[thefactor]

as i said, i would have looked at the car for an equipment violation. bulb that was out, obscured license plate, tinted windows. stuff like that. all within the officer's rights if the vehicle is operated on public roads.

and i would have been nice and polite about it. the kid wants to agitate, fine. but i'm going to do my job to the letter.

[FlJoePa]

WTF are you talking about? Why should ANY leo LOOK for an equipment violation? Why? To prove some point? What kind of an attitude is that? Who works for who here?

The kid was in a public parking lot and did NOTHING wrong. The cop (if he had a brain) should have checked him out, laughed, and left.

But he had to play “tough guy” and play right into the kid’s hands. He must have the IQ of a hamster.

[WoofDog123]

“and i would have been nice and polite about it. the kid wants to agitate, fine. but i’m going to do my job to the letter.”

THAT is the issue, and if it had been handled that way I would tend to agree. A nice and polite officer can make their point very effectively in the way you describe if a point needs to be made and have no problem at all later, taped or whatever. I don’t think you would find any but the most biased posters on this thread having a problem for a cop *politely* proceeding to cite the kid for whatever list of real equipment problems after the kid mouthed off., finished with ‘have a good night, sir.’