Cop: "You're Recording Me? I Will Pull My Gun On You."

[aitm]

I swear it is almost like most people here can't even 'imagine' any cop situtaion without a gun EVEN THOUGH they are not the part of that gun culture. How fucked up is that?

The disconnect is those of us who live here don't see the problem you see. It appears that all you ever hear about is da bad cops fuckin wit the poo folks and gunning them down in the street. Those of us who live here see those and the hundreds of events that are never "recorded", like saving peoples lives in car accidents or running into a burning house, or stopping to play basketball with some kids cause it creates good relationships, the vast majority of cops are good people.

You have the issue, most of us don't.

[widdershins]

hey hey hey... I'm in agreement with you on this topic, but no need to call someone a dipshit.

We have a long-standing dislike for each other...but for YOU, I was out of line and I apologize.  It will not happen again.

[Nonsensei]

As far as I am concerned the cop did exactly what I want him to do. He is patrolling and some guy supposedly hooking up his own boat, or is it his, suddenly stops and gets all wiggy and starts to record me. Yeah, that shit ain't right. Innocent people don't stop what they are doing just because a squad car drives down the street. I mean, do you? When you see a squad car do you stop what you are doing and start recording in case...I don't know, why would you? Unless, perhaps you're a fucking thief.

Why would a thief record what would surely be evidence against themselves if they were actually stealing something? I'm sorry but your whole thing here with the recording for protection from the police only makes sense if the person recording actually ISNT doing anything wrong, in which case the officer had no reason to confront him in the first place!

I don't want cops deciding, based on nothing more than their own personal feelings, whether or not a legal activity warrants investigation. Why? Because some cops personally feel that people with darker skin are "suspicious" and require investigation. Not every police officer has personal judgment worthy of their position. I don't want to open up the field to FUCKING IDIOTS harassing people with their badges when there is no legal standing or purpose in doing so.

[widdershins]

I think that what some are failing to understand while accusing our "gun culture" of being a problem with cops is that, yes, it IS a "gun culture", which means ANYONE could be armed.  I saw in the news recently a mom who might be charged because her child had enough access to her gun to shoot her.  A few months ago, a grandma shot by a toddler because auntie didn't remember that she had a gun in pouch on the back of the seat before giving them a ride.  Also this week, a kid arrested for taking a loaded gun to school.  If kids can get guns this easy it's really not that hard for bad guys.  Cops here pull guns, not because the "gun culture" is a problem with the cops, but because the gun culture is a problem FOR the cops.  Anyone could be armed.

And the people here who don't see that are engaging in wild speculation and revisionist versions of the video.  I've read, "The guy was clearly unarmed".  Well, no, that isn't "clear" because you can't see him.  I read, "He emptied his pockets".  Well, probably, but you never see his pockets, you don't know them to be empty.  And I've read, "Of course he'd get agitated if the cop pulls a gun on him", but he was agitated AND THEN the cop pulled the gun.  And I've ready, "How is it suspicious behavior to film a cop?".  It's not when something's happening.  But if you're just following a cop around with your camera, it makes the cop want to know what the hell is up.  You don't get to pretend that human nature does not come into play here.  If YOU would want to know why someone was following YOU around with a camera, you must assume that most other people, regardless whether they wear a uniform or civilian clothes, would also want to know.  And cops are not emotionless cyborgs, much as we all like to pretend they should react perfectly in every situation without emotional investment.  Honestly, it might have irritated the cop that he was being filmed while he was just doing his job the same way it would irritate anyone doing any job to be filmed by someone who didn't like their position.  A logger, for example, being followed around by an environmentalist would likely get irritated.  The difference is the cop has the authority, it is actually part of his job description, to stop and find out what the hell is going on.  And, yes, it is "suspicious" to have someone following you around with a camera by reasonable definition.  The officer has the authority to make the call to check that out.

He never raised his voice.  He never pointed the gun.  He only drew the gun after he asked the man to take his hands out of his pockets and the man verbally (we cannot see what he physically did) refused.  He was clearly irritated with the man in the end there, but what cop wouldn't be?  He didn't do anything about it.  Frankly, he could have arrested the man.  Resisting arrest, disturbing the peace, failure to comply with a lawful order...there is no end to the shit a cop can make up to arrest you for which translates to "I really just don't like you".  And this shit happens all the time with REAL bad police officers.  This officer did nothing but make sure that he was in control of the situation at all times because they are trained that if you are not in control you die, and that is, unfortunately, a reality.

[widdershins]

Why would a thief record what would surely be evidence against themselves if they were actually stealing something? I'm sorry but your whole thing here with the recording for protection from the police only makes sense if the person recording actually ISNT doing anything wrong, in which case the officer had no reason to confront him in the first place!

I don't want cops deciding, based on nothing more than their own personal feelings, whether or not a legal activity warrants investigation. Why? Because some cops personally feel that people with darker skin are "suspicious" and require investigation. Not every police officer has personal judgment worthy of their position. I don't want to open up the field to FUCKING IDIOTS harassing people with their badges when there is no legal standing or purpose in doing so.

I'm sorry, but that is basically their job description.  Every day every cop out there decides, often based on nothing more than their own personal feelings, whether or not a legal activity warrants investigation.  That is the very nature of the job and it is IMPOSSIBLE to do the job without doing that.  If a man looks at a cop, looks surprised and quickly turns his head away and puts up his hood, those are all legal activities, and all clear signs that the cop should talk to that man.  And that's just an obvious example.  I know for a fact that they get training to spot body language and signs of lying, clues that something may be wrong.  None of those things are 100% accurate, but they're a pretty damned good indication.  Tons of crime is prevented each year because police stop "suspicious" people.  If you take away the ability of the police force to investigate suspicious activity based on their own judgement then you essentially make patrols useless.  You'd be left with nothing but a SWAT team whose job it was to respond to crime, not to prevent it.

[Nonsensei]

I'm sorry, but that is basically their job description.  Every day every cop out there decides, often based on nothing more than their own personal feelings, whether or not a legal activity warrants investigation.  That is the very nature of the job and it is IMPOSSIBLE to do the job without doing that.  If a man looks at a cop, looks surprised and quickly turns his head away and puts up his hood, those are all legal activities, and all clear signs that the cop should talk to that man.  And that's just an obvious example.  I know for a fact that they get training to spot body language and signs of lying, clues that something may be wrong.  None of those things are 100% accurate, but they're a pretty damned good indication.  Tons of crime is prevented each year because police stop "suspicious" people.  If you take away the ability of the police force to investigate suspicious activity based on their own judgement then you essentially make patrols useless.  You'd be left with nothing but a SWAT team whose job it was to respond to crime, not to prevent it.

For an argument like this I am going to do something I rarely do: demand numbers. You say tons of crimes are prevented this way. Are there any statistics to support your assertion or are you saying this merely because it makes sense in your mind?

How many crimes are prevented by cops defining probable cause as whatever they damn well please?
How often are cops WRONG about this sort of thing?
How often do cops spark a situation that otherwise would not have existed if not for their intervention based on their personal opinion of the way a suspect looks or acts?

I always get super suspicious when people start telling me that anything at all prevents "tons" of crime. Our police officers are not all that fucking wonderful at actually preventing crime. Out criminal justice system is, well, desined to mete out JUSTICE. As in legal retribution for crimes committed. Cops cant be everywhere. In fact cops are almost nowhere in relation to all the places people are. I find it difficult to accept that cops engaging in undefined profiling dont create just as many situations as they prevent, and the situations they do prevent are just a drop in the bucket to how many crimes are committed in aggregate.

Is that worth giving what amounts to (often) thinly trained, poorly screened regular people with guns even more authority to do whatever they please on the street? I say fuck no.

[aitm]

Why would a thief record what would surely be evidence against themselves if they were actually stealing something?

Again....does a squad car driving down your street cause you to stop doing whatever the hell you might be doing and start recording the approaching car? Does it? Really, please everyone raise your hand if you have ever stopped what you were doing to record a squad car driving around your street. C'mon, lets see those little piggies. Surely I must be wrong if this is so widespread that this is the first time I have seen it in my lifetime, I must life a sheltered life. I have had hundreds of squad cars though my neighborhoods and never once did it ever occur to me I should stop what I am doing and record him "just in case" he gets out and harasses me.

I don't want cops deciding, based on nothing more than their own personal feelings, whether or not a legal activity warrants investigation.

It called a "hunch" everybody has "hunches" including you. You trust yours. I trust theirs.

. I don't want to open up the field to FUCKING IDIOTS harassing people with their badges when there is no legal standing or purpose in doing so.

Again, a show of hands for all of you who have stopped what you were doing and started recording an approaching squad car, because I can tell you I sure as hell would find it suspicious and that under law, means he has legal standing to investigate.

[PickelledEggs]

Jesus.... This thread shows how much of a joke  and out of hand this anti-cop movement has become.

[PickelledEggs]

We have a long-standing dislike for each other...but for YOU, I was out of line and I apologize.  It will not happen again.

Thanks, dude. I appreciate it. We can have our disagreements, but throwing around insults will just make them even more irrational than they already are being.

[Baruch]

Jesus.... This thread shows how much of a joke  and out of hand this anti-cop movement has become.

All part of the bidirectional race war ... since perps are seen to be mostly of one color (White folk do nice banking crimes).

Shoe ... yes, would be nice if there were fewer guns, but basically that requires fewer Americans.  If the situation were different, and the cop had his gun, and the guy with the camera ... for argument's sake, had a shiv on him ... and I were the cop ... I would still draw my gun, based on subjective hunch that the guy is suspicious (and yes, with real people, this can involve how someone is dressed or how their skin color looks).  And if he didn't pull his hand out of his pocket when I told him to ... he wouldn't have a gun, just a shiv ... and the second he showed the shiv, but not before, I would take him down, without much concern for his survival ... because some people can still fight with multiple gunshot wounds.

[PickelledEggs]

Let's try to keep it as much on topic without bringing race in to this, Baruch. We don't need them more distracted and confused about a white man refusing to show the cop that he isn't hostile by taking his hand out of his pocket the first time the cop asks.

[Baruch]

Well yeah, if you want to keep it all White on White.  But Shoe was speaking about the whole USA ... and we have a race problem, even if these two apes didn't.

[PickelledEggs]

Yeah. A lot of times, in an attempt to regain control of the argument, the person losing the argument will throw in the kitchen sink and make the argument about a similar, but different topic.

[Nonsensei]

Again....does a squad car driving down your street cause you to stop doing whatever the hell you might be doing and start recording the approaching car? Does it? Really, please everyone raise your hand if you have ever stopped what you were doing to record a squad car driving around your street. C'mon, lets see those little piggies. Surely I must be wrong if this is so widespread that this is the first time I have seen it in my lifetime, I must life a sheltered life. I have had hundreds of squad cars though my neighborhoods and never once did it ever occur to me I should stop what I am doing and record him "just in case" he gets out and harasses me.

It called a "hunch" everybody has "hunches" including you. You trust yours. I trust theirs.

Again, a show of hands for all of you who have stopped what you were doing and started recording an approaching squad car, because I can tell you I sure as hell would find it suspicious and that under law, means he has legal standing to investigate.

You really can't get over that can you? How about a show of hands of criminals in the middle of committing a crime who see a cop and immediately start RECORDING EVIDENCE TO BE USED AGAINST THEMSELVES AT TRIAL.

Are you serious here?

[PickelledEggs]

You really can't get over that can you? How about a show of hands of criminals in the middle of committing a crime who see a cop and immediately start RECORDING EVIDENCE TO BE USED AGAINST THEMSELVES AT TRIAL.

Are you serious here?

So why would he start recording if the cop was aallll the way down the street and he hasn't even got out of his patrol vehicle yet? That would seem overly suspicious to me if I was a cop. Why record like something is going to go down if the cop isn't even there yet? Even if the boat guy wasn't doing anything wrong.... (In the video, the cop eventually realizes that and leaves) it gives the impression that you think you're going to be suspected of something.