Gun Policy A No-Brainer

“A police officer should not carry a gun after an allegation of domestic violence.”

With that astoundingly logical statement, Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis last week made clear that a cop accused of smacking his wife or her husband around ought not be carrying a gun while the incident is investigated. Other than union leadership, we’re hard-pressed to think of anyone who might disagree.

Ah, but as if on cue, a lawyer for the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association steps up to play the “now hold on just a second” role:

“Someone can take out a restraining order ex parte on their word alone,” attorney Thomas Drechsler told the Herald. “I’ve had many restraining orders against a police officer that were vacated when a judge hears all the facts.”

Well, fine - unfortunately, we know false allegations do happen. When it is all sorted out, the cop whose name is cleared should certainly get the sidearm back.

But a tougher domestic violence policy within the BPD is sorely needed. A review by Herald reporter O’Ryan Johnson indicated that not one of the 11 officers disciplined in the past two years by the BPD for domestic abuse was fired.

Davis has pledged to bring department policy in line with national standards - the gun rule among them. That can only be a good thing."

Let me begin by offering that the moment someone chirps up by saying that such cases are "complicated", is in effect either lying their cops-are-Gods asses off, or incredibly stupid.

The law, should be the law, for everyone. If you or I can be disarmed due to a domestic violence accusation then so should members of law enforcement. Think about that title for a moment. LAW ENFORCEMENT. Here, the union shyster is trying to make a case that law enforcers have more rights than others, when all law enforcers ever do is police their assignations so we do not have to. An important contribution to society, yes indeed, as we are too busy keeping the economy going to then spend time and effort chasing after the criminal element, but these folks WORK FOR US. The Constitution of the United States is clear on exactly WHO is the boss.

How can the police expect their employers...meaning us...to obey laws that they themselves disregard?