Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/21/2010 5:21:25 PM EDT
http://www.theledger.com/article/20101021/NEWS/101029947/1410?Title=LPD-Officer-Arrested-Suspended-



Was a bad move. Do LEO's commonly get to drive their duty vehicle like this?




Link Posted: 10/21/2010 5:27:16 PM EDT
Depends on the agency. Here you can take it to or from training, gym, or work. It used to be that you could use it for grocery shopping, taking the kids to soccer, whatever.
Link Posted: 10/21/2010 7:34:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/21/2010 9:52:14 PM EDT
I was a stupid mistake but he shouldn't be fired for it. To get arrested and put in jail is just stupid. Give him a fine and let him get on with his life. No need to f*** the guy over.
Link Posted: 10/22/2010 5:55:09 AM EDT
I've known a lot of LEO's over the years and it's not uncommon for them to bring their duty cars home, but I don't know of any that used them for running errands.  Leaving kids and a loaded gun in the car is stupid but I'm not sure he should loose his job over it.  Then again, if the kid got killed I'm sure they'd be stringing him up right now.

I'm glad for the kid that got shot that (no matter what we read on ARFCOM) not all .45 wounds are fatal .
Link Posted: 10/22/2010 6:04:50 AM EDT
Obviously a stupid mistake, but sometimes stupid hurts.



The first question is, had this been Joe Blow, would it be prosecuted by the SAO. If so, then game on, sorry about your luck officer. I'm 99.9% sure the SAO prosecutes these crimes, so unless you are saying the officer is above the law, or better than Joe Blow for some reason or another, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent as he is a professional and is held to a higher standard (at least that's what FDOT says when they pull me over).



The second question is, if I was a Lakeland tax payer, why in the hell was this patrol car in Orlando in the first place, being used for personal business. That sounds like a HUGE waste of taxpayer money, but I guess ya'll have more money than you know what to do with over there. I have no problem with take home cars if the officer lives in jurisdiction, or heck even the same county if its a small town, however they should never be for personal use.


Originally Posted By CPTK:


I was a stupid mistake but he shouldn't be fired for it. To get arrested and put in jail is just stupid. Give him a fine and let him get on with his life. No need to f*** the guy over.






 
Link Posted: 10/22/2010 12:55:17 PM EDT
I think he should at least be sentenced the same as anyone else. I also believe LEO's

should be held to a higher standard. After all they enforce laws and are familiar with

the laws.



I don't like the fact that they would be allowed to drive their duty vehicle like that

at all. They get good pay and great benefits. They can pay for their own ride

and gas on their time off like the rest of us do. Lakeland has budget issues and were

threatening to close parks due to a lack of revenue. If this is a common practice

it would be costing us a great deal in fuel, maintenance and depreciation on the vehicles.
Link Posted: 10/22/2010 4:59:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Banditman:
I think he should at least be sentenced the same as anyone else. I also believe LEO's
should be held to a higher standard. After all they enforce laws and are familiar with
the laws.

I don't like the fact that they would be allowed to drive their duty vehicle like that
at all. They get good pay and great benefits. They can pay for their own ride
and gas on their time off like the rest of us do. Lakeland has budget issues and were
threatening to close parks due to a lack of revenue. If this is a common practice
it would be costing us a great deal in fuel, maintenance and depreciation on the vehicles.


I fully agree + 1
Link Posted: 10/22/2010 6:09:16 PM EDT
It says it was an unmarked car.  That likely means that he is an investigator of some sort and therefore subject to "On-Call" status.  That means that he is REQUIRED to take his police car anywhere that he goes and cannot consume alcohol and cannot leave a specified radius from his jurisdiction while he is on-call.  Obviously citizens don't want to hear, "It's gonna be a while until the detective gets here.  He has to drive home and pick up his car first."

Also keep in mind that cops are people too.  We make mistakes from time to time and it's extremely rare that anyone faces any jail time on this charge when it results in minor injuries.  That kid will be set for life after the PD settles out with his parents anyway.
Link Posted: 10/23/2010 3:21:40 AM EDT
the idiot needs to be prosecuted, convicted and jailed.  Heck, any Citizen that is that careless deserves the same.  Just because he is in LE, does NOT make him immune to the same penalties for stupidity as the rest of us.  If anything, the bar should be higher for him.
Link Posted: 10/23/2010 3:39:01 AM EDT




Originally Posted By Banditman:

I don't like the fact that they would be allowed to drive their duty vehicle like that

at all. They get good pay and great benefits. They can pay for their own ride

and gas on their time off like the rest of us do. Lakeland has budget issues and were

threatening to close parks due to a lack of revenue. If this is a common practice

it would be costing us a great deal in fuel, maintenance and depreciation on the vehicles.




I have seen agencies that allow their people to drive their "company cars" when they are out volunteering, such as coaching a Little League team. Out of the county.. I dunno about that. Up to the agency, though.



I know a couple of guys who are required by the agency to do everything in their G-ride during their on-call period. On-call being the time when you are scheduled to be the on-call person for your unit. This policy allows for reduced response times, and usually, when those people are responding, a reduced response time is important. The usual restriction I've seen is that they have to stay within the county or within a certain number of miles from town.
Link Posted: 10/23/2010 4:06:44 AM EDT



Originally Posted By justin_schuyler:


It says it was an unmarked car.  That likely means that he is an investigator of some sort and therefore subject to "On-Call" status.  That means that he is REQUIRED to take his police car anywhere that he goes and cannot consume alcohol and cannot leave a specified radius from his jurisdiction while he is on-call.  Obviously citizens don't want to hear, "It's gonna be a while until the detective gets here.  He has to drive home and pick up his car first."



Also keep in mind that cops are people too.  We make mistakes from time to time and it's extremely rare that anyone faces any jail time on this charge when it results in minor injuries.  That kid will be set for life after the PD settles out with his parents anyway.


I sure he could get there real fast with two kids in the car 40 miles

away. I understand about going to a local store, but driving that far

away is not right. If he is an investigator that means he makes more

money and can afford to drive himself in how own vehicle.



The mistake excuse does not fly with non LEO's and it should apply

even less when a LEO commits a crime.



 
Link Posted: 10/23/2010 4:39:19 AM EDT
"Joe Blow" or LEO shouldn't got to jail over this  or lose their job is my point. These days everyone gets arrested for stupid shit. Like he or "Joe Blow" need to be arrested. For what? Did they think he was going to leave the country!? LEOs are too arrest happy and scumbag lawyers are too sue happy. Try getting the real criminals off the street. Why ruin the guys life over a mistake and poor judgement. I know none of us have made stupid mistakes  

Thats what is f***ed up about our country these days. Everyone wants to step on the next guy so they can feel better about their crappy life.
Link Posted: 10/23/2010 4:55:54 AM EDT
I just want there to be equal punishment for all. I haven't called for jail. But I am tired

of see LEO's get off with less punishment than another would get for the same crime.

If they feel the law is not right they should take steps to get it repealed.



I don't like the law personally, they did not need to pass it. There were already

laws covering child endangerment. This was a feel good law for antigunners

that has caused even more heartache for many since it was passed.



I still am uptight about the PCSO Sheriff Deputy that got caught with a

Short Barreled shotgun, gun with serial number filed off and explosives that did not

go to jail. And others have gone to jail for using a shoestring on a rifle.
 
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 4:00:43 PM EDT
LPD is corrupt to the bone. They seem to LOVE to hire whackos.
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 7:02:48 PM EDT
If he was on call his weapon should have been on his person so that if he did have to respond to a call he would not have to look for the weapon he forgot was there.  He should have made other arrangements for the children to get to the destination period. Nuff said. Irresponsible and should be held accountable to the full extent.
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 7:56:23 PM EDT
A veteran police officer who in his off duty life coaches little league football and made the mistake of forgetting that his back-up weapon was in a duffle bag in the car with a child that he was taking to practice.  You guys want blood.  WOW.
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 7:58:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By nynalidge:
If he was on call his weapon should have been on his person so that if he did have to respond to a call he would not have to look for the weapon he forgot was there.  He should have made other arrangements for the children to get to the destination period. Nuff said. Irresponsible and should be held accountable to the full extent.


Oh, I didn't see that.  Disregard my last post then.
Link Posted: 10/26/2010 8:40:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 2:51:59 AM EDT
I know a few cops  (PCSO & LPD) and a majority of them are good guys.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 5:54:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/27/2010 5:56:48 AM EDT by ripro]
On the cruiser usage topic, there is a guy who looks no more than 24 that drives a marked car (City of Miami I believe) to FIU around the same time as my 6:20 class. He parks it by ECS near the disabled spots. I guess we can't know for sure but I'm not thinking he's on any "official business."

ETA: I should say for those not familiar with FIU that it's not a parking lot aside from the loading zone and the disabled spots.
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 9:06:46 AM EDT
Very rarely is anyone actually arrested for a violation like this... normally the case would just be sent to the SA for review, and possibly the filing of charges.  The only reason an arrest was made was because this guy is a cop.


And to the car issue.... departments are allowed to do as they please.  If they allow their officer's to use the car off duty, so be it... Why would anyone be angry about this?  It has been well proven in numerous studies (I'm too lazy to look them up, but you're welcome to), that more police vehicles on the street is a deterance to crime.  It doesn't matter if the unit is on-duty or not, it's still a police car on the street for a bad guy to see.  Some people bitch only because cops get a benefit they don't, but everyone is happy when a police car is parked on their block....

I take my car home.....  I also have to pay the city for the gas to do so.... that trend is becoming very common, it takes the tax payer issue out of the equation...
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 4:13:33 PM EDT
This is the Law
790.174Safe storage of firearms required.

(1)A person who stores or leaves, on a premise under his or her control, a loaded firearm, as defined in s. 790.001, and who knows or reasonably should know that a minor is likely to gain access to the firearm without the lawful permission of the minor’s parent or the person having charge of the minor, or without the supervision required by law, shall keep the firearm in a securely locked box or container or in a location which a reasonable person would believe to be secure or shall secure it with a trigger lock, except when the person is carrying the firearm on his or her body or within such close proximity thereto that he or she can retrieve and use it as easily and quickly as if he or she carried it on his or her body.

(2)It is a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, if a person violates subsection (1) by failing to store or leave a firearm in the required manner and as a result thereof a minor gains access to the firearm, without the lawful permission of the minor’s parent or the person having charge of the minor, and possesses or exhibits it, without the supervision required by law:

(a)In a public place; or

(b)In a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner in violation of s. 790.10.

This subsection does not apply if the minor obtains the firearm as a result of an unlawful entry by any person.

1(3)As used in this act, the term “minor” means any person under the age of 16.

History.—ss. 2, 7, ch. 89-534; s. 1216, ch. 97-102.

1Note.—Also published at s. 784.05(4).
Is he guilty? I can't say, will he be prosecuted? who knows. Should he have known better? Yes.  
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 5:21:41 PM EDT



Originally Posted By BombTec:


Very rarely is anyone actually arrested for a violation like this... normally the case would just be sent to the SA for review, and possibly the filing of charges.  The only reason an arrest was made was because this guy is a cop.





And to the car issue.... departments are allowed to do as they please.  If they allow their officer's to use the car off duty, so be it... Why would anyone be angry about this?  It has been well proven in numerous studies (I'm too lazy to look them up, but you're welcome to), that more police vehicles on the street is a deterance to crime.  It doesn't matter if the unit is on-duty or not, it's still a police car on the street for a bad guy to see.  Some people bitch only because cops get a benefit they don't, but everyone is happy when a police car is parked on their block....



This was an unmarked car, does not stop any crime. I have a neighbor that was a LEO

and having a car in the drive did not stop thieves from burglarizing his next door neighbor's

house. I think that the car in the drive thing is overrated.



I take my car home.....  I also have to pay the city for the gas to do so.... that trend is becoming very common, it takes the tax payer issue out of the equation...



I'm glad to see you pay for the gas, but it appears you forgot that tax money bought that car

and pay for maintenance on it.







 
Link Posted: 10/27/2010 5:34:29 PM EDT
You're absolutely right Banditman, tax payers pay for the car.  They also pay for the presence of police cars and they don't care if we're off duty or not, they want to see their police.  How many times have you been driving around and seen some idiot blow a red light and said "Where's a cop when you need one?"  

If the majority of the tax payers had a fraction of the heartburn that you have about it, it would have been stopped a long time ago.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 8:18:03 AM EDT
How about all the idiots who drive their marked cars to and from work at 90mph on the expressway?  How about all the idiots who put on their lights to beat a light or get around traffic?  How about the increased negative view on LEO's these actions have?  Would they be putting the lives of civilians in harms way of they were driving their personal cars?

We put up with too much shit from cops because they are cops.  I've resorted to shooting video of the couple idiots who, on an almost daily basis, I see doing the above to and from work.  I don't stand for it anymore.  I support the good cops every chance I get BUT I will report the idiots every chance I get as well.  We all need to start doing so.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 8:22:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By ripro:
On the cruiser usage topic, there is a guy who looks no more than 24 that drives a marked car (City of Miami I believe) to FIU around the same time as my 6:20 class. He parks it by ECS near the disabled spots. I guess we can't know for sure but I'm not thinking he's on any "official business."

ETA: I should say for those not familiar with FIU that it's not a parking lot aside from the loading zone and the disabled spots.


Take a picture every time you see it.  Call MDPD Motor Pool and see where the car is assigned.  Call the station and ask for the cops sergeant and tell him how the cop is abusing his privilege.  When he tells you that it was probably just that one time, tell him you have multiple pictures of it.  It will stop.  Because he is a cop does not give him the right to park illegally so he can avoid a decal or having to look for a spot to park.

I've done this a couple times.

We need to start holding these bad apples accountable for their actions.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 8:48:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/28/2010 8:53:11 AM EDT by nynalidge]
The off duty officer was in another county with children not ready to respond to anything including the safety of the individuals inside his own vehicle. My opinion is this, if citizens of all ages look at the police to protect and serve them the officers should at least remember they have a weapon with them. Plain stupid for any officer to forget he has a weapon in his protect and serve vehicle especially transporting children in it. And IF he was on call he had no business in another county with anyone in the car except maybe a partner unless he was at home.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 3:55:53 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Banditman:

Originally Posted By BombTec:
Very rarely is anyone actually arrested for a violation like this... normally the case would just be sent to the SA for review, and possibly the filing of charges.  The only reason an arrest was made was because this guy is a cop.


And to the car issue.... departments are allowed to do as they please.  If they allow their officer's to use the car off duty, so be it... Why would anyone be angry about this?  It has been well proven in numerous studies (I'm too lazy to look them up, but you're welcome to), that more police vehicles on the street is a deterance to crime.  It doesn't matter if the unit is on-duty or not, it's still a police car on the street for a bad guy to see.  Some people bitch only because cops get a benefit they don't, but everyone is happy when a police car is parked on their block....

This was an unmarked car, does not stop any crime. I have a neighbor that was a LEO
and having a car in the drive did not stop thieves from burglarizing his next door neighbor's
house. I think that the car in the drive thing is overrated.

I take my car home.....  I also have to pay the city for the gas to do so.... that trend is becoming very common, it takes the tax payer issue out of the equation...

I'm glad to see you pay for the gas, but it appears you forgot that tax money bought that car
and pay for maintenance on it.


 




I don't believe that anyone thinks a car in the driveway will stop all crime in it's tracks, but it is a deterance.  You may not believe that it stops anything, but that is your belief, not fact.  And, I was making a general statement about the cars, as this thread kind of moved away from the OPs point...  not directly related to the car in question.

As to the maintenance issue, of course tax money pays for it ....  however, because cars are personally assigned, they are kept in far better condition, last far longer, and require far less maintenance than shared cars.  The cars we use that are shared last an average of three to four years before falling apart.  They average 40k miles/year, and are driven 12 hours a day, seven days a week.  Our oldest assigned car is a 2004.  It has 80k.  It's in better condition than shared 2009's.  Personally assigning cars and letting the guys take 'em home actually saves agencies quite a bit of money.
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 4:13:57 PM EDT



Originally Posted By BombTec:





As to the maintenance issue, of course tax money pays for it ....  however, because cars are personally assigned, they are kept in far better condition, last far longer, and require far less maintenance than shared cars.  The cars we use that are shared last an average of three to four years before falling apart.  They average 40k miles/year, and are driven 12 hours a day, seven days a week.  Our oldest assigned car is a 2004.  It has 80k.  It's in better condition than shared 2009's.  Personally assigning cars and letting the guys take 'em home actually saves agencies quite a bit of money.


I don't like that take on it either, It is all propaganda. I can't trash my work equipment.

It would be easy to keep tabs on who does not take care of a vehicle and discipline them.

I accept the take home car thing, but am becoming more and more against it. The Salary

and pensions the public workers make has become unreasonable and is not sustainable.

Most workers in the private sector will not get a pension. Most workers in the private do

not get take home cars.





 
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 7:00:18 PM EDT
I don't understand how pensions come into this, but whatever......


And many private companies do still offer company cars, even if it's just in the form of a stipend....


I don't believe we've ever had an exchange before, so I don't know anything about you, but I assume you're not a fan of LE.... thus not in the business.  You can be for or against the car thing, you have a right to your opinion, but if you're not involved in it, how does affect you, and why would you care so much?


Also, what propaganda?   The FACT about mainentance costs and vehicle upkeep?
Link Posted: 10/28/2010 7:18:40 PM EDT
Kid shoots himself with off duty officers misplaced and unsecured weapon - to pensions and vehicle perks
Top Top