CA cop draws gun on guy filming him

[chipbennett]

I'm guessing it would be to make sure your hand isn't on a gun in the pocket.
I didn't see the officer with his hand on a gun until the refusal to pull a hand out of a pocket.

What is the specific, reasonable, articulable suspicion that the man had a gun in his pocket? (Or, that the suspected gun in his pocket was unlawful?)

As for "orders from a police officer".... If he orders me to shoot someone, no I'm not. If he orders me to take my hand out of my pocket.

I'll ask the same question: if you think that a request to remove a hand from a pocket is reasonable, what other things are reasonable? If a police officer has no reason to bother you in the first place, why is ANY request - especially when issued as an implied command - reasonable?

If he wants to search my car, I will let him, but in a calm voice inform him I do not consent to a search.

If you let him merely because he "wanted" to, then you just consented. If he has probable cause, he doesn't need your consent, even if he asks for it. (Maybe that's what you mean?)

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[woowoo2]

Warning shot. Totally.

Along with the words.... "Dance Boy Dance!"

 

[actaeon277]

What is the specific, reasonable, articulable suspicion that the man had a gun in his pocket? (Or, that the suspected gun in his pocket was unlawful?)



I'll ask the same question: if you think that a request to remove a hand from a pocket is reasonable, what other things are reasonable? If a police officer has no reason to bother you in the first place, why is ANY request - especially when issued as an implied command - reasonable?



If you let him merely because he "wanted" to, then you just consented. If he has probable cause, he doesn't need your consent, even if he asks for it. (Maybe that's what you mean?)

Jeez chip. Normally I agree with what you're saying.
But what are you going to do? Officer says he's going to search your car, you disagree, and he goes to search your car, what are you going to do? SHOOT HIM?
"Officer, I do not consent to a search".
And that's what I've done on the side of I-80 for quite a while, while and officer tried to wear me down to get permission. He had no PC or RAS. He threatened to get a warrant. He threatened to get a drug dog. I held my ground and did not consent. And eventually I drove away, car not searched.
But I guess that isn't good enough for you. I guess I should have shot him.

 

[ATM]

If the officer chooses to initiate a conversation absent any reason to detain, he is on the same playing field as any other citizen who chooses to initiate conversation with another.

The badge and gun do not confer special conversational privileges or authority to just order others about on a whim.

Don't like it? Drive on.

 

[Alpo]

I guess I'm too old for this. Nothing better to do than video a patrol car slow-rolling through the neighborhood?

 

[chipbennett]

Jeez chip. Normally I agree with what you're saying.
But what are you going to do? Officer says he's going to search your car, you disagree, and he goes to search your car, what are you going to do? SHOOT HIM?
"Officer, I do not consent to a search".
And that's what I've done on the side of I-80 for quite a while, while and officer tried to wear me down to get permission. He had no PC or RAS. He threatened to get a warrant. He threatened to get a drug dog. I held my ground and did not consent. And eventually I drove away, car not searched.
But I guess that isn't good enough for you. I guess I should have shot him.

Nice straw man you've got there. I said or implied that... where, exactly?

You compared consenting to a vehicle search to consenting to removing a hand from a pocket. Failing to comply, in both cases, merely involves inaction: i.e. not doing the thing that the officer is unlawfully commanding you to do (remove your hand from a pocket, consent to a search).

Where, in any of that, did you infer that I suggest shooting the officer in response?

 

[ATM]

I guess I'm too old for this. Nothing better to do than video a patrol car slow-rolling through the neighborhood?

If the officer had just driven on, there wouldn't be much to post.

Obviously, that didn't happen.

 

[Alpo]

And perhaps the LEO receives a lot of calls on disturbances at that address. Lots of possibilities.

 

[Rookie]

If the officer had just driven on, there wouldn't be much to post.

Obviously, that didn't happen.

Do you mean the officer didn't have to escalate the situation? That's just silly.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Do you mean the officer didn't have to escalate the situation? That's just silly.

Where does the onus lie in this situation for "who started it"?

The officer didn't have to escalate.
The civilian didn't have to be obstinate.

Is it the officer's fault for approaching the civ? Is it the civ's fault for starting recording? Is it the officer's fault for just being in the neighborhood? Nothing the civ did was illegal, but did he give reason to further the questioning? Nothing the cop did was illegal, but did civ give reason to escalate? What started it, who should the ultimate blame be put on, and why are we all yelling

 

[chipbennett]

And perhaps the LEO receives a lot of calls on disturbances at that address. Lots of possibilities.

The officer stated that he didn't know the man, meaning that he had no specific, reasonable, articulable suspicion of any unlawful activity - regardless of any history of "disturbance calls" at that address. The officer also said that he did not suspect the man of any unlawful activity, because (as he said) he would have arrested him if he did.

 

[chipbennett]

Where does the onus lie in this situation for "who started it"?

The officer didn't have to escalate.
The civilian didn't have to be obstinate.

Is it the officer's fault for approaching the civ? Is it the civ's fault for starting recording? Is it the officer's fault for just being in the neighborhood? Nothing the civ did was illegal, but did he give reason to further the questioning? Nothing the cop did was illegal, but did civ give reason to escalate? What started it, who should the ultimate blame be put on, and why are we all yelling

Man is tooling around with his boat hitch. Officer drives by - then repeatedly drives by. Man decides to start recording. Officer takes apparent umbrage with the man recording, so he stops. Officer starts taking pictures - doing his own "recording" - clear evidence that he is perturbed by the man recording.

Note, at this point, there is zero suspicion of any unlawful activity. Yet, the officer exits his vehicle, approaches and accosts the man. He issues a demand for the man to take his hand out of his pocket - while simultaneously unholstering his firearm.

At what point, in any of that, did the man do anything to escalate any situation? How is the officer not 100% liable for any and all escalation?

 

[Birds Away]

I just took my hands out of my pockets.

 

[Rookie]

Where does the onus lie in this situation for "who started it"?

The officer didn't have to escalate.
The civilian didn't have to be obstinate.

Is it the officer's fault for approaching the civ? Is it the civ's fault for starting recording? Is it the officer's fault for just being in the neighborhood? Nothing the civ did was illegal, but did he give reason to further the questioning? Nothing the cop did was illegal, but did civ give reason to escalate? What started it, who should the ultimate blame be put on, and why are we all yelling

Pretty simple. The officer stopped, called in his license plate, took a picture, got out, and started acting like Billy bad ass because the guy had the nerve to video tape him. Who started it? The guy filming. Who escalated it? Billy bad ass. Why? He could have been professional, which is something I would expect from a police officer, and simply waved as he drove by.

 

[Rookie]

I just took my hands out of my pockets.

PUT YOUR HANDS BACK IN YOUR POCKETS

 

[Birds Away]

Pretty simple. The officer stopped, called in his license plate, took a picture, got out, and started acting like Billy bad ass because the guy had the nerve to video tape him. Who started it? The guy filming. Who escalated it? Billy bad ass. Why? He could have been professional, which is something I would expect from a police officer, and simply waved as he drove by.

What are you, a crazy constitutionalist? What is that anyway? Does that make the cop an anti-constitutionalist?

 

[Birds Away]

PUT YOUR HANDS BACK IN YOUR POCKETS

 

[Alpo]

Cop acted like Billy Bad A**?

Man, you guys must never have met anyone tougher than Barney Fife and Sheriff Andy.

Would you like to meet Frank?

 

[Rookie]

I think a lot of people's opinion is based on their experiences. I know, given my experience with my local sheriff's department, I'll not so politely tell them to get the **** off my property if I haven't asked them there. I don't care what that makes me, I have absolutely no desire to have any interaction of any type with any local officer ever again.