle from department. 2. Guy puts it in his safe 3. Guy deploys to AFG twice in looks like 4 years totaling 2.5 years deployed. 4. While he is deployed, Dept notices gun is missing, looks for it. Guy never knows about it, since he's overseas. 5. When guy comes home, sees the missing rifle story on the news and calls his supervisor and says he has one. And it's it. Department fucked up by not knowing who they gave the rifle to obviously, but I don't see the outcry. It's kind of like pussy on a pedestal. It's an OMG M-16! Ehhh, just another rifle to folks who are use to them. I see no practical reason to own an M16. Carried an A1 for a while, and the dept I worked at got some from the gov. We were not permitted to take them home. I think the guy was hoping they would forget about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:03:41 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no idea where you are going to get uniforms for $20/25. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The rank and file wear $25 pants and $20 shirts. Even the "uniform" I wear is no more $40 for both the embroidered polo and cargo pants. I have no idea where you are going to get uniforms for $20/25. Even our shit uniforms were double that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:05:54 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have no idea where you are going to get uniforms for $20/25. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The rank and file wear $25 pants and $20 shirts. Even the "uniform" I wear is no more $40 for both the embroidered polo and cargo pants. I have no idea where you are going to get uniforms for $20/25. No shit. I paid more than that in 1980. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:06:03 PM EDT
[#35]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:08:31 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why does it say the investigators found it when in reality the deputy saw the news story of it and decided to return it on his own? I have a feeling the dept asked everyone where it was before they made it public. Just a hunch, and when the feds said they were going to investigate, it was suddenly found. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:14:18 PM EDT
[#37]
Too bad he got caught. He might need it one day.
Just right it off as a return for the taxes he paid last week. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:19:25 PM EDT
[#38]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:19:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I haven't seen microfiche since the early 90's, and haven't used one since the 80's. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I knew a deputy who had an dept-owned M16 in his safe. The rifle hadn't seen the inside of a cruiser or the arms room for a very long time, and the records for it were probably on microfiche by then. I bet the guys in that department under age 30 have never even touched a microfiche. Ah, the good old days I haven't seen microfiche since the early 90's, and haven't used one since the 80's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:26:32 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. Your assumption is wrong. I'm talking about the actions he took to CORRECT his fuck up after it was brought to his attention. I believe the facts are: He borrowed the weapon for training. He was deployed over 2 tours to a stressful environment. He missed departmental comminique about the missing gun (assumption is they asked their department members about it while he was gone), once he realized he had the missing weapon he did the right thing and made notification. It is obvious after seven years the department had no clue who had the weapon (hence it not being traced back to him when he was deployed). He could have distanced himself from it very easily and lied when asked but he did not (which the article doesn't intimate that he was even asked). He told his department what happened. My assumption, based on the limited evidence I have, is that it was not his intent to steal the weapon. Your assumption is that it was. Logic dictates that if he was intending to steal the weapon and had gotten away with it for seven years, he would not throw himself on his sword when its disappearance was discovered, he would have lied his way out of it. Like I said originally, deputy fucked up, department fucked up. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Finally someone who understands how this works. Deputy was wrong, department was wrong. There is no criminal intent here. If there was criminal intent on the deputy's part why in the hell would he turn the weapon over after hearing about the investigation? Why not just throw it in the river if the "Feds" are getting close?? Because he has integrity and some of you will never understand exactly what that means. I could be way off here but what you're calling integrity I see as, "oh shit, somebody noticed and I need to cover my ass as well as it can get covered" throw something in a river that might get traced directly back to your or instead stumble across it all of a sudden, which would get you in more trouble? No. Your assumption is wrong. I'm talking about the actions he took to CORRECT his fuck up after it was brought to his attention. I believe the facts are: He borrowed the weapon for training. He was deployed over 2 tours to a stressful environment. He missed departmental comminique about the missing gun (assumption is they asked their department members about it while he was gone), once he realized he had the missing weapon he did the right thing and made notification. It is obvious after seven years the department had no clue who had the weapon (hence it not being traced back to him when he was deployed). He could have distanced himself from it very easily and lied when asked but he did not (which the article doesn't intimate that he was even asked). He told his department what happened. My assumption, based on the limited evidence I have, is that it was not his intent to steal the weapon. Your assumption is that it was. Logic dictates that if he was intending to steal the weapon and had gotten away with it for seven years, he would not throw himself on his sword when its disappearance was discovered, he would have lied his way out of it. Like I said originally, deputy fucked up, department fucked up. Your assumption regarding the facts appears to be wrong. The article clearly states that he has been home for "several years." The weapon was discovered missing in 2013. Simple timeline is simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:51:06 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
dude, I shoot full auto shit all the time so I have no idea where that post sample M16 I last saw in 2006 might be Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Who would go to jail if they forgot about a firearm in the back of their safe? dude, I shoot full auto shit all the time so I have no idea where that post sample M16 I last saw in 2006 might be I'm still not seeing where someone is going to jail. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:52:52 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I see no practical reason to own an M16. Carried an A1 for a while, and the dept I worked at got some from the gov. We were not permitted to take them home. I think the guy was hoping they would forget about it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's kind of like pussy on a pedestal. It's an OMG M-16! Ehhh, just another rifle to folks who are use to them. I see no practical reason to own an M16. Carried an A1 for a while, and the dept I worked at got some from the gov. We were not permitted to take them home. I think the guy was hoping they would forget about it. I had a full auto L1A1 at my former dept. Maybe,maybe not, as soon as the he read the story in the newspaper he contacted someone about the issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 4:53:33 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No shit. I paid more than that in 1980. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The rank and file wear $25 pants and $20 shirts. Even the "uniform" I wear is no more $40 for both the embroidered polo and cargo pants. I have no idea where you are going to get uniforms for $20/25. No shit. I paid more than that in 1980. I think the last pants and shirt I bought were in the $70 each range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:08:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryThey will find it in the trunk of a CVPI parked out in the back of the vehicle lot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:13:04 PM EDT
[#45]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:57:59 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
bullcrap. he was hoping it was forgotten about, and now his to keep. It seems like they lost track of it and he turned it back in Seven years later, after the investigation to find it appeared in the newspaper and the Sheriff threatened prosecution... so um, yeah. The seven years is almost irrelevant except that the SO should have caught the discrepancy about 6 or 7 years ago. Reading the article, it was one of 20 rifles that were just kept in the armory and issued out for training. It looks like the SO just pencil-whipped the accountability document every year without laying hands on the rifles to ensure accountability (their bad).... until 2013 when they had to send in digital photos of the serial numbers. That's when the investigation began. Well, the real question then is whether the M16 was issued to him and they failed to keep records, or whether it was simply handed to him (apparently sans paperwork) for a short-term training program, and he neglected to return it afterwards. My bet would be that whoever was in charge of the armory at that point in time simply didn't give a damn about keeping records either way, and the general attitude was probably "Just take one if you want it" so long as the person remains a deputy. Except that 7 years passed, armorers change, and suddenly the Feds are wanting to make sure their property is still accounted for...thus resulting in the "Oh Shit" moment for the brass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:08:36 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm still stuck on Feds auditing local PDs. WTF? Only a matter of time before we're next. Kali first! Off to dig into the safe.... the feds still own the rifle. DRMO guns are still property of the feds, just on loan to whatever PD. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:18:00 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At $25,000 and up? Yeah, right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:26:07 PM EDT
[#49]
Guns are tools. Tools get used and sometimes lost. Accountability is important but it's secondary to the actual use of the tool.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:05:26 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Guns are tools. Tools get used and sometimes lost. Accountability is important but it's secondary to the actual use of the tool. He wasn't actually using it. He got it to train with before he deployed for a different organization. Accountability and usability aren't mutually exclusive. Knowing where your assets are and routinely validating them in no way makes them unable to be used for their intended purpose. And if they get lost or damaged in the course of duty then there should be a process to get the loss documented and removed from the rolls. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
