LOL...woman goes nuts after cop pushes her aside...

[Alone]

They told them to go the other way and GTFO. When you advance on a cop when he tells you to do something else, do you expect him not to enforce it?

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: pray4mojo

Originally posted by: irishScott
A good number of reporters are simply emo fags who want an occupation where everybody likes and respects them (ie: News Anchor). Thus their fragile ego is shattered when they realize that they aren't untouchable.

If I were that cop, I'd shove her extra for slapping me.

Or maybe she knows her rights as a news reporter? :roll:

Her rights are no different than any other citizen. She doesn't get special rights just because she is a reporter.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus
Those are some f*cking stupid police officers. Who the hell randomly beat people up when there's cameras rolling?

Who was beat? They were refusing to obey an order to move and the cops pushed them along. I never saw a single strike. Just pushing.

Had the cops hit them, they would be wrong. But in this case the cops merely were trying to clear the area and pushed them along. It's not the cop's fault they were fighting back and falling down intentionally.

Some of you really need to spend time as a cop. What else can they do when people do not follow orders to clear an area? Beg? Plead? Cry?

Give me a break.

You need to read through the whole thread:

http://www.filecabi.net/video/file-302037267.html

The camera man was beaten with batons for no reason and the reporter was trying to save him but they beat and pushed her away too.

edit: add to the fact that that what they did was constitutionally questionable. They should have detained the few men who were causing trouble... it's not like there was a riot, but they went into storm trooper mode moved down the street to the peaceful protestors and started shooting them with rubber bullets and beating them with batons. Stop calling yourself a libertarian please.

Stop with the insults. A libertarian believes in a strong government to provide protection and protect individual rights.

A libertarian is not an anarchist.

Now, on to the video. I admit the second video looks damning and is being billed as "unedited." But you know what? It's highly edited. It skips to specific police actions without showing ANY lead up to that action. So neither you, nor I, have ANY idea what happened before each action, or what may have provoked those actions. Additionally in the part she says the cops are beating the reporter with batons I see NOTHING about any batons. I see no cops swinging. All I see are the reporters falling down again and refusing to move.

A libertarian is also objective. You are taking the word of a highly edited video made by highly biased people with an agenda. The reporters who are claiming harm are also the ones in control of the content you just watched and the ones reporting on said content.

Outside of a FEW individuals, the protest, by all accounts, was peaceful. Libertarians should have a certain amount of distrust of the government, which you do not seem to have when it comes to human rights, otherwise you would probably be more vocal about such acts like this, or Bush's insistence on circumventing habeus corpus, using torture on both guilty and innocent detainees alike, extraordinary renditions, secret prisons, etc. like the rest of the libertarian community. You told me yourself you cannot name a right you've lost, but others have lost their rights but you don't much seem to care.

As for the video, ALL accounts indicated the protest was very peaceful until the cops decided to act without any self control or any professionalism and started attacking the peaceful protesters. These protesters were on public property and the vast vast majority were not causing any problems.

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: Phokus
As for the video, ALL accounts indicated the protest was very peaceful until the cops decided to act without any self control or any professionalism and started attacking the peaceful protesters. These protesters were on public property and the vast vast majority were not causing any problems.

Do you think riots don't start like this? Ever? People were causing problems to the cops went in to make sure it didn't get worse, then these people started taunting the cops. At that point they decided that it would make more sense to stop it now, rather than wait for it to become a riot.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Alone

Originally posted by: Phokus
As for the video, ALL accounts indicated the protest was very peaceful until the cops decided to act without any self control or any professionalism and started attacking the peaceful protesters. These protesters were on public property and the vast vast majority were not causing any problems.

Do you think riots don't start like this? Ever? People were causing problems to the cops went in to make sure it didn't get worse, then these people started taunting the cops. At that point they decided that it would make more sense to stop it now, rather than wait for it to become a riot.

No, there were a few idiots causing problems, and the cops took care of them. After that, the cops decided to go down the street and turn on the peaceful protesters for absolutely no reason. Hey guess what, chaos ensued after that. If the crowd was out of control, then they had a right to use force, but the crowd was in control.

 

[Alone]

No, there were a few idiots causing problems, and the cops took care of them. After that, the cops decided to go down the street and turn on the peaceful protesters for absolutely no reason. Hey guess what, chaos ensued after that. If the crowd was out of control, then they had a right to use force, but the crowd was in control.

You mean the footage that a reporter presented that supported them couldn't possibly be biased? Thanks for opening my eyes!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus
Those are some f*cking stupid police officers. Who the hell randomly beat people up when there's cameras rolling?

Who was beat? They were refusing to obey an order to move and the cops pushed them along. I never saw a single strike. Just pushing.

Had the cops hit them, they would be wrong. But in this case the cops merely were trying to clear the area and pushed them along. It's not the cop's fault they were fighting back and falling down intentionally.

Some of you really need to spend time as a cop. What else can they do when people do not follow orders to clear an area? Beg? Plead? Cry?

Give me a break.

You need to read through the whole thread:

http://www.filecabi.net/video/file-302037267.html

The camera man was beaten with batons for no reason and the reporter was trying to save him but they beat and pushed her away too.

edit: add to the fact that that what they did was constitutionally questionable. They should have detained the few men who were causing trouble... it's not like there was a riot, but they went into storm trooper mode moved down the street to the peaceful protestors and started shooting them with rubber bullets and beating them with batons. Stop calling yourself a libertarian please.

Stop with the insults. A libertarian believes in a strong government to provide protection and protect individual rights.

A libertarian is not an anarchist.

Now, on to the video. I admit the second video looks damning and is being billed as "unedited." But you know what? It's highly edited. It skips to specific police actions without showing ANY lead up to that action. So neither you, nor I, have ANY idea what happened before each action, or what may have provoked those actions. Additionally in the part she says the cops are beating the reporter with batons I see NOTHING about any batons. I see no cops swinging. All I see are the reporters falling down again and refusing to move.

A libertarian is also objective. You are taking the word of a highly edited video made by highly biased people with an agenda. The reporters who are claiming harm are also the ones in control of the content you just watched and the ones reporting on said content.

Outside of a FEW individuals, the protest, by all accounts, was peaceful. Libertarians should have a certain amount of distrust of the government, which you do not seem to have when it comes to human rights, otherwise you would probably be more vocal about such acts like this, or Bush's insistence on circumventing habeus corpus, using torture on both guilty and innocent detainees alike, extraordinary renditions, secret prisons, etc. like the rest of the libertarian community. You told me yourself you cannot name a right you've lost, but others have lost their rights but you don't much seem to care.

As for the video, ALL accounts indicated the protest was very peaceful until the cops decided to act without any self control or any professionalism and started attacking the peaceful protesters. These protesters were on public property and the vast vast majority were not causing any problems.

I have a lot of distrust of the government.

Having grown up in LA, I have just as much distrust in the crowds they were dealing with.

And this video is HARDLY unbiased.

The difference between you and me, Phokus, is you are an idealist and I am a pragmatist. You are subjective, and I am objective.

We are both libertarians, only with different priorities, different philosophical beliefs and different lives.

I could just as easily point out how I never see you rally against socialism and nanny-statism.

So stop with the questioning of my political beliefs. It's getting old.

 

[Canai]

Why all the fuss about the video being unbiased? Of COURSE it's not unbiased, the reporter in the video had a run in with the police.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Canai
Why all the fuss about the video being unbiased? Of COURSE it's not unbiased, the reporter in the video had a run in with the police.

Because the video is HIGHLY edited and editorialized and some people are taking it as gospel rather than looking at it with suspicion.

 

[Icepick]

That was pretty lame. This is my favorite reporter ownage video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYyyqIZTvYY

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus
Those are some f*cking stupid police officers. Who the hell randomly beat people up when there's cameras rolling?

Who was beat? They were refusing to obey an order to move and the cops pushed them along. I never saw a single strike. Just pushing.

Had the cops hit them, they would be wrong. But in this case the cops merely were trying to clear the area and pushed them along. It's not the cop's fault they were fighting back and falling down intentionally.

Some of you really need to spend time as a cop. What else can they do when people do not follow orders to clear an area? Beg? Plead? Cry?

Give me a break.

You need to read through the whole thread:

http://www.filecabi.net/video/file-302037267.html

The camera man was beaten with batons for no reason and the reporter was trying to save him but they beat and pushed her away too.

edit: add to the fact that that what they did was constitutionally questionable. They should have detained the few men who were causing trouble... it's not like there was a riot, but they went into storm trooper mode moved down the street to the peaceful protestors and started shooting them with rubber bullets and beating them with batons. Stop calling yourself a libertarian please.

Stop with the insults. A libertarian believes in a strong government to provide protection and protect individual rights.

A libertarian is not an anarchist.

Now, on to the video. I admit the second video looks damning and is being billed as "unedited." But you know what? It's highly edited. It skips to specific police actions without showing ANY lead up to that action. So neither you, nor I, have ANY idea what happened before each action, or what may have provoked those actions. Additionally in the part she says the cops are beating the reporter with batons I see NOTHING about any batons. I see no cops swinging. All I see are the reporters falling down again and refusing to move.

A libertarian is also objective. You are taking the word of a highly edited video made by highly biased people with an agenda. The reporters who are claiming harm are also the ones in control of the content you just watched and the ones reporting on said content.

Outside of a FEW individuals, the protest, by all accounts, was peaceful. Libertarians should have a certain amount of distrust of the government, which you do not seem to have when it comes to human rights, otherwise you would probably be more vocal about such acts like this, or Bush's insistence on circumventing habeus corpus, using torture on both guilty and innocent detainees alike, extraordinary renditions, secret prisons, etc. like the rest of the libertarian community. You told me yourself you cannot name a right you've lost, but others have lost their rights but you don't much seem to care.

As for the video, ALL accounts indicated the protest was very peaceful until the cops decided to act without any self control or any professionalism and started attacking the peaceful protesters. These protesters were on public property and the vast vast majority were not causing any problems.

I have a lot of distrust of the government.

Having grown up in LA, I have just as much distrust in the crowds they were dealing with.

And this video is HARDLY unbiased.

The difference between you and me, Phokus, is you are an idealist and I am a pragmatist. You are subjective, and I am objective.

We are both libertarians, only with different priorities, different philosophical beliefs and different lives.

I could just as easily point out how I never see you rally against socialism and nanny-statism.

So stop with the questioning of my political beliefs. It's getting old.

Of course i have, i've rallied against the vast expansion of the federal gov't under the Bush administration (whom you so love out of 'pragmatism') these past 7 years.

I would hardly call you 'objective' either... you're more like a 'glenn reynolds' libertarian who will call himself libertarian but will gladly overlook abuses of liberty by Bush and his cronies.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Alone

No, there were a few idiots causing problems, and the cops took care of them. After that, the cops decided to go down the street and turn on the peaceful protesters for absolutely no reason. Hey guess what, chaos ensued after that. If the crowd was out of control, then they had a right to use force, but the crowd was in control.

You mean the footage that a reporter presented that supported them couldn't possibly be biased? Thanks for opening my eyes!

Uh yeah, too bad the story has been played out from multiple media outlets and all of them show the police overreacting from multiple cameras and multiple witnesses.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Of course i have, i've rallied against the vast expansion of the federal gov't under the Bush administration (whom you so love out of 'pragmatism') these past 7 years.

I would hardly call you 'objective' either... you're more like a 'glenn reynolds' libertarian who will call himself libertarian but will gladly overlook abuses of liberty by Bush and his cronies.

And I could just as easily point out how I have never seen you rally against democratic party calls for authoritarian socialism.

And who ever said I was a Bush supporter?

Grow up, Phokus. You hate the GOP more than the Dems. I hate the Dems just slightly more than the GOP. We hold the same ideals, for the most part. We are libertarians with different PRIORITIES.

So I'm sorry if I don't walk lock step with you on every issue or on what issues I find most important to me. You'll have that when people are INDIVIDUAL free thinkers.

 

[txrandom]

I hate how journalists think they are special and can doing anything at anytime. Sadly most of us support this because I like watching the news.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: Wheezer
You cannot do that!!!...sorry lady looks like he did...move along.

it was reported on TV that she was a reporter for Fox News.

 

[crt1530]

This reporter and her camera woman had one altercation with the police and then sought out another. I don't feel sorry for them.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: pray4mojo

Originally posted by: irishScott
A good number of reporters are simply emo fags who want an occupation where everybody likes and respects them (ie: News Anchor). Thus their fragile ego is shattered when they realize that they aren't untouchable.

If I were that cop, I'd shove her extra for slapping me.

Or maybe she knows her rights as a news reporter? :roll:

Exactly...the emo is IrishScott. There is law and emotions...you obviously made your choice.

His homepage is here.

 

[abaez]

I read a couple of the reponses - for those that say she needs to do what the cop tells her, a few years ago there was a law passed here in L.A. that the cops could not interfere with the media when reporting on an incident barring danger to themselves and/or the reporter or other people. Obviously none of that was happening which is why she was pretty upset and adamant that he couldn't do what he was doing.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: pray4mojo

Originally posted by: irishScott
A good number of reporters are simply emo fags who want an occupation where everybody likes and respects them (ie: News Anchor). Thus their fragile ego is shattered when they realize that they aren't untouchable.

If I were that cop, I'd shove her extra for slapping me.

Or maybe she knows her rights as a news reporter? :roll:

Ah, the naivety of liberals.

 

[Toastedlightly]

Next time I get pulled over... I'll resist the cop. Seems like I can sue them for using force against me.

 

[intogamer]

If this was a rally in any other country, little pushing is nothing. :roll: The US is getting to be a real pvsssy, I mean every small sh1t can be a lawsuit. The laws are being taking advantage than being followed. Plus the media which is just like an evil corporate, they exploit sh1t the wrong way. After all they are still to make profits...

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: pray4mojo

Originally posted by: irishScott
A good number of reporters are simply emo fags who want an occupation where everybody likes and respects them (ie: News Anchor). Thus their fragile ego is shattered when they realize that they aren't untouchable.

If I were that cop, I'd shove her extra for slapping me.

Or maybe she knows her rights as a news reporter? :roll:

So a cop can't shove a news reporter? :roll: If a cop tells you to move, you move.

Being a journalist doesn't make you special.

I suppose the Newsweek people who blew a CIA agent's cover also "knew their rights as a news reporter".

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: pray4mojo

Originally posted by: irishScott
A good number of reporters are simply emo fags who want an occupation where everybody likes and respects them (ie: News Anchor). Thus their fragile ego is shattered when they realize that they aren't untouchable.

If I were that cop, I'd shove her extra for slapping me.

Or maybe she knows her rights as a news reporter? :roll:

Exactly...the emo is IrishScott. There is law and emotions...you obviously made your choice.

His homepage is here.

So a cop can't shove a news reporter? :roll: If a cop tells you to move, you move.

Being a journalist doesn't make you special.

I suppose the Newsweek people who blew a CIA agent's cover also "knew their rights as a news reporter".

? I'm a little cynical I admit, but HTF am I emo?

 

[Rudee]

That was boring.

 

[natto fire]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: pray4mojo

Originally posted by: irishScott
A good number of reporters are simply emo fags who want an occupation where everybody likes and respects them (ie: News Anchor). Thus their fragile ego is shattered when they realize that they aren't untouchable.

If I were that cop, I'd shove her extra for slapping me.

Or maybe she knows her rights as a news reporter? :roll:

Exactly...the emo is IrishScott. There is law and emotions...you obviously made your choice.

His homepage is here.

So a cop can't shove a news reporter? :roll: If a cop tells you to move, you move.

Being a journalist doesn't make you special.

I suppose the Newsweek people who blew a CIA agent's cover also "knew their rights as a news reporter".

? I'm a little cynical I admit, but HTF am I emo?

Respecting police officers and not having knee-jerk reactions are now emo, didn't you get the memo? :roll:

I was avoiding this thread for so long because I knew their would be stupid comments about police brutality etc. I know the LAPD does not have the best reputation as far as being level-headed, but generalizing because of that is just stupid.

What are these special rights that news reporters have? Should I round up a few and start a posse, robbing banks, speeding, assaulting people and saying "Don't worry, we are news reporters".

Bottom line, when there is a mob around and a cop is in full riot gear and telling you what to do, you should probably go ahead and do it, unless you want to be treated like a rioter yourself. Let me guess though, nobody that made those asinine comments ever gets stressed at their job? Try having a job that your mistakes mean a lot more than "losing the Ripley account" or whatever else you knee-jerk OMG brutality whiny punks do.