‘Get Behind the Vest' breakfast looks to raise money for new bulletproof bests for CPD officers
CHICAGO – At St. Ignatius College Prep, pancakes fed the prayers of people looking to help.
On Saturday morning, Ald. Bill Conway (34th Ward) hosted a 'Get Behind the Vest' breakfast for the first time.
Since 2014, these events have cooked up the funds for the Chicago Police Memorial Foundation's efforts to help Chicago police officers buy new bulletproof vests.
'Chicago police officers have our back, so it's important that we have theirs and we're putting a good bulletproof vest on their backs,' Conway said.
Weekend Break: White Sox celebrate families with Kids Opening Day on the South Side
While the city gives each officer a bulletproof vest when they come out of the academy, officers are responsible for replacements every five years.
'Officers don't replace their vests like they should upon expiration. They kind of roll the dice and wait to see, and they spend their money on family and the house and everything else,' Maureen Biggane with the Chicago Police Memorial Foundation said.
Just last year, Officer Edwin Gramajo's life was saved when his vest caught a bullet.
'He was in his squad car. You'll see pictures of where the bullet penetrated the windshield and then struck him in the vest. Thank God he was wearing his vest, saved his life undoubtably and we were able to provide him with a replacement vest after that incident,' Biggane said.
So far, the police memorial foundation has replaced 14,000 vests at a cost of about $500 each.
Read more: Latest Chicago news and headlines
'Any protection we can get for our officers, especially when they're facing the types of challenges they're facing out there. We know how many officers we've lost over the last two years and we don't want that to happen again. We want to keep our officers safe when they're out there keeping others safe. Those bullet proof vests do a lot to protect our officers,' CPD Supt. Larry Snelling said.
Conway hopes to raise over $100,000 from sponsors and pancake sales.
'In the military, I was in Afghanistan and wore a bulletproof vest. So I want to make sure that our police officers have the protection they need,' Conway said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
A Teen Killed Himself After Talking to a Chatbot. His Mom's Lawsuit Could Cripple the AI Industry.
The Orlando Division of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida will hear allegations against Character Technologies, the creator of in the wrongful death lawsuit Garcia v. Character Technologies, Inc. If the case is not first settled between the parties, Judge Anne Conway's ruling will set a major precedent for First Amendment protections afforded to artificial intelligence and the liability of AI companies for damages their models may cause. The case was brought against the company by Megan Garcia, the mother of 14-year-old Sewell Setzer III, who killed himself after conversing with a chatbot roleplaying as Daenerys and Rhaenyra Targaryen from the Game of Thrones franchise. Eugene Volokh, professor emeritus at UCLA School of Law, shares examples of Sewell's conversations included in the complaint against Character Technologies. Garcia's complaint alleges that Character Technologies negligently designed "as a sexualized product that would deceive minor customers and engage in explicit and abusive acts with them." The complaint also asserts that the company failed to warn the public "of the dangers arising from a foreseeable use of including specific dangers for children"; intentionally inflicted emotional distress on Sewell by "failing to implement adequate safety guardrails in the product before launching it into the marketplace"; and that the company's neglect proximately caused the death of Sewell who experienced "rapid mental health decline after he began using and with which he conversed "just moments before his death." Conway dismissed the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim on the grounds that "none of the allegations relating to Defendants' conduct rises to the type of outrageous conduct necessary to support" such a claim. However, Conway rejected the defendants' motions to dismiss the rest of Garcia's claims on First Amendment grounds, saying, "The Court is not prepared to hold that the Character A.I. [large language model] LLM's output is speech at this stage." Adam Zayed, founder and managing attorney of Zayed Law Offices, tells Reason he thinks "that there's a difference between the First Amendment arguments where a child is on social media or a child is on YouTube" and bypasses the age-verification measures to consume content "that's being produced by some other person" vs. minors accessing inappropriate chatbot outputs. However, Conway recognized Justice Antonin Scalia's opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) that the First Amendment "is written in terms of 'speech,' not speakers." Conway ruled that defendants "must convince the court that the Character A.I. LLM's output is protected speech" to invoke the First Amendment rights of third parties— users—whose access to the software would be restricted by a ruling in Garcia's favor. Conway says that Character Technologies "fail[ed] to articulate why words strung together by an LLM are speech." Whether LLM output is speech is an intractable philosophical question and a red herring; Conway herself invokes Davidson v. Time Inc. (1997) to assert that "the public…has the right to access social, aesthetic, moral, and other ideas and experiences." Speech acts are broadly construed as "ideas and experiences" here—the word speech is not even used. So, the question isn't whether the AI output is speech per se, but whether it communicates ideas and experiences to users. In alleging that targeted her son with sexually explicit material, the plaintiff admits that the LLM communicated ideas, albeit inappropriate ones, to Sewell. Therefore, LLM output is expressive speech (in this case, it's obscene speech to express to a minor under the Florida Computer Pornography and Child Exploitation Prevention Act.) The opening paragraph of the complaint accuses Character Technologies of "launching their systems without adequate safety features, and with knowledge of potential dangers" to "gain a competitive foothold in the market." If the court establishes that the First Amendment does not protect LLM output and AI firms can be held liable for damages these models cause, only highly capitalized firms will be able to invest in the architecture required to shield themselves from such liability. Such a ruling would inadvertently erect a massive barrier to entry to the burgeoning American AI industry and protect incumbent firms from market competition, which would harm consumer welfare. Jane Bambauer, professor of law at the University of Florida, best explains the case in The Volokh Conspiracy: "It is a tragedy, and it would not have happened if had not existed. But that is not enough of a reason to saddle a promising industry with the duty to keep all people safe from their own expressive explorations." The post A Teen Killed Himself After Talking to a Chatbot. His Mom's Lawsuit Could Cripple the AI Industry. appeared first on
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Hundreds attempt to vouch for a man of many faces
Jun. 5—Decades ago, a convicted murderer whose death-penalty sentence was overturned on appeal was returned to Champaign County for re-sentencing. As part of that process, the defendant was asked to submit letters from friends and acquaintances for the judge to consider when imposing a new sentence. The letters are akin to recommendations — the writer says good things about the defendant as part of an effort to get him a lower sentence. In this case, the defendant chose poorly, selecting a former employer who was horrified by the defendant's crimes. "Lock him up forever" was the gist of this "recommendation" letter. It was a rare display of candor by a letter writer who took a hard look at the defendant and what he did. That letter came to mind while reviewing the 200-plus letters submitted by the defense on behalf of former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan. He's due to be sentenced June 13, and his lawyers contend he should get a wrist slap — probation, home confinement and a "reasonable" fine. They're hoping the favorable letters submitted mostly by a cross-section of political and business elites will boost Madigan's prospects for leniency. But some stood out like sore thumbs because they were a bit off key. Here's one example: Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf vouched for Madigan's "lifetime commitment to improving the lives of all Illinoisans," specifically citing Madigan's key role in arranging for the construction of a new White Sox stadium that prevented the team's move to Florida. Reinsdorf praised Madigan for "saving the White Sox." But from whom? Well, from Reinsdorf, who threatened to move the Sox unless taxpayers helped pay for a new stadium. Reinsdorf now is asking the state to help him build a new Sox stadium because he no longer likes the current one. Another letter came from former U.S. Rep. William Lipinski, a longtime political ally. Lipinski described Madigan as "Mr. Integrity." Hello? Anybody home? Madigan was convicted on corruption charges. In this context, the "Mr. Integrity" appellation seems a bit of a stretch. Former Republican Gov. Jim Edgar urged leniency for Madigan, noting that he "always kept his word" when they worked on legislative proposals. Legislative leaders like Madigan must keep their word when they make commitments because trust is the glue that holds deals together. A leader without credibility — like former Gov. Rod Blagojevich — won't be an effective leader for long. Others suggested Madigan's age of 83 means he's too old for prison. Madigan is a supersenior, but he was no spring chicken when he and his co-conspirators embarked on their years-long bribery conspiracy. Further, Madigan's advanced age was no impediment to his four-decade tenure as speaker of the Illinois House. Madigan would still hold that post if fellow Democrats hadn't forced him into a 2021 retirement that was followed by indictment and conviction. Madigan is a devoted husband and father. He's helped hundreds of constituents over the years, something that goes along with an elected official's job. Madigan's daughter, former attorney general Lisa Madigan, noted that her dad performs household duties and takes good care of his ailing wife. A couple who run Madigan's favorite Italian restaurant noted he is friendly, helpful to his employees and gracious to fellow customers. "He is always a gentleman," wrote restaurant owners Ilona and Luciano Silvestri of their longtime customer. Like many people, Madigan is many things, some good and some not. He was especially good at playing bloodsport politics in Chicago until he suddenly wasn't. In that context, being a gentleman doesn't count for much.
CBS News
5 days ago
- CBS News
Around 1,000 motorcyclists take part in Chicago Police Memorial Foundation Ride to Remember
Around 1,000 motorcyclists took to Chicago roads Sunday to remember police officers who went above and beyond the call of duty for Chicago. The 21st Annual Chicago Police Memorial Foundation's Area Four Ride to Remember took off from the United Center Sunday morning. The ride honored officers who were killed or catastrophically injured on the job. It ended at the Gold Star Families Memorial in Burnham Park, east of Soldier Field. There were ceremonies and tributes to the fallen and the loved ones they left behind. Chicago Police Supt. Larry Snelling spoke at the event at the memorial, as did Chicago Police Memorial Foundation Executive Director Phil Cline — himself a former police superintendent. All proceeds from the Ride to Remember are donated to the Chicago Police Memorial Foundation.
