# There's always one...harassing cops in the name of "rights".



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

I'm for individual rights as anyone out there, but I think the moron making this video should be slapped for being stupid. People like this irritate me b/c they set this stuff up just for the sole purpose of harassing cops trying to do their jobs, and it is complete nonsense!


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

hope he has an accident and the LEO's will be unable to help him as the LEO's won't have 3 forms of ID to convince him they really Are LEOs.
He's also the type who would not help another citizen in distress.


----------



## MoMan (Dec 27, 2010)

What a douche-nozzle!
This type of behavior is not going to help anyone's opinion of us! 
I fully support our Constitution, but I also do not think it gives us a right to be an idiot!! This cop had a lot of restraint, and handled this about as well as he could have! I'm not saying the guys should have been arrested!! The cop was just doing his job, answering concerns of the citizens of his town!

These guys don't get it!!

MO


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Obviously, this was a contest between two competent people to see if either could be baited into overstepping their bounds. The policeman apparently believed that his superiors would not be pleased with a scene over arresting someone for violating a city code that they really did not want to have tested against the Constitution. It was a no-win for the policeman, so he decided to wait them out, and at least establish that they didn't have the authority to make him tuck tail and walk away.

I honestly don't know how I feel about this. I'm not that fond of lawyers seeking to create test cases for their favorite cause, but, on the other hand, I approve of the cause. Interesting.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

The video'er makes the comment "how do I know you're a policeman during this day n age of buullshit going on" or something to that affect.

Same goes for the police officer, how the heck is he supposed to react to someone pointing a supposed video camera in his face? 

I would detain the person , confiscate the supposed camera pointing in my (face) or direction , until I can ascertain that is actually a camera , and not a threat to me or others in my direction.

Once I have determined that the device is indeed just a camera and not a threat I would release it back to the owner


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Link

Deadly-Decoys


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

These types of calls are becoming more and more common to many LE agencies across this country. Sad, but true. Some show up on scenes and begin heckling officers which causes un-needed distraction... all in the name of exercising their rights. 

Bunch of idiots who need to get jobs... and lives.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

TAPnRACK said:


> These types of calls are becoming more and more common to many LE agencies across this country. Sad, but true. Some show up on scenes and begin heckling officers which causes un-needed distraction... all in the name of exercising their rights.
> 
> *Bunch of idiots who need to get jobs... and lives*.


I couldn't agree more! There are some cases where rights have been violated by an LEO; however, that does not justify setting up traps to instigate and provoke a situation. Senseless and dangerous.


----------



## shootbrownelk (May 18, 2014)

They show about as much sense as the neck-beards that go to Starbucks with AR's & AK's slung on their shoulders...just exercising their rights....in a ridiculous fashion, giving all gun owners a black eye.
What sense does it make to taunt a cop. That officer showed more restraint than I could come up with.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

Most LEOs are professionals and exercise more restraint than I think shey should at times, but my guess is (and correct me if I'm wrong LEOs) that they are more aware of the authority they carry than anyone, and beating peole up or taking life just isn't what they want to do to prove it.


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

Their game is to bait officers, knowing they can insult or harass.. knowing full well it isn't unlawful and officers need to show more restraint than them due to their position of authority. But everyone has a breaking point... they know this and find it amusing to attempt to find it. I've been yelled at and cursed at and i've had to bite my tongue to remain a professional... not always easy, lol. I just consider the source.

The ones i've encountered usuall don't have jobs, they ride bikes or take busses for transportation... but have a ton of money invested in video & editing equipment. I assume at some point they blame someone else (LE/Gov) for their position/lack of success in life.

To some, it gives them an identity... a chance to be part of a "movement" or join a community of other like-minded individuals. These videos are trophies to them... and proof they are worthy to be counted in whatever group they seek acceptance from.

Kinda sad.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

shootbrownelk said:


> They show about as much sense as the neck-beards that go to Starbucks with AR's & AK's slung on their shoulders...just exercising their rights....in a ridiculous fashion, giving all gun owners a black eye.
> What sense does it make to taunt a cop. That officer showed more restraint than I could come up with.


I agree...but...they _are_ in California, and California is used to radicals driving the agenda. So, if they are able to provoke a cop into arresting them for violating the city code, and they do get past the Ninth Court of Appeals with their Constitutional battle, and actually win it, it would be a nice victory against the type of laws California and other liberal states are cramming down everyone's throats in gun unfriendly locales. It would be ironic, since so much of the crap liberals have put into place has been done with the exact same methodology.

It _is_ totally unfair to the policeman, and personally, I don't think I could put up with it. But it does put pressure on city councils and state legislatures that thumb their nose at the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and I do approve of that aspect. If nothing else, it gives them a dose of their own medicine. The part of it that I don't agree with is that it is succumbing to the idea that "the end justifies the means," and I don't like the police being victimized by it.

It's all a matter of whether you judge it to be (a) stooping to the level of liberalism, or (b) "fighting fire with fire." That's the part that I can't make up my mind about.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

TAPnRACK said:


> These types of calls are becoming more and more common to many LE agencies across this country. Sad, but true. Some show up on scenes and begin heckling officers which causes un-needed distraction... all in the name of exercising their rights.
> 
> Bunch of idiots who need to get jobs... and lives.


Oh, [email protected] We agree again.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> I couldn't agree more! There are some cases where rights have been violated by an LEO; however, that does not justify setting up traps to instigate and provoke a situation. Senseless and dangerous.


I'm going to have to disagree with this. If you have a police department, or a few rogue officers, who have proven that they are above the law and act accordingly, I am all in favor of "outing" them, and hidden videos are a great tool with which to do this. Remember, it is us for whom they work and from where they derive their power and authority.

If you have bad police, only bad things will follow. Out them, get them fired, and sue them to the point that them and their families will be destitute. One of the extreme cases in my lifetime was the "Battle of Athens, Tennessee" in 1946.

Now for those who think I am anti-police, you are way off base. I am anti-oppressive government and governmental agencies which overstep their bounds at the expense of the People, be it at whatever level.

And as for this video and the civilians in it... Well I wouldn't do what they did. If I was selling ammo and an officer approached me, I would handle it on a case by case basis. I would not be an ass, but I would also not surrender my rights.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> I'm going to have to disagree with this. If you have a police department, or a few rogue officers, who have proven that they are above the law and act accordingly, I am all in favor of "outing" them, and hidden videos are a great tool with which to do this. Remember, it is us for whom they work and from where they derive their power and authority.
> 
> If you have bad police, only bad things will follow. Out them, get them fired, and sue them to the point that them and their families will be destitute. One of the extreme cases in my lifetime was the "Battle of Athens, Tennessee" in 1946.
> 
> ...


I don't think there is anything wrong with outing bad cops. I don't disagree with using cameras to film cops in the line of duty. What I disagree with is the blatant and obnoxious baiting with the clear intent to enrage someone, provoking them to anger. It is completely uncalled for and is not an agenda to out a bad cop. It is an agenda to incite a riot by intentionally antagonizing the cop. Like Tap said, there are limits even for trained professionals.

You don't have to do much to give bad cops room to hang themselves. They are generally looking for people to harass.


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

GCBHM said:


> Most LEOs are professionals and exercise more restraint than I think shey should at times, but my guess is (and correct me if I'm wrong LEOs) that they are more aware of the authority they carry than anyone, and beating peole up or taking life just isn't what they want to do to prove it.


Quite right... We are professionals, we do this profession for a reason, and it's not to go off on a power trip or abuse the authority given to us... at least for more than 99% of us.

Yes, there are bad apples in every bunch... sometimes it's a personality flaw or due to the stress of the job. I'm not making excusses for anyone, just stating the facts. We cringe when we hear or read about an officer that violated someones rights or abused their authority. It is such a small percentage of the whole group... but it casts it's shadow upon us all. We (the many) truely are judged by the actions of the few. I wish everyone could understand this and realize that by far, the majority of my LE brothers and sisters are honest, good men and women with integrity who have a moral compass and strive to be a professional while wading through human garbage most of the time... at least in my experience working in a low income urban community... others mileage may vary.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> I don't think there is anything wrong with outing bad cops. I don't disagree with using cameras to film cops in the line of duty. *What I disagree with is the blatant and obnoxious baiting with the clear intent to enrage someone, provoking them to anger.* It is completely uncalled for and is not an agenda to out a bad cop. It is an agenda to incite a riot by intentionally antagonizing the cop. Like Tap said, there are limits even for trained professionals.
> 
> You don't have to do much to give bad cops room to hang themselves. They are generally looking for people to harass.


I certainly agree with what you said that I bolded. Don't have a lot of use for those folks. Outing bad cops? Absolutely. Just trying to get a rise out of good cops and good people? Nope, can't go with that at all.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

TAPnRACK said:


> Quite right... We are professionals, we do this profession for a reason, and it's not to go off on a power trip or abuse the authority given to us... at least more than for 99% of us.
> 
> Yes, there are bad apples in every bunch... sometimes it's a personality flaw or due to the stress of the job. I'm not making excusses for anyone, just stating the facts. We cringe when we hear or read about an officer that violated someones rights or abused their authority. It is such a small percentage of the whole group... but it casts it's shadow upon us all. We (the many) truely are judged by the actions of the few. I wish everyone could understand this and realize that by far, the majority of my LE brothers and sisters are honest, good men and women with integrity who have a moral compass and strive to be a professional while wading through human garbage most of the time... at least in my experience working in a low income urban community... others mileage may vary.


I was told by a local police officer last year that some of our local police departments are recruiting people from up north for positions as LEO's down here. This officer was concerned that these people may not know or be in favor of what has been traditional in our region. Specifically, he was concerned about guns and civilians carrying them, open and concealed. I thought that was very informative.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> I was told by a local police officer last year that some of our local police departments are recruiting people from up north for positions as LEO's down here. This officer was concerned that these people may not know or be in favor of what has been traditional in our region. Specifically, he was concerned about guns and civilians carrying them, open and concealed. I thought that was very informative.


That sounds like a training issue as much as anything. That said, our island PD has a very large percentage of island-born men on it - and it shows in the mutual respect.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> I was told by a local police officer last year that some of our local police departments are recruiting people from up north for positions as LEO's down here. This officer was concerned that these people may not know or be in favor of what has been traditional in our region. Specifically, he was concerned about guns and civilians carrying them, open and concealed. I thought that was very informative.


That could be a real problem, even if training addresses the issue. There will be some who just do not agree with it, and when on patrol, patrol with that mindset. It could be a problem.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

GCBHM said:


> That could be a real problem, even if training addresses the issue. There will be some who just do not agree with it, and when on patrol, patrol with that mindset. It could be a problem.


If the training doesn't "stick" then it is STILL a training issue.... Just a different kind of issue, method rather than content.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

SailDesign said:


> That sounds like a training issue as much as anything. That said, our island PD has a very large percentage of island-born men on it - and it shows in the mutual respect.


Yeah, I don't know what it is or might be other than perhaps they don't have enough applicants for openings. I do imagine that if some fellow from New York city saw someone walking around with a sidearm on his hip down here he could be taken aback. Here it is quite normal (I didn't say quite common). The whole attitude about firearms is probably a bit different and foreign to people from up your ways. I have seen and experienced it myself. Had a somewhat intense discussion with a few people from Connecticut a few years back. This took place in South Carolina. Let's just say that they found my position a might different than theirs.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

SailDesign said:


> That sounds like a training issue as much as anything. That said, our island PD has a very large percentage of island-born men on it - and it shows in the mutual respect.


I was also told it was more of a training issue, I don't know why , but it seems that way


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

SouthernBoy said:


> Yeah, I don't know what it is or might be other than perhaps they don't have enough applicants for openings. I do imagine that if some fellow from New York city saw someone walking around with a sidearm on his hip down here he could be taken aback. Here it is quite normal (I didn't say quite common). The whole attitude about firearms is probably a bit different and foreign to people from up your ways. I have seen and experienced it myself. Had a somewhat intense discussion with a few people from Connecticut a few years back. This took place in South Carolina. Let's just say that they found my position a might different than theirs.


Connecticut n NYC , maybe New Jersey also , are kinda messed up ,lol.

NYSTATE minus NYC is all pro gun.

NY *state* catches a bad rap from the major city NY.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> If the training doesn't "stick" then it is STILL a training issue.... Just a different kind of issue, method rather than content.


There are just some things that can't be trained out.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

GCBHM said:


> There are just some things that can't be trained out.


Then discharge, if officers WON'T follow training. It ain't hard.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> Then discharge, if officers WON'T follow training. It ain't hard.


We had a saying when I was recruiting for the Navy. There are two types of people out here; can't dos and won't dos. There is an easy solution for both. You train the can't do and he will do what he knows to do. A won't do is someone who has been trained, but won't do what he knows to do, and you send him back to doing whatever he was good at before he came out here.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Two thoughts.....

1. Could it be that the person(s) selling ammunition expected to have to deal with law enforcement and video taped the encounters.

2. If this person(s) was selling pencils would there have been any calls to law enforcement by "concerned citizens.....


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Cait43 said:


> Two thoughts.....
> 
> 1. Could it be that the person(s) selling ammunition expected to have to deal with law enforcement and video taped the encounters.
> 
> 2. If this person(s) was selling pencils would there have been any calls to law enforcement by "concerned citizens.....


If you should decide to sell ammo on a traffic island (which it appeared to me they did), you can expect someone to place a call to the police. If you should decide to sell ammo on a public sidewalk, again, you should fully expect someone to call the police.

Not too far from where I live, a guy sells ammo out of his garage. Usually, it's on weekends / holidays, and he has a good-sized sign at the end of his driveway advertising such. There's no way that you can pass by his house w/o seeing that sign. Beings that he is on private property, he's fully entitled to do so. But.....I'd bet $5.00 that more than just a few people have called our local PD about it.

In answer to your question, I'd likely go with door #1. :watching:


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

Cait43 said:


> Two thoughts.....
> 
> 1. Could it be that the person(s) selling ammunition expected to have to deal with law enforcement and video taped the encounters.
> 
> 2. If this person(s) was selling pencils would there have been any calls to law enforcement by "concerned citizens.....


Well, judging by the tone in the guy's voice and his demeanor from the onset, I would say he not only expected to have an encounter with the police, he intended to so that he could get it on video. First clue.

Second clue, his response to the officer's question about why he was selling ammunition on the street. "B/c it's my right". Who does that? Most people sell "X, Y, Z" to make money, not b/c it's "their right". The guy was combative and obnoxious for absolutely no reason.

Third clue, the guy in the video makes it a point to identify the officer from a previous run-in. Even the sub-title of the video has the officer's name in it. So my guess is the guy in the video is a jackass who intentionally set this up, as he has other situations, expressly to instigate an encounter with a cop so that he could intentionally work the responding officer up to get it all on video. There is absolutely no cause for it.

Now, if the cop had shown up demanding the guy pack up and leave without any investigation, conversation, etc., and the person in the video was the one exercising restraint (as the officer in this video did) while the officer was behaving irrationally, abusively and obnoxiously, I think it would be clear that it was a case of the person's rights being violated which needed to be captured on video. That isn't the case here in this video.

Note some of the comments below. Several people said that the guy didn't have to be so rude, and he didn't have to be, he wanted to be. He set it up with the purpose of getting it on video. The only thing is the officer didn't take the bait. He exercised restraint and kept his cool under the senseless pressure of some baby pitching a fit for no other reason than to get it all on video.


----------

