Definitely should be drug tested!

It seems a bit naive to think that the drugs are being stolen for personal use. More likely, they are being sold to dealers for re-sale to the public. Except to ake it appear that "something is being done", I am not sure what drug testing would accomplish. Although it is commonplace among unions, demading more pay for drug testing seems mildly outrageous. I put it in the same class as demanding extra pay for wearing seat belts.

Drug testing should absolutely be required for every cop and any other city employee who can control a citizen's freedom and liberty. There should also be psychological profiles required every couple of years. You have pass psychological examination to get hired. Why aren't periodical reviews required after being hired as well?

Time to get over the missing drugs! The drugs went up in smoke a long time ago and the more you investigate, the less you will find. Any testing that you want to make the cops take would cost the taxpayers even more money. Drug testing is very expensive and the more drugs you test for, the more it costs. The cop union would fight any testing and that would also cost the citizens of Attleboro.

Are you for real? The cops arrest people for doing the same thing! Great example to our teens! There is a major drug problem in this city and everywhere else! Should we just ignore the fact that there are some thiefs and or drug addicts among our police officers? What about the cameras in the evidence room out of order for several years? How much does that cost to fix? That is inexcuseable! They should be drug and alcohol tested just like many other jobs. And by the way, remember they drive police cruisers all day! Why not help keep our officers honest,as their job stands for!

Joanne, I agree with you! Paul if you're concerned about tax payer money. you should be up in arms over all the lawsuits that Attleboro is fighting. we have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars of our money. The ARA lawsuits (which are at least 3 or more) The back pay and benefits we will owe for the people who were fired and found in a court of law, unjustly, the firefighter lawsuit, and the list goes on. I would rather pay taxes for drug testing police than grudge lawsuits.

Now we have the firefighter involved with drug selling it amazes me with his prior record he "even" got on the fire dept,who was Chief and appointing party for city then? Great job/

It's very simple solution. You make drug/alcohol testing a condition of employment. No officer should have a problem with this policy unless they're hiding something. If he/she is, then maybe their character and fitness for the position as a police officer needs to be re-addressed and remedied. With regard to the firefighter alleged to be involved in selling drugs, it isn't the fire chief or the mayor's job to baby-sit their employees. I think it's unfair to make the assumption that the (former) fire chief and (former) mayor were keenly aware of his alleged criminal past and chose to engage in a cover-up. As a former city employee, (I voluntarily left for a different job in case you're wondering...), I know first hand that background checks are conducted on new employees. However, once an employee is hired by the city, it does not routinely conduct background checks on its employees as a matter of policy; or at least it didn't back in 2000.

It's insane to me that officers aren't drug tested already. They deal with drugs everyday, and are put into a position where they can take stuff from people, and either resell it or use personally. I think of it this way, if a cop stops someone for an unrelated reason, and searches him and finds a bag of cannabis, and takes it from him, doesn't give him a ticket, or call it in on the radio, and doesn't dispose of it in front of the person. It kinda makes people weary to the fact of where is the fail-safe in this in making sure it gets to where it need to go, and that the officer isn't using it. Even if someone sees, say, the police chiefs son, doing an illegal substance, do you really think there gonna complain unless something trickles down because he does it at a party or something too someone who thinks cops shouldn't be above the law, but instead just enforce it. Anyone else that see's a cop doing that, probably, ain't gonna say anything cause there either selling it to them or hanging out in that crowd. Even if someone does, who's to say that the cops won't just give them a hard time in the future. Obviously, Attleboro has a bad drug problem, and it is evident that there are some people with emergency services doing the same thing. Recently, weren't like a firefighter or two and a dispatcher fired or penalized for there drug use/possession? How is this city suppose to get cleaned up if there's bad seeds in the department doing the same thing?

UPDATE: This is from the CBS Boston website - funny how it never appeared in the local rag the Sun Chronicle...

ATTLEBORO (CBS) – An Attleboro police investigation recently found a former veteran police official routinely issued gun licenses to people who were potentially dangerous.

The investigation finds that former Attleboro Police Sgt. Michael MacDonald issued at least 12 firearms licenses to convicted felons and people with mental health and substance abuse issues.

MacDonald issued a machine gun license to a person who had undergone alcohol treatment and another license to a man who had a number of run-ins with police.

It was recommended that MacDonald be disciplined.

No action was taken since he retired before the investigation ended.

His lawyer claims this is a case of dirty politics because MacDonald had filed unfair labor practice charges against the police chief and mayor.

LINK: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/06/18/police-attleboro-officer-issued-gun-licenses-to-potentially-dangerous-people/

OFF WE GO TO EARLY RETIREMENT AND A FULL PENSION PAID BY THE TAXPAYERS - THIS IS MORE COSTLY THAN THE MISSING COCAINE