Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 08:40pm PT
|
Hmmm Farrakhan is back? That guy almost certainly had a lot to do with the murder of Malcolm X.
Malcolm was becoming too moderate and devoutly Muslim.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 08:44pm PT
|
The video is of the conjunction of two idiots.
Well, more of an eclipse.
No need to bring Calypso Louie into it.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 08:54pm PT
|
An armed thug would have robbed you.
This cop was suspicious of the odd behavior he observed.
Taunting police is a dangerous hobby.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 09:24pm PT
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 08:46pm PT
Farracack needs a 338 laPua hole right through his bean. Why hes still sucking wind is a mystery and a shame.
The words of a disturbed, disgusting racist. You need to be locked up.
TGT merely channels Limbaugh, Ron channels James Earl Ray.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 09:27pm PT
|
Brennan...Calling Reilly an English Pigdog...? You trying to freeze the thread...?
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 09:30pm PT
|
This cop was suspicious of the odd behavior he observed.
So, in answer to the clear question, "Do you suspect me of any crime?" the negative answer is the context in which it's justified to draw and point the gun? What "odd behavior" was there to observe that even REMOTELY justifies the cop to come onto the guy's property with gun pointed at him?
Look, if things have escalated in the mind of a cop to the point that he/she has the gun out, particularly pointed, particularly on private property, there had better be clear-cut and defensible probable cause and virtual certainty of criminal charges filed!
In the absence of probable cause, that cop has no more right to point a gun at a citizen on that citizen's property than you or I do. That cop has exactly zero more authority on that citizen's property than you or I do, and pulling a gun on somebody outside the context of demonstrable probable cause is outrageous and itself dangerous to the officer! Citizens have the right to defend themselves on their own property, even against thug cops that are not themselves abiding by the law.
Taunting police is a dangerous hobby.
In a free society it shouldn't be. "Taunting," depending upon what you mean by that term, in itself is not a crime, and only as we've swept into full-blown PC mode has this "great" nation started to believe that "name calling" is not just crass but "criminal."
The cops must abide by at least the same legal standards that we do. They have ZERO authority to impose their will (or their "reaction" to being "taunted") outside of the context of probable cause, which is not evident in this video.
When an everyday citizen cannot have his hands in his pockets on his own property, lest he be ordered to show them... at gunpoint... by a cop that by his own admission has no probable cause, we have fully embarked upon a police state. And the fact that some seem okay with it is deeply troubling!
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 09:44pm PT
|
MB,
The cop never pointed the gun at anyone.
The guy was clearly agitated when questioned and seemed over stimulated IMO.
The cop should not have unholstered his weapon unless he believed there was a probable threat. I think he believed there was.
The guy filming was a real dork.
The attitude of the individual questioned was confrontational.
If I had been approached by this cop I doubt there would have been any problem at all.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2015 - 09:48pm PT
|
RJ, he is 1/4 correct - I can go from a brogue to Hyde Park tout de suite.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 02:42am PT
|
The cop never pointed the gun at anyone.
False. At one point the gun is up, pointed at the guy's person (at least crotch height point of aim), and for several seconds the gun is NOT pointed straight down but is instead "trained" on the lower portion of the person.
Any normal person on the "receiving end" of the gun as it appears in that picture is going to correctly state: "The cop pointed his gun at me."
The guy was clearly agitated when questioned and seemed over stimulated IMO.
You can have whatever opinions you want about the "state" of the guy. In FACT, being "agitated" is not a crime, nor is it probable cause that any crime has been or will be committed. The cop has his gun out from the first seconds of his exit from the vehicle, and he approaches and even stalks the guy from that moment onward.
The cop should not have unholstered his weapon unless he believed there was a probable threat. I think he believed there was.
Not one iota of such a threat is in evidence, so you beg the question to assume that the cop, being a cop and all, MUST have perceived a threat BECAUSE his gun was out.
That idea of imminent threat requiring possible use of deadly force in RESPONSE to such threat is patently ridiculous on the face of it for (at least) these reasons:
1) The cop has his gun out immediately and APPROACHES and even stalks the guy. If he was in such supposed "danger," he should have called for backup and tried to talk the "perp" down from a safe distance. NO reason to risk an imminent threat from the second he exits his vehicle. Standard practice is to NOT take on an armed (or presumed armed) perp alone if it is possible to withdraw enough to await backup, while keeping the perp from harming anybody while awaiting backup. This cop ACTS for all the world like he KNEW he was in no actual danger. He swaggers. He stalks. He keeps honing in, gun drawn from the first seconds of the encounter. His gun is his authority, and he brandishes both from the start.
2) The only reason to approach and even stalk the guy would be if the cop believed that he needed to get close enough to ultimately restrain and arrest the "perp," and that before getting backup because there was imminent danger of the "perp" harming somebody else. And the gun would be justifiably out at that point ONLY if the cop had reason to believe that the "perp" would violently resist arrest. But when confronted about the "reason" why the cop was accosting the "perp" in the first place, the cop admits that he has no probable cause, no suspicion of a crime, and no intention to even detain much less arrest the "perp." So, flat-out, the COP escalates the situation when he has ZERO intention to actually do anything that would require him to approach the guy AT ALL, much less with brandished deadly force.
3) The cop plays the "you film me, so I'll film you" game until he gets irritated by it, as he realizes that there's no "win" for him in the game. Then, with nothing in the way of "threat" having changed, he exits his vehicle to escalate the situation and draws his gun NOT to protect against some perceived threat but to impose power that his "tit for tat" filming could not afford him.
4) The continual approaching in a manner that can only be called "stalking" is outlandish in itself. The guy is backing up while telling the cop to back off and get off of his property, and the cop follows him, even threading his way between vehicles WHILE violating private property laws, and that without a warrant, without probable cause, and WITH the guy telling him to knock it off. But the cop just keeps coming! The sheer relentlessness with which the cop keeps coming clearly reveals that the cop KNEW that he was the only power-player in the situation. This was intimidation, plain and simple.
The guy filming was a real dork.
Whatever. Your opinion. But it doesn't matter, because being a "dork" is neither illegal nor probable cause. It is CERTAINLY NOT cause to have a loaded gun pointed at you by an individual who can claim authority to pull the trigger!
The attitude of the individual questioned was confrontational.
Again, your opinion. But, again, irrelevant.
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with being confrontational! Any legally-savvy cop in this day and age is aware that a citizen being "confrontational" with them is par for the course at this point. A citizen has EVERY right to be "confrontational" with a cop that has NO legal reason to be engaging with them in the first place.
Questions from the START of an encounter are always within a citizen's rights:
1) Are you detaining me?
2) What is the nature of your detention?
3) Am I suspected of any crime?
4) Do you claim ANY probable cause in ANY respect at this moment?
5) Why won't you leave my property IMMEDIATELY, when I have clearly told you to do so?
And so forth.
For you to state that the guy was "wrong" in some way for being "confrontational," and that his "confrontational attitude" JUSTIFIED that cop to stalk him with drawn gun is outrageous.
Cops have a HARD job, but that does NOT justify them for crossing legal boundaries ONE STEP, even if they "feel" that a guy IS being a "jerk" and has a "bad attitude." If you want to be a cop, then BUCK UP and realize that you're going to encounter a LOT of jerks with bad attitudes, and YOU are going to have to continually take the high ground and BE NICE until the moment when you are FORCED (with no other alternative) to use deadly force.
This cop had countless alternatives to the power-play he chose. He escalated when he could simply have driven away. He had NO apparent justification for a drawn gun in the first place, and he DOES point it at the person of the guy, even if only briefly. Being "confrontational" (while, ironically, BACKING AWAY from a STALKING cop) is NOT a reason to have a deadly weapon pointed at you, and that cop should KNOW it! The COP should have backed down rather than to escalate.
If I had been approached by this cop I doubt there would have been any problem at all.
Opinion. Conjecture. Speculation. Wishful thinking.
Whatever.
What is captured in THIS video does not provide a shred of justification for the cop's behavior. Keep everything the same, yet the cop keeps his gun holstered, and my sympathy goes ENTIRELY to the cop! But the second that gun comes out, the cop loses ALL sympathy from me! This is DEADLY force the cop is threatening, and that without ANY apparent legal justification. The cop had no business on the guy's property in the first place.
You or I pull a stunt like that, and we're going to JAIL. The cops don't get a pass for pulling such stunts either!
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 05:31am PT
|
This incident is little more than petty bickering. Yet, it gets mileage, while stories like the killing of Deven Guilford are ignored.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 07:47am PT
|
"There is a reason that the lowest rung of the High School ladder becomes a cop. They are losers who want power. Until we raise the bar for acceptance to being a cop and raise the pay, we will continue to get losers and power hungry guys..." -Carl
|
|
Gary
Social climber
From A Buick 6
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 07:51am PT
|
The cop pulled a gun because he let himself get scared as he was trying to intimidate a citizen.
The cop probably also was scared because of the proliferation of guns in this society. He'd be a fool to assume that someone was unarmed. Not much room for error there.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 08:01am PT
|
Like I said, and the picture posted shows, the officer never pointed his weapon at anyone.
This individual was confrontational, not and opinion.
"you guys have done enough to my family", "you don't touch me, you don't touch me, you don't touch me, you don't touch me"
The cop even asked him to "calm down"
I would like to have seen what the cop was seeing instead of just his actions.
Under the same circumstance, I would have waved the cop over and asked what he was doing. If he ignored me, I would have walked over to his car and asked. Calmly.
If the guy filming was acting erratically and would not comply with a simple request to show his hands, why wouldn't a trained officer perceive danger?
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 08:05am PT
|
As stated before is it illegal to stand in your front yard playing pocket pool while filming
gamma ray impacts in the cul-de-sac? That cop has issues.
|
|
pud
climber
Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 08:28am PT
|
It's also not illegal for the guy to be holding a firearm in his front yard, just stupid.
Why not calmly show you do not have a weapon and question the officer?
The guy states on his FB page that the cops have done this to him "a few dozen times over the last year".
There's more to this story.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 08:46am PT
|
There's more to this story.
Too bad Don McComas isn't providing details on his history with the cops.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 08:55am PT
|
The new Truth is Transparency ;D
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 08:57am PT
|
Thank goodness Ron's Boy Scout troop showed up!
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015 - 09:11am PT
|
Like almost all of these types of confrontations we have two people contributing to the situation.
The citizen acting belligerent. And the LEO not being professional.
Did the LEO really need to approach the guy in his front yard? No, it's likely he didn't like being filmed and decided to confront the guy. The LEO gave the guy about 1/2 second to comply before pulling out his gun. weak.
The citizen had an attitude and was demanding to the cop "don't touch me!". He's lucky it didn't escalate further. Being on film probably helped in that regard.
If you are a citizen smile and say good afternoon and film discreetly. If you are a LEO don't demand people comply with your orders when unnecessary and get a big chip on your shoulder when they don't respect your authoritie.
At the same time I'm kinda glad there are hot head citizens around like this especially when being filmed because it tests officers and exposes the bad ones. Power corrupts and some LEOS are susceptible to corruption. If everyone complied all the time these bad cops would just get more and more power drunk until they killed someone for doing nothing wrong.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!