DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> US Marshal attacks woman and smashes camera
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 103, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/23/2015 08:07:53 AM · #1
Thank goodness for increasing numbers of people filming police. This really is out of control.

CNN Article, with video.

ETA: Long version on Youtube (Language warning: NSFW)

For those keeping score, if a civilian was to take a phone from someone, while wearing a rifle, they would undoubtedly be charged with, and convicted of, armed robbery. Anyone want to take a whack at guessing why this officer won't face the same charges?

Message edited by author 2015-04-23 08:12:53.
04/23/2015 09:09:11 AM · #2
That's nuts. Guys like this need to be fired. If he can't control his temper with a woman with a camera-phone, how can he control himself with actual criminals?
04/23/2015 09:25:54 AM · #3
How many times do I have to say "BODY CAM".
Just another bully cop urinating on the rights of an innocent person.

I would love to hear the cops side of the story (provided he didn't know he was being recorded across the street).

It's time to weed these thugs out. I wonder if any of the other officers turned him in for breaking the law?
04/23/2015 09:54:56 AM · #4
start suing them and force them pay the lawsuits out of the pension fund.
04/23/2015 10:10:41 AM · #5
Originally posted by Mike:

start suing them and force them pay the lawsuits out of the pension fund.


If it was only that easy.
04/23/2015 11:04:04 AM · #6
Originally posted by Mike:

start suing them and force them pay the lawsuits out of the pension fund.


Well, one thing is for sure - the real losers here are always the tax payers (and not just the tax payers who are getting assaulted and battered by the police, but also those of us who just get to repeatedly foot the bill for this non-sense)

It was just announced this week that the county in California where the guy who stole the horse was beaten has settled with that idiot for $650,000 - now seriously, we the tax payers just funded this criminal's activities for the next few years, and all because the officers couldn't resist the opportunity to mete out a bit of street justice.

Personally, I LOVE the idea of taking it out of the pension fund, along with 1/2 of the money coming directly from the officer's paycheck.
04/23/2015 11:06:08 AM · #7
Originally posted by nygold:



It's time to weed these thugs out. I wonder if any of the other officers turned him in for breaking the law?


Of course not. Heck, you know they'll bury the body-cam footage every time they can as well - citizens with cameras is the only real solution to this problem, and the more citizens record the police, the less this shit will happen. (especially, if as suggested above, we start to make them financially responsible rather than just taking the money out of the tax payer's pockets)
04/23/2015 11:17:04 AM · #8
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by nygold:



It's time to weed these thugs out. I wonder if any of the other officers turned him in for breaking the law?


Of course not. Heck, you know they'll bury the body-cam footage every time they can as well - citizens with cameras is the only real solution to this problem, and the more citizens record the police, the less this shit will happen. (especially, if as suggested above, we start to make them financially responsible rather than just taking the money out of the tax payer's pockets)


Here's a thought... make having liability insurance a pre-requisite for all police officers, determine what the minimum amount of coverage will be required, have them pay for it, monitor the process to ensure that coverage is up to date and voila, the burden on taxpayers is greatly reduced.

Any ideas on this suggestion.

Ray
04/23/2015 11:28:04 AM · #9
Originally posted by RayEthier:



Here's a thought... make having liability insurance a pre-requisite for all police officers, determine what the minimum amount of coverage will be required, have them pay for it, monitor the process to ensure that coverage is up to date and voila, the burden on taxpayers is greatly reduced.

Any ideas on this suggestion.

Ray


Awful idea - why? Because just like malpractice insurance with doctors, the cost will get passed along to the tax payers in the end, and the actual cost will be magnified by the fact that we would now have a for-profit 3rd party in the middle.

ETA: Additionally, this would probably just further embolden the thugs, as they'd figure "Screw it, I'm insured!"..

The only solution is to make the officers themselves directly liable for damages.

Message edited by author 2015-04-23 11:30:08.
04/23/2015 12:04:32 PM · #10
The officer was absolutely wrong in what he did.

But in watching the video, I'm stunned at the stupidity of the woman standing so close to what was going on. I may be extremely naive, but I still think there a lot of good men and women putting their lives on the line to try to keep the peace and keep people safe. They don't need people crawling up their rears while they're trying to do their job.

I say go ahead and film -- but keep a reasonable distance! These people are the ones that are getting the photographers in trouble and giving them a bad name. The ones that run up to the accidents, the arrests, thinking they can be right there and in the way.

I know she wasn't all that close; there have been ones a lot worse, but I immediately thought: I would never go in that close for the pictures or the video. I would have a camera with a video and a longer lens. You don't need to give people who are already in dangerous situations something else to worry about.

04/23/2015 12:15:56 PM · #11
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by RayEthier:



Here's a thought... make having liability insurance a pre-requisite for all police officers, determine what the minimum amount of coverage will be required, have them pay for it, monitor the process to ensure that coverage is up to date and voila, the burden on taxpayers is greatly reduced.

Any ideas on this suggestion.

Ray


Awful idea - why? Because just like malpractice insurance with doctors, the cost will get passed along to the tax payers in the end, and the actual cost will be magnified by the fact that we would now have a for-profit 3rd party in the middle.

ETA: Additionally, this would probably just further embolden the thugs, as they'd figure "Screw it, I'm insured!"..

The only solution is to make the officers themselves directly liable for damages.


Just a bit simplistic, I'm afraid. This would unduly burden the vast majority of cops who are doing their job right. I think the real issue is the "blue wall", and that's almost impossible to address. First, its mere existence has to be acknowledged, and then the entire culture needs to be shifted. The main problem with that is the type of work they do. It's literally life and death, and you really need to be able to trust your partner to do it properly.

I also think the police force needs to do a better job of screening applicants, keeping an eye on those who start displaying worrisome tendencies, and reassign them to positions off the street while undergoing mandatory counseling until such time they are cleared for duty or fired.
04/23/2015 12:25:49 PM · #12
Originally posted by tanguera:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by RayEthier:



Here's a thought... make having liability insurance a pre-requisite for all police officers, determine what the minimum amount of coverage will be required, have them pay for it, monitor the process to ensure that coverage is up to date and voila, the burden on taxpayers is greatly reduced.

Any ideas on this suggestion.

Ray


Awful idea - why? Because just like malpractice insurance with doctors, the cost will get passed along to the tax payers in the end, and the actual cost will be magnified by the fact that we would now have a for-profit 3rd party in the middle.

ETA: Additionally, this would probably just further embolden the thugs, as they'd figure "Screw it, I'm insured!"..

The only solution is to make the officers themselves directly liable for damages.


Just a bit simplistic, I'm afraid. This would unduly burden the vast majority of cops who are doing their job right.


no one holds these types of cops accountable and the taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for a reckless civil servant. someone has to hold him accountable and knowing that a cops partners behavior is affecting their financial future might make them attempt to keep that officer in check or at least not look the other way.
04/23/2015 01:18:35 PM · #13
Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.
04/23/2015 01:32:26 PM · #14
Originally posted by bohemka:

Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.


LOL!!!
04/23/2015 01:42:55 PM · #15
a fine line between bravery and foolhardiness.
04/23/2015 02:43:56 PM · #16
Originally posted by tanguera:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by RayEthier:



Here's a thought... make having liability insurance a pre-requisite for all police officers, determine what the minimum amount of coverage will be required, have them pay for it, monitor the process to ensure that coverage is up to date and voila, the burden on taxpayers is greatly reduced.

Any ideas on this suggestion.

Ray


Awful idea - why? Because just like malpractice insurance with doctors, the cost will get passed along to the tax payers in the end, and the actual cost will be magnified by the fact that we would now have a for-profit 3rd party in the middle.

ETA: Additionally, this would probably just further embolden the thugs, as they'd figure "Screw it, I'm insured!"..

The only solution is to make the officers themselves directly liable for damages.


Just a bit simplistic, I'm afraid. This would unduly burden the vast majority of cops who are doing their job right. I think the real issue is the "blue wall", and that's almost impossible to address. First, its mere existence has to be acknowledged, and then the entire culture needs to be shifted. The main problem with that is the type of work they do. It's literally life and death, and you really need to be able to trust your partner to do it properly.

I also think the police force needs to do a better job of screening applicants, keeping an eye on those who start displaying worrisome tendencies, and reassign them to positions off the street while undergoing mandatory counseling until such time they are cleared for duty or fired.


Unduly burden? If I blow up a server and take my client's manufacturing facility offline for a day, you can bet they're going to sue me for damages and lost production. Why is that an unreasonable burden upon them if it's not unreasonable upon me? I mean, what reason do they have to reasonably be relieved of personal accountability for their actions...

And, for the record, the amount of damages claimed in that scenario could easily top $1,000,000 USD - so it's not like I'm talking about small numbers here.

ETA: Also, the whole "life and death" thing is hyperbolic, police work is by no means the most dangerous job out there. Heck, it doesn't even make the top 10.

Message edited by author 2015-04-23 14:57:07.
04/23/2015 05:44:15 PM · #17
Originally posted by tanguera:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by RayEthier:



Here's a thought... make having liability insurance a pre-requisite for all police officers, determine what the minimum amount of coverage will be required, have them pay for it, monitor the process to ensure that coverage is up to date and voila, the burden on taxpayers is greatly reduced.

Any ideas on this suggestion.

Ray


Awful idea - why? Because just like malpractice insurance with doctors, the cost will get passed along to the tax payers in the end, and the actual cost will be magnified by the fact that we would now have a for-profit 3rd party in the middle.

ETA: Additionally, this would probably just further embolden the thugs, as they'd figure "Screw it, I'm insured!"..

The only solution is to make the officers themselves directly liable for damages.


Just a bit simplistic, I'm afraid. This would unduly burden the vast majority of cops who are doing their job right. .


No more so than having liability insurance for any other profession. Do your job right and your rates stay low, start smashing cameras and assaulting people for no reason and you won't be able to afford to be a cop because your insurance company doesn't want to keep paying out for your asshattery and your rates will reflect that.
04/23/2015 05:47:56 PM · #18
That's sad...

Originally posted by bohemka:

Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.
04/23/2015 07:54:05 PM · #19
Originally posted by bohemka:

Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.

I agree. She was super annoying. Here's the recovered video from her phone.
04/23/2015 08:04:53 PM · #20
Originally posted by bohemka:

Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.


Sounds like someone else has TMZ disease also.
04/23/2015 08:19:42 PM · #21
Originally posted by markwiley:

Originally posted by bohemka:

Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.

I agree. She was super annoying. Here's the recovered video from her phone.


The Police gave a lawful order to go across the street...they messed up.... what they should have done is arrest her for ignoring that order, confiscated her phone, then give it back to her when someone bailed her out of jail.....when the U.S.Marshal's get involved it is usually more than the local pot dealer...

Message edited by author 2015-04-23 20:21:32.
04/24/2015 07:47:04 AM · #22
Originally posted by nygold:

Originally posted by bohemka:

Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.


Sounds like someone else has TMZ disease also.


Ok, for the other senior citizens to shy to ask, what is TMZ disease?
04/24/2015 09:15:33 AM · #23
Originally posted by ambaker:

Ok, for the other senior citizens to shy to ask, what is TMZ disease?

MEGA celebrity-gossip web site.
04/24/2015 09:38:24 AM · #24
Originally posted by ambaker:

Originally posted by nygold:

Originally posted by bohemka:

Sorry, but I kind of enjoyed watching an annoying person with TMZ disease get their phone smashed.


Sounds like someone else has TMZ disease also.


Ok, for the other senior citizens to shy to ask, what is TMZ disease?

I don't know that it's a real thing. It's just some words I flippantly threw together to criticize the over-documentation of ourselves and the people and events we've built up to "celebrity" in our minds. TMZ is a program or network (I honestly don't know; maybe a magazine as well) that exists to create news using random, non-news items, like the clothes TV and movie personalities wear, arguments with paparazzi, shelves for rear ends, etc.

This person had no interest in documenting what the police and marshals were actually doing — she interjected herself as an actor in an attempt to create news, voluntarily standing in the immediate proximity of armed police action, and then recording herself repeatedly accusing them of making her feel unsafe. They didn't ask her to stop filming (as she said), they asked her to move away. It's certainly not legal or nice to grab and smash her phone, but she was obnoxiously hunting bull, and as the great philosopher Richard Vernon famously said, "Don't mess with the bull. You'll get the horns." It's a reminder that the law isn't a safety net for a failure of common sense.

[Cops-abusing-authority-bad disclaimer here, since it's apparently needed.]
04/24/2015 09:53:16 AM · #25
you are right and this video is just another reminder of how there is a second side to most incidents to see nowadays.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 09:17:32 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 09:17:32 PM EDT.