Everything is ok - BANNED - Police, Camera, Action(Video)

Did he blatently break the law to make this video and make the officer look stupid? If so he is a bit of an idiot for provoking that situation. That said though it worked and the officer quite clearly did not know what he was talking about and then clearly threw he toys out the pram in the end. Documents for a pushbike? reallly? If you are going to pull people over then I would suggest being equipped with the knowledge to come back at someone. Its the officers job to deal with these situations and deal with it he did not do.

reply to post by pazcat


I'm surprised the law enforcement man stayed patient for so long. living in the USA, here in NJ, i can't imagine lasting half that time without the cyclist receiving pain (clubbed, limbs twisted about in aggressive holds, tazered) and being arrested. maybe the 'charges' would be dropped - after the cyclists day was well ruined, he spent some 8 hours in a holding cell, helmet-cam ($$$) broken and his bike in worse condition that night that it was that morning.

i don't advocate speaking to the police, at all.

Originally posted by ScorpioRising
That cyclist is an idiot.
I actually think the copper showed quite a lot of restraint! If it were me I would have prob smacked the guy.
It is NOT funny when people wind the police up that much and then get all upset because the person snapped. All he did was go to grab the camera! He could have just smacked him in his cocky chops.
Even the most placid and professional copper would struggle with some donkey like that Danny behaving like that.

oh ye...god forbid anybody actually stand up to the police and challenge their power

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by pazcat

 

The Officer is not the brightest bulb on the planet, but the guy making the video is a complete Ass. He' probably a hero to children raised by bad parents and adults with childish minds, but in reality he's just another jerk on a bicycle, making video's for attention.

yeah because he took his camera out with him for "attention"...he thought "i know...ill grab my camera...get some attention on the way to my destination".

another jerk on a bike? are all cyclists jerks then? or if he was a pedestrian would he be "another jerk on the streets" or if he was in a car would he be "another jerk in a car"

i think you being awkward for the sake of being awkward

I am an ex road-cyclist and racer. I will say that I support the cyclist's position on asking the questions but keep in mind that he did break the law. If he was to run a red light, he has done this. On hundreds of training rides - I and my fellow cyclists *never* ran red lights even at intersections where there was little to no traffic.

The law applies to all vehicles. A red light indicates stop, wait your turn. Without simple laws like this - we have no basis for tougher, more stringent laws.

I have heard of this bumper sticker on a car - never saw it but it makes sense:

- World peace begins with turn signals

reply to post by pazcat


I just love how the Officer was made a ass..lol

ive just watched most of this guys videos on y/t and he makes very valid points to the police.

reply to post by pazcat


Its people like you who make it hard on everybody else so you can have a little fun.. im all for rights and all that stuff. But If you did fail to stop at a light then did not show any kind of identification.even if you did stop. you could be some wanted sex offender, or some member to some terror group. or many of other things that need pulled off the street. this is actually one video im on the police side. kinda hope to see them backtrack the video and charge you. you can tell you just wanted to start # to get out of a ticket. just like a corp would abuse loopholes that would get them out of trouble when they are really busted. you are no different from them corporations.. .

Originally posted by St0mP121
reply to post by pazcat

 

Its people like you who make it hard on everybody else so you can have a little fun.. im all for rights and all that stuff. But If you did fail to stop at a light then did not show any kind of identification.even if you did stop. you could be some wanted sex offender, or some member to some terror group. or many of other things that need pulled off the street. this is actually one video im on the police side. kinda hope to see them backtrack the video and charge you. you can tell you just wanted to start # to get out of a ticket. just like a corp would abuse loopholes that would get them out of trouble when they are really busted. you are no different from them corporations.. .

Don't be such a judgemental fool and throw accusations around so quickly.
It's not me.
Pay attention.


Btw, did you just call me a sex offender and a terrorist?
Idiot.

The video was a very good laugh, mostly because both of them were playing in circles with words.

But to me, the biggest lesson to take out of this, is that this cop/victim situations don't need to be the "worst sin the world has ever seen".

People over-exaggerate what they feel, especially in the moment, and kudos for this guy for being transparent and taking away good lessons on it, and not just hate towards cops.

I salute this gentlemen for his stand and his words in the video.

reply to post by LargeFries


It's pretty much this situation. I don't know how the cops are in England, but here in America, you don't talk back to a cop. They don't give a crap if they're breaking the law or the amount of fancy words you throw at them. If you refuse to produce your ID and you get all smart alec with them, they'll beat you with a club and arrest you, simple as that. You think you can sue the cop for assault?

This is America. Good luck with that.

S&F at the pure win.

This is so lovely to go to sleep and wake up to.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Demanding that police can cite the law word for word is idiotic. There is endless amounts of laws and the language is like gibberish.

Whatever... that's their problem. If they want to create countless useless laws to keep everyone in line, well it's up to them to keep their own facts straight. I agree that "word for word" is indeed asking a bit much, but its only fair that he at least be able to provide the gist of it so the person getting arrested has enough information verify that particular law on his own.

reply to post by Silicis n Volvo


He wasn't standing up to him, he was acting like a jerk.

Originally posted by St0mP121
reply to post by pazcat

 

Its people like you who make it hard on everybody else so you can have a little fun.. im all for rights and all that stuff. But If you did fail to stop at a light then did not show any kind of identification.even if you did stop. you could be some wanted sex offender, or some member to some terror group. or many of other things that need pulled off the street. this is actually one video im on the police side. kinda hope to see them backtrack the video and charge you. you can tell you just wanted to start # to get out of a ticket. just like a corp would abuse loopholes that would get them out of trouble when they are really busted. you are no different from them corporations.. .

we dont know if he stopped for the light or not. what we do know is this,
-it is not a legal requiremnt to provide details unless a PC has seen, knows or under the suspicion that a criminal offence has been commited.
-Most people in uniform, not just police are under the illusion that wearing the uniform gives them some sort of authority or power.

There are not terrorists, pedophiles, murdurers, rapists, muggers etc everywhere as the media likes you to believe. Its just a scare tactic to keep up distracted, misinformed and afraid. It is due to this fear that many police officers abuse the power that is granted to them, as soon as an officer mentions arrest people gat scarred. The police do not make the law, they do not change the law they are simply there to enforce it.

If the road and intersection was empty than the officer should have left him, he wasn't endangering other road users or nothing. Those 5 mins wasted could have been used to catch some real criminals.

Oh and P.S i gurantee if he had tried to grab something of the police officer he would have probably been arrested for assulting a police officer, ironic no?

reply to post by pazcat


Thanks for posting this vid If only people were taught basic 'Law', the world would be such a better place..

But of course, that's not the plan, is it? :'(

Originally posted by St0mP121
reply to post by pazcat

 

Its people like you who make it hard on everybody else so you can have a little fun.. im all for rights and all that stuff. But If you did fail to stop at a light then did not show any kind of identification.even if you did stop. you could be some wanted sex offender, or some member to some terror group. or many of other things that need pulled off the street. this is actually one video im on the police side. kinda hope to see them backtrack the video and charge you. you can tell you just wanted to start # to get out of a ticket. just like a corp would abuse loopholes that would get them out of trouble when they are really busted. you are no different from them corporations.. .

Sir, you are missing the point entirely.

The 'police' have no right to detain you and hold you on a whim, regardless of the current practice. 'Runiing a red light' is no crime, and both participants in the video knew that...why do you think chase was not given?

I mean this in the friendliest way, but your premise that police should be able to detain random people who may or may not be criminal is part of the problem, and I find it rather sad.

"Those who trade liberty for security deserve neither" Ben Franklin

Originally posted by pazcat
Not sure if this has been posted before but it made me giggle.

Well played PC stout.

Rather enjoyed it, although I am actually reasonably certain that the Constable was correct in asserting that s.24 Police and Criminal Evidence Act empowers him to arrest the individual in this instance (i.e. where he refuses to identify himself in order that a ticket can be issued). The relevant provision is s.24(5)(e),(f) PACE 1984. In running a red light he is prima facie guilty of an offense under s.28 or s.29 Road Traffic Act 1988 (as amended by RTA 1991).

Remember, a ticket is merely an order to appear before a court so that you can defend your innocence and the state can try to prove your guilt. You can contest it in court, but it is unfortunately the discretion of the officer to give them. That is why we have a judicial system which acts as a check on the power of Police.

That being said, I'm pretty sure the guy would probably have just gotten off with a warning for running the red light (assuming he did) had he not challenged the authority of the constable. Again, on the spot, much is left to the discretion of the officer to issue or not. By and large, I don't really think it's worthwhile to risk the potential fine. Other people may feel otherwise inclined, but for something minor like a traffic violation, chances are that you're going to be ticketed if you question the constable. Obviously, for more serious offences I would keep schtum and not say a bloody word, but for something so minor.

Sadly the chap in the video probably was in the legal wrong in this case. A police officer is not allowed to simply demand you to produce identification on demand, but when he has witnessed or has reason to suspect you have committed an offence (as in this case) then he is probably well within his authority to do so. That being said, the obvious check against open and free discretion to do so is the fact that he would probably be fired if he was found to be writing frivolous tickets and abusing his authority.

Originally posted by servumlibertatem

Originally posted by St0mP121
reply to post by pazcat

 

Its people like you who make it hard on everybody else so you can have a little fun.. im all for rights and all that stuff. But If you did fail to stop at a light then did not show any kind of identification.even if you did stop. you could be some wanted sex offender, or some member to some terror group. or many of other things that need pulled off the street. this is actually one video im on the police side. kinda hope to see them backtrack the video and charge you. you can tell you just wanted to start # to get out of a ticket. just like a corp would abuse loopholes that would get them out of trouble when they are really busted. you are no different from them corporations.. .

Sir, you are missing the point entirely.

The 'police' have no right to detain you and hold you on a whim, regardless of the current practice. 'Runiing a red light' is no crime, and both participants in the video knew that...why do you think chase was not given?

I mean this in the friendliest way, but your premise that police should be able to detain random people who may or may not be criminal is part of the problem, and I find it rather sad.

"Those who trade liberty for security deserve neither" Ben Franklin

Do read my post below. Inconsiderate and dangerous cycling are specific road traffic offenses.

Unfortunately, actually finding out what the possible fines and penalties are is a HELL of a maze. I can see the objective in codifying the criminal law in England in that sense...

I certainly hope PC Stout went home that evening and brushed up on his 'arrest laws'. The fact that he faltered and seemed uncertain was his downfall. I'm not saying the cyclist was in the right, he was stopped for a reason, and IMO he was right to assert his knowledge of his rights, although perhaps with a little less smugness. He neither denied nor confirmed any wrongdoing (kinda like 'pleading the 5th' in a roundabout way). Had PC Stout been in the same position knowledgewise, instead just assuming that his position entitled him to unquestioned authority (which only leads to little wannabe dictators harassing the public because they think their badge gives them the authority to act like a pillock) and instead of losing his cool, he would have been able to assert his rightful authority to control the situation, either fine him, caution him or arrest him. In my mind that is BASIC policing, he should KNOW without a shadow of a doubt when he can and can't arrest someone. And if he's going to stop someone for a traffic violation, he needs to know those laws too. That said, even with the appalling smugness and equally appalling lack of policing, it did make I larf !

As for the other coppers messing about, well I think they have a really tough job and it's good to let off steam now and then or we end up with rigid robocops unyielding to any misdemeanor. Please let's keep them human, after all laughter is the best medicine. Anyway it's the old ladies taking on the thugs these days !! I am, and I'm sure many others are, guilty of taking the mick when we know the boss isn't watching.