Hey, there! Log in / Register

Police: Man who ran at officers with a loaded gun after they heard him firing it is arrested in South Boston

Boston Police report officers were on patrol in the area of Logan and Gavin ways around 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, when they heard a gunshot and then spotted:

A male with a gun in his hand, pointing the firearm across the street. The male then began running toward the officers while attempting to conceal the firearm in his waistband. The officers drew their department issued firearms and gave the male lawful orders to drop the firearm and put his hands up. After taking several more steps between two parked vehicles, the male placed the firearm on the hood of the vehicle and complied with officers’ orders. The male was placed into custody without further incident, and officers recovered a loaded silver Bersa SA .22 caliber firearm.

Jeffry Ventura, 19, of Pawtucket, RI, was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful possession of ammunition, carrying a loaded firearm and discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a residence.

Police say the officers were on patrol in the Mary Ellen McCormack project due to a recent spate of gun violence that has included at least one shooting.

Innocent, etc.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

how the police didn't immediately shoot him dead from an armored bearcat tactical vehicle like they do in other states.

up
Voting closed 0

The criminal complied with the police officers' orders and he's alive to face charges.

up
Voting closed 0

You'd have to have your head in the sand to think that isn't weird, given the events in the news.

up
Voting closed 0

and I'll keep saying it (without wanting to tempt fate):

This guy would have been dead in many or most other jurisdictions. The better training, better wages and better other things that we insist upon for police in Massachusetts has paid off again.

up
Voting closed 0

Also other parts of MA. The Boston PD has emphasized training officers in handling situations without shooting, de-escalation, etc. and it shows.

up
Voting closed 0

Look, this isn't a knock to BPD in any way. They have an excellent track record for deescalation of these situations and have shown amazing restraint. But apart from training, does anyone wonder if this "us vs. them" mentality has created a climate where police are afraid to use deadly force, even when completely justified?

up
Voting closed 0

Granted, you'd have to ask somebody who wears a badge, which I obviously don't, but I think the evidence from other places is pretty strong that police in general in those places are not letting anything get in the way of them shooting people to death.

Boston officers will use deadly force when they feel they have to. But training does go a long way, as does a commitment to community policing, and we're lucky to live in a city where police fire as a last resort, rather than going into situations where they fire first and ask questions later (or fire first and ask no questions whatsoever).

up
Voting closed 0

a climate where police are afraid to use deadly force, even when completely justified?

Why would this be a bad thing?

up
Voting closed 0

They've got guns pointed at them or are even being shot at? All I'm saying is there is a difference between restraint due to training and hesitation due to fear of how people have reacted to even the clean, justified officer involved shootings. They've got familes to go home to.

up
Voting closed 0

And so do the people they're pointing their gun at.

A person who does not consider the consequences of their action before the use of deadly force is not a person I want to be using deadly force.

up
Voting closed 0

Of course they are considering the consequences; that's what I'm saying. Whether through a failure on my part to articulate, or your own comprehension of it, we're just not communicating here. Have a good one.

up
Voting closed 0

That is what leads police to think that "us goodguys (say it or ELSE)" shooting "them animals" is okay.

What we have is a climate of "all of us" - hence the defense of the BPD when they do have to take someone down with lethal force.

Someone posted a "cities where all use of lethal force was against black people" meme at the end of last year, and lots of people jumped on the stupidity of putting Boston on that list since they only killed the guy who shot a cop in the head point blank and wouldn't surrender - and he happened to be black.

up
Voting closed 0

If you are going to carry a sidearm in an illegal fashion why not at least carry one that actually has some potency? A 22 out of that short little barrel is not exactly a defensive firearm.

up
Voting closed 0

I don't think criminals are too picky about whatever stolen or otherwise illegally obtained firearms they can get their little felon fingers on. The mishmash of ammo found on these guys is even worse for wear. Surprised more criminals don't blow their hands off from catastrophic cartridge failures.

up
Voting closed 0

So this guy lives in Rhode Island, drives to So. Boston with a stolen gun, for what purpose? Things that makya go hmmmmmm.

up
Voting closed 0

what else?

up
Voting closed 0

"compiled with officer's orders" was a good idea

up
Voting closed 0

It pretty much always is.

up
Voting closed 0

Sure thing!

Doesn't help if the cop wants to commit murder.

up
Voting closed 0

I have a serious question and I'm not looking to offend anyone, or stir up a heated debate because I know how sensitive we can all be in 2016 America.

Anyway, why doesn't the BLM Movement acknowledge situations such as this? In my experiences with them and from what I have read online, the local chapter doesn't seem willing to engage in conversation with the BPD, and seem to really loathe us as much as their nationwide companions. In fact at one of their latest protests, they said the police that were escorting them and keeping the roads and sidewalks clear for their march were making them "nervous" because they were wearing bulletproof vests (just days after Dallas).

Wouldn't this be a GREAT example of how complying with police orders and better trained officers were able to take a potentially catastrophic and deadly encounter and turn into a commendable arrest where no one was hurt? Shouldn't they be tweeting and sharing this story so people nationwide see it as a model? But they never seem to do so.

In Boston, this is the rule and not the exception. Why doesn't BLM say, "hey, there seems to be something going on Boston that we don't think the rest of the country's police forces don't seem to get. Let's commend these officers and have a serious, respectful dialogue about what they are doing that's so different".

But all I ever really hear is more vitriol unfortunately. I'm genuinely curious.

- a Boston cop

up
Voting closed 0

So can't answer that.
You know more about murderous conflict than any of us I'd guess. Curious, do you feel you are in a conflict or battle? Where is the pressure coming from and who would you like to see acknowledge your points?

up
Voting closed 0

for engaging this in good faith. Most folks only listen to what they want to hear. And it's 7:30 AM and I'm feeling chatty, so sure, I'll try to explain.

First, "BLM" isn't an atomic thing. It's an organization, with some spokespeople but mostly with a bunch of loosely-organized member groups whose membership ebbs and flows. And the leadership has indeed come out in praise of individual police department actions. (Most recently here, and I'll bet you a Galway chicken dinner that you hear similar reporting in Boston in the next 48 hours) Individual members are also not all staunchly anti-police. I'm not active in the organization, though I'm obviously sympathetic, and you can dig through my comment history if you want to verify that even though I'm UHub's resident anti-cop-crank, there have been a few times in the last year or two that I've come out and said "That was really well-handled" when the BPD successfully de-escalated a violent situation that would have ended in death somewhere else.

Wouldn't this be a GREAT example of how complying with police orders and better trained officers were able to take a potentially catastrophic and deadly encounter and turn into a commendable arrest where no one was hurt? Shouldn't they be tweeting and sharing this story so people nationwide see it as a model? But they never seem to do so.

So, here's where we start to run into problems. I get what you're trying to say: this was a positive example of the department using its superior training and know-how to turn a situation that could have easily become violent into a peaceful arrest. And you'll get no argument from me--it was a great job, and other departments should strive to emulate it. But I'm curious about how you've worded it. "a great example of how complying with police orders... turn[ed] into a commendable arrest where no one was hurt." "Complying with lawful orders" has become a loaded term, because it has been used so many times to defend police actions that were clearly not defensible. In the past week alone, we've seen:

  • A man who told an officer at a traffic stop that he was legally armed, followed the script law enforcement has established for gunowners, and was summarily executed when he reached for his wallet
  • Another legally armed man at the Dallas shooting, whose first move when the shooting started was to hand his weapon to the nearest police officer and say "please hold onto this so it doesn't look like I'm involved in this shooting." The Dallas PD thanked him for his efforts by posting his image on Twitter as a suspect.

You're probably wondering what this has to do with your question, when the spirit of your statement (to you) is clear, so I want to spell this out as carefully as I can: there is a growing sense, particularly among minority populations, that the police are not acting as a legitimate law enforcement agency, but have positioned themselves as another armed street gang. T-Nehisi Coates wrote a really good breakdown of this for the Atlantic this week; I'd encourage you to read it. So when police officers (even when they mean well! I'm not casting some backhand aspersion on you!) use language like this, it causes distrust and fear in vulnerable populations who have seen the same language used by actual-jackbooted-thugs-in-uniform. We're judged by the company we keep, etc. etc. (FWIW, there are absolutely folks who take this to absurd lengths on the other side of the argument, too. I have Facebook friends who I've had to unfollow because posting "it's not enough!" after every thing to BPD does right is just noise that hurts the underlying cause) It turns what should be a positive, teachable moment into a tense misunderstanding between two groups that are talking totally different languages.

So, the answer as always is "it's complicated." I agree that the BPD is one of the best agencies in the country when it comes to resolving armed conflicts peacefully. I'd like to see their approach emulated elsewhere. But it also makes me sad that we have to call out every instance of "the police didn't kill this suspect, even though they probably wouldn't been legally culpable for his death" as a positive. It should be the expectation of every encounter. And that's what BLM is trying to say.

Anyway, I'd be happy to talk further about this, but I'm going to step away from the thread for a bit, because there will be of course be 12 responses to this by bosguy and DPM about what a terrible human being I am and how all those dead black guys had it coming to them. But I really do value talking to people earnestly about this, so thanks for engaging in good faith.

up
Voting closed 0

Thank you for your earnest and respectful reply! Sincerely, I mean it.

In the above scenario, I think me saying "complying with lawful orders" is completely justified. The officers heard gun fire, saw an armed suspect with a firearm in his hand and immediately ordered him to drop the weapon. This is also an area that has been very active for firearm violence in the past few weeks, so it's no coincidence that the officers happened to be in this particular area.

Nonetheless, given all the circumsstances of this particular event, the officers were justified in drawing their weapons, ordering this individual to drop his weapon and commanding he get on the ground. I'm not sure if you have ever been in a tense situation like this (perhaps in military service), but I have and this is an incredibly scary and traumatic experience for the officers. Imagine, hearing gun fire and actually seeing someone with a gun running towards you. It's really, really scary. At that particular moment, your heart feels like it's going to beat out of your chest, you most likely will develop tunnel vision and you're sincerely hoping you don't die today. All of this happening in a matter of seconds.

I'm not sure what happened in Minnesota, but I agree, it doesn't sound very good for the officers. A legally licensed individual with no criminal history and his family in the car just decided on that particular day that he was going to put a cop's life in danger? Can't be. Not impossible, but very questionable. In Baton Rouge, however, I saw a video of a very large individual whom police were informed by a 911 caller that he had a gun in his pocket take a taser with no effect and then fight and resist the officers attempts to handcuff him. I wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a justified shoot. Tragic, yes of course, but justified nonetheless.

I hope you're right and the local BLM chapter references the South Boston incident soon, but I for one won't be surprised if they don't. The Mayor has invited them to have a dialogue numerous times and they have outright refused or ignored him. Hopefully I'm wrong and they start working with us to start hearing some of these deep wounds. Black lives do matter and I don't think that anyone knows this more than the police.

I for one, promise you I will remain kind, professional and very approachable out there. At the same time, I plan to go home to my wife and kids every single day. So my suggestion to you, and everyone is: always comply. Even if you KNOW the officer is in the wrong. Film us, absolutely. Anyone fighting that in today's world is a naive fool. Just make sure you comply so we, and you, are safe in the end. (Then just think of your rewards in the inevitable lawsuit!)

- a Boston cop

up
Voting closed 0