Boston City Council to once again ask the state to let Boston Police patrol the South Boston Waterfront

As it has done in years past, the Boston City Council voted today to formally ask the state Legislature to let Boston Police patrol the South Boston Waterfront. Although Boston officers respond there in emergencies, legally, State Police have jurisdiction.

State Police have beaten back similar efforts in the past, but that was before the recent series of scandals that led Gov. Baker to reorganize some State Police barracks and to make his own request to State Police to consider letting BPD share patrol duties in the Seaport, which has transformed from a sleepy series of parking lots and cargo areas to an actual Boston neighborhood with residents, stores, offices and hotels.

A pissed off Councilor Tim McCarthy (Hyde Park, Mattapan, Roslindale) filed the home-rule petition today, several days after State Police refused to send anybody to a council hearing last week on the issue.

"We deserve better than what happened last Friday," he said, noting State Police only notified the council of its intention to not come to City Hall in an e-mail at 9:59 p.m. on Thursday. He called the slight "incredibly disrespectful and unprofessional."

McCarthy and Councilor Ed Flynn (South Boston, South End, Chinatown, Downtown) said the issue is not detail work, but the need to give Seaport residents and businesses the same coverage and protection as other Boston residents. BPD, they said, focuses on community policing and sends officers to community meetings and other functions to build up the trust needed to have residents actually call police in an emergency.

Letting BPD formally share patrol duties in the area requires legislative approval because of a law - passed when nobody lived in the district - assigned coverage to State Police.



Free tagging: 



You're not allowed to criticize motorists without also waving your finger at the equally dangerous cyclists and pedestrians.


Risk Assessment

By on

Give tickets to the people who kill the most other people first.

It makes no sense to do enforcement on cyclists when they only rarely kill anyone.

It makes the most sense to ticket the operators of murder machines for operating them dangerously.

In your world, you would regulate nurf guns equally with real guns.


Why should the police choose?

By on

Station cops at an intersection. Cars run the light or block the box, ticket them. Pedestrians cross against the lights, ticket him (and I wrote that without chuckling once, at least out loud.) Cyclists do things they should not be doing at the intersection, ticket them. It's not that hard.

And you do realize that the police did once take a strong stance against fake guns, so that's that for you.


Dunno about one track mind

But you keep harping on this idea that I don't think we should ticket certain people who violate the law. I've of course said otherwise to you over and over and over and over and over again, so theres that.

Then there's this other weird thing you keep repeating about motorists being "understanding" of the law and punishments for breaking those laws, that you wouldn't find a motorist who runs a red light and also thinks they are above the law. But thats different from a cyclist that runs red lights because they think they are above the law. Do have that point down right?

More to your ever shifting point, I believe LEOs call it "police discretion." They might see a car and cyclist running a red light and decide to ticket the motorist and give a warning to the cyclist cause you know, both broke the law but one of them is inherently more dangerous to public safety. Might be one of the reasons that you see police rarely ticketing cyclists around here.


Here’s what I’m saying

By on

If a motorist gets a ticket for running a light or speeding or whatnot, by and large they would concede that they did something wrong and will pay the fine. From reading comments here over the years, I often get the feeling that cyclists don’t quite accept that things like traffic lights apply to them, often answering the charge with comments about how a motor vehicle can cause much more damage were it to strike something. While that is very much true, logically, that would mean that any action by a motorist can be justified as long as they don’t hit anything.

Since I enjoy the concept of rule of law, I agree that motorists should be ticketed for breaking laws. I’ve gotten tickets, and I understand why. The City of Cambridge ticketed cyclists a few years back. We’re you okay with that?


Pretty small sample size to make a broad point like that

Also weren't you arguing last week that internet comments are a poor metric to gauge things by? Guess it fits the narrative this week. But come on, people that break the law do it because they think they are above it, the mental gymnastics here don't change that. That also carries the attitude you just brought up, justified as long as they don’t hit anything.

And the rule of law line is cute and all but kinda falls on its face when you realize how unrealistic it is. Police are gonna start ticketing based on strict enforcement of the law? Its a logistical and bureaucratic nightmare, you're gonna need a lot more cops to police the tiniest of road infractions and that would include myself and just about every person the drives, bikes or walks across our roads.

As for Cambridge ticketing cyclists, hell yeah I'm okay with it, mainly cause they won't have a reason to ticket me, aside from the points mentioned above which I guess they could do in a perfect world where the letter of the law is enforced. But alas, police discretion is a thing.


I don't think you read Michael's comment

By on

Even though it was short, and you replied to it.

To make it more verbose, the saw was that the staties and BPD could sort out who should have jurisdiction over the Seaport (seriously, it should be BPD) by having a ticket writing contest. The most tickets win. That would by its nature entail lots and lots of tickets. Mostly to motorists, to be sure (though if they decided to hit jaywalkers, that would be the easy winner and I'd be public enemy #1) but why stop there.

As for you once more obsessing about comments, I'll try to explain it again. The number of comments means nothing. That said, people make comments, and much like yourself people remember these comments. That people on this thread have once again excused lawbreaking by cyclists shows what I mean. That said, I am glad you are good with obeying the law. And to be fair, most drivers and most cyclists are conscientious about such things. Pedestrians, not so much, but since that's how I get around most often, I should stay silent on that.

Nah I did read it

And I replied with a pretty innocent and sarcastic comment regarding the whataboutism that might occur cause he didn't mention bikes and peds.

It'd be great if they could ticket each and every infraction but its just not realistic, so I think some of the comments you hear are reflecting that, coupled with the few people that actually think cyclists are above the law, which I'm genuinely gathering that you understand I'm not one, of so good!

But actually on the topic that Mike started, I did read recently about the NYPDs sting operations ticketing cyclists and someone on Twitter was going through stats and noticed about

30k bicycle citations per year and about a million traffic citations overall (minus 20% for seat belt, insurance, etc). Bikes have about 1% mode share. Ticketed at 4x rate.....But cars now kill over 300ppl a year; bicycles kill 2-3 people a DECADE.

I think THATS what people are speaking to when they say please ticket motorists, please focus on where the actual dangers are coming from so we prevent those 300 deaths. Ticket the dangerous cyclists too but focus the majority of enforcement on cars.

Calling the state police

By on

Calling the state police "incredibly disrespectful and unprofessional" is being kind. They are thieves and the taxpayers of Massachusetts are their victims.


Driving to work drunk,

By on

Driving to work drunk, stealing overtime, buying guns with law enforcement discounts and reselling them at full price for a profit, driving the shit out of take home cars, stealing state purchased gasoline, equipment, and ammunition for personal use or resale, sleeping on the job, playing games to boost pensions, fixing tickets, falsifying reports for important people like judges, prosecutors, politicians and their families, playing games with scaring the shit out of hapless motorists, running a crime lab where fraudulent credentials and testing can go on for years without anyone noticing resulting in wrongful convictions or valid cases getting thrown out....... yeah MSP is a model for professionalism in law enforcement.


You don’t know what the hell youre talking about.

By on

All lies.
The state drug lab that had all of the problems was NOT...I repeat NOT the State Police Crime Lab.
It was the Mass Dept of Public Health Lab.

Additionally, there is no “padding of pensions”. Pension levels are unaffected by overtime and paid detail totals.

You best check your information and yourself “Anon”.

Plus MSP is keeping primary jurisdiction at the Seaport and South Boston, as it rightfully should. Fully trained and desired by the people and businesses of those areas as their primary police department. BPD made another futile effort to muscle its way in. Ain’t gonna happen. Massport property. End of story. South Boston beaches? Former MDC property. State jurisdiction.

Speaking of the Silver Line

By on

If a crime or accident minor or serious occurs on a Silver Line bus on Massport Property can the Transit or Boston police respond or will they be told to screw by the state police.

How do they have time to deal with Seaport

By on

There were at least 10 officers (mostly MSP, plus I think some sherrif Dept) watching construction work on the Pike last night at midnight, just between 95 and Copley.

I wonder how they could have time to patrol the Seaport, never mind all the legislative lobbying they're clearly doing.

Ps- BPD details all day, all over Boston aren't any better.


When the apocalypse comes,

By on

When the apocalypse comes, and stunned survivors are crawling up out of the steaming rubble, there will be at least one ass-hat bitching about cars and bike lanes. At least until the rest have roasted him over a fire for dinner.