February 27th, 2014

Cops now Reaching for Guns Against Citizens who Video Record them 138

By Carlos Miller

Two short videos posted on Youtube in recent days, one from California, the other from Florida, resulted in police reaching for their guns against the citizens who were recording them.

In the shortest video, which lasts only 12 seconds, a man gets confronted by San Francisco cops who surround him as he pulls out his camera phone with one of them telling him, “put that thing away.”

He responds by saying, “I have the right to document,” but his phone is snatched away.

In his Youtube description, the man says he was stopped by a motorcycle cop for jaywalking, then tried to pull out a camera, which incidentally, didn’t have a memory card, so he resorted to his Android, but that resulted in him being handcuffed and detained.

I hurry across so as not to block traffic since the light turned green, 2 seconds later as I step onto the curb the officer on the bike barks at me to stop as he climbs off his bike. With my back to the officer, I reach for my camera as I always do when confronted by the police, I turn to face him, and he shouts not to reach in the bag after my hand is clearly already in the bag as I pull the camera neck strap out and tell the officer I am pulling out my camera. I look at his hand, on his pistol ready to draw, as I state that I AM going to pull out my camera and the camera is slowly withdrawn by the neck strap and placed over my head. The officer is clearly frustrated, still holding his hand on his gun he asks for my ID, and I reply “its in my pocket but I’m not going to get it out with your hand on your gun”! I then shout cameras up several times as the zombies walk on by… the officer calls for backup as I realize my memory card is no in the camera (DOH)! Thank god I have a backup, squirming I think why me then it hits me I have my DROID! I reach for it in my front pocket just as 7 more cops come screaming up in 2 squad cars and 2 more bikes, I start to punch in the code to unlock it and the officer say don’t reach into your pockets again! Just as I think I’m going to get some good video of police harassment of a homeless veteran, they demand I turn off the camera and in fact as you can see forcing me to, they then put me in handcuffs for detainment, sat me on the curb, and ran my info from my veterans ID.

And in the other video, which is from Palm Bay, Florida, a man walks up to a cop during some kind of traffic stop and asks for his badge number, resulting in the cop pulling out his gun.

The video is dark, so we can’t see the cop pulling out the gun, but we can hear the man saying, “you’re reaching for a gun?”

The cop tells him to back away from him, before accusing him of having made threats against police officers, which the man, Richard Petik, denies in his Youtube description.

Palm Bay, Florida ( brevard county)Cop (car 181)pulls gun on homeowner realizing hes being taped says ive threatened him…to give himself justification. ( sorry for poor quality)

If it was true Petik had made threats against the officer that night, he would have been arrested, but we can see he walked away, even cursing out the cop as he did.

And if was true that Petik had made threats against an officer on a previous occasion, he would have been arrested, which would have been easily verifiable through the Brevard County court public records website.

But all that comes up is the following traffic infraction, which is from February 20, 2014. Considering the video was uploaded on February 22, we can probably assume Petik pulled up in his car and started recording, which led to the cops citing him on the following charges.

 


Screenshot 2014-02-27 05.07.08

 


Send stories, tips and videos to Carlos Miller.
  • B.D.E.

    There is two problems here. One is the reaction of the cops but the other trend now popular is antagonizing cops to provoke such responses. As far i can tell from both of these videos is d-bags on both sides of the camera.

    • Carlos_Miller

      They antagonize citizens more than citizens antagonize them.

      • Carl Montes

        Why is it that when someone states something that is actually happening, something that is rationally put, and isn’t jumping on the “I’m oppressed so therefore people like me are the ONLY victims that matter.” bandwagon, people have to use the fashionable “Well this side has it worse than that side!”

        When did B.D.E. say anything about which side has it worse? B.D.E. was simply stating that there is another trend happening, where civilians are actually antagonizing cops. I know that there are plenty of corrupt cops in this nation, and they deserve plenty of jail time. They’re horrible, hypocritical bullies with badges that they don’t even deserve. But I also know that there are good cops as well, who do their job the way it was meant to be done: To serve and protect the public, and arrest the true villains. We won’t ever be able to tell which is which until we’re confronted with them. So why do we automatically switch to “blast and bash the douche cop” mode the moment we’re in a situation with a cop, before even getting to know how that cop is, huh? Those who do that are just as shitty as the cops who harshly profile and instantly take harsh action before rationalizing first. Are we to be hypocrites? Spouting off about justice and then turning around and acting like aggressive assholes ourselves? Well?

        • Carlos_Miller

          Because, Carl, one is a reaction to another. If there weren’t so many asshole cops violating people’s rights, then these citizens wouldn’t be motivated to confront them with cameras.

          • http://alexanderknight.ca Alexander Knight

            That does perpetuate the cycle though doesn’t it? They intimidate us, so we challenge them–and so on. This helps grow the us-vs-them culture that we now see on an almost daily basis.

          • Carlos_Miller

            You either give up your rights or you fight for them. And sometimes, you go on the offensive. As long as you’re not breaking the law, then it’s all fair.

            Niceties and professionalism went out the window long ago due to the arrogance and aggression of police.

          • sfmc98

            One thing to keep in mind: When a person is being lawfully detained or arrested, they don’t necessarily have the right to film, especially if it involves using the hands. The police can restrict movement and behavior under those circumstances.

            Absolutely, the police should be audio recorded with a pocket recorder and if theres a good way to capture video, like with a camera around the neck, etc that’s a good idea too. But my point is the rules are a little different when being detained. They’ve gotta follow the rules and so do we.

          • G

            In the movie Black Rain, the Japanese police inspector Mashiro Matsumoto informed Sgt Conklin “This is isn’t New York, we have rules here”, and Conklin stated “We have rules, Hey, look pal, I’ve seen Sato’s work okay, he ain’t following your program.”
            You can say that about the police. They don’t follow their own rules and programs unless they decide to do so and only when it is at the expense of the rest of us.

          • Difdi

            What cycle? Citizen acts in complete accordance with the law, so a criminal is justified in brutalizing the citizen? Since when is it a challenge to authority to expect that authority to obey the law and not break the oath they swore?

          • Carl Montes

            Oh there is nothing wrong with documenting and recording on cameras. I do not have an issue with that at all.
            I’m just tired of so much hypocrisy going on in this nation, involving the previously oppressed now turning things around and being horrible people to others instead of punishing only those who actually committed the crimes.

            I know that men have oppressed women for a huge chunk of our history, and I understand the need for the feminist movement back then. Even now, there are discriminations happening, and not just to women, but men in certain scenarios as well (note that I never stated which side has it harder). But just because of what’s happening, that does not give a certain number of women any right to generalize and irrationally punish men, putting down the ones who haven’t even done anything wrong to them. That’s hypocritical and unfair, and very Magneto-like.

            Same in this scenario. Yes, there are plenty of crooked cops. But good cops still exist as well. We civilians have no right to treat the police as a whole with hostility, because we’d be punishing the good ones as well, when those cops haven’t done anything wrong. And just as Alexander Knight had said, it will perpetuate the us-vs-them cycle instead of doing anything to help work towards mutual peace and understanding.

          • Burrow Owl

            There is no such thing as a good cop.
            The sole reason for their existance is to impose the power of the state upon us via the threat and/or use of deadly force.

          • n4zhg

            And how do you tell the difference? Good cops don’t wear special insignia that says “I’m not a stormtrooper”. If they did, the bad cops would be wearing them the next shift.

          • Carl Montes

            n4zhg, bad cops don’t wear special insignia that says, “I’m a stormtrooper”, either. We can’t prove right off the bat that a cop is good, sure. But we can’t prove right off the bat that a cop is bad, either.

          • n4zhg

            Safer to assume they are stormtroopers until proven otherwise.

          • Carl Montes

            And, what, begin acting hostile right off the bat?

          • Difdi

            To people who are not cops, there is a large difference between non-cooperative and hostile.

          • LibertyEbbs

            ^^THIS

            That is a very good point and it goes a long way toward explaining why the once mundane interactions between LEO’s and non-LEO’s have become anything but.

          • Difdi

            Exactly. In the old days, police acted like people and were able to have conversations like people. Bad cops happened, but they were rare.

            Nowadays, you get cops who will lie, cheat, brutalize and murder anyone in order to make sure the go home safe that night who view hostility as an immediate threat to their life and see no difference whatsoever between hostility and non-cooperation.

            If you or I were to talk to a cop using the same language, same tone, same body language — odds are that cop would draw his gun and shoot us in ‘self-defense’.

          • LibertyEbbs

            Except 9 times out of 10 (at least) the escalation by LEO’s has absolutely nothing to do with safety or a perceived threat. It is all about 100% compliance and the authority they believe to be inherent to their position. Standing up for your rights, saying no, or disagreeing in any way is enough to set them off.

            “Constitutionalist” is the term I have been hearing LEO’s use a lot in the last few years. It is their derogatory slang for anyone who doesn’t lick the polish off their boots, but they are too stupid to see the irony in it. So someone who cares about, understands, and works to preserve the documents which they swear to uphold and protect are somehow the bad guys? That only makes sense to morons and sociopaths.

          • G

            Cops can’t prove right off the bad that every person they encounter is a bad one. But they do it anyway.

          • OhSnapDJB

            Did u not read what he wrote? there’s NO difference to tell because there is NO such thing as a good cop!

          • G

            Despite their experience and their so called instinicts, cops can’t seem to size up someone who is a good person and who is a bad person. They treat everyone as a criminal.even reporters like Democracy Now Amy Goodman when she heard that two of her Democracy Now reporters had been arrested. Furthermore, you had reporters at the RNC being knock down and beaten by the police even though they had their press credentials hung around their necks.

        • Ed

          Sorry, anybody who says that they know there are good cops instantly loses credibility.

          • Carl Montes

            So…cop automatically equals evil?

          • Ed

            Yes, when a large part of the job description is disrupting the lives of people who have harmed no one, those who go ahead and take the job are evil.

        • OhSnapDJB

          You people will never learn! There’s no such thing as a “good cop” and i doubt that ANY of you awe willing to bet your freedom on it. I promise you all this: if a cop (ANY COP) is put into a position where they have to lie to protect other cops OR lie to justify an arrest OR lie to cover themselves, THEY WOULD DO IT IN A HEARTBEAT and you morons are too stupid and soft to see that! If any of you put your trust in ANY cop, you are in for a VERY rude awakening and the only thing you’ll have to lose is your freedom so go right ahead and be the FOOL!

          • Carl Montes

            Holy jeez…you people are so far gone from saving…
            I hope the ability to rationalize somehow comes back to you all, and that this harsh over-aggressive bias leaves your souls soon enough.

          • G

            Too many cops are far from saving and lost their souls a long time ago. May God have mercy on their souls; although, I believe that many of these cops think that they are God and that their sins will be forgiven when they come to St. Peter’s gate.

          • Carl Montes

            I cannot disagree with that. Still, this doesn’t mean that all cops are corrupt. There are still plenty of good ones, even though the misdeeds of the corrupt ones make louder noises in this nation than the good deeds of the true cops.

          • libby

            your the one that still has a brain here. they hide, they try to figure what is going on, and they dont have a clue! CARLOS, cops not unlike lawyers are part of the system! the system has been placing thugs with badges/guns on our streets for many years now! they are trained to shoot to kill, not wound! TO KILL! isnt the military trained to also kill? OHSNAPDJB i remember a story about a PIG, he shot the shit out of someone, {opppps, i pulled out the gun by mistake, i thought it was my taser! oh well, NP at least i am still alive!} the judges of this nation have known for years that COPS lie in the court room, they all dont give a crap, who is to say anything about it, NO ONE! that is who!

          • OhSnapDJB

            That kid was Oscar Grant and that happened in Oakland, Ca. at Fruitvale Station. The cops got a year or so in jail I believe.

      • John

        So, you’re saying that automatically makes it ok to antagonize at will?

        Agree 100% with BDE. There are assholes on both sides of the camera. The cop was unprofessional, no question. Yet, had the videographer in the second video a) taken the high road, b) waited until the conclusion of the traffic stop to ask for name and badge number (thereby giving no doubt there was no interference whatsoever), c) known that the requirement for cops to identify themselves is a department policy, not a law, d) not used homophobic slurs, and e) been polite the entire time, then he might have a leg to stand on. But he didn’t do any of that, and the fact is, we simply don’t know what threats this guy has made before.

        There are ways of standing up for one’s rights as a photographer in such a way as to make it painfully obvious the police officer subject of the video is in the wrong. This was not one of those. Unfortunately, people that act like this set photographers backward. Not forward.

        • Carlos_Miller

          Your comment is a perfect example of how cops are given more leeway than citizens.

          The citizen is not representing a company or a city. He is representing himself.

          The cop, on the other hand, not only represents the community, he gets paid by the community.

        • Carlos_Miller

          John,

          I am admittedly biased because of my personal experiences with cops but when you say “we don’t know what threats the guy has made before” when we know he has never been charged with making threats, we can pretty much be sure he never made threats before.

          • John

            Can you be 100% sure that just because someone makes a threat against a police officer, that person will automatically be arrested and charged? The cops you’ve encountered were certainly unreasonable. Not all of them are. What if he made a threat and received a warning from a reasonable cop? What if his arrest was expunged? Certainly, the cop could very well be randomly making something up, but in either case we simply don’t know. We just don’t have all the facts.

            I don’t think cops should be given more leeway than citizens — quite the contrary. I believe if you have a badge and a gun you should be held to a higher standard.

            But in this case, the citizen with the camera is trying to make a point, and that point would be stronger and more polarizing if he had been the bigger person.

          • Kenny Powers

            if threaten a jack boot and expect to get a warning you are living in fantasy land. You would be tased at least if you made any threats.

          • LibertyEbbs

            As Carlos posted evidence that they charged him with three Bullshit citations days earlier it would be a safe bet that had they any evidence that he threatened to shoot them he would have been arrested for it.

          • John

            Seems a lot more likely that the “bullshit citations” were something they could easily prove and were a response to something that upset them, like making a threat, which is much harder to prove in court. With “bullshit citations” you can at least be sure there will be punishment.

            In any case, a “safe bet” is not 100% certainty.

          • LibertyEbbs

            So, you think that cops limit arrests to offenses that they believe can be proved in court? That is incredibly naive and is not supported by the evidence.

          • John

            I’m not sure why you keep twisting my words.

            I’ll make it simple: No one here knows for sure whether or not this individual ever made a threat against a police officer.

            There is no possible way anyone with a basic sense of logic can disagree with that statement.

          • LibertyEbbs

            Okay, that is true. However, I think I can say that beyond any reasonable doubt that if the man had threatened to shoot police, and any of them were aware of said threat, he would have been arrested (or worse) on the spot. 100% certainty is not a fair standard to use and you know it. [hint: that's why we don't use it in our criminal system.]

          • ViperRum

            That’s rich. Twisting your words when you seem to have such reading comprehension issues. Carlos never said he was 100% sure the guy did not threaten any cops. He said he was pretty sure he did not.

            Learn to read. Learn to comprehend what you read. Then reply with a logical and rational response, not some made up fantasy that supports your view point.

      • Rick Lane

        Well like that’s your opinion man

      • libby

        [They {the pigs} antagonize citizens more than citizens antagonize them.] on point and those that would argue that point have a major problem! is a law to “antagonize” someone, or/and a pig! i am so fed up with this shit! we have to be careful what we say to a PIG, dont want to piss them off! biggest pile of bullshit on the planet earth!

    • bj

      whats your problem, is it ok for cops to video record citizens and ask them questions but the reverse is confrontational? thats a weird way to view things

      • Corey Hendricks

        Bj…..you are weapons grade stupid

        • Corey Hendricks

          Oops….read your comment wrong. I’m stupid. Now for some coffee. Carry on sir

    • Schlitzstop

      There *are* two problems here.

    • putaro

      Cops are working and being paid by the citizens. They’re supposed to respond to reasonable requests (like what’s your badge number) without getting upset.

    • Brad Wesley

      How did the guy in SF antagonize the cops?

      • Kenny Powers

        he recorded their suspicious wheelings and dealings.

    • Xiccarph

      It all depends on whose definition of “antagonize is used. If you are observing/filming a police action, stay out of the way and keep quiet. If you are the target of a police action, film but be respectful. If the cops “don’t like being filmed” it is 100% their problem, and they should suck it up and just do their job. If they begin the antagonizing, then they become the problem, not the filmer. There has to be an end to the assumption that any order by a cop is 100% to be obeyed and 100% legal, and as long as Chiefs and supervisors and prosecutors ONLY believe and backup the cops, this will only become worse.

      • Fotaugrafee

        Apparently ANY kind of confrontation is “antagonizing” to many people. And when the confrontation involves a cop, most of those same people are inclined to (sadly, still) believe that the pig is the innocent party being demonized by the videographer.

    • Kia Jones

      Requesting a badge number and name is not a crime or even categorization as antagonizing. Regardless of whether they want to or not, police MUST tell you their name and badge number if requested as that is the law. Not the reverse.

      • John

        It is not the law. It is (in most departments) a department policy.

        If Florida has recently passed a law as well, by all means please correct me if I’m wrong and cite the statute.

      • al

        Yes, but it appears that this walked up to the cope and started asking while the cops was involved in a traffic stop. Your not allowed to interfere with that, there becomes a whole slew of safety concerns your never going to win an argument against if that how your approach cops to ask for that info.

    • Alexander Knight

      I am inclined to agree with you on the second video however the actions of the officer would be justified if the cameraman did indeed threaten officers during an earlier encounter. The first video is too short to make any type of assumptions.

      Police officers should always attempt to deescalate any situation, but us civilians should also do the same–if for no other reason, for their own safety. When an overly aggressive officer(s) is(are) attacking a civilian that is another situation altogether and I don’t have the answer for that.

    • Kenny Powers

      you are the only d bag i see. you have a duty to document any police activity in public space.

    • Nubby Mcquilicutty

      Antagonizing Cops…OOOO Im so fucking sorry for exercising the rights they SWORE an oath to.

    • James

      The problem here is that a paid and trained “professional” such as a cop should not so easily, readily and so often fall victim to such antagonistic displays.

      My son spent an hour today screaming about how he hates me, how he isn’t my son, how he wants me dead etc etc, because I told him he needs to do his homework before going outside just like every other day for the past 5 years.

      As a dad, i wasn’t trained in how to handle this, so would it have been OK if I had beaten the shit out of him? Instead I ignored him, used an open hand to lead him back to the stairs each time for him to sit for the required 10 minutes once he stopped screaming.

      After an hour of it, he finally sat still for 10 minutes, did his homework, ate his food, cleaned his room and went to bed.

      These cops should WELCOME being recorded. It removes any doubt when a violent person attacks them and they are left with no choice but to protect themselves. They should welcome this.

      • John

        A lot of cops do welcome being recorded. Here in Silicon Valley, a number of departments (including Palo Alto, home to Stanford, Facebook, and numerous other startups) are requiring body cameras on every cop and full 360 degree view cameras on every car. A substantial number of cops here volunteered for this when it was only a pilot program.

        The common sentiment was (paraphrasing from media reports — apologies that I don’t have the source readily available): “We like the cameras. When we later show that video to a subject, they have a whole new perspective as to how they were acting and what prompted us to take the action we did. Further, to a jury or an internal affairs investigator, there is no dispute whatsoever. Video doesn’t lie.”

        A lot of cops welcome cameras. I suspect there is nearly a 100% overlap in the Venn diagram of “good cops” and “cops who like cameras.”

        • James

          “I suspect there is nearly a 100% overlap in the Venn diagram of “good cops” and “cops who like cameras.”

          I would likely agree with this.

        • G

          Unfortunately, some years ago, 5 cops in the state of Alabama lost their jobs because a judge asks for the original police video about a year later regarding a criminal case and when the judge saw the video, it was totally different from the police video that was used at the trial. The original video show that it was the cops who were out of line and they had copy and the edited the video in order to send an innocent person to prison.

          You can’t tell me that there are safeguards build into police cameras to prevent this from happening. If computer hackers can find ways to get around computer security systems, then it is also possible to bypass the safeguards in police cameras. As Sherlock Holmes stated in the Dancing Men “What one man can invent another can discover”

    • edward linton

      You’re right, who knows what happened before the editing by the camera man. but the police farce does give a green light many times over to shoot and kill for somebody with their hand in their pocket not under arrest. Even asking technical questions maybe having a flashback from when his life was on the line. I don’t know but when taken by “case by case basis” the law always seems to side with law. cops gotta get used to cameras or the internal affairs needs to grow a pair.

    • rust

      “Antagonizing cops” — yeah, with CAMERAS! riiiiight.

    • Difdi

      So what? Cops love to create circumstances where people have a choice to obey the law or break it and then arrest the people who make an unwise choice.

      Engaging in constitutionally-protected, completely lawful behavior may be unpopular with bad cops, but it certainly does not justify their lawbreaking.

  • Kirkus1964

    How would engaging in a perfectly legal activity, filming cops, be “antagonizing” them? They’re paid, by us, not to be antagonized by legal activity.

    • leslie green

      It’s simple, they can be held accountable for their actions if caught on camera. In other words it hinders their ability to really “bully”, it cramps their style and they don’t like being held accountable…. They are the “Law”…(B..S.) That’s their motto. Filming is a form of self-defense for the citizens, our only legal weapon and they (the bad ones) don’t like it.
      Most people filming are polite but firm, and that angers the cops even more… Thank goodness for phone cameras and the like… More people should implement the use of them, let them get used to the surveillance that we are being subjected to also.

    • John

      Filming silently from a reasonable distance in and of itself isn’t antagonizing. But asking a cop for his name and badge number while he’s in the middle of a traffic stop or other investigation is. Reaching into one’s bag for an unknown purpose when a cop says “let me see your hands” is (and it’s pretty stupid, too).

      • Kirkus1964

        “Filming silently from a reasonable distance in and of itself isn’t antagonizing.” Funny then, that we see so many videos of cops approaching/harassing/assaulting people doing just that.

        “But asking a cop for his name and badge number while he’s in the middle of a traffic stop or other investigation is.” I agree, it’s a bad idea. However, given how much unnecessary and illegal harassment of the citizenry done by cops, I’m not terribly sympathetic.

        “Reaching into one’s bag for an unknown purpose when a cop says “let me see your hands” is (and it’s pretty stupid, too).” Is what? Antagonizing of the citizen by the cop? Yes, it is. The cop had no reason to tell that citizen to “let me see your hands”. The citizen was doing nothing illegal.

        • John

          “Funny then, that we see so many videos of cops approaching/harassing/assaulting people doing just that.”

          What’s your point? Some cops are assholes, yes. And the ones that harass people simply for filming from a safe distance generally fit that description.

          My point was that if the guy filming in the second video had been doing so silently from a safe distance, there would be no doubt whatsoever that he was not antagonizing or creating a distraction to the cops doing the investigation. But he didn’t do that. Instead, he antagonized them and gave them ammunition to use against him. He gave them a leg to stand on.

          “The cop had no reason to tell that citizen to “let me see your hands”. The citizen was doing nothing illegal.”

          It’s irrelevant if he was doing something illegal or not. Cops are allowed to order you out of your car for their safety. They’re allowed to ask you to step back to a reasonable distance (which distance is unfortunately open to interpretation). And they’re allowed to order that you show your hands to confirm you aren’t holding a weapon. All the citizen had to do was comply, then say “I’m going to reach into my bag and grab my phone. I’ll do so slowly.”

          There are ways to film such that it leaves no doubt that the videographer is doing nothing antagonistic whatsoever. This person did not do that.

  • OhSnapDJB

    I’m all for filming the cops and I’ve done it many times myself. But here’s the thing (and I can’t emphasize this enough). STOP giving the cops leverage against you! What is so fucking hard about filming the cops WITHOUT saying a single word? Why is that so dam difficult for some of you morons. If a cop is conducting an investigation (pedestrian stop, traffic stop, or whatever) and you approach them asking for a name and badge number, you are dancing very close (in the COPS mind) to obstruction, or interfering, or whatever the charge is. These are (in my opinion) the type of things that people who film cops get charged with AND what the cops look for. We have all seen video where the person filming was 30-40 feet away and STILL gets hassled. However, you stand a BETTER chance at beating the charges when ur that far away AND saying nothing versus walking up during an investigation and asking for names and numbers. It is unfortunate that people get arrested for filming cops, it truly is. But I will always believe that u should NOT give the cops any more power than they already have. You should learn the laws of your city BEFORE u start filming cops. Don’t just rely on the Constitution. Now some of u are gonna say “the Constitution trumps all laws” and i get it! But you will be surprised at some of the tricks cops pull to justify an arrest. There might be some obscure law in your city that makes it an arrestable offense to use video equipment between the hours of 3am- am to film a jail or something. I hope that there isnt, but why (like I said earlier) give the cops MORE power? Just film and don’t bother these moron cops.

    • pinbalwyz

      Gratuitously provoking cops is never a good idea even if it seems like one of the newest popular sports among the street punk set. I actually like and respect the public safety competent honest LEO’s provide. The ones who abuse their position to bully, threaten, lie, intimidate, beat, and kill turn my stomach. Hopefully this site will help to educate at least some of them. It is constructive for LEO’s to hear the people speak and how they feel. Too often, people are bullied and intimidated into remaining silent. Worse, too often they are set up, falsely arrested, and must deconstruct deliberately disingenuous reports and perjured testimony. The police in many instances, actually have become more corrupt and more dishonest than the criminals they arrest. When that happens, they’re just another street gang.
      – amicuscuria.com/wordpress -

      • OhSnapDJB

        I’m 45 years old and I remember a set of movies that came out in the late 70’s called “Billy Jack”. It was about a Vietnam Vet who was part Indian and he ran some sort of “Freedom School” for (i believe) runaway kids. Billy Jack was played by Tom Laughlin and he was a martial arts bad ass! Anyway, there was one scene in the movie that has ALWAYS stayed with me. The cops had some sort of beef with the school and it’s kids and always gave them shit whenever they came into town. Arresting the kids for this, giving them tickets for that, so on and so forth. One day Billy Jack was riding his horse and the cops were shooting wild horses and I’m not sure why. Billy Jack confronted them (calmly) and a conversation began. It was short but I remember (and it’s been 35 years since I saw this movie) the last thing Billy Jack said to the cops in this particular scene. He said, “When the cops break the law, there is no law and all that’s left is SURVIVAL”. This is going to happen in our country if the government DOES NOT start holding these cops 100 percent responsible for breaking the law. It is going to be a sad day for alot of cops if this happens because these asshole cops are gonna kill the WRONG kid one day and it will cost them their OWN kids life!

        • Xiccarph

          Misdirected revenge would accomplish nothing and only make matters worse, AND leave the actual bad cop around to “do it again” AND they’d be seen only as an “innocent victim” from the public’s point of view. Any “payback” should be directed only to the actual perpetrator, not their innocent friends or relatives.

          • OhSnapDJB

            Tell that to a Father whose INNOCENT son was killed by some cop because he was filming or wearing a black hoodie! If ANYONE and I mean ANYONE killed my child for some bullshit reason, there would be NO LIMIT to the pain I would cause even if justice WAS served and even if it meant my own life! Theres No way in HELL that I would NOT get revenge……..BELIEVE THAT!

        • paschn

          I remember those films. Entertaining and an applicable morality for the times. Then, as now, there were provocateurs, (young punk cops willing to do anything to show their bosses how far they’ll go for ‘em, swine actually), sent in to break the law in some way, any way to give them the excuse they needed to “Kelly Thomas” a few folks. This is happening too frequently now to be a social phenomena. there’s too many instances where, after a citizen has been injured/violated/murdered, the administrators BLOCK the laws they’ve sworn to uphold and protect the lesser filth, (they being the greater filth), from righteous justice. This, coupled with militarizing simpleton cops is suspicious and should be alarming. It’s like a puzzle with many pieces not fitting into place. With electronic ballet counters, you can no longer vote the 5th column traitors out. So what’s left for a victimized citizenry to do? Grease their colons, bend over obediently and simply say, “do whatever your Israeli trained ass wants to do to us, “massah”?

          ” .. these asshole cops are gonna kill the WRONG kid one day and it will cost them their OWN kids life!”
          So be it. A bit abstract, but when someone in a position of trust has defecated on that trust, betrayed their fellows, the victimized go mad to a degree and in their frustration want desperately to hurt those hurting them. If the spawn or spouse are twisted or torn because of the evil/treachery dispersed by “daddy” or “mommy” swine…. well, they ate the food, slept in the bed, wore the clothes etc. all bought with the 30 pieces of silver paid to a reprehensible dog for licking his masters’ ass and is, in the end, nothing more than acceptable collateral damage. It’s idiocy to “play by the rules” while your enemy doesn’t give a damn about rules as long as he’s on the side wielding the power. These aren’t ignorant, frightened fools not sure about what is right or wrong. These are well trained/equipped PAID golems doing as they are told by a co-opted “government” that doesn’t give a shit about it’s own people, let alone what’s moral and right. They made the rules, they will eventually live or die by same, spawn or spouse as well. Why should we place more value on theirs than they (obviously), place on ours? Are we to be fools as well as victims?

          • jmacabeus

            Another self-hating jew.. classic

          • zarathustra2k1

            Another shitcunt shitcunt… classic.

          • paschn

            Hmm, is that terrorist nation SO SPECIAL, SO immune to validated criticism that you can “chirp” a ridiculous statement such as that and not be blushing while you type it??!!
            What the hell have they, (Israel), done that is SO wonderful, SO humane, so good ANYTHING that addled sycophants such as yourself would even post such arrogant stupidity?
            Fact; They are training our cops on how to “deal with” domestic terrorists.
            Fact; Since this began several years ago, the Sycophants-in-Blue have gotten MORE vicious, MORE arrogant have beaten/tazed/clubbed/murdered MORE citizens than ever.
            Fact; Since Judge Goldstone, (acting under the auspices of the U.N.), declared Israel a terrorist entity for the atrocities they committed against unarmed men, women and children during their “heroic” cast lead attack, our out-of-control government is LITERALLY giving out lucrative contracts to a “terrorist entity” to train the filth. What’s more, don’t you think those lucrative contracts would do THEIR OWN people more good? Say, oh, I dunno by CREATING more jobs here??
            Fool, the comment I used above regarding their Israeli training is a POLITICAL opinion, not picking on the “chosen”. Idiot.

          • inquisitor

            Good points paschn. The connection is too profound to ignore or discount.

            The extreme militarization of American police forces has been brought
            to public attention by the tactics employed against Occupy protesters,
            which often appear more appropriate to counter-terrorism operations than
            to the control of non-violent protest. According to investigative
            journalist Max Blumenthal, however, the proper term for this ruthless
            suppression of dissent should be “Israelification.”

            In an article which begins with examples of American police training alongside Israeli security forces, Blumenthal writes,
            “Having been schooled in Israeli tactics perfected during a 63 year
            experience of controlling, dispossessing, and occupying an indigenous
            population, local police forces have adapted them to monitor Muslim and
            immigrant neighborhoods in US cities. Meanwhile, former Israeli military
            officers have been hired to spearhead security operations at American
            airports and suburban shopping malls, leading to a wave of disturbing
            incidents of racial profiling, intimidation, and FBI interrogations of
            innocent, unsuspecting people. The New York Police Department’s
            disclosure that it deployed ‘counter-terror’ measures against Occupy
            protesters encamped in downtown Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park is just the
            latest example of the so-called War on Terror creeping into every day
            life. Revelations like these have raised serious questions about the
            extent to which Israeli-inspired tactics are being used to suppress the
            Occupy movement.”

            According to Blumenthal, the transformation began after September 11,
            when American law enforcement officers began to look to the Israelis
            for counter-terrorism expertise and in response the Israel Lobby
            “provid[ed] thousands of top cops with all-expenses paid trips to Israel
            and stateside training sessions with Israeli military and intelligence
            officials.”

            Many of these trips and training sessions were arranged by JINSA, the
            stridently pro-Israel organization whose advisors have included such
            prominent Neocons as Douglas Feith and Richard Perle.

            The Anti-Defamation League has also provided Israeli-run training
            senssions to over 700 police officers through its course on Extremist
            and Terroist Threats and claims to have provided a background in Israeli
            perspectives to another 45,000 through its Law Enforcement and Society
            program, which is required training for all new FBI agents.

            The Israeli influence has been particularly strong in New York City
            where, Blumenthal writes, “under the leadership of Police Commissioner
            Ray Kelly, ties between the NYPD and Israel have deepened by the day.
            Kelly embarked on his first trip to Israel in early 2009 to demonstrate
            his support for Israel’s ongoing assault on the Gaza Strip. … Kelly
            returned to Israel the following year to speak at the Herziliya
            Conference, an annual gathering of neoconservative security and
            government officials who obsess over supposed ‘demographic threats.’ …
            Back in New York, the NYPD set up a secret ‘Demographics Unit’ designed
            to spy on and monitor Muslim communities around the city.”

            Not only dissidents but even ordinary criminals may be treated as
            terrorists under the Israel model, which can also include the routine
            use of torture. Karen Greenberg, director of Fordham School of Law’s
            Center on National Security, told Blumenthal, “After 9/11 we reached out
            to the Israelis on many fronts and one of those fronts was torture. The
            training in Iraq and Afghanistan on torture was Israeli training.
            There’s been a huge downside to taking our cue from the Israelis and now
            we’re going to spread that into the fabric of everyday American life?
            It’s counter-terrorism creep. And it’s exactly what you could have
            predicted would have happened.”

            “Given the amount of training the NYPD and so many other police
            forces have received from Israel’s military-intelligence apparatus,”
            Blumenthal concludes, “and the profuse levels of gratitude American
            police chiefs have expressed to their Israeli mentors, it is worth
            asking how much Israeli instruction has influenced the way the police
            have attempted to suppress the Occupy movement, and how much it will
            inform police repression of future upsurges of street protest. But
            already, the Israelification of American law enforcement appears to have
            intensified police hostility towards the civilian population, blurring
            the lines between protesters, common criminals, and terrorists.”

          • jmacabeus

            Blumenthal? Really? He’s the Poster Child for Self-Hating Jew. Could you cite a less credible source? pathetic

          • inquisitor

            Self-hating Jew is the moniker used when anti-Semite just doesn’t fly.
            Just another Jew marginalization tactic.

            Just look it up the information yourself cunt.
            It’s not like it is hidden.
            Learn something.

            The true King of the Jews is Norman Finkelstein.

          • paschn

            Agreed.

            At the risk of being attacked yet again, I’m going to post a link to a site which, with it’s own money, paid for the translation to English of chapter 18 of “200 years Together” by the amazing Alexandr Solzhenitsyn who lived through the Lenin/Stalin years, (many in the gulag archipelago). Please read the one chapter and tell me if you see any parallels with where we are headed today. Bearing in mind that Russian Christian/Muslim people had their own police/military turned against them which culminated in 60,000,000 murdered and 600,000,000 Rubles in Russian Gold stolen, (the “bailout”?), which later miraculously appeared in the coffers of Kuhn/Loeb bank here in the states;

            http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Solzhenitsyn-200-Years-Together-18.html

            Many of you may believe I rant a bit, but I feel my concerns are real and need to be addressed. This is definitely on topic.

          • inquisitor

            Ukraine is now feeling the pain.
            Just a matter of time before they do the same in the US.

          • paschn

            They, like Russia, felt the jack-boot of the Bolsheviks under Stalin. In ’32/’33 I believe, their borders were closed, “youth groups” and Bolsheviks confiscated farming tools/food, (NDAA?). You resisted, you were executed on the spot or shipped off to the gulags. Seven million were intentionally starved to death because the Bolsheviks wanted to crush their independent spirit and nationalist pride. I have a feeling they know who’s pulling the strings in the west and don’t want a Holodomor redux. After all these decades, they finally made the state accept that it happened and thus gave it a name. I’m not certain but I believe “Holodomor” translates something like death by starvation. The controlled media here, (even then), kept reporting it as a natural disaster and for the most part kept it out of the media.

            http://www.holodomorct.org/history.html

          • Truthseeker

            Its always nice to see someone else with their eyes open.Well said!!

          • Tijuana Joe

            If Billy Jack were alive today, he would film cops.
            And he would karate chop them if they resisted.

          • Billyjock

            And be promptly gunned down.
            brilliant plan

    • Threepercenter

      A GREAT piece of advice

    • MoBetter2

      All citizens have a right to record police officers on T-H-E-I-R terms when they are behaving in accordance with the Constitution. Local bullcrap “no recording between 3 am and 4 am’ rules/ordinances/laws and such are illegal and unconstitutional. I don’t give a crap what is in the cop’s mind regarding obstruction or interfering. The laws are codified for a reason, so they are standard and not totally subjective depending on the whim of whatever Thug With A Badge wishes to interpret for his own agenda. They are the civil servants. WE are their employers, don’t reverse the roles in your ignorance!

  • Mithrandir

    I can’t believe all of these comments. The American public has become a nation of MILLIES! Don’t hide your cameras, ANYONE STANDING NEARBY SHOULD HELP THEIR FELLOW HUMANS AND FILM. If he/she/it is doing nothing wrong why should he/she/it mind being recorded? If they are doing wrong, it must be recorded! AND PROSECUTED!

  • Harrison Nearn

    Man I hope y’all get them I’m sick of cops doing what they want

  • Pingback: NewsSprocket | Cops now Reaching for Guns Against Citizens who Video Record them

  • jaywalking_jerk

    A cop drawing his gun in response to someone reaching into a bag, to grab an unknown object is perfectly reasonable. It is very different from pulling a gun on someone who is already holding a camera. In the SF situation, much to my surprise, I support the actions of the cop.

    • JdL

      A cop drawing his gun in response to someone reaching into a bag, to grab an unknown object is perfectly reasonable.

      If that is true, then pulling a gun on a cop whenever he does something questionable is even MORE “reasonable”. Cops are much more likely to start firing wildly than normal people are, and to react with extreme rage in situations where normal people would keep their cool. Clearly we need more people pulling guns on cops, and ordering them to calm down or face the consequences. They are murderous, out-of-control criminals, and enough is enough!

      • Brandon

        You serious man? Pulling a gun on a cop will land you in a body bag in under a minute. You will have died and the officer will not even sweat it for a second.

        • inquisitor

          Not if you are skilled and actually fire the gun accurately.

        • Rail Car Fan

          Not unless you pull the trigger first!!

          Rail Car Fan

        • Fotaugrafee

          LULZ. Runner-up for Bootlicker of the week goes to Brandon, a wanna-be pig.

        • Difdi

          Think about it. Say you draw your gun to low ready in response to a furtive movement on the part of a cop. If he tries to draw his own, you already have a gun drawn and he doesn’t. If he moves to aim his gun at you, that justifies you to shoot him.

          Police are entitled to use force when threatened because they are citizens, not because they have badges.

      • anonymous

        The obvious NSA troll is obvious

  • Joe

    Why did he put his hand on his gun? Didn’t you listen at all to the cop??? Obviously he had previous contact with this A-HOLE as he claimed that the A-HOLE threatened to shoot cops in the past. If you were in the officers shoes and someone had made a threat against your life would you not prepare your self in case the threat was real.

    • inquisitor

      Obviously?

      • LibertyEbbs

        Obvious because a cop said it. Of course, obviously, that is second only to truthfullness of the Good Book.

    • defmbqwerty

      “If you were in a giant’s shoes and an ant made a threat against your life, would you not prepare yourself in case the threat was real?”

      Screw you, Joe.

      • Fotaugrafee

        Hey man, it could be like…uhhhhh…one of those fire ants or something. LOL

    • Fotaugrafee

      Ahhh, Bootlicker of the Week Award goes to JOE!!! :D

    • matism

      That works both ways, then, piggy! Your fokking pig buddies threaten to shoot Mere Citizens on a regular basis. They had better expect the same in return.

    • Difdi

      A threat to shoot cops in the past is in the past. State v. Plummer is only binding in one state, but the ruling was made on the foundation of all US law.

      A cop is allowed to use the necessary force to carry out his duties, but he does not have a murder license. A threat of deadly force that is not part of his duties is an unlawful act. Actually using deadly force outside of his duties entitles his victim to shoot back lawfully.

      When a cop threatens an extra-judicial execution or actually attempts to carry it out, it’s not a crime to defend yourself.

  • Pingback: Cops now Reaching for Guns Against Citizens who Video Record them | Disclosure News Online

  • Missy

    I live in Palm Bay. I was fasley arrested when I refused to give more than my name without a lawyer present. Also, a few weeks ago 6 cop cars drove, lights and sirens, to a house a few blocks down from me. There is no incident report on PBPD website for that either.

  • disqus_G7NcbXZXTC

    He isn’t “reaching for his gun,” nor is he reaching for anything. He has his hand near his weapon as a police officer normally will when approaching a situation, even during a typical traffic stop.

    The police officer shouldn’t have swatted his camera out of his hand, but saying he’s “reaching for his gun because of filming” is nothing but sensationalism.

    • Carlos_Miller

      Did you read the guy’s own account?

      • matism

        Pigs can’t read.

      • disqus_G7NcbXZXTC

        I didn’t see the second video until now.

        The second, the cop was clearly in the wrong, though I wouldn’t have minded the guy videoing being assaulted by the cop (and then the cop getting in trouble doing it) for the type of language the guy filming used.

        Really? Calling the cop a “faggot”? Real mature. With that said, and the hostility/attitude of the guy with the camera, it wouldn’t surprise me if he had threatened them in the past or why they might legitimately look at him as a threat.

        And matism, are you inferring that I’m a cop? If so, you couldn’t be further from the truth.

        • Difdi

          Cops are supposedly professionals. The guy has the right to express himself. Even if it’s not particularly mature.

    • inquisitor

      Video number one there is the swatting of the camera from the photog’s hands.
      There is no mention of drawing a gun.

      :38 in the second video it is obvious and evident that the cop drew his gun and it is right there in his hand. But there is no swatting of the camera from the photog’s hands.

      In your final point where you mention the swatting of the camera out of his hand, which is video number one, and you mention his saying “he is reaching for his gun because of filming” is actually video number two.

      The two videos are unrelated.
      But in video number two the cop surely draws his weapon.

    • Difdi

      So if a non-police officer is lawfully openly carrying a holstered pistol, he doesn’t commit any crimes if he has his hand near his gun or even on the gun while talking to someone?

      Fail.

  • 5280

    Okay I’ve seen this in a lot of videos lately, where the videographer claims that the officer is required by law to give his name and badge number, but I’ve never actually seen that law. Is it governed at city, state or federal level and where can we actually read the information? I thought it was only departmental policy and perhaps not always required but it’d be great to know for sure

    • Carlos_Miller

      They are departmental policies. There are no laws.

  • ?

    I just don’t understand why the police fear people with video cameras. Cameras are every where.

    • me2

      I know. They don’t act crazy when the local TV reporters show up with their equipment.

    • Fotaugrafee

      Because they have their own taxpayer provided & funded surveillance, which makes their job easier. When we videotape them doing felonious acts & committing acts that should subject them to castration (or worse), they feel that’s a threat…and they come knockin’ on our door. To spell it out, it’s all a matter of holding these fucking cowboys accountable for their misdeeds.

    • matism

      When those cameras record their corruption and crimes, the video conveniently disappears. Do you not understand that by now???

  • Shepard

    I just sent an e-mail to the entire police department, I will update you with what they have to say.

  • jpriest2121jr .

    All punk thug cops do not want the public to see them violating constitutional rights so that is why they steal cameras! Only the very few cops who are decent don’t care because they do nothing wrong!

    • matism

      And even those “decent” cops will back their pig Brothers in Blue no matter what they do. So much for the bullshit that “it’s only a few bad apples”. May they all soon burn in hell where they belong.

  • LibertyEbbs

    1st video: what a cluster of cowardly, power trippin’ morons. Amazing how much you can tell about the situation in just 15 sec. Do we have to sue every fucking cop in the whole damn country for this criminal response to cameras to stop?

    2nd video: I get that dude is pissed about previous encounter(s) and all, but it looked like he may have interfered with the cop during a stop. Film em, but don’t approach and start demanding info. Cop brandishing is fucking nuts and clearly being used to threaten, he should be disciplined for it.

  • Truthseeker

    He said he could be a “Terrorist”… and they have a list for terrorist targets. This is a complete crock of shit. This “war on terror” is the greatest sham ever pulled off. It is a “war” that can NEVER be won. Its a “war” against an idea and not a person or persons. Our rights have slowly been taken away and will continue to be. To avoid the escalating of the situation I agree this guy coulda been more cooperative. However he should have NEVER been approached and/or questioned to begin with. So regardless of what bad comes from the situation it is on the police officers hands. I think that the police officers were very tolerant for police officers and I respect that because MOST would not have been so calm. Once again though, they should have never been speaking to this dude.

  • Skypilot

    I shed blood for rights my fore fathers handed down and I’ll be damn if I will give up those rights.
    You want to shot me? You better make it a fatal shot or YOU WILL spend time in prison and be sued for so much money your great great grandchildren will be in debt. So make your move cowboy, I don’t play games.

  • Patrick Ryan

    This is probably one of the main reasons I want Google Glass

  • johngy

    People are still thinking this is the old USA. You, of your own free will and choice, gave away your rights to a Socialist government. You didn’t vote or if you did, you thought it was a popularity contest. You got what you voted for.

    • G

      No, we gave away our rights to a right wing fascist government under