Ridiculous cops harass man quietly eating in his car (1 Viewer)

[Drowning Man]

Cops get butthurt that he asserts his rights and arrest him.

Should you be afraid to exercise your rights?

 

[TheParser]

Yes, some cops are real [fill in your own pejorative word].

Some lie and are sadistic. (Judges know that some cops lie in court, but judges are silent, for they have to go along to get along.)

BUT things would be a million times worse if there were no cops.

The predators out there roaming our streets are the worst beings on earth.

The other day one of them had the nerve to enter the tony town of Beverly Hills, California, where he smashed in a sliding glass door and murdered a prominent woman. He then left and while attempting another break-in, he accidentally shot himself in the foot. Sadly, he survived.

And an Asian lady in New York City (The Big Rotten Apple) has just died. She had been walking up the stairs in the subway when a gentleman tried to rob her. She fell down the stairs. Her family is grieving and traumatized. The gentleman, of course, will get merely a slap on the wrist.

YES, some cops are very bad.

BUT without cops, this country would be even worse to live in than it ALREADY is. (So far 58 police officers have been killed in the line of duty.)

 

[justabubba]

Cops get butthurt that he asserts his rights and arrest him.

Should you be afraid to exercise your rights?

what this documented for me is that the driver had the right to be arrested for refusing to reveal he was a licensed and insured driver, and that his vehicle was appropriately registered to be on the public roads
he could/should have done that and then refused to respond further, once demonstrating he was legally licensed to be behind the wheel of a vehicle which was compliant with vehicle registration requirements

 

[EdwinWillers]

Cops get butthurt that he asserts his rights and arrest him.

Should you be afraid to exercise your rights?

The guy was loitering in front of a closed business, which is, according to the police officer, not legal to do wherever they are - and being it was at night, makes sense to me, frankly.
All the officer was doing was trying to figure out who the guy was, asking for his identification, which given the circumstances was totally appropriate and LEGAL for him to do.

The guy in the car was just being a total jerk. If he was eating his taco in a different place that wouldn't be construed as loitering, he might have a case for harassment, but not here.

 

[Drowning Man]

what this documented for me is that the driver had the right to be arrested for refusing to reveal he was a licensed and insured driver,

No obligation to do that when not driving. Sitting in a car does not require a driver's license.

and that his vehicle was appropriately registered to be on the public roads

He wasn't on a public road.

he could/should have done that and then refused to respond further, once demonstrating he was legally licensed to be behind the wheel of a vehicle which was compliant with vehicle registration requirements

The police had no reasonable suspicion of a crime. They could clearly see what he was doing. He was eating food in his car in sight of the establishment that he purchased his food from.

 

[EdwinWillers]

No obligation to do that when not driving. Sitting in a car does not require a driver's license.

He wasn't on a public road.

The police had no reasonable suspicion of a crime. They could clearly see what he was doing. He was eating food in his car in sight of the establishment that he purchased his food from.

Did you not watch your own video? He was parked in front of a closed business, which is apparently NOT LEGAL in whatever town they're in - WHICH, btw, the officer explained to him.
And honestly, being parked in front of a closed business, at night, is perfectly legitimate reason for the officers to have stopped to investigate.

Rather than be a total jerk, all he had to do was hear the officer out, show him his driver's license and registration, and he'd have been on his way.
Instead, he chose to be a jerk got what he 100% deserved.

 

[Drowning Man]

Did you not watch your own video? He was parked in front of a closed business, which is apparently NOT LEGAL in whatever town they're in - WHICH, btw, the officer explained to him.
And honestly, being parked in front of a closed business, at night, is perfectly legitimate reason for the officers to have stopped to investigate.

Investigate away! They see him eating...

Oooooh....nefarious!

The encounter should have stopped right there.

Rather than be a total jerk, all he had to do was hear the officer out, show him his driver's license and registration, and he'd have been on his way.
Instead, he chose to be a jerk got what he 100% deserved.

Bullshit. The officers needlessly escalated the situation because they were mad that a guy was exercising his rights.

Should you be afraid to exercise your rights in this country? Maybe we should make it being a "total jerk" to have a gun in public...then you would say that open carrying is illegal, right?

 

[EdwinWillers]

what this documented for me is that the driver had the right to be arrested for refusing to reveal he was a licensed and insured driver, and that his vehicle was appropriately registered to be on the public roads
he could/should have done that and then refused to respond further, once demonstrating he was legally licensed to be behind the wheel of a vehicle which was compliant with vehicle registration requirements

It's night. It's dark out. The guy is parked in front of a closed business.
This is what the officer explained to the guy as he was asking for his ID and registration.
There is adequate reason for the officers to believe him being parked, at night, in front of a closed business, in violation of a local ordinance (apparently), was a suspicious situation, worthy of investigating.

And that's all the officers were doing - was investigating a suspicious situation that had, as an undernote, the aspect of a violation of a local ordinance.

All the guy had to do was answer the officer's questions, provide his ID and registration, and he'd have been ushered on his way, free to go about eating his taco.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Investigate away! They see him eating...

Oooooh....nefarious!

The encounter should have stopped right there.



Bullshit. The officers needlessly escalated the situation because they were mad that a guy was exercising his rights.

Should you be afraid to exercise your rights in this country? Maybe we should make it being a "total jerk" to have a gun in public...then you would say that open carrying is illegal, right?

That's total BS. Total nonsense. You have absolutely ZERO clue what you're talking about. You didn't even watch your own video for pity's sake.

It was the idiot who escalated the situation. 100%. And needlessly so. He got what he deserved, and rightly so.

 

[notquiteright]

No obligation to do that when not driving. Sitting in a car does not require a driver's license. He wasn't on a public road. The police had no reasonable suspicion of a crime. They could clearly see what he was doing. He was eating food in his car in sight of the establishment that he purchased his food from.

Actually, failure to produce some form of identification can get the citizen detained until their identity can be established.

Public road... perhaps that could be refined. Any area where the public has open access vs your driveway. However, sitting behind the wheel with key in ignition is considered operating that vehicle and the Officer can ask for ID and insurance.

Eating near source of food. That's one thing so is sitting near possible burglary targets. What criminal activity is occurring in the area is something few citizens know.

Best way to avoid problems is produce ID and insurance when an Officer asks and then decide how firmly you want to stand on your rights....

 

[jonny5]

Imagine if the guy had just helped the cops do their job. The cops could have moved on to something else, the guy could be eating his taco, and there would be no thread. Win Win Win.

 

[Drowning Man]

The police AREN'T feelings police. Being a "total jerk" isn't against the law. Especially when people seem to equate excising your rights with being a "total jerk"...

Again...let's put it in terms of gun rights (the only Amendment some people seem to actually respect). Let's say that it's being a "total jerk" to openly carry a gun in public. Should you, on that basis alone, not do it?

 

[EdwinWillers]

Imagine if the guy had just helped the cops do their job. The cops could have moved on to something else, the guy could be eating his taco, and there would be no thread. Win Win Win.

BINGO!

/thread

 

[Drowning Man]

Actually, failure to produce some form of identification can get the citizen detained until their identity can be established.

Nope. IF the police have reasonable suspicion of a crime, even in states with Terry stop laws, you aren't required to have any kind of identification card. You may be required to identify yourself (usually with your name and address and/or birthday), but no ID is required.

Public road... perhaps that could be refined. Any area where the public has open access vs your driveway. However, sitting behind the wheel with key in ignition is considered operating that vehicle and the Officer can ask for ID and insurance.

Nope. Not on private property.

Eating near source of food. That's one thing so is sitting near possible burglary targets. What criminal activity is occurring in the area is something few citizens know.

Still not reasonable suspicion without something more.

Best way to avoid problems is produce ID and insurance when an Officer asks and then decide how firmly you want to stand on your rights....

Yeah...why have rights?

 

[multivita-man]

No obligation to do that when not driving. Sitting in a car does not require a driver's license.

He's presumably operating a motor vehicle if he's in the driver's seat and has his keys in the ignition or if it can be reasonably deduced that he drove to his present location. A classic example is that you can be arrested, charged, and convicted of DUI even if you're not actually driving the vehicle.

He wasn't on a public road.

The police had no reasonable suspicion of a crime. They could clearly see what he was doing. He was eating food in his car in sight of the establishment that he purchased his food from.

All of this may be true, but I have no sympathy at all for people who are trying to start shit with cops for no apparent reason other than to get on YouTube.

 

[Drowning Man]

Imagine if the guy had just helped the cops do their job. The cops could have moved on to something else, the guy could be eating his taco, and there would be no thread. Win Win Win.

Yeah...no reason to have rights. Just let the cops wipe their asses with the Constitution.

 

[EdwinWillers]

The police AREN'T feelings police. Being a "total jerk" isn't against the law. Especially when people seem to equate excising your rights with being a "total jerk"...

Again...let's put it in terms of gun rights (the only Amendment some people seem to actually respect). Let's say that it's being a "total jerk" to openly carry a gun in public. Should you, on that basis alone, not do it?

YOUR THREAD has nothing to do with "gun rights," even if you are making some sort of massive mental leap between your video and that.

And the idiot / jerk wasn't arrested for being an idiot / jerk. His being an idiot / jerk is what prompted him to behave as he did, that behavior being what got him arrested. And rightly so.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Yeah...no reason to have rights. Just let the cops wipe their asses with the Constitution.

 

[Drowning Man]

He's presumably operating a motor vehicle if he's in the driver's seat and has his keys in the ignition or if it can be reasonably deduced that he drove to his present location. A classic example is that you can be arrested, charged, and convicted of DUI even if you're not actually driving the vehicle.

"Presumably" isn't actuality. Again, no obligation under the law. And if you're off the public road, off the public easement, I'm not sure that the cops can get you for DUI.

For example, if you're in your driveway sleeping in your car...it gets real murky.

All of this may be true, but I have no sympathy at all for people who are trying to start shit with cops for no apparent reason other than to get on YouTube.

He didn't start anything. He sat in his car eating...

 

[EdwinWillers]

...and this is why one remains silent or pleads the 5th whenever brought before a leftist kangaroo court. Nothing you say, however rational it may be, will have any impact whatsoever.

 

[Drowning Man]

...and this is why one remains silent or pleads the 5th whenever brought before a leftist kangaroo court. Nothing you say, however rational it may be, will have any impact whatsoever.

Try saying something rational...

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

The police had no reasonable suspicion of a crime. They could clearly see what he was doing. He was eating food in his car in sight of the establishment that he purchased his food from.

The video did not have enough evidence for the viewer to determine that. Many businesses restrict parking in their lots to business hours, and parking outside of business hours would be criminal trespass in such a case.

It was not a single officer overreaching his authority, but a coordinated effort by multiple officers who seemed to all be under the understanding that the arrest was being executed by the book. None of the officers seemed particularly belligerent, but were merely following the protocol for that situation. They no doubt cited a specific municipal code as part of the arrest.

It seems likely that the author of the video knew that he was doing something illegal. He clearly took that video with the intention of getting arrested and framed it in such a way that he thought would appeal to the anti-cop sentiments of his audience.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No obligation to do that when not driving. Sitting in a car does not require a driver's license.

He admitted to have driven to and away from a nearby Taco Bell as well asking if he was free to leave (presumably to drive away). He expected and received answers to his own questions.

He wasn't on a public road.

He wasn’t being given a ticket.

The police had no reasonable suspicion of a crime. They could clearly see what he was doing. He was eating food in his car in sight of the establishment that he purchased his food from.

He had been loitering near a closed business and had obviously been driving and wished to continue driving. Asking for identification (license and registration) is not unreasonable - he asked for identification from at least one officer.

What the video shows starts sometime after his initial encounter with police (as backup was arriving) - meaning you have no idea what else may have come to the attention of police who decided that calling for backup was in order.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Cops get butthurt that he asserts his rights and arrest him.

Should you be afraid to exercise your rights?

You have no privilege to drive without providing applicable documentation supporting having been granted that privilege.

 

[Drowning Man]

The video did not have enough evidence for the viewer to determine that. Many businesses restrict parking in their lots to business hours, and parking outside of business hours would be criminal trespass in such a case.

It was not a single officer overreaching his authority, but a coordinated effort by multiple officers who seemed to all be under the understanding that the arrest was being executed by the book. None of the officers seemed particularly belligerent, but were merely following the protocol for that situation. They no doubt cited a specific municipal code as part of the arrest.

It seems likely that the author of the video knew that he was doing something illegal. He clearly took that video with the intention of getting arrested and framed it in such a way that he thought would appeal to the anti-cop sentiments of his audience.

IF that were the case, giving up his ID was irrelevant.