So, in your world "Co-Operation" means subjecting yourself to an illegal search/detainment, and giving up your 4th/5th Ammendment rights? "Co-operation" means that a donut-eater is always right? "Co-operation" means that LEO-Uber-Alles types, and their Statist hangers-on have more rights and freedoms than I or anyone else who follows Constitutional Law does?
OK, repeat after me..."BBBbbaaaaaaahhhhhh!"
Enjoy your slave collar and new name/number....I will not follow you and your ilk's path.
No, he refused to submit to a request for ID that to him was unjustified. If he committed a crime of any sort, he was subject to arrest without being ID'ed. If he committed a crime and was arrested, he could identify himself from jail in order to make bail. At the side of the road, what difference does it make who he is if he is not guilty of anything? Not having ID is not a crime.
Since the man wasn't beligerent or aggressive, why didn't the cop explain why he was there and what he wanted? I think that it is because he wanted to prove that he was the 'man' and that this guy had to submit. Period.
I know that not all cops are bad. In fact, most are not. But they all seem to have a complex that doesn't let them not be top dog.
As an aside, I've been in a lot of bars where the bouncers took that attitude and I've seen lots of fights because of it. I worked at a bouncer for a short time, but my approach was different. These people were customers that the management wanted to have a good time and come back. When there was a problem, I spoke to them man to man. I never backed them into a corner. I didn't challenge their manhood. Guess what? I walked people out the door. No problems. No fights. Nobody hurt or arrested. This man did nothing in that video that required an arrest. Nothing. Even if what the cop did wasn't beyond his authority, it certainly was done in a stupid and irresponsible way that escalated the matter.