Hey, there! Log in / Register
Boston police officer shot in the leg in Dorchester
By adamg on Fri, 01/08/2016 - 10:48am
A suspected drug dealer ordered to pull over in his car got out with a gun and began firing around 10:25 a.m., hitting a plainclothes officer in the leg outside 33 Mt. Bowdoin Terrace, Police Commissioner William Evans said.
The officer, hit in the leg, returned fire, and suspect Grant Hedley, 27, began to run, Evans said at a press conference at Boston Medical Center, where the officer is now in the ICU. Headley was not hit.
As some officers began to chase Headley, one officer remained behind and applied a tourniquet to his leg, Evans continued.
Evans declined to name the officer yet, because he was not sure all his family members had been notified.
Headley has "a dangerous past" and was on probation, Evans said. In 2005, then just 17, he was arrested on firearms charges.
Evans said the incident began when plainclothes drug-unit officers spotted him driving a car, knew he didn't have a current driving license and "boxed him in" on Mt. Bowdoin Terrace.
Mayor Marty Walsh said he's grateful the officer will recover, but said there are just too many guns on the streets of Boston.
"We are the targets," police-union President Pat Rose said. "The public should not stand for this, it's outrageous.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
prayers
n/t
From the scanner: Officer
From the scanner: Officer will be okay, up to 2 others injured (but not shot) and taken to the hospital as well. Suspect was caught on Geneva Ave near the shooting scene.
Suspect is a career criminal.
Suspect is a career criminal. just wrapped up a sentence for possession of a firearm less than a year ago.
For supposedly tough laws in
For supposedly tough laws in this state, it seems the people which do the most damage never seem to serve long sentences.
What's with that?
Why are people allowed to get to the point they are considered 'career' criminals? Why are people at level of dangerousness even walking around?
the first charges to be pled
the first charges to be pled down in every criminal case involving a gun are the gun related charges. you rob a store while flashing an illegally obtained, unregistered gun,. at first you are charged with the robbery and possession of an illegal fire arm- maybe you are a felon so they tag on a gun charge related to that. you get before the judge and the prosecutor tosses all the gun charges first so you plea down to just a lesser robbery charge. everyone wins- in the paper it looks like the state is enforcing its' gun laws- which it isn't because it drops all those charges in court but that point never makes the papers- and the state gets a plea and you serve less time than if the gun laws were applied.
numerous cities with draconian gun laws also have the highest gun crime and gun homicide rates in the nation. because continually penalizing law abiding gun owners who follow those laws has no effect whatsoever on, you know, criminals.
Everything In This is Wrong
In Massachusetts, anyway.
Fact: A robbery case is harder to prove than a gun case. You have to find the victim, get him or her on board for trial, hope he or she can testify believably, educate the jury about the effect that stress has on memory and perception when the victim says the gun was huge and silver when it was small and shiny black, etc. With a gun, on the other hand, you don't need any victim, any witness, anything except the gun itself.
Fact: As a result, gun cases are rarely dropped unless there's some actual flaw with the evidence. If it's lost or destroyed or was found in a shared space like an apartment building basement with no direct link to the suspect, then it may not be a case that can (or should) go to trial.
Fact: Massachusetts has some of the toughest gun laws in the country and some of the lowest gun fatalities in the country. Law abiding gun owners aren't penalized because they're (wait for it!) law-abiding.
Prison must be too nice
He wanted to go back.
Maybe if he is convicted for
Maybe if he is convicted for his 4th gun charge, and assault with intent to murder, he might be.
Original post updated
With details on the suspect and the shooting.
Why is this looser out on the streets?
Judges in MA are way to soft on career criminals.
Here's a link to one of Mr. Hedley's gun arrest A DECADE AGO!!!!
http://bpdnews.com/blog/2005/12/31/boston-police-incidents-for-december-...
"Biker Arrested with Firearm Members of the Youth Violence Strike Force arrested Grant Headley, 17, of Dorchester"
Really?
"Mayor Marty Walsh said he's grateful the officer will recover, but said there are just too many guns on the streets of Boston."
No Marty, there are just to many criminal on the streets of Boston!
Correction
There are just too many criminals.
Maybe if they learned to read and write properly, there would be fewer criminals.
To-uche
Touche
If they're on the street
Theyre not necessarily criminals. Guns on the other hand are designed for killing no matter where they are.
And
Knifes were created to cut through flesh, but like guns they require a person to operate them.
I have a gun, but i'v never shot anyone. Gun are only as dangerous as the person in possession of them.
Yeah
Those three year olds that keep shooting themselves in the face. Super dangerous.
Sorry dude
Knives have a whole lot more utility than cutting flesh.
Guns are for killing, but mostly used as toys where people pretend or practice killing
My gun is in a safe, because
My gun is in a safe, because that's what the law requires. I can't imagine what would happen if it wasn't locked up, though, To date, it hasn't killed anybody, but you never know when an inanimate object decides it wants to be dangerous.
I guess my legally acquired guns
I guess my legally acquired guns are for killing too, unless I'm trap or target shooting or hunting (since because I have no felonies or arrest record, and I passed the practical after filling out all the required paperwork and getting a backround check I'm not actually allowed to conceal carry in Boston) but I've never killed anyone with them. I guess a lot of it depends on the person, though.
Yes, guns are part of the problem, but don't shrink it to just that.
Well
Limiting access is to a gun is one way to making it harder to commit violent crime and thus reducing the number of criminals.
No
Limiting aces to the streets for known criminals would make it harder to commit crime. You can have as many laws as you want, but they're about as useful as an extra asshole on you elbow if no one obeys them.
Although, implement a 25 year minimum for illegal gun possession with none of that cutesy illegal search or other bullshit and enforce it every single time, and i'm sure 99% of gun nuts out there will agree to any gun control law you throw at them.
Yes
The more I hear people like you spout this nonsense without any real solutions to reduce gun violence the more I feel the best thing is to just ban them entirely. The murders aren't machinists. They would have a much harder time getting access to firearms if the firearms factories are closed and general ownership is banned.
Yes please
But first, 25 year mandatory jail term for illegal gun possession, enforced all time, every time.
Hasn't worked for the drugs
Hasn't worked for the drugs said criminals are making all their money from.
oh, just ban them entirely?
That sounds so simple. Why hasn't anyone thought of that?
They Have
For example, here is one of many comparative articles available on the subject:
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/12/4/9850572/gun-control-us-...
A big part of the problem is supply. All illegal guns were legal guns once. Not so many legal guns means not so many illegal guns.
Sooo
Make something that's already illegal even more illegal, eh? That'll make all those tens of millions of illegal guns already on the streets disappear overnight, and turn all those thugs who always plead out, get gun charges dropped and turn a five year prison stint into five months into angelic choir boys?
Real solution
Bump the mandatory minimum for illegal gun possession to at least ten years and start enforcing it every time anyone is caught with an illegal gun, with none of that plea bargain or illegal search BS. And perhaps offer a cash reward for turning in gun-toting thugs - put that in place and there won't be any shootings save for a few nut jobs here and there even if guns are sold at every CVS.
The majority
Of gun related crimes in Boston are committed with illegal, unlicensed firearms.
It is basically impossible to get a concealed carry license as a city resident, that as strict as you can get. Buttttttt.... we still have gun related crime, just like we would if Boston had a complete ban on all firearms.
US, not Boston
Which is why gun control must be at the national level, not state or local. Banning guns outright has worked pretty well for Australia.
Australia
A nation with about 7% of the population of the U.S. and no land borders. And they still have guns, drugs, etc. Perhaps the solution isn't as simple as a few keystrokes.
Actually ...
The US has been sending guns over the borders in the other direction.
The "collectors" and "private sales" are a convenient conduit to less than savory people who want guns outside of the US.
Seriously, you should try to
Seriously, you should try to get a permit in Boston. Almost impossible.
Wrong! That is like limiting
Wrong! That is like limiting spoons and folks will stop people from getting fat, right?
Carrying guns bought at red state gun shows
and trucked into our city.
Straw purchasing is already
Straw purchasing is already mucho illegal.
You can't walk out of an out of state show with a handgun. It has to be transferred through a local licensed dealer in your home state which will run the state/federal checks.
Private party sales require none of that.
You have the money, you look like a nice guy. Sale complete.
It's already a felony (10+
It's already a felony (10+ year sentence) to sell a handgun to an out of state person without involving a licensed dealer to conduct the transfer. Do it and you are lunch for the ATF.
In state private sales occur between licensed persons which already have undergone checks to get licensed in the first place.
Yes they do.
"Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B, requires all individuals who sell, transfer, inherit, or lose a firearm to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss of the firearms to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services Firearms Records Bureau (FRB). This on-line system will allow you to report the sale, transfer, inheritance, or loss/theft data electronically to the FRB.
"
See that up there ^ ? "All individuals".
More reading on this:
https://mircs.chs.state.ma.us/fa10/action/home?app_context=home&app_acti...
Massachusetts General Law c. 140, §§128A and 128B
When Gomer Pyle is selling guns in a
private sale down south he could give a rats ass about Massachusetts Law.
It's against federal law to
It's against federal law to do a private handgun sale to an out of state person. 10+ years in prison big time felony.
Now you've really pissed me off.
What kind of person picks on Gomer Pyle?!
Golly Sergeant Carter
I couldn't sell that guy your old M-1. Perhaps this will cheer you up (breaks into a rendition of Galveston).
Glad
The officer is going to be OK. BPD has been doing a great job lately in a tough environment; without the misfortune you see elsewhere.
Keep up the good work!
i for one
think that if they instituted some draconian punishments it would solve this problem
Really?
This guy will go to jail for 20 years for shooting a cop. He knew that and still pulled the trigger.
Prison isn't as much of a deterrent as you think.
lol
it is the opposite, actually, which was my point. i don't know anybody that would advocate for a punishment and then refer to it as draconian.
What does he mean?
I don't quite understand the police union presidents comments. What does he mean when he says that "we are the targets"? From the report, It doesn't appear that Grant Hedley set out to target a police officer. He wasn't hunting for officers to shoot, according to the report. Also - "The public should not stand for this. It's outrageous." - Stand for what? People shooting police officers? The public most definitely doesn't stand for that. Stand for drug dealers? We don't stand for that either. I wish the statement was more clear so "the public" could respond and try to do what he is asking us.
He doesn't want people shooting at police officers
He also referenced a Philadelphia cop who was shot while sitting in his cruiser last night.
I still don't get it
What does he expect the public to do? Call up our elected representatives and demand they pass a law making it illegal to shoot cops?
I believe he was referring to
I believe he was referring to the current nationwide anti-police trend. Without trying to get political, the vast number of law enforcement officer perform an extremely difficult job on a daily basis that can best be described as protecting the public. While there may be some bad apples, the number of them is miniscule, yet the general public, ecspecially in urban areas, automatically assumes that the police are the enemy.
I have personally observed citizens, on multiple occasons, make comments that applaude police officers being shot or otherwise injured. And the number of these comments have increased within the past couple of years. You can do the math as to what has changed in this timeframe.
And yes, I am involved in law enforcement. And I can tell you that the vast majority of people I work with do so to serve the place we work and make it a better place. My thoughts today are with the officer who was shot today while trying to make the neighborhood he was working in a better place. But the Boston Police certainly need the help of the comminity in making the city better, and that, I believe, is what Pat Rose was referring to.
Okay, let's be real
1.
Nobody's saying there aren't people who are not in favor of police officers (i.e. criminals and their sympathizers), but this "trend" thing has long been trumped-up (for lack of another term). Criminals have always shot at cops just like they've shot at each other (and unfortunately missed and hit innocents from time to time); this isn't all-of-a-sudden an issue because of Black Lives Matter or Obama or de Blasio or any other bs that's been crammed down our throats. For what it's worth, one of the reasons why the violent crime rate is rather down in the City of Boston is because police are working well with communities of color and the vice versa; so even if there is a "nationwide trend," it's certainly not apparent in the City of Boston, as Commissioner Evans was careful to explain.
2.
Broad-stroking much? Furthermore, let's flip it around and talk about some police officers' perceptions about communities of color (citation coming with point #3).
3.
Again, going back to my first point, I think the whole "increased within the past couple of years" is trumped-up; and I mean Trumped up as well, because this is the same bs as the "I saw people cheering 9/11!" argument. I mean, any time you have people in positions of authority, the people that they have control over are going to complain; and beyond those people are always fringe people that relish in others' misery, even if for no apparent reason. But, here's the real bombshell: the BPPA isn't exactly noted for not speaking very ill of people of color and others, so really, why don't they look in the mirror first:
http://thephoenix.com/boston/news/140923-shit-boston-cops-say/
4.
And, again, the communities stand behind the Boston Police. The problem with people like Rose is that, while well-intentioned, their rhetoric feeds right into the divisive history of the police and communities of color. Instead of backhandedly slamming the communities for "not doing enough," how about talking about working more closely with the communities to further reduce crime and increase the satisfaction of police engagements? I'm so glad that Commissioner Evans spoke again after Rose because Evans steered the conversation back to praising the efforts of all officers involved (especially the one injured) at the scene as well as praising the BPD without suggesting that it was somehow the community's fault that this happened. But, really, Rose, just needs to get a clue: this isn't Philly, Baltimore, etc., so maybe, like Evans, he can be a little more optimistic about what is working for the City of Boston.
Lighten up, grammar nazi
I see glaring typos in the NY Times and WaPo, so even with multiple proof readers and editors, errors occur; posters on uhub generally don't have proof readers and editors, and frequently are typing on a phone.
And I have a question? Aren't white (Caucasian) people also '...of color'?
Trainmon,
Trainmon,
You mad bro? Just trying to provide some insight from my personal experiences and observations in a constructive manner. But great job on the citations, you are very good at internet.
Bad apples
Bad apples are the officers like the guy in Medford that threatened to kill a motorist, right? And might have been drunk while brandishing a firearm? What about the apples that see corruption, lies, false reports, and everything else that has come to light the past 5+ years and do not speak up or take responsibility to try and quell it? There is absolutely no accountability. Yes, I know good police officers. This does not excuse the action of the bad OR the inaction of the rest of them. If you have any doubt that this behavior is something recent and that's why it's all over the news, I have bridges to sell you. The only difference is more people have video cameras so the public sees the other side of the story.
Comment
I see people make comments on "guns" a lot of these types of posts. I myself have never commented before and I feel the need to say something.
I think those of you who are anti-gun seem to believe that if guns didn't exist on this planet, period, that somehow these folks would be straight-A students who are helping old ladies carry their groceries. They wouldn't. They would just be murdering/maiming/injuring with other weapons. I'm not here to comment on the politics of firearms, but this would otherwise be a story about a stabbing if it wasn't a story about a shooting.
My heart goes out to the officer. Speedy recovery, sir.
Other weapons are much less efficient
You are right that those gun-toting losers would still be dangerous losers if there were no guns. However, all those other weapons are much less efficient at killing people than guns. Look at England, where guns are illegal. People still get robbed and mugged and stabbed, but a hell of a lot less KILLING goes on. You can't do a drive-by shooting with a knife.
England has a much higher
England has a much higher rate of violent crime than the US. Their stats are also skewed because they are only complied upon conviction. No conviction = no recorded crime stat for that offence.
If you want a comparative country France is a much better example.
That's been debunked
The way the US measures violent crime is very different from the way they do it in the UK so it skews the numbers.
http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swann-...
Firearms, nukes, machetes, etc.
can't be un-invented. And there's a lot of them. The nukes can be reasonably controlled and secured; not so firearms or machetes. When they're banned, a very profitable black market is created, much like the now booming black market in cigarettes (which aren't banned outright, but are very highly taxed and regulated), or illegal substances.
BPD has my support
That punk should have been made Swiss cheese but the BPD posses some of the most cunning and brave officers out there. Don't anybody dare compare our guys in blue to any other force. A shame that a state with stringent gun laws show more leniency towards punks possessive of illegal firearms.
damn right
Not only did they not shoot, but they didn't hesitate to chase him down. Best in the nation.
If you check the article, the
If you check the article, the officer shot DID return fire, and didn't hit the suspect.
A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting
Excellent article about almost eliminating shooting deaths completely in Japan. Can you imagine if the US followed Japan?
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-...
Mexico enacted
Similar laws, its not working out that well.
Japan is 99% homogeneous.
Japan is 99% homogeneous.
While you're at it...
Go compare their prisons to ours.
Japan is one of the least
Japan is one of the least ethnically and culturally diverse places in the world. Everyone is the same which reduces crime. Comparing them to the US is like comparing Earth to Mars.
Their suicide rate is also highly unnerving
I don't trust Japanese statistics
I cannot remember the book I read, but the gist was that in Japan, they get creative about what is a murder and what is not, mainly based on the ability of locating the killer. Doing so skews the statistics about solving murders, thus making the nation seem safer than it actually is. So, murders become suicides or accidents.
This is not to say that I think Japan is as violent as the United States, but it is a more violent place than they want the world to think.
Dorchester shooting
I would like to say i'm very happy that officer is okay and i do thank him for trying to clean up the area. I also want to say that this area of Geneva Ave, Dorchester, MA. and side Streets near Geneva have some bad Drug dealers and the Boston Police knows lot's of the houses but mostly they will do not close them.
The City of Boston needs to keep them in a certain area for better control of the dealers and not have them go into better neighborhoods like Lower mills, Adams Village of Dorchester. I do see Boston Police on Bowdion Street every day parked and also walking around in that area from St. Peters Church down to Topliff Street of Dorchester, but the Police will never park on Geneva Ave or Police the same as Bowdion Street and you will never see the Boston Police park and walk up and down Geneva Ave because they know it's the worst part of Geneva Ave is from Fields Corner station to Bowdion Street of drugs and gangs that run this part of Dorchester.
Note: The Mayor is safe to come in the area only with a police escort to say a few words then go home and we have pray that we can sleep and go to work safe.
Sandra.