Masterson, Other Coppers Ignored At Gun Hearing

The folowing opinion is representative of coppers from Boise, Nampa, Moscow and Canyon County, to name a few who were muzzeled at an Idaho Senate hearing last week. The GUARDIAN will offer the forum not allowed in the Idaho Legislature. We may be a bit slow to approve comments as we are in the South Seas and internet service is cumbersome.
ByBoise Police Chief Mike Masterson
A reporter for the Idaho statesman called my office last week asking if I’d share comments about SB1254. I declined and directed him to the upcoming legislative hearing believing it proper and respectful to first provide my comments directly to the legislators considering the law. That didn’t work. As the Chief of Idaho’s largest city responsible for policing Idaho’s largest university, I wasn’t allowed to speak at the hearing.

And I wasn’t alone. Moscow Police Chief David Duke, Nampa Chief Craig Kingsbury and Canyon County Sheriff Kieran Donahue were also present to offer testimony as leaders of Idaho communities with responsibility for policing a college campus. None of us were permitted to speak.

The right idea will survive public debate. Arbitrarily ceasing debate raises suspicion about intent. It also destroys trust and confidence in the people running the process, in this case, the hearing in the state senate. So I take this opportunity to share my comments with you, the people I serve, and encourage you to share your opinion, whatever it is, with your legislator on this important public safety issue.

Police Chiefs across Idaho support citizens Second Amendment right to bear arms. We support the portion of SB 1254 to allow current and qualified retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed on a college campus. We support a person’s right to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense provided they are of sound mind and law abiding.

What is troubling, however, is the provision of SB1254 that authorizes a person with enhanced CCW permit to carry on a college campus. An enhanced permit requires only the most minimal of basic weapons training. Idaho laws are weak on grounds for denying a CCW permit. This poses public safety concerns trained officers see every day and it’s a risk to great to be extended to college campuses.

Most experienced officers would testify they have been called to control situations involving individuals who possess a valid CCW permit but who also suffer from serious mental health issues including PTSD. Often these individuals are not taking required medications and are exhibiting behavior perceived to be bizarre and dangerous. Access to weapons is always a priority concern for safety of the officer, the public and the individual involved.

These examples may be the minority of CCW permits holders, but our experience shows the real numbers are high enough to pose an unnecessary safety risk to students, be it sitting next to our children in a classroom or at a campus tailgate where thousands of people gather.

As most CCW permit holders know, carrying a weapon comes with great responsibility and liability. Under SB 1254, it’s okay to carry a gun and consume alcohol, but just not too much alcohol. That’s a dangerous combination for anyone especially a young adult in such a unique and sensitive environment as a college campus.

At least two college facilities in Meridian and Hailey have classrooms attached to a high school. How would weapons be treated under SB1254?

Legitimate questions should be raised and openly vetted in public testimony. On SB 1254, apparently minds are made up from the Governor on down and opportunity for free discussion of all views including law enforcement’s view of practical or unintended public safety consequences were minimized. It should be disturbing that in the people’s house, and in a citizen’s legislature, community police leaders were not allowed to speak.

My colleagues and I have discussed these issues and are concerned. Thank you for allowing me to share my views with you in this forum. You, the citizens we all serve deserve time and answers from the people you elect. Call them, share your views; have your voice heard and demand accountability.’smylegislator.htm

Comments & Discussion

Comments are closed for this post.

  1. Chief you wrote this in your piece….Arbitrarily ceasing debate raises suspicion about intent. It also destroys trust and confidence in the people running the process, in this case, the hearing in the state senate.

    Sounds a lot like what happens when people complain about LE. The complainants are either branded as cop haters or law breakers. I really take issue with another part of your post… We support a person’s right to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense provided they are of sound mind and law abiding. People who have broken the law at some point do not have the right to protect themselves?

    I realize these comments will seem argumentative to some but, isn’t debate by it’s very nature argumentative? It is hard for me to understand how LE can complain that their views are not being heard when LE consistently ignores the complaints from citizens.

  2. Grumpy ole guy
    Feb 16, 2014, 6:06 pm

    The Legislative Committees too often act in a manner which makes them appear to be too busy to consider citizens points of views; whether those citizens are representatives of “official” duties or merely their own points of view. For a “Citizen Legislature” too often, too many of them, forget or overlook a part of that title.

  3. I would ask the chief if he really supports 2nd Amendment rights, why does he really oppose this law? The truth is the cops want to be the only people carrying guns in public, they feel like it would make their jobs easier, and it might. But it won’t stop bad guys or the mentally ill from arming themselves, which is the real problem. And mental health problems are at least as prevalent among cops as they are in our society as a whole, just ask the folks in Filer!

  4. Chuck Finley
    Feb 16, 2014, 7:00 pm

    Chief Masterson was there to give testimony for his own Poticial agenda. Please understand this, many of the Officers in the Bosie Police Department do not share his views on this subject and were/are quite upset that he used the “Boise Police Department” to further his own agenda. This is not the first time Chief Masterson has used your Police Department to further agendas that the Police should not be involved in. Your local Police Department should stay neutral in Legislative agendas in order to serve you, the community without predgudice.

  5. A man with an agenda?
    Feb 16, 2014, 9:24 pm

    “These examples may be the minority of CCW holders”? I daresay I would like to know of at least one. There appears to be a “progressive” movement afoot among our politicians and law enforcement “administrators” and it does not bode well for 2nd amendment advocates. Progressives seem to have found their way in to any number of public forums under the mistaken notion that their opinions matter when it comes to the Constitution. You seem to take the stance that because something MIGHT happen then ALL CCW holders are suspect and need to be forbidden to carry. With that type of attitude, the citizens are not out of line when there may be evidence of only a few officers using drugs, engaged in criminal activity or drunken behavior to think that ALL officers are lying drunks, drug addicted thief’s. See it works both ways. What I find most disturbing about this article is the notion that a police officer (regardless of so called rank) thinks enough of his opinion that he has taken the extraordinary step of essentially circumventing our Constitution. Enforce the law. Period. The double standard evidenced here is appalling. The citizens are guilty before a crime has even been committed in the eyes of this man. And yet we STILL don’t know exactly what took place and why the need for a FEDERAL AGENCY to spend 18 months investigating this department. If anything I would suggest that there appears to be more need for concern about some of Boise’s officers carrying guns than the VAST majority of citizens in this city. At any rate i find it offensive that this “Chief” has the arrogance to suggest that his opinion trumps the Constitution. Just do what we pay you for: enforce the law and keep your so called legal opinions to yourself. And I really wonder if you actually do speak for you r officers. Somehow I think not………

  6. Chief, you write, “Call them, share your views; have your voice heard and demand accountability”

    And to you, I would like to share my view to you – Stop whining.

    Your use of “arbitrarily ceasing debate”, is inaccurate I’m sure. Although not there, I bet there was a time limit. You people before you used all the time. If the committee allowed EVERYONE to talk, session would go till June.

    Boise police have a TERRIBLE record of discharging their firearms, from starting fires in the foothills while practicing, to shooting into occupied office buildings, to shooting 12 rounds into an apartment complex at George Nickel when he didn’t fire any- fortunately all 12 missed target. Oh yeah, do we need to remember the use of a gun to control a little dog in a neighborhood?

    My trust and confidence in “the process” is not eroded by you not testifying the words we know what you are going to say. My trust and confidence is eroded in our local police- in particular the Boise Police. I would rather deal with Ada, Canyon or State troopers.

  7. I greatly respect your worries about the bill and your concern over police chiefs not being permitted to testify at the hearing, however one part of your piece is extremely troubling, and that is your conflation of “mental illness” with “violently unstable.”

    The state of mental healthcare in this country is absolutely deplorable, and while some people with mental illness do commit violent crimes the simple truth is people suffering from poor mental health are far more likely to be victims of violent crime than perpetrators.

    Furthermore by implying that keeping guns out of the hands mentally ill people will reduce risks to officers and public ignores the fact that perfectly cogent, rational people commit horrific acts of violence every day in our country and in our state.

    When it comes to issues of gun safety, the common denominator is not the presence or absence of mental illness, but the presence of a gun.

  8. My view is that the bill in question is so restrictive I think it nothing more than a publicity stunt for the author.
    I would feel much safer with open carry where people are not hiding anything. There is nothing to say that Police officers are any more reliable when it comes to firearms. My guess would be there are many concealed weapons in the vehicles at the tail gate party’s. The Statehouse since the days of Kempthorne have had no incidents that I know of and open carry has been permitted as well as some Legislators keeping a firearm in their pantyhose.

  9. Chief Mike Masterson
    Feb 17, 2014, 12:24 pm

    thanks rick. you raise a good point i thought i’d take a few minutes to respond. First, unlike other govt leaders I routinely interact with BG readers. Many of them discount your views; I have not. While we may not agree I believe it is important to listen to strong critics of government, not only to listen but to learn. I don’t engage in arguments and you will never find a lack of civility from me. I respect your rights to hold differing views and to express them. Sometimes the best we can do is agree to disagree.

    I’ve just started my tenth year as Boise Police Chief. During that time when people called my office and wanted to speak with me they got me in person or, in my absence, another member of my command staff to listen. Ask yourself is other government agencies afford you that type of access? Just this week a man called to express his concerns over the video of the dog shot by police outside of boise. We had a nice talk and he gave me some good ideas to consider.

    I will have more to share on the CCW issue later this week at a public meeting. It’s hard to make statements that everyone doesn’t immediately think we are talking about them. Take a look at the requirements for CCW in Idaho code and tell me how we keep guns out of the hands of those who would harm you like the mentally ill who dont rise to the level of a mental hold? for those who have threatened violence against another but there is insufficient to charge them criminally? That we have a system that allows gang members to obtain a ccw permit in Idaho and carry concealed? I just want an opportunity to be heard, like all of us want. I think you get that with me, far more than any other official has been willing to offer in the past, and probably few will be accomodating to do in the future. Thanks for a good comment and the opportunity to respond.

  10. Interested Citizen
    Feb 17, 2014, 2:00 pm


    Well stated.

    And further, Chief Masterson:

    You had best clean up your own house first!!!

    Coppers, prosecutors, court officials, and others connected to law enforcement and the judiciary must be forced to be more aacountable, as they have proven themselves to be unworthy of self-restraint and self-regulation and self-discipline.

  11. Interested Citizen
    Feb 17, 2014, 2:13 pm

    How many others besides me do not feel “served or protected” by law enforcement, and instead feel harrassed and threatened and coerced by them???

    And, the moment you begin to impede an iindividual’s right to protect himself, you have lost my support!!!!

  12. Grumpy ole guy
    Feb 17, 2014, 5:28 pm

    I think that this discussion has strayed from the topic. This is NOT a Second Amendment issue. This is NOT a Boise Police Department verification issue. This IS a public safety on college campuses issue. Curb your tongues

  13. Afghanistan aint the only battleground
    Feb 17, 2014, 5:36 pm

    If I hadn’t just read it I wouldn’t believe it. Masterson just ridiculed and relegated commentators of this site as not worthy of….what? The Idaho Statesman? The New York Times? The BPD “news” site compiling the usual DUI and shoplifting thefts requiring a SWAT call OUT. What absolute arrogance. Go to any website on the internet and there are always a few “interesting” comments. But for you to relegate these comments to the dung heap is the height of arrogance.
    And yet….here you are.
    How about some answers then since you opened this up. Why were you unaware of the FBI investigation and who was investigated? Not telling the Chief of an agency under investigation seems rather…peculiar…. and raises a number of questions and issues. Were there criminal actions committed on the part of your officers that didn’t rise to the level of a federal indictment but could easily be heard in local courts? Why the secrecy? or do you really not know what is going on in your own department? Were officers fired? The Statesman article implied there were? Is that “personnel action” or do the citizens need to know if a crime was committed by one of BPD’s finest. The whole situation smells to high heaven.
    You seem fascinated with a number of rather “peripheral” issues but issues that one who is interested in “other” employment might want on the record. You are a hard one to figure out. But you appear to be “progressive” in your thoughts and actions. I agree with the earlier comment: it’s hard to take you seriously when your own home seems to be in need of some cleaning.
    And lastly why is your opinion on Constitutional Law of any value? Did you go to Law school? You are a police officer…period. Granted you have a couple stars pinned on your collar but in terms of actual understanding of this issue, you seem to be focused on some vague mental illness angle that seems to be a non issue and public relations seems to be the point. There are many individuals in this community that would like some answers but I suspect that you really don’t know.
    “Dum excusare credos, accusas”.

  14. Well Chief,
    It appears unanimous on this board.

    Point by point in your letter, here and printed in The Statesman, you have fallacies, inaccuracies and a generally a bad opinion.

    Seems your issue is more with the current CCW law than with this current proposed law.

    The old “agree to disagree” conclusion is really weak when someone says, “The sky is green”. Well, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree…

    Although there are points for jumping into the fire of a public forum though.

  15. Chief

    A lot.. no all the readers of this blog know that I am not a fan of LE. I have my personal reasons for that feeling I also have reasons that go to the lack of respect that cops in general show to the public. I am not saying all cops but, as the old saying goes it only takes 1 bad apple to spoil the whole barrel…. Or something like that.

    You seem willing to listen but, just listening does not seem to be slowing the hit parade of incidents. A local cop in a downtown bar drunk on a mechanical bull…. With at least 1 gun… the officer 3 incident… the plethora of dead dogs… outright misuse of authority… (illegally demanding an individual’s ID) ect. ect. It is going to take some action… not just listening.

    Shoogi did make a very good and very accurate point….”mental health problems are at least as prevalent among cops as they are in our society as a whole” Shoogi could have mentioned that the rates of Domestic Violence (DV) in LE is twice that of the national average and yet cops still keep their jobs and guns. I guess I personally loose all trust in cops and the system when a tazer is held to an individuals testicles and there are multiple threats to use the tazer and all that happens to the cop is… some more training.

    I am also very concerned about your continued comments about those with a mental illness (MI) being “so dangerous” you are painting with a very very broad brush sir and that is scary to me. The vast majority of individuals with MI are not dangerous at all… even the “horribly scary” schizophrenic’s.

    I will agree with the person who posted that you and the others who were there to testify had their own agenda…. everyone who wants to be heard on any subject has their own agenda… that does not make it nefarious. You have every right as a citizen and as a public servant I feel you especially have a duty to make your views known on any subject that concerns safety. So to me that is nothing more than an attempt to inflame.

    I for one think there should be no CCW…. at all… NO ONE should be carrying a gun concealed…NO ONE. Maybe I’m too much of a John Wayne fan but I do not trust a hideaway man, put it on your hip where everyone can see it. The only reason to hide a gun is so you can ambush an unknowing individual.

    More than one person has brought up the whole 2nd amendment argument, face it folks we as citizens have lost that one. It was lost many years ago when restrictions were put on gun ownership for felons and the stripping of gun rights has not slowed much since, now some misdemeanants are banned from owning guns… even if no weapon was used in their crime.

    I whole heartedly agree that you have engaged in a civil manner more with the public than any other member of your dept. and I applaud you for that. Other members of the BPD and ACSD have not been so pleasant in their comments on here but, that is their problem, or is it?

    In closing I would like to say that I for one hope you continue to read and comment on these posts. I wish that the leader of, as he calls it, or used to anyway, the Law Enforcement dept of choice would grace us with his presence and his views. I will not hold my breath for that one though.

  16. Interesting that a person whose entire profession is not Constitutionally compliant, complains about Constitutional infringement.

    Last I checked the only Law that is supposed to be here is the elected Sheriff. Everything else is just a militia.

  17. give us no more bud
    Feb 17, 2014, 9:10 pm

    …and in the meantime, while the ombudsman apparently was unaware of the 22 month federal investigation in to the questionable(?) activities of our public employees, (he) managed to conduct a very detailed investigation in to an officer who supposedly had his cell phone attached to a car window watching a football game while driving. Great job Ombudsman!1 Good to know we are safe from personal fouls and clipping calls here in Boise. Something is so very broken in this city.

  18. MEH! (Saying “whatever” would have been an over reaction.)
    So a politically appointed administrator feels slighted because ELECTED officials don’t care to listen him?

    Masterson has a typical cop’s attitude about police and retired lawmen somehow being special and deserving of privileges we “civilians” shouldn’t have.

    He really may be a “big fish” in Boise city limits, another useful mouthpiece for his boss Bieter and perhaps even a few Boiseans.

    I, and apparently many of our ELECTED law MAKERS, care little about this appointee’s opinions on Idaho’s laws.

    Perhaps things would go more to his liking BACK in Madison.

  19. Las Vegas Rebel
    Feb 17, 2014, 11:58 pm

    @Interested Citizen-I feel plenty protected and served by the Boise Police Department and could not disagree with you more. If you think the BPD is not a great police department and does not work hard for its citizens move to somewhere like Oakland or Seattle then tell me how you feel about the police “harrassment.”

  20. Grumpy… the 2nd amend issue was raised in the initial post so it is relevant. As two the house cleaning you are partially right… it does not belong here but, every time it gets brought up it is shutdown very early.

  21. Personal story about cops…

    I was once going to be a cop, going on ride a-longs, starting the paperwork to use my GI bill to go to post. Then a couple of instances made me re think what I wanted to do. A cop I was with got a call that there was a “deal” going on close to his location. I saw as a cop was all excited to make a bust. He ran off, and later when I saw him again he was celebrating like he just busted Scare Face with a bunch of coke. In all actuality all he did was catch a 16 year old kid selling a piece of Marijuana to a friend that was the equivalent in size to a cap of a ball point pen. Still got that kid for distribution, a felony. This cop ruined that kids life, all over something that was so small that it couldn’t have possibly done any damage. But the cop was so excited that he seemed like he was about to open a bottle of champagne and throw a party.

    Also When talking to another cop, he told me, (when dealing with resistant individuals) that, and I quote, “…it doesn’t matter what the truth is, all that matters is what we put in the reports, and that becomes the truth…”

    So knowing this, and knowing that this is a common sort of mentality among cops, I chose to change professions. I would rather keep my soul than be affiliated with that group.
    However, for those that DO choose to be in that line of work, and they subject themselves to this sort of “Us Vs. Them” attitude with dealing with the public, any complaints that you are not getting your way, or are feeling that you are not being heard, is just giving you a taste of your own medicine. For once you now get to feel what it is like to be apart of the common public, and for that you should not receive any sympathy. If anything it should motivate you to make some serious paradigm changes within your ranks.

    Lead by example, not with an Iron fist. You will be both more effective, and gain more support throughout the community.

  22. The opinions are overwhelming, and that’s interesting. I 65, white, haven’t had a ticket in 35 years, and I am intimidated by police.. and that’s by design. I don’t like the “tactical” gear look. I don’t liked the shaved heads and bulked up appearance. I don’t like the fact that too many cars show up for every incident. I don’t like the “tactical SWAT vehicle” or the “mobile command post.” And now Meridian is building a “scenario village.” Are we training for Iraq? And every time I ask about a police policy the answer is “That’s the way we do things.” or the old “agree to disagree” BS. I firmly believe that current policing escalates more situations than they help. I know we don’t live in an Andy Griffith Mayberry world.. but we don’t deserve militarization either. As for CCW, I have a permit. And cops, ex-cops, and politicians should have to get one just like I did.

    EDITOR NOTE–Not so sure the opinions are overwhelming. Several critical posts are by the same authors using an alias.
    I will try to address the issue in the future as it creates a false impression. FYI at least 6 posts on this thread are from two people. We don’t judge the content, but if the GUARDIAN allows use of an alias, we ask commenters to at least use the same name.

  23. I, for one, appreciate the Chief’s position. He briefly mentions the ability of many CWP holders to safely discharge a firearm in the context of a campus. Based on my CWP training a few years back, competency and proficiency with a gun is no hurdle at all to obtaining a permit. Most of those folks in the practicals couldn’t hit the paper unless they were standing 10 feet away. I’m not comfortable with this, and would really appreciate seeing legislation to create a minimum standard of target acquisition, rather than loosening the restrictions for CWPs.

    The part about alcohol and concealed carry is also very much of a practical concern. Folks, if we can’t pass common-sense laws, eventually there WILL be stronger federal regulation and that’s very much what you don’t want. Please consider the salient points at hand here and try to untwist your knickers at the thought that the feds are comin’ for your guns. If our state proves incompetent, it could actually happen and it’ll be no one’s fault but your own.

  24. Don't be ridiculous grump
    Feb 18, 2014, 9:58 am

    ….of COURSE this is a 2nd amendment issue. What else could it possibly be. The whole issue revolves around the right to carry a firearm…….period. There is no stipulation ANYWHERE about the mental health of the owner. The “Chief” and his progressive friends are the ones bringing the issue up. There have always been and always will be individuals who you can’t trust in any capacity: driving, drinking, having children, military service or carrying a gun. And as someone else pointed out, just because you carry a badge and gun, that does not exempt them from these statistics. There are drug addicts, pedophiles and DRUNKS on any police department anywhere. They slip through the cracks, they become addicted, they lie…just like any other human being on the face of the earth.
    Grumpy don’t YOU lose track of what the REAL issue here is. It is NOT mental illness for crying out loud.

  25. truth will set you free
    Feb 18, 2014, 10:39 am

    Rereading the Chief’s comments it occurs to me that the grey area he speaks of has ALWAYS been there. gang members, individuals who threaten violence, the so called mentally ill. It boils down to not what you think you know but what you can prove…..something that seems to take on new meaning with this department. Is it illegal to be a gang member? Well it depends…are they involved in a criminal enterprise or do they ride motorcycles. If criminal, how do the police know? Can they prove an individual is involved and therefore not worthy of a permit? Then indict and prevent. Does it have to be crimes of violence or is GRAND THEFT enough to prevent an individual from carrying. Mental illness can be defined as easily as obsessive compulsive behavior. (making a bed over and over again). Does this disqualify an individual from carrying.
    It’s easy to step on a soap box and pretend you have an understanding of these issues, but I feel you do not. That is why it is best to allow the CONSTITUTION to do the talking here. Our country has become sick. Idaho is ranked SIXTH in suicides in the nation. How about a law that says if the state you live in is ranked lower than 25th in suicides, no one can carry a gun? The theory is the same as you appear to be stumping for. 80 percent of prescription meds go to antidepressants and the like. Should that be a disqualifier. The founding fathers, I am certain had no idea the level of insanity this country would fall to 250 years ago. But ironically, because we have fallen so far the issue of gun ownership and carry is more important NOW than it was then.
    I am still curious though. What ONE incident has influenced you to believe that potential mental illness somehow is an issue in this city concerning CCW permits?

  26. Your comments are interesting and I have no reason to doubt them. My feeling is that the current batch of law enforcement “professionals” have entered the arena for reasons other than public service in the best sense of the word. I suspect that many have entered because they could not get a job in this economy, were laid off due to economic business decisions or simply needed a job for medical benefits with some overtime perks as well. The days of working your way to the top based on merit are long gone. Political correctness, progressive administrative tactics, cronyism and word games are the order of the day now. Those that fit in to this “mold” i am certain are rewarded or at the very least certain questionable actions overlooked ( for some reason our infamous YOUTUBE heroine comes to mind but I digress) Someone mentioned that this “Chief’ is from Madison. if true that says a lot about his political outlook. It simply is not possible to place unreasonable stipulations on 98 percent of the population because of the POTENTIAL actions of 2 percent. It simply is not logical.
    I don’t know if your experiences were with this department, but if there is a common theme heard in this city it is the “badge heavy cowboy” moniker that seems the most prevalent. Despite that I find it very hard to believe that the average cop is so scared of the potential of violence from someone who may or may not be mentally ill and who has a CCW permit that the Constitution is questioned and that new laws are required to curtail this “threat”. This is not a violent town. If that can be attributed to the fear that crooks have that someone might have a gun, then great. But Boise is not LA either where violence is an every day event handled routinely by the police. I suspect in their view that everyone is carrying a gun and they handle it accordingly.
    I am not certain what this Chief’s motives are but it seems that there is more here than a concern for the safety of police officers or the “potential” for violence by CCW holders. And why speak up now? He has been “Chief” for, as he says 10 years now. Plenty of time to change whatever he feels needed changing. Are federal funds hinging on some sort of posturing on his part? or is this concern that with all our returning combat vets there is some sort of threat? I hope not. One incident with an honorable veteran who needed help I would HOPE is not the issue or the catalyst here. But it seems that everything surrounding this agency is shrouded in fog or covered in filth.

  27. Chief, while I am not in agreement with all your points, I do want to thank you for engaging the public through BG, it does show your interest in the public’s thoughts and a desire to reach out.

  28. To LD, you are right this is not an overly violent town… it is not LA… unfortunately there is a fairly large % of cops on BPA ACSD and in Canyon County that are ex-cali cops. The attitude has made it up here…even the recruiter for BPD is an ex-LA cop. Hollywood to be specific. That does not excuse the attitude but it explains why it is being defended so hard.

    You are right that 10 years is more than enough time to make ANY changes, so we must conclude that what we have is seen by the powers that be in LE to be a well functioning dept.

    As to your comment about vet’s there is a lot more to that story… and ironically some in “the system” have huddled around the individual previously referred to. I do not think they see him as a threat…I also do not think that the Chief was trying to make George an issue here.

    I for one am wondering this… should the safety of the public be of a higher concern than the safety of LE. Hear me out please. LE every where is so “officer safety” oriented that even the smallest inkling that a cop is in danger is grounds for skinning that smoke wagon as Wyatt Earp said…lol…and blasting away. As someone posted earlier… BPD fired 12 rounds at George… who to my knowledge never fired a shot. BPD is killing dogs because the cops were scared… Do we need better training… or cops that aren’t “scardy cats”

  29. If only we could trust the cops as much as we can trust a stranger.

    Evidence shows we cannot. Many a cop, especially those who’ve behaved badly when dealing with people’s rights, feel naked without a gun, thus the proposed law. Statistically speaking cops have a higher than average rate of: Mental illness diagnosis, domestic violence, substance addiction/abuse, suicide, and assaults on strangers. The chief still has not addressed my question in a previous post about why most police departments do not test for steroids, growth hormones, and similar substances when conducting drug screenings.

  30. Interested Citizen
    Feb 18, 2014, 9:08 pm

    Las Vegas Rebel:

    You apparently set very low standards for your public servants!!

    Your comparisons and assertions are unpersuasive at best.

  31. Agreed.
    But i feel that the system is too far gone to be able to fix. Corruption starts at the top, and works it’s way to the bottom ranks, and by that time it is so entrenched that the average beat walker has a perfunctory attitude, saying when questioned by an informed citizen, “just doing my job…” (which is the exact response given by those on the defense at the Nuremberg Trials).
    To make any significant change, the whole needs to be purged, but that won’t happen without a fight.

  32. The witch hunt by the same 10 regulars has commenced in full force. Who cares anymore that the topic was about concealed carry, gun laws and Masterson’s views on them. This is why many moderates who try to contribute to this blog are scared off by the cop haters and their made up or embellished stories about cops pissing in their cheerios.
    You call foul for those who try to classify you or diminish your voice yet you have no problem doing that to whole groups of others.

    On topic: Our Legislators properly vetted the arguments both for and against this bill. Unfortunately, it would be impossible to hear everyone’s view. I understand some concerns coming from Masterson about those who may carry concealed weapons and aren’t in sound mind. How would a law barring them from carrying concealed weapons keep them from carrying them though? Are those willing to break the law going to have a sudden change of heart because of laws keeping them from carrying concealed under certain circumstances? Does disarming those who follow laws keep them safer from those who don’t?

  33. Thanks Kelly…. Don’t take the bait folk…. One question… what dept do you work for?

  34. To Kelly-
    The “cop haters” as you put it have a valid argument that is in fact VERY pertinent to the main topic of the article. Idaho cops are notorious for allowing their irrational fear to dictate irrational decisions when confronting the public. This is not an organization that I for one, would have making rules on who can carry or who cannot.
    Furthermore, if a few people vent their displeasure for the cops, who cares? You do the very same thing, just on the other side of the fence.

  35. …that is why the Constitution trumps the “Chief”…….as has already been discussed. Don’t be too hard on your fellow citizens. Where there is smoke there is usually fire and it is still smoldering. The history of this department under this
    Chief’s” leadership as documented in the papers and elsewhere lends credence to their comments: pedophiles, debauchery, drunken behavior, sexual misconduct, abuse of authority ( I love YOUTUBE) and God knows what else that reporters won’t touch….the Feds must have been on to something for two years. Maybe the comments would cease if the truth were told. I think it is good to have a site like this for people to voice opinions.

  36. Interested Citizen
    Feb 19, 2014, 10:26 am

    Kelly S:

    Apparently, your oxen has not yet been gored by “professional law enforcement”!!!

  37. Interested Citizen
    Feb 19, 2014, 10:49 am

    Masterson states that “Idaho laws are weak on grounds to deny a CCW permit”.

    Does this mean that he advocates some convolution of Idaho’s straightforward and unequivocal laws concerning concealed carry???

    Does Masterson merely wish to expand the coppers’ monopoly on weapons and law enforcement that already exists?

  38. Important to note that the Chief’s agenda is closely aligned with a national police agenda to have special rules for special people:

  39. Many on here have demonized the police: I do think there are many a good cop. I think Boise is better than most. However, it is clear that not enough is done to root out the bad. It’s kinda like the Catholic Priest problem. Ya can’t tell me they don’t know who these guys are. Second point: Before all you coppers get offended by the comments on here, please tell me of any event in the known history of mankind when a massacre of large numbers of citizens was NOT carried out by police under the direction of someone they were loyal to. Police in the USA are moving away from accountability to the average citizen and that is what people are concerned about. History shows what it will lead to.

  40. Interested Citizen
    Feb 19, 2014, 2:56 pm

    Citizens may need to reconsider the legal immunities that have been bestowed on police, prosecutors, and the judiciary. In short, these immunities have resulted in too many abuses, for which there is very limited recourse.

  41. The governments appear to be preparing for mass civil unrest. “Fear a government which fears is people” a very smart man once said: (link is to a news outlet)

  42. I don’t believe the police are being demonized. It appears that the dam has finally broken and it is time for some answers. A series of very telling events have taken place or been exposed and people are now asking questions. If anyone thinks that the very few people that post on this site are the only ones concerned…WRONG. I have been asked about the YOUTUBE incident from people living on the east coast wondering just what is going on in this little town. The FBI investigation may have failed to return any indictments but I have a very strong suspicion it was not because whoever was being investigated was innocent. Boise is still a connected town in the worst sense of the word. But until a paid civil service employee tasked with investigating the civil servants in this city decides to give the public some details after collecting his 80k check or the CHIEF decides to tell the people who pay his salary just exactly what the FEDS were doing snooping around in “his” department without his knowledge, I guess we will never know.
    The CCW issue is meaningless. He is posturing and in reality his opinion means absolutely nothing. One hundred bucks says he is out as Chief shortly and running for political office somewhere.

    EDITOR NOTE–You guys are not on topic anymore and continue to bash the chief and his coppers–which is fine if they deserve it, but not when the issue is being denied a forum at the legislature. We have offered the forum here to one and all, but it’s time to move on. You personally have accounted for way too many posts on this thread under various names.

  43. ………and good riddance.

  44. I am not surprised
    Feb 20, 2014, 1:08 pm

    Reading about the number of teachers, male and female, who have sexually molested students, the bigger threat on campus are the teachers. The Sheriff is the Constitutionally Elected Law Enforcement officer in Idaho and stands at the people’s pleasure, not some political appointee lackey like the Police Chief. It doesn’t surprise me that the Police Chiefs are against this…most of them previously come from jurisdictions where police control of the private citizen is the accepted and preferred practice. The Presidents of the Colleges all are died in the wool liberal anti-free speech and anti-gun nanny-staters. Just look at what the President of the College of Idaho found as the most important thing toi highlight in his going away press release: ……bring in lots of foreign students and increase the diversity of the campus…he didn’t mention that it raised the cost for the paying student as they were all on grants or “scholarships”. He didn’t mention that he is cutting the number of classes and instructors so he could finance a football team. He didn’t speak of trying to get Veterans to the Campus…even though many, including Veterans Services tried to get a program going, …because he didn’t endorse it and wasn’t “interested”. He doesn’t speak of raising academic standards…because he didn’t.

    These people seem to be more interested in social engineering, political correctness and control of others than they are about personal freedoms and academic learning.

  45. Chief, make sure this kinda bullcrap don’t happen in our town please:

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address: