Folks, you can't watch that video and not admit that the police are very often put in a no win situation where even the most minor event can blow up with a single person doing something stupid. I'm not talking about specifics to this video, just the overall picture of the police surrounded by a group and they have no idea who is in that group or what direction the situation will take.

I'm failing to find an issue with the guy recording what was going on. If he was too close (as if he was the ONLY person too close), then move him back. No need to smack the phone out of his hand and pepper spray him.

I agree but if you do that bad actors will act out even more, it will escalate, and the police will get blamed for that too.

 

I blame a lot of it on political correctness and hatred towards the police by many members of society.

 

In short, and especially without political backing, the police are in a no win situation.

 

I was on second street in Cincy during my college years when they had the big parties down there or on the plaza at riverfront stadium. A kid was not cooperating with the police. A very large crowd of folks surrounded the cop and the kid. The cop turned around and maced everyone around to clear is out. Buddy got it on the eyes. It worked pretty good for the cops as we all finally listened to them.

I'm failing to find an issue with the guy recording what was going on. If he was too close (as if he was the ONLY person too close)' date=' then move him back. No need to smack the phone out of his hand and pepper spray him.[/quote']

 

Looked like they were trying to move him back and he wasn't doing it. Instead he wanted to move closer and record.

Looked like they were trying to move him back and he wasn't doing it. Instead he wanted to move closer and record.

 

Okay, let's say that is the case. Why snatch the phone out of his hand, and why pepper spray him? He wasn't the only person that close.

The officer shouldn't have grabbed the phone. If they wanted him to move further back (the rest of the crown wasn't too far behind him) they should have moved him back, not take the phone and then throw it.

Okay, let's say that is the case. Why snatch the phone out of his hand, and why pepper spray him? He wasn't the only person that close.

 

Same reason only one person gets a ticket for speeding when there are dozens speeding by.

Okay, let's say that is the case. Why snatch the phone out of his hand, and why pepper spray him? He wasn't the only person that close.

 

I don't agree with snatching the phone out of his hand but to answer your other question, because you make an example out of the worst offender.

And to answer your question two or three horses before that one the officer told everyone to back up (away from the incident) and the one that grabbed the phone was motioning the same thing. In short, this is another situation where bystanders were given a lawful order to disperse away from an emergency situation and the man in question disregarded those orders. He is absolutely in violation of the law, no question about it.

 

All anyone had to do was take a few steps back and film away.

what is a safe distance to film?? There isn't a law stating 20 feet. This is a big time grey area. The officer should not take grab or damage a person phone. This is the misconduct. Police don't have rights that anyone else gets. If I stole a phone and broke it I would be charged. Why not the officer involed?? Was it safety?? The words be safe is just that a word. Feeling isn't the law. Feeling unsafe isn't a crime.

what is a safe distance to film?? There isn't a law stating 20 feet. This is a big time grey area. The officer should not take grab or damage a person phone. This is the misconduct. Police don't have rights that anyone else gets. If I stole a phone and broke it I would be charged. Why not the officer involed?? Was it safety?? The words be safe is just that a word. Feeling isn't the law. Feeling unsafe isn't a crime.

 

Good point. There is going to have to be a law and 20 feet is a good starting point but as EVERY police officer knows 20 feet is too close.

Good point. There is going to have to be a law and 20 feet is a good starting point but as EVERY police officer knows 20 feet is too close.

this won't happen. Why. Who is going to get out a tape and measure the distance. This is all preception. Two officer didn't have an issue one did. I say it's that officer that has the problem. Needs to find another line of work. No two people have the same preception. I'd say two out of three answers the question of who's wrong.

this won't happen. Why. Who is going to get out a tape and measure the distance. This is all preception. Two officer didn't have an issue one did. I say it's that officer that has the problem. Needs to find another line of work. No two people have the same preception. I'd say two out of three answers the question of who's wrong.

 

You and I definitely disagree on this topic.

 

And on the distance:

 

It is common knowledge that a suspect, armed with an edged weapon and within twenty-one feet of a police officer presents a deadly threat. Why? Because the “average” man can run that twenty-one feet in about one-point-five seconds; the same one-point-five seconds it will take that police officer to recognize danger, draw and point his weapon, and then pull the trigger. Even if the officer manages to get the shot off, and even if it hits the suspect; even if it instantly disables the suspect, the blade is going to be so close to the officer that the suspect’s momentum may continue forward with enough force for the edged weapon to end up injuring the officer anyway.

 

21 Feet Is Way Too Close - By Frank Borelli

I don't agree with snatching the phone out of his hand but to answer your other question, because you make an example out of the worst offender.

 

What makes that guy the worst offender? Because he has a phone in is hand?

Location Location Location

Location Location Location

 

Meaning he had his phone out and was nearby the officer with the shortest temper.