Typical POS article. Why did the police detain the kid in the first place? I find it hard to believe that it was for the weapon because if they though a weapon was involved they would not have tried to force him to the ground. Since when can police just force you against a fence and they try to throw you to the ground. I have not heard a reason for the original stop nor even info about questioning him. Something smells here.
This is the first thing that came to my mind, and something I can't believe isn't mentioned in the article. They may very well have had a valid reason to stop him, but the fact that no such reason was mentioned makes it look bad for the officers involved.