WATCH: Citizen Blows Up on Cops After Officer Threatens to Kill Him for Filming

a reply to: JBurns

Didn't seem like "harassment" to me. It was clear in the video, he was legally recording a traffic stop, as a citizen.
The cop confronted HIM. To top it off, he pointed his loaded gun at him, all for recording.

As to your second point, this was not "rhetoric"
This was a real, filmed situation where a cop pulled a gun on a law abiding citizen, for nothing more than filming him.

I do agree with your sentiments regarding the mistreatment of police in this country at the moment.
When I see that, I'll call it out.
This was certainly not that.

a reply to: notsure1

The cop was a jerk. No doubt. But the cameraman exacerbates the situation from the first moment by raising his voice to the cop and calling him "tyrant."

Does the cop have justification for unholstering his weapon? Not really. But the cop has no idea how to take control of the situation so he reaches for the only thing that he thinks will put him back into control; his weapon. When backup shows up, the backup immediately goes into alarm mode and reaches for his weapon as well. Then backup realizes..."wait a minute, there's no threat here." and reholsters and assumes a flanking position.

Absolutely ridiculous that a cop feels so "out of control" of a situation due to a camera that he reaches for his piece. But it's equally ridiculous that the cameraman would push the situation further.

a reply to: kelbtalfenek
What you witnessed was a man who refused to cower in the face of death, by a death dealer. That is merely what having balls looks like while Citing case law and statutes.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Ok Iam invested now.
I wanna know how this ends.

thanks.

a reply to: grey580

YIKES.

a reply to: kelbtalfenek

"The cop has no idea how to take control of the situation and the only way he thinks he can get control is by reaching for his weapon."

I agree that's what it looks like. If it's the case, it's totally frightening!

I think that sentence of yours well verbalizes what a lot of people have a problem with. Not that people hate cops these days, but it SEEMS like more and more of them are using their guns as a way to get control of a situation, when going to the weapon is completely unjustified.

But the police will say "I feared for my life" and we cannot debunk that. There's no way to prove that false. Same with "It looked like a weapon." No way to disprove that. And JBurns, I understand that lots of guns can be made to look like household or regular items, but as another poster said, if you're going to use that, then cops and the public better get used to them walking around with their guns drawn 24/7.

JBurns, I'm interested in your opinion on how this was handled. To me, the officer had zero reason to continue interacting with the guy after he asked him what he was doing and he got an answer. Whether or not the guy was over the top (he was) and using his outside voice.

Why did he ask him in the first place what he was doing? Seems it was pretty obvious what he was doing, since the cop verbally expresses his suspicion that he's filming. Once it was confirmed, why didn't he let it go?

I think the cop didn't like being filmed and later used the "I thought it might be a weapon" excuse because he knows he went too far.

Either that or he is a bit of a tyrant.

Can we just be honest about it? I know cops face danger constantly. I thank them for that. I also think they need to have the emotional even-ness to, say, "ok, you're filming" and carry on once he's determined there is no threat. And I think he DID realize there was no immediate threat.

a reply to: notsure1
Ehhh...I'm guessing the guy with the camera was white?

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: notsure1

The cop was a jerk. No doubt. But the cameraman exacerbates the situation from the first moment by raising his voice to the cop and calling him "tyrant."

Does the cop have justification for unholstering his weapon? Not really. But the cop has no idea how to take control of the situation so he reaches for the only thing that he thinks will put him back into control; his weapon. When backup shows up, the backup immediately goes into alarm mode and reaches for his weapon as well. Then backup realizes..."wait a minute, there's no threat here." and reholsters and assumes a flanking position.

Absolutely ridiculous that a cop feels so "out of control" of a situation due to a camera that he reaches for his piece. But it's equally ridiculous that the cameraman would push the situation further.

Watch it again the guy does not raise his voice or become an ass hole until the cops grabs his weapon..

a reply to: JBurns

But I'd like to point out the officer never "aims" his weapon at the cameraman

Looks pointed at him to me????


As for the rest of your post...

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: notsure1

Ok lemme be the bad guy and say the obvious, the dude sounds like he is of the Caucasian Persuasion..but hey if he can ball down cops like that and walked away unscathed.. Wow!!

you would be surprised what you can get away with with the right "tone" and while being legally right or at least have moral high ground. If you assert a position of dominance (backed up legally) in forceful tone, while being in the legal right of way, they you can get these people to back down fairly often. The problem is that many people tend to drop to the lowest common denominator and start calling names, which is a big no-no and will usually backfire even when all other things are in the right.

These people should work in teams or they need an automated rifle platform that can be moved pan/tilt and link the video from the scope to the person filming. If a cop draws a weapon warn them that this will be the last thing they do, "I promise" and tell them they have a 300 win mag zero'd on their ear from 50-60 yards out. If he raises his weapon further, then that is an obvious thread and the videographer can drop him with a click of a button on his phone. All the tech is out there and can be put together for under $500 (minus gun).
What would happen if a civilian raised a gun on an officer b/c he didn't want to be recorded by the officers body cam? The cop might be held hostage (as this guy was) but he would probably be dropped by a fellow officer sniper in short order w/o any warning. I say all is fair when the script is flipped and an automated targeting system can be made to connect to a tablet, smart phone, (even google glasses!) for those people who have to work alone. On top of that there could be numerous other audio and video recordings to back up everything that happened. A nice shot through the ear to remove that brain that wasn't being used anyway.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

If the officer would've trained his weapon on the cameraman, made verbal threats of violence or detained/arrested the cameraman then I'd agree with the general sentiment I've seen here. I'm not saying the officer's actions (assuming a defensive posture) were necessary or even appropriate. But it certainly does not rise to the level this thread claims, nor should it result it criminal sanctions/loss of job IMHO. A reprimand sounds reasonable though

The problem with videos is that it doesn't show context, only raw events during the time span of the video. This guy was clearly there looking to pick a fight, and it all goes back to those "unknown/unknowable" circumstances. What exactly did this guy do to attract the officer's attention in the first place? Was he truly just a bystander filming the stop, or was he actively inserting himself into police business to provoke a reaction?

One is the lawful exercise of your rights, the other is a nuisance at best (and possibly a crime depending on his jurisdiction)

originally posted by: Gothmog

The first thing he says is "why are you filming "

That right there should end the police officer's career and give him 4-5 years in hard time.
No doubt , no exception
By his own admission , he knew what the person was holding , no matter what was claimed afterwards.
A lot of times I roll with the police
Not in this case

I don't know about jail time, but he should lose his badge immediately.

a reply to: JBurns

If the officer would've trained his weapon on the cameraman, made verbal threats of violence or detained/arrested the cameraman then I'd agree with the general sentiment I've seen here

2 out of 3 aint bad. So him not arresting the guy for filming makes all that other shi ok?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gothmog

The first thing he says is "why are you filming "

That right there should end the police officer's career and give him 4-5 years in hard time.
No doubt , no exception
By his own admission , he knew what the person was holding , no matter what was claimed afterwards.
A lot of times I roll with the police
Not in this case

I don't know about jail time, but he should lose his badge immediately.

1) Terroristic threats
2) Death threats
3) Assault with a deadly weapon
Yep , hard time in the pen.

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: kelbtalfenek
a reply to: notsure1

The cop was a jerk. No doubt. But the cameraman exacerbates the situation from the first moment by raising his voice to the cop and calling him "tyrant."

Does the cop have justification for unholstering his weapon? Not really. But the cop has no idea how to take control of the situation so he reaches for the only thing that he thinks will put him back into control; his weapon. When backup shows up, the backup immediately goes into alarm mode and reaches for his weapon as well. Then backup realizes..."wait a minute, there's no threat here." and reholsters and assumes a flanking position.

Absolutely ridiculous that a cop feels so "out of control" of a situation due to a camera that he reaches for his piece. But it's equally ridiculous that the cameraman would push the situation further.

Watch it again the guy does not raise his voice or become an ass hole until the cops grabs his weapon..

The cop goes to cover his weapon...that's the cops "control" point. That's how this cop believes he acquires his legitimacy and power and authority. If the camera operator hadn't shouted, it is MY opinion that the weapon would have not been drawn.

The power of calmness is something to behold when it's used correctly. It defuses situations very rapidly. A raised voice does just the opposite.

I stand by my initial assessment. If we disagree about the particulars, then we disagree.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Fair Points to consider .

The cameraman is scum, he had no reason to film the cop but had to prove his rights. Just because you have the right to film someone doesn't mean you should if asked not to, sure keep the camera there and walk away but stop bothering the police who are in a stressful job.

I like the fact he thought he was jack sh1t with his cameras but dropped his guts when the cop unholstered and only got hobby again once the other police arrived giving it his tyrant talk.

Probably a fat coward who gets off on taunting cops. I'm seeing comic book guy off the Simpsons!

Hope the cop walks free.

a reply to: Forensick

I thoughts rights were really important to you guys, like the 2nd for example, are some rights more important than others? Should we just abolish the ones we don't agree with?

I agree the cameraman was a dick, so was the cop though,....

The guy was clearly out to antagonise the cop, and let's face it, that thing he was saying is a go pro could easily have been confused with a weapon, there's a lot of funky looking guns out there.

Yes, the cop knew he was filming, but the device he thought was a gun obviously wasn't the equipment that made that video, so yeah, the cop was taking precautions.

To be honest, if someone was screeching like that at me in the street, gun or no gun, I would shove the camera up his arse and make him squeal for his mother.

There are a lot of police out there (in a most countries) that don't deserve to be on the street, but there is absolutely no need for anyone to go out and pick an argument with them just to make a point.

Even the best of the police would have a hard time keeping calm with someone acting like a prick the way this guy was.

a reply to: woogleuk

Your actually making me rethink my position on this. If he was coming across as confrontational I could see how the officer er felt threatened. Because there is one thing we couldn't see and that's his body language. The cop could have felt he was going to pull a gun and video his death. I'm still leaning to he overreacted but I'm at least willing to admit the officer could have felt this situation was a threat.

We do have nut cases that make it there lifes priority to attack police officers. In the past police were not targeted but times have changed.