Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,015
- Points
- 1,260
Im kind of addicted police body cam channels on YouTube. This one is out there to watch if you're so inclined.
Police Folk Allegedly Behaving Badly
- Thread starter Bruce Monkhouse
- Start date
Im kind of addicted police body cam channels on YouTube. This one is out there to watch if you're so inclined.
- Reaction score
- 42,120
- Points
- 1,210
It may be a hot take, but police should probably know the law if they're trying to enforce it.
- Reaction score
- 2,437
- Points
- 1,260
Taser Tuesday on YouTube,
The "Medicine from Con Edison. "
"It's the taser, 50,000 volts of light, zap zap, sit down, you gonna act right when that switch flip fool you get polite."
They also show fur missiles earning their Alpo.
- Reaction score
- 42,120
- Points
- 1,210
Proposal for legislation: If you lose your gun, you lose your job.
www.ctvnews.ca
Peel police officer accidentally left loaded gun behind in Square One change room
Peel police say a plainclothes police officer will forfeit 15 days’ pay after she admitted to leaving a loaded, police-issued firearm unattended in a change room inside a busy Mississauga, Ont., mall.
www.ctvnews.ca
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 47,436
- Points
- 1,160
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,465
- Points
- 1,140
There'd be not insignificant number of CAF member getting sacked if similar logic was applied there.
The article make no mention of the outcome of the CCC charges for unsafe storage. I guess that's the other shoe waiting to drop?
- Reaction score
- 42,120
- Points
- 1,210
I have no problem with CAF members who lose / misplace their weapons being kicked out.
An undercover officer leaving their pistol behind in a change room should not be a police officer.
The protection from political interference in policing has become an abdication of responsibility by political leadership to properly manage policing.
Sorry, just gonna be a pedant here 'cause this is one of those things that makes my eye twitch a bit; 'plainclothes' =/= 'undercover'.
- Reaction score
- 42,120
- Points
- 1,210
Fair.
Good news: I think plainclothes, uniformed and undercover cops should all lose their jobs if they lose their weapons. (I would differentiate a theft from a loss).
Sure, reasonable point for discussion. It's up for debate whether the cost benefit of discarding usually a lot of training and experience is worth it for a colossally embarrassing fuckup that will almost invariably be successfully punished, deterred, and learned from and practically never repeated. I would suggest that if 'gun left behind' turns into a default dismissal, then the rare case of 'gun left behind' risks turning into a situation someone tries to cover up for hours in hopes they can find it with the resultant risk of a 'gun left behind' turning into 'gun gone astray', versus being an immediate 'oh shit!' with the member knowing they're going to eat some major crap, but there being an incentive to immediately bring the problem forward for help in recovering it.
Absolutely it's an intolerable screwup. It absolutely needs to be punished seriously. I'm not certain that, in every case, loss of employment will best address the problem to be solved.
Food for thought.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 47,436
- Points
- 1,160
Gun vs. taser confusion, though...
Kim Potter is found guilty of manslaughter in the death of Daunte Wright
Kim Potter, the former Minnesota police officer who mistakenly drew her handgun instead of her Taser during a traffic stop in April in which she fatally shot Daunte Wright, has been found guilty.Jurors had been deliberating since Monday before finding Potter, who had served as an officer in Brooklyn Center, Minn., for 26 years, guilty of first- and second-degree manslaughter charges in the death of Wright.
- Reaction score
- 42,120
- Points
- 1,210
The question becomes: what level of error is irredeemable. (The sunk cost fallacy, to my mind, is a bit of a red herring). And after such an obvious error, what will their McNeil disclosure look like? Will that level of forgetfulness about a foundational issue threaten to impugn their testimony going forward? And if that's the case - if they're now a "Crown won't move forward with anything they touch because of their McNeil" - what is the value in keeping them as a peace officer?
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,015
- Points
- 1,260
Proposal for legislation: If you lose your gun, you lose your job.
Peel police officer accidentally left loaded gun behind in Square One change room
Peel police say a plainclothes police officer will forfeit 15 days’ pay after she admitted to leaving a loaded, police-issued firearm unattended in a change room inside a busy Mississauga, Ont., mall.
We can have that debate, and I would probably agree with you.
At the least they should face the same repercussions as if a civilian had left their firearm unattended, unsecured, in public and forgot about it.
Haggis
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,465
- Points
- 1,140
As would I, to an extent. Over my years in the green machine I've seen at least six cases personally where an unattended firearm was found. Most were in blue rockets.
This I can definitely get behind. Most LEA firearms are prohibs. This officer, according to the linked article, also faces a charge of unsafe storage. The outcome of that, for a civilian, would likely be a term of firearms prohibition (alongside other punishments). There are many cases here and in the US of LEOs doing dumb things with a duty firearm who faced far less legal jeopardy that a civvy would/has under similar circumstances.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,015
- Points
- 1,260
We really shouldn't differentiate. If you FA with firearms you should FO and it should carte blanche, professional or personal.
I'm not talking about sunk cost so much as opportunity cost of losing someone who otherwise contributes to police work.
A McNeil covers any and all misconduct. Its mere existence does not mean someone is investigationally useless. A conduct finding for something like unprofessionalism or discourtesy (say, telling your boss, or a bystander on a scene to eff off), or a McNeil for doing something unsafe is one thing, but that won't tend to impugn someone's credibility. Credibility is impugned by misconduct that can be reasonably held to reflect a person's integrity, and whether they can be relied upon to tell the truth on the stand and to pursue an investigation objectively. So, the difference there would be someone who leaves their gun in the changeroom when running out to take an urgent call, realizes "oh shit!' and immediately and openly acts to remedy the situation, versus the person who does the same thing and spends a few hours telling nobody and scrambling to try to find it to stay out of shit, with a gun in the wind.
100% a major screwup that deserves the resultant criminal charge and disciplinary process. I’m just prepared for the possibility that the rest of a person’s conduct may, in the balance, make them redeemable.
Absolutely. A criminal charge and sentence is appropriate. I cannot from a quick check find what this actually gets given as a sentence for such cases; a standalone conviction for unsafe storage of a firearm otherwise lawfully possessed and used is tough to find reported examples of. It is an offence with no minimum sentence and eligible for a discharge at sentencing, so in the right set of circumstances courts are permitted lots of leniency. A weapons prohibition is discretionary by the court, not mandatory. So there’s nothing in criminal sentencing for this offence that by default is incompatible with still being able to be employed as a police officer.
Speaking for myself, as a plainclothes guy who carries every day (many plainclothes don’t unless specifically gearing up to leave the office), I don’t know how the hell someone could forget their chunk. I’m super aware of it when carrying and when stopping anywhere, and paranoid about putting it back in place the odd time I get caught code brown on shift. I’ve carried in all manner of public places, and it’s not something I’ve ever felt so relaxed about as to become unaware of it.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,015
- Points
- 1,260
I would assume safe handling and operation of firearm would be considered a core competency for a LEO. If they demonstrably cannot meet that mark not only should legal action be possible but termination of employment seems to be within reach as well.
Booter
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,348
- Points
- 1,010
it would have no bearing on a McNeil. It would be screened out by crown as not relevant to the proceedings. Unless they lied about it etc. we have to disclose it, but The overwhelming majority of McNeil information is screened out before it goes anywhere because it has nothing to do with the subject matter. Like traffic tickets etc.
Plain clothes officers doing things do a variety of “costume changes” during evolving circumstances. Having your target pivot suddenly and forgetting your fanny pack in a change room is unacceptable. But it isn’t unexplainable or impossible.
I don’t know the case here. But I know the comparison to what “Civis” are doing is ridiculous.
On that deputy chief thing from Durham there was a new story that actually had the context in it back when this happened. It was dumb and he should lose his job- specifically for not knowing the political hay he was handing to people but it’s wasn’t “malicious”. It was: Unacceptable. Easily avoidable. Stupid enough to say you aren’t appropriate for senior leadership. But it wasn’t “evil”. I can’t recall the details enough to recount them- but I just recall saying “that is the dumbest deputy chief I’ve ever seen”
I went back through all the news articles i could find but I can’t find it now. Only the ones where city councillors are getting air time about what they think should be the case.
Plain clothes officers doing things do a variety of “costume changes” during evolving circumstances. Having your target pivot suddenly and forgetting your fanny pack in a change room is unacceptable. But it isn’t unexplainable or impossible.
I don’t know the case here. But I know the comparison to what “Civis” are doing is ridiculous.
On that deputy chief thing from Durham there was a new story that actually had the context in it back when this happened. It was dumb and he should lose his job- specifically for not knowing the political hay he was handing to people but it’s wasn’t “malicious”. It was: Unacceptable. Easily avoidable. Stupid enough to say you aren’t appropriate for senior leadership. But it wasn’t “evil”. I can’t recall the details enough to recount them- but I just recall saying “that is the dumbest deputy chief I’ve ever seen”
I went back through all the news articles i could find but I can’t find it now. Only the ones where city councillors are getting air time about what they think should be the case.
Last edited:
Yes, but now you’re conflating conduct and performance. Both are in play, but they don’t have the same process. While a job can be lost for performance, in unionized/public employer it’s rarely based on a one-off, and usually requires a pattern of reasonably related sucking-at-job that has been resistant to corrective training and development. A situation like this would very clearly be an easily corrected performance deficiency, separately subject to an internal conduct process where she ate probably $7-8k in fines, and finally she also faces criminal prosecution and everything that entails.
There’s really no fighting a case like this; you eat it, own it, and try to show the best character you can in hopes that none of the various procedural emperors decide on thumbs-down.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 47,436
- Points
- 1,160
Similar threads
