Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

DirkyDee t1_je0184f wrote

When this story first broke the police thought it were experts who broke into the vehicle because they knew exactly where to look and how to break the locks.

🤣🤣

14 and 15 year old experts 🤣🤣

155

NoMoLerking t1_je024eo wrote

Much more likely the door was unlocked and the key to the mount hasn’t been seen since 2021.

98

dante662 t1_je07yh8 wrote

They broke the window but I'll bet a whole US dollar the rifle wasn't locked into the secure mount.

​

Getting it out of the mount would have been difficult if it was locked, unless the whole mount itself was removed.

51

NoMoLerking t1_je0842u wrote

They broke the window? Or the window was broken? I know what I’d do if I came back to my unlocked cruiser and found the rifle missing.

37

dante662 t1_je08w84 wrote

All I know is when they towed the cruiser one of the windows was broken.

11

SomeSortofDisaster t1_je08fxk wrote

I'm not an expert on police issued lockable mounts but if they're anything like the standard gun lock you can pick them with a slotted screwdriver or hair pin.

15

dante662 t1_je08u0f wrote

Perhaps the teens are fans of the Lock Picking Lawyer on youtube!

​

It probably is pretty easy to pick, but shit stealing a fucking carbine from a state trooper's cruiser would have my hands shaking.

22

MammothCat1 t1_je0gmno wrote

You'd think with how much the LPL does they'd make better locks. Nope, he even slapped one open....

7

COVID_2019 t1_je0slga wrote

Didn't he do a video one time about police vehicle locks? I thought I remembered the lock being magnetic, so all you had to do was put a magnet up to it to unlock it. Could be remembering someone else as well.

6

madtho t1_je25d5s wrote

carrying those post-pubescent balls around in a wheelbarrow!

1

Shufflebuzz t1_je0kx66 wrote

You can open it instantly with a magnet.

Here's another

6

Proof-Variation7005 t1_je09g9n wrote

Is the broken window definitely confirmed? I didn't really see that in any of the reports and it seems like they'd just explicitly say that.

6

shockandawesome0 t1_je01rst wrote

Man, cops are dumb as hell. "Hmm, I think I'll check the trunk" and "knowing how to jimmy a lock" don't exactly require a PhD lol

15

ben70 t1_je1f9zu wrote

Hey, they were listening to Ed Davis - you knew the bar was low!

1

SomeSortofDisaster t1_jdznq3t wrote

So it's a rifle when a cop leaves it in his car and it gets stolen, but it's an assault weapon when it's properly locked in a safe in my house. Got it.

90

warlocc_ t1_jdzwmdf wrote

Funny how we all notice that about every article on the topic, but the media themselves doesn't seem to notice.

2

SouthShoreSerenade t1_jdzpu4f wrote

Piss on your guns.

−24

The_eldritch_bitch t1_jdzs2ew wrote

Is a patrol rifle the same as an assault rifle?

38

Hoosac_Love OP t1_jdzuoa5 wrote

An assault rifle is more of an adjective than a noun but yes in general they are using .223/5.6mm AR rifles which in our hands would be called assault weapons.

These terms are more adjective than noun

43

The_eldritch_bitch t1_jdzzljw wrote

I should have added an /s tag. It’s a post-ban, fully-auto, large capacity, patrol-assault rifle if we want to add all the MA qualifiers.

43

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je009ck wrote

Are police allowed auto burst military style weapons,I thought polive were only allowed high capacity magazine semi-auto's

10

dante662 t1_je08cc3 wrote

Police are "allowed" any firearm sold in the USA or fielded by the military. While technically giving a machine gun to a poorly trained cop is a bad idea, there's no law against it.

​

Any police officer can buy any firearm they want. Technically it needs to be "for work" but many get them for personal reasons.

​

There's been a few cops arrested/fired for abusing this ability and re-selling those same firearms on the private market. Because, for example, a modern Glock pistol cannot be transferred to a buyer in the state of Massachusetts by a gun store (FFL holder). But, you can sell one in a private sale. Welcome to loopholesville, because police can buy all the glock pistols they want and then resell them that a tidy profit (due to the soft ban in this state, Glock pistols and other restricted firearms sell for extremely high markups on the secondary market).

20

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je094go wrote

Wow,never knew that ,I always wondered why Jurek Brothers sporting goods in Greenfield had a police only back room ,I guess there is the answer .

8

DeadassBdeadassB t1_je2twpc wrote

Just fyi there isn’t really a soft ban on most Glocks now, there was quite a few on the approved roster last I checked

1

Joeldiaz1995 t1_je37eqg wrote

The Approved Firearms Roster is just one hurdle that a handgun has to jump in order to be sold in MA. The other is the AG’s “consumer protection” regulations. (940 CMR 16). The AGO asserts that Glocks don’t meet these regulations, so even though they’re on the roster dealers can’t sell them. So there is most definitely still a soft ban on most Glocks in place.

3

DeadassBdeadassB t1_je3cm83 wrote

Well that’s just dumb😂 why have a roster if it means nothing. MA laws are so stupid

1

SheeEttin t1_je5fqtz wrote

This is what happens when you legislate without understanding what you're legislating.

2

The_eldritch_bitch t1_je011y7 wrote

Idk, don’t they have m16s which are fully auto?

4

GARGLE_TAINT_SWEAT t1_je01p9d wrote

That actually depends on the M16. M16A1 and M16A3 are the full auto variants. A2/A4 are safe-semi-burst. I imagine that most cops have either A4s or M4s which are also largely safe-semi-burst.

5

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je02vwu wrote

The M4 Carbine just just a lighter weight shorter barrel M16 Same 223 5.6 mm round

5

DeadassBdeadassB t1_je2trx6 wrote

Most police stations have a few full autos kicking around. Mostly for swat teams and shit

2

DillonD t1_je1mzki wrote

What defines an “assault weapon” is really nonsense. Having a certain grip or magazine size? Really isn’t a way to categorize weapons

5

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je1on87 wrote

And also what is wrong with an assault weapon if used for ethical and lawful purposes.For military,police or civilian self defense or hunting small game even.

A garat wire is deadly if used with nefarious intent.

3

[deleted] t1_je0bat1 wrote

Yes. Cops in US have military gear its insane.

11

DeadassBdeadassB t1_je2u5vf wrote

Nah, the cops stuff is way nicer😂 “military grade” means the cheapest crap at the lowest price

1

somegridplayer t1_je4lizz wrote

You mean like the surplus humvees they drove around once or twice and are now rotting in a back lot because they can't afford to keep them running?

2

ben70 t1_je1hpg4 wrote

The issued rifle would certainly have been in violation of the Mass assault weapons ban, but may also have been further restricted under the National Firearms Act of 1934, which regulates manufacture, sale and ownership of machineguns and short barreled rifles, among other things. Police are exempt from many provisions of the latter, and exempt from the Mass AWB - but it would be extra illegal for non-police to possess such an item.

1

DeadassBdeadassB t1_je2tnrc wrote

No because assault rifles aren’t a real thing. How ever police rifles are the closest thing to what liberals think assault rifles are. Most have full auto capabilities.

1

MXC-GuyLedouche t1_je31f8q wrote

In this instance it is a custom M4 built for Airport scenarios. Ranged scope/probably grips for ranged shooting and bullets designed to pierce plane windows.

Not sure if it has full auto but no one shoots carbines like that spray and pray style anyways. "Patrol" rifle just makes it sound like less of an oppressive death stick, as the whole assault rifle thing is just a shitty use of an adjective to sway opinions. For example AR-15 is a specific brand model like mountain dew code red not assault rifle 15 and half the articles that mention them are actually talking about different guns.

Education creates safer gun users and will lead to laws that actually create safer places.

Banning bump stocks then not getting cops in trouble who leave their guns unlocked accomplishes nothing.

0

mattgm1995 t1_jdzv7rg wrote

Lol. And here’s the problem with people in our state. No one even knows what an AR is but they want to ban it. The current AWB is clearly written by someone with no understanding of guns.

−16

Clamgravy t1_jdzz8b2 wrote

AnD hErE'S tHe PrObLeM wItH pEoPlE iN oUr StAtE

18

Coerced_onto_reddit t1_je01kay wrote

I’m not pro or anti gun - I definitely think there needs to be more effective regulation - but one thing that I see often is a dismissal of a comment like this guy’s. Something like “people writing the legislation obviously don’t know anything about guns!”

If some time is taken to gain education about the weapons and their characteristics, it would probably make it easier to draft more specific (and hopefully effective) legislation. It would also take away the “you don’t know anything about guns!” Defense used by a lot of pro gun people/groups whenever this conversation inevitably rears its ugly head again

15

TzarKazm t1_je02adk wrote

Yea I have had thus conversation more than once with my MIL. "They should ban assault weapons. " "ok, what does that mean?" "You know, the assault ones."

I don't own any guns so I don't have any skin in the game, but it's tough to have a productive discussion when one person has no idea what they even want.

10

mattgm1995 t1_je03mp8 wrote

They don’t! My point is they ban “assault weapons” but you can still buy a SCAR in MA, you can still by an AR15 in MA, you can still get large capacity mags as long as they were made before 1994 in MA. It’s not dismissive, im saying lawmakers legitimately do not understand. The laws do literally nothing!

9

DarthT15 t1_je0uqvx wrote

>The laws do literally nothing!

Laws are nothing but opinions with the backing of jackbooted thugs

4

mattgm1995 t1_je03utr wrote

You can mock me and downvote me if you want, but hear me out. They don’t! My point we already have an “assault weapons ban” in MA, but you can still buy a SCAR in MA, you can still by an AR15 in MA, you can still get large capacity mags as long as they were made before 1994 in MA (they’re only $40) It’s not a dismissive comment, im saying lawmakers legitimately do not understand. The laws do literally nothing!

4

jp_jellyroll t1_je0d60n wrote

>The laws do literally nothing!

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The gun laws aren't perfect. We get that. But there is a direct correlation between gun laws, gun ownership, and death by guns. If there are more guns available, if it's easier to get those guns, then there are more people dying by those guns.

MA has some of the strictest gun laws in the country and also one of the lowest rates of gun deaths in the country.

It's just like smoking laws. If you make cigs cheap, easy to get, no ID, allow smoking everywhere... then more people will smoke and subsequently die from lung cancer. Even people who don't smoke will die. If you ban cigs, tax them, ban indoor smoking, etc, then fewer people will smoke and, thus, fewer people will die from lung cancer.

−2

mattgm1995 t1_je0ezag wrote

I didn’t say throw them out! Lol taking words completely out of context. All I’m saying is it would do the public and our legislators a good service to better educate themselves.

Also counterpoint: NH has almost no gun laws and the lowest rate of gun crime in the nation. Correlation ≠ causation

4

brufleth t1_je0u9xf wrote

> NH has almost no gun laws

That's rich coming from someone saying we all need to be better educated on guns. NH has many many gun laws.

−2

mattgm1995 t1_je0y4ei wrote

Relative to MA? Which the discussion is focused on? Very few

2

willis936 t1_je1u734 wrote

Name em. I have friends in NH with multiple AR15 platforms with high capacity magazines and silencers.

Constitutional carry, no permits, castle doctrine, state preemption of municipal restrictions. NH gun laws are primarily protections rather than restrictions.

1

yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je00ey1 wrote

Remind me why it’s “safe” for Police to have Ar’s and Glocks but as soon as a normal person gets one it’s considered a “dangerous “ weapon

31

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je00ozy wrote

It appears the police actually had a M4 Carbine , actually much more dangerous than a AR or Glock

It's beyond that

21

yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je00sbl wrote

How the hell did he get an M4?!?!?!

5

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je014ua wrote

Another poster on this thread made that claim not me,ask them!I had thought it was am AR too.

5

djsmith89 t1_je0akx8 wrote

Because police departments can purchase newly manufactured machine guns

5

peteypaaaablo t1_je8pap9 wrote

MA staties have become way over militarized…they have more warfighting equipment and non-explosive weaponry than some smaller countries. The pentagon provided the state with bearcats and a bunch of other shit like 10 years ago…literally got equipment meant to fight a war against foreign adversaries lol even according to Boston magazine some literal Tanks

2

SheeEttin t1_je0fugu wrote

The department goes to a supplier and orders it?

A real true M4 isn't really obtainable outside the military, but a generic AR in the exact same configuration is relatively easy to get. (Though for private non-LEO citizens, you can't have full auto without shelling out several thousand for the transferable machinegun lower receiver.)

−2

dante662 t1_je08l5k wrote

Because police are "trained".

​

Actually, no they are not. Most barely pass their annual qualifiers and after X years of service they no longer even have to do that.

9

Drix22 t1_je1uj5v wrote

I have a friend who's a police officer in Worcester, I spend more time at the range and do more official trainings than he does annualy, and he states himself as being the average officer.

If we're going to moan about "police are trained" then we should be able to agree that anyone can obtain this kind of training and be on the same foot if not better when it comes to marksmanship and use of force. But instead this is always used as a hard stop- "Police are trained, but you aren't".

Uhh, ok, I did 200 hours of live fire training last year, plus 40 hours of in class time as a non-leo, does that not matter for anything?

3

DillonD t1_je1nd44 wrote

Because we live in an authoritarian police state that wants to take the means of community defense away from the individual and entrust it into an oppressive institution that has a monopoly on violence.

3

medforddad t1_je0zctz wrote

> Remind me why it’s “safe” for Police to have Ar’s and Glocks but as soon as a normal person gets one it’s considered a “dangerous “ weapon

Does any person actually hold that view? The type of people who are for more restrictive gun laws on individuals are also the type to not be big fans of the police having more deadly, militaristic weaponry.

−1

yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je3r959 wrote

Yes literally the politicians who draft gun laws with loopholes for LEO’s to get guns that these same politicians are harping off that are a hazard and too dangerous for people to have hence Ma approved gun roasters but they don’t apply for law enforcement. “Laws for thee , but not for me”

2

medforddad t1_je4mll3 wrote

Which politicians exactly? Can you point to someone in the MA legislature who has advocated for stricter gun laws and has advocated for more police access to deadly weapons?

0

melissafromtherivah t1_jdzym0j wrote

The weapon stolen was an M4, they mentioned it very early on when it first happened.

23

Hoosac_Love OP t1_jdzzld9 wrote

I have no recollection of a specific model/caliber ever mentioned in any article I read or posted,i posted myself the theft original article,the safe recovery follow up article and this mornings teens arrested article.I have no recollection.

I believe you ,the M4 Carbine is a shoter barreled lighter weight version in the .223/5.6mm caliber that is the same as the M16/AR-15

If one was keeping a rifle in their car they'd want the light weight carbine model.

5

melissafromtherivah t1_je01l6c wrote

It was stated on channel 4 WBZ the cbs affiliate the day it happened. I’m sure they have not wanted to publicize it over and over again, it’s not a good look!

1

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je02dvs wrote

I don't have TV, only Netflix and no local or cable TV ,I read the Globe and necn.com online.

2

melissafromtherivah t1_je02jpu wrote

Yeah no worries. You can get pretty accurate content on the web via the local news affiliates

1

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je04878 wrote

Getting news is no problem online ,I really miss watching the Red Sox live though.

1

melissafromtherivah t1_je04frd wrote

I have a digital antenna. Recommend getting one for local broadcasts

1

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je05oy4 wrote

So sort of like digital rabbit ears for local channels.

I'm in the Berkshires ,an hour west of Springfield and an hour east of Albany and I don't know if digital rabbit ears go that far and I don't think Pittsfield has a TV station.

2

The_eldritch_bitch t1_je049l8 wrote

Will the trooper be named?

16

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je06hey wrote

I wouldn't know such a issue of future information but so far no reports on an ID.I checked the State Police Facebook page and this issue has not even been posted or commented on so far.

3

throwsplasticattrees t1_je0l2tp wrote

Release the trooper's name. If this happened to a civilian, their name would be released by the press. There is no valid reason for protecting this Trooper's identity.

Ideally, his name is released stating he has been relieved of duty and decertified as a law enforcement officer.

14

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je0m51n wrote

Call the Boston Globe

3

throwsplasticattrees t1_je0vmju wrote

I wasn't trying to call you out OP, you're just sharing the story as posted.

7

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je0vzhl wrote

It's ok I understand Calling to the Boston Globe might not be a bad idea ,maybe they might pressure the police

3

JaesopPop t1_je2c3oe wrote

Maybe I missed some information about this story, but what did the trooper do exactly? If it was secured in the car, isn’t that how they’re supposed to keep them?

0

Some_Ride1014 t1_je1p2hk wrote

How much overtime did the staties put in for, looking for the weapon

3

joeltb t1_je0e7f8 wrote

This reminds me of the time my dad borrowed the Chief of Police's personal truck to make a dump run. When he got home my dad found the police issued hand gun in the back seat unsecured and in plain sight. The whole time my dad was driving the truck around with that just rollin' around in the back.

2

peteypaaaablo t1_je8olzf wrote

“WBZ-TV Security Analyst Ed Davis says it's not unusual for some tactical officers to keep their firearms in their vehicles for ready access, but what the intentions are of these thieves raises many more questions.

"That's your fear when you get into an investigation like this. In the back of your mind, you're thinking what's next," Davis said. … I-Team sources said it "appears to be a professional job." As the cruiser was driven from the garage, and then put on a flatbed, a broken lock was visible on the driver's door.

The State Police cruiser was towed away hours after a rifle was stolen from a locked compartment in the SUV. Davis says troopers and officers take many steps to secure their firearms, heightening the concern this was a more sophisticated robbery.

"There is usually a process of things to go through to get that thing open," Davis said. "That would indicate inside knowledge of how systems work. That doesn't mean someone within the police agency, but someone who may work in the industry."

2

rattiestthatuknow t1_je1puw4 wrote

If it was anyone but a cop’s gun they would be in more trouble than those kids. Cop probably won’t even get in trouble

0

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je1r80t wrote

They don't always get in trouble per say but when a cop reports a firearm missing they get sweated by Internal Affairs up the ass.IAB will make there life hell before they decide whether or whether not to file sanctions or charges,a cop doesn't want to lose a gun.

2

rufknkidingme t1_je31c7x wrote

Not a car thief but I am pretty sure no one has punched a car doir lock to open a door in about a decade. Way to many easier methods to open a vehicle.

0

greyrabbit12 t1_je0l3ic wrote

Anyone thinking the gun has a gps in it?

−1

Hoosac_Love OP t1_je0luxs wrote

I can't answer if guns can have a GPS in them but likely if this one had it would have been found sooner .

5