At what point in the story, which was articulated, were the officers expected to determine this guy was a "reasonable guy" and on what basis were they to make this judgement?
In a civil society, the 'authorities' don't have the right to stop and frisk anyone anytime they want. Unless asking questions about weird things you see in public places and taking pictures of same is now a crime, they didn't really have much if any business at all detaining him. It's not up to random Joe Citizen to answer any question the 'authorities' might think to have unless tere is some reasonable suspicion that a crime had, in fact, or was likely to take place.
now for the first...
If we're ever going to return to a state where we can walk safely any where at any time, rather than always fearing the possibility of a crime or a terrorist attack, we're going to have to expect answers from those people who seem to think they are too important, or do not want to be bothered by authorities, and refuse to provide civil answers to reasonable questions.
In a word, no. You people are seeing terrorists behind every lamppost. You notice that according to the article, the 'authorities' massively de-escalated the situation once they discovered that he was a reporter. Why is it that a reporter should get that kind of deference when the rest of us out here dont? Could it be that the 'authorties' in question knew they were out of line, and had exceeded their authority in searching him because he didn't feel like quaking in his shoes and licking their boots in a properly submissive manner?
Just because some people are criminals, does not give them the right to treat us all like we are.
Some else on the thread already mentioned Franklin's quote earlier. It is frankly more apt today than at any time in our history outside of the lawlessness that occurred during reconstruction in the south.
In a civil society, the 'authorities' don't have the right to stop and frisk anyone anytime they want.
That was not the case here. The officers responded to a call of a person 'acting suspicously.' They were simply responding to others fear. They only frisked him when he refused cooperation. Maybe his 'right' but not too smart.
Unless asking questions about weird things you see in public places and taking pictures of same is now a crime, they didn't really have much if any business at all detaining him.
I recall recently a similar incident. A mideastern man and a woman were taking pics of a TVA dam at 4 or 5:00 on a Sunday morning. That was not in and of itself illegal, but it was suspicious. The cop took his name and reported it to the FBI. The man was wanted for questioning by the FBI and later arrested for false passport or ID. According to your statements, the cop was out of line. In my mind he played a hunch and was correct, which is good police work.
It's not up to random Joe Citizen to answer any question the 'authorities' might think to have
Although true, think about how life will be if everyone refused to cooperate with the police under all circumstances, eveb reasonable ones, such as this.
You people
You people? Who are 'you people'? anyone who disagrees with you, or are you drawing your own conclusions?
are seeing terrorists behind every lamppost.
No. We are keeping our eyes open. By doing so it may make it more difficult for real terrorists.
You notice that according to the article, the 'authorities' massively de-escalated the situation once they discovered that he was a reporter.
In other words when he went from being a suspect, to being a cooperative person.
Why is it that a reporter should get that kind of deference when the rest of us out here dont?
Brief story. I was at the local video store when I saw two cops approaching a guy standing by a car. They asked him some questions and he produced ID. One cop called it in. The guy then took off and was soon tackled by the other cop. In attempting to cuff the guy, the guy stood up, with two cops on him. A third cop came over and some punches were thrown. The man was soon subdued, after some continued struggle.
A woman standing next to me thought the cops to be way out of line and commented to her friend that "somebody should report this". That was when I decided to act. I approached one of the officers, gave him my card, told him what the woman said and offered to be a witness to the whole incident.
The cop was very grateful that I stepped forward. He said too few do in support of them.
People can see things differently, you and others see the reporter incident as "harrasment" I see it as police being a little cautious in these trying times.