Posted on 07/04/2013 4:13:43 PM PDT by redreno
Is that what the police said?
I understand what you are saying. However the Cops in general have created such a toxic environment with their “blue wall of silence”, “them versus us” attitude, truly regal perks, andincreasing incidents of dog shooting and blasting into the wrong apartment or house notto menation a paramilitary method of operation that they are losing credibility.
I repeat Cops should be required to LIVE where they work, their should be civilian review boards with the power to fire rogue cops, and civilian directors of public safety supervising them instead of police chiefs. Further the 20 and out rule has to go. Full benefits for a full life’s work like any other profession. This is breaking the budgets of local governments. Of course this has to be implemented for new hires only.
Riiiiiiiight, I’m the ignorant one. The article states pretty clearly as to why this guy got arrested, why do you continue to insist otherwise. You’re either a cop, a cop wannabe, or a troll.
With power windows on cars these days, NOT impossible.
You were saying?
So, here’s my question. Who taped this incident, why, and did the cops arrest this person taking the video, too?
Boom... boom.
Where did you go? I'm considering the same action.
But the issue is about filming.
The issue has played out over several years and the courts keep ruling against the police. So the police have invented other "crimes" to control the filming, in this case obstruction. Sometimes "interfering with a police officer". Sometimes threatening a police officer.
The 4 police cars established the perimeter and the man was outside the perimeter. The dog was outside the perimeter.
The other camera you mention was across the side street, further outside the perimeter, but more important, they were not blatently filming, challenging the authority of the police.
The question here is why was the dog owner arrested, not what followed.
Maybe you could provide an answer.
Could you provide a specific point on the video the dog owner obstructed justice and or interfered with police?
I wasn’t there. Reading the original article the owner purposely pulled into a current crime scene and played his radio over requests of LEO’s, that could not hear their two-way radios, to turn his down. The owner had a history of not only videoing police (which I find perfectly ok and legal) but also disrupting their ability to work.
My response to a charging 13 pound Rot is still the same two shots instead of one. Now I will leave this thread as the rabid dog types will descend with all sorts of alternative scenarios or “you would only shoot mine once” type retorts.
“Boom... boom”
You got that right.
The police officers knew he didn't obstruct justice. But he was blatently filming, holding the camera above his head, hollering at the police, agitating, challenging their authority.
The two police officers knew he would not have been convicted but he would be booked, spend some time in a cell, pay 10% of the bond, pay to get both his car and dog out of the pound. And would probably never film the police again.
The question here is why was the dog owner arrested, not what followed.
Maybe you could provide an answer.
I could clearly hear people talking on the video, but could not or barely hear a car radio...How could that possibly interfere?
The history of the dog owner, or what might have happened years ago, has nothing to do with this incident.
“Where did you go? I’m considering the same action.”
__________________________________________________
I started international traveling in 1999, mostly in central Europe. I left the states for good in Jan. 2005, for Slovakia, and worked as a private tutor of English conversation.
I traveled to the Philippines for a month in 2008 to meet some online girlfriends, then moved here in Jan 09.
I now live on a beach with my Philippine wife and our 2 year old baby boy. We live in a small two room cottage with all conveniences, such as aircon, kitchen nook, satellite TV, and DSL internet. Life is nice, and costing the three of us only about $1000 per month! We do not need, or want a car. There is plenty of very low cost and convenient transportation to take us anywhere we want, such as air conditioned buses that we can catch anywhere out on the nearby highway, within a ten min. wait. Some have on-board movies and wi-fi.
We have our own special pedicab driver, that we can text at anytime, to come pick us up, or run an errand. For example, I pay him fifty cents to pick up a case of beer from the distributor, or 15 cents to take wife and boy to her parents house,
I go to the market each day on my bicycle. Life is nice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.