5269
Post by: lord_blackfang
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
I hear this is how the Boston Massacre got started.
Seriously though, if you throw things at people going about their day you deserve to be reprimanded (if not threatened with a firearm).
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Hmm, so the dude gets out of his hummer and approaches with gun in hand, scolds the crowd and as he is walking back to his hummer someone throws a snowball at him?
Since when did it become a good idea to throw a snowball at a man who approached you with a gun in his hand? That is akin to using your bare hand to feed a lion a piece of steak or hamburger. He will probably get more than just the meat you offered him.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
He's a COP - he's entitled!
5470
Post by: sebster
I heard this on the radio and I thought 'I wonder if the usual suspects on dakka that always defend policeman will defend this idiot?'
And for the record, it's a really stupid thing to brandish a firearm over a trivial offence like snowballs. Yes, it's stupid to provoke the lunatic brandishing the gun, but that doesn't change the fact that it was very stupid to draw the gun in the first place.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
If the kid or anyone HAD thrown a snowball at the cop he could have nabbed them for assault a peace officer.
Approaching with gun drawn may not have been the wisest but the crowd, the one in particular, using foul language and verbally assaulting a peace officer wasn't the smartest thing to do either.
Someone is lucky they didn't get tazed. Not to mention throwing snowballs at cars and the cops did nothing about that? They have some really laid back cops in D.C or else the cops just didn't want to bother with paperwork. Most places throwing snowballs at cars would get you slapped with a citation or the very least a warning.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Great way to blanket people who defend cops against idiots.
This cop was clearly not the wisest cop in the world. Gotta admit that the cop was pretty calm when the crowd started calling him a pig, though for the record that guy who was the one using the "F bomb" the most should have gotten his jaw broken.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
He's the guy who stepped into the middle of a snowball fight. He gets what he deserves.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
@Fateweaver: 'That Cop' was being a dick. If your car (a hummer at that) gets hit by a snowball, policeman or not, you don't brandish your weapon at them.
This guy was a killjoy and a control freak to boot. The other policemen didn't care, no one was getting hurt. It was a bit of harmless fun. Geez, member of the force or not, what a jerk...
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Maybe so but if I'm a cop and I made it clear that I was and someone threw a snowball at me they'll be LUCKY to get a warning. Odds are I'd arrest them for assaulting a peace officer.
Not siding with the cop. It was unwise to have had his gun out over something like thrown snowballs but I'm surprised that the crowd was not made to disperse (in fact the officer at the end said they could keep it up so long as nobody got hurt or they didn't break any laws) and the fact that the one who was verbally assaulting the cop wasn't fined for doing so (or very least made to leave).
Trust me, you throw a snowball at a cop here in Mn and you will have a new home for at least 30 days.
5470
Post by: sebster
Fateweaver wrote:If the kid or anyone HAD thrown a snowball at the cop he could have nabbed them for assault a peace officer.
Approaching with gun drawn may not have been the wisest but the crowd, the one in particular, using foul language and verbally assaulting a peace officer wasn't the smartest thing to do either.
Someone is lucky they didn't get tazed. Not to mention throwing snowballs at cars and the cops did nothing about that? They have some really laid back cops in D.C or else the cops just didn't want to bother with paperwork. Most places throwing snowballs at cars would get you slapped with a citation or the very least a warning.
Yes, the kid could have been nabbed for assault. Making the assault the arrest would not require drawing a gun. You're only supposed to draw your gun when it's likely you'll have to shoot someone - and this was a snowball fight.
And yes, some people from the snowball fight were idiots. The idea that some people in the general public will act like idiots is not exactly news. The idea that policemen will not always react in the best way, as they're only human, is also not news. It becomes news when the reaction by the cop is so ridiculously over the top that it becomes funny - like drawing a gun in response to someone throwing a snowball at you.
But the idea that people will defend such ridiculous over-reactions by policeman... well that's fascinating.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Fateweaver wrote:
Not siding with the cop. It was unwise to have had his gun out over something like thrown snowballs but I'm surprised that the crowd was not made to disperse
You forgot to say 'Bah, Humbug'. (in fact the officer at the end said they could keep it up so long as nobody got hurt or they didn't break any laws) and the fact that the one who was verbally assaulting the cop wasn't fined for doing so (or very least made to leave).
Apart from the chant of "Don't bring a gun to a snowball fight!" (which is perfectly sensible) I didn't pick up any foul language been thrown at him. Maybe you have better hearing than I do.  EDIT: Nevermind. It was at the end. *rolls eyes* Automatically Appended Next Post: @sebster: Oooh, I spotted that. 
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
F'ing pig is verbal assault. Maybe you don't think so but you call a cop an F'ing pig enough times you will get arrested for assault of a cop and fined. Free speech isn't free when it is used to slander or harass someone else.
Again Seb, your reading comprehension skills appear to be lacking. Where in any of my posts did I say the officer was in his right to draw a gun? In fact I have said the opposite.
I am not defending his drawing of the gun. I acknowledged it wasn't a wise thing to do. Just because I didn't say "that F'ing pig was a trigger happy kook" does not mean I agree that drawing the gun was right. Unwise =/= agree with.
So before attacking me with a blanket and thinly veiled attack, try actually reading what I post. You call me out all the time for supposedly speaking without reading so you should try to practice what you preach.
In unrelated news, sort of, this guy IS an IDIOT. See Seb, I enlarged the font so you can't misread what I say.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091221/ap_on_re_us/us_child_shoots_child;_ylt=Aj8KCj3w89IgwaK3rZ5044VvzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTJxZm90dXIxBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkxMjIxL3VzX2NoaWxkX3Nob290c19jaGlsZARwb3MDMQRzZWMDeW5fYXJ0aWNsZV9zdW1tYXJ5X2xpc3QEc2xrA3BvbGljZWFycmVzdA--
For sure deserves jail time and a huge fine.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
I also wonder who is supposed to be defending the policeman's drawing of the gun in this thread.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I think seb is seeing ghost posts because nobody is defending the cop.
Dirty glasses? Dirty monocle? Hmm, I don't really know because no post I have read is defending the cop.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
I guess my post could be construed as defending the cop, since I criticized the snowball throwers and not him.
In that case, I should clarify that I don't think the cop was right to have drawn his gun, especially in response to his car being hit with snow. (On a day when it's already snowing? Really? Why even get out of the car?)
5470
Post by: sebster
Fateweaver wrote:Again Seb, your reading comprehension skills appear to be lacking. Where in any of my posts did I say the officer was in his right to draw a gun? In fact I have said the opposite.
Yeah, I was writing my last post when you said that. Not that it matters much anyway, as it took until your fourth post to actually get around to saying that. In the meantime, the most you'd done to criticise the cop was say his action was not the wisest (and that was in the context 'his action was not the wisest but...') while in your first post you only criticised the guy throwing the snowball, in your second post you gave the 'not the wisest comment' while then going on to criticies the snowball thrower, including a suggestion that he should have been tased, while in your third post you continue talking about why the guy should have been arrested.
So yeah, you did get around to saying the cop was an idiot, after first attempting to move the discussion towards the far less ridiculous part of the story and suggesting other ridiculous over-reactions to what was a public nuisance charge at most.
So before attacking me with a blanket and thinly veiled attack, try actually reading what I post.
Thinly veiled? Attack?
I've said there are people on Dakka who will defend the most ridiculous of police actions. You were on this thread, obviously you were included in that. How that's thinly veiled is beyond me.
But how is pointing out someone's got a silly POV an attack? Isn't that basically what Dakka is?
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Beyond him drawing a gun (which is very much OTT) I would probably chastise the guy for being a public disturbance and ruining peoples fun.
@Fateweaver: Yeah, I was waiting for the end to load and that's when I heard it. (Crap internetz here.  ) Regardless, that's not what set the guy off.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Actually, from about 1/2 way in to the end when it was revealed he was a cop the "f'ing pig" bomb was dropped numerous times.
Seb, just because I didn't chastise the cop right away but instead commented on the overreaction by the crowd, one heckler in particular, does not mean I see them more evil than the cop. Just pointing out the fact that the heckler in question should have gotten 10,000volts sent through him.
I really wonder how cops keep their cool so well. Someone calls me an f'ing anything at a bar they normall get a beer bottle across their head or jaw. Guess maybe that's why I'm not a cop.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Well, if we're going down the rabbit hole, how come nobody's noted out that the cop is black and the snowball thrower is white. Clearly, the snowball thrower is racist.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Oh I'm sure someone might try that.
Although from what I've seen in other threads had the snowball thrower been black and the cop white there would be about 8 members in here now proclaiming the cop a racist ahole for wanting to arrest the guy for assault (as that's what he appeared to want to do near the end).
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
JohnHwangDD wrote:Well, if we're going down the rabbit hole, how come nobody's noted out that the cop is black and the snowball thrower is white. Clearly, the snowball thrower is racist.
What are you talking about? That police officer was probably a Christian, trying to stop people who just wanted to have fun because his magic sky fairy told him to.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Is the rabbit white? Didn't Alice chase a white rabbit down a hole?
I think many people feel Obamanation is a wonderland. It for sure is a land of make believe but it's more akin to the world in the Matrix. Some people perceive it to be a wonderous place when all it is is a giant lab of people providing fuel for this giant supercomputer known as liberal government and not actually seeing any benefits coming their way.
Ha. I like that anology. I should sig it. 
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Fateweaver wrote:Hmm, so the dude gets out of his hummer and approaches with gun in hand, scolds the crowd and as he is walking back to his hummer someone throws a snowball at him?
Since when did it become a good idea to throw a snowball at a man who approached you with a gun in his hand? That is akin to using your bare hand to feed a lion a piece of steak or hamburger. He will probably get more than just the meat you offered him.
There was a whole crowd of snowball fighters. Several of them must have had guns. If the cop had started shooting wildly some righteous citizen would have taken him down pretty quickly.
5470
Post by: sebster
Fateweaver wrote:Seb, just because I didn't chastise the cop right away but instead commented on the overreaction by the crowd, one heckler in particular, does not mean I see them more evil than the cop. Just pointing out the fact that the heckler in question should have gotten 10,000volts sent through him.
In this instance, we have a guy in the street being a jackhole, and a cop wildly over-reacting and drawing a gun on him. You chose to focus on the random guy who acted like a bit of a jerk.
That's not to say that's just something you do. We all do it. A big part of how we form our beliefs, and a really big part of how we argue for them is where we place our emphasis. We will acknowledge the facts that favour the other POV but then go about making a really big deal about the facts that favour our side.
I really wonder how cops keep their cool so well. Someone calls me an f'ing anything at a bar they normall get a beer bottle across their head or jaw. Guess maybe that's why I'm not a cop.
Policing is a tough job, and one where it easy to act badly. That's why we have such high standards for police conduct.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Fateweaver wrote:If the kid or anyone HAD thrown a snowball at the cop he could have nabbed them for assault a peace officer.
Approaching with gun drawn may not have been the wisest but the crowd, the one in particular, using foul language and verbally assaulting a peace officer wasn't the smartest thing to do either.
Someone is lucky they didn't get tazed. Not to mention throwing snowballs at cars and the cops did nothing about that? They have some really laid back cops in D.C or else the cops just didn't want to bother with paperwork. Most places throwing snowballs at cars would get you slapped with a citation or the very least a warning.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Great way to blanket people who defend cops against idiots.
This cop was clearly not the wisest cop in the world. Gotta admit that the cop was pretty calm when the crowd started calling him a pig, though for the record that guy who was the one using the "F bomb" the most should have gotten his jaw broken.
The cop's actions were not sane. He should be, in this order:
1. Arrested and charge with public disturbance and 200 counts of assault with a deadly weapon (or however many people were there);
2. Fired.
I am as serious as a heart attack on both. He pulled a gun on kids having a snow fight.
20956
Post by: Empchild
Alrighty time for my two cents. One an officer should never pull their weapon unless they are presented with a dangerous situation. That said it was assault on an officer, but it was a snowball. Now if it was ice and the cop had to go to the hospital I could see a arrest, but at the most all he should have done was detaine the person who throw it(if they could figure who) and take them to their parents. I think he needs to remember the crap he pulled as a kid.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Yup. When Joe civilian pulls a gun like this, he goes to jail. No stop, no bail. Straight into the slammer.
173
Post by: Shaman
Too bad he didn't shoot the kid.
Honesty Id just laugh if he did.
15594
Post by: Albatross
Well, the cop WAS acting like a fething pig, IMO. Is it any wonder respect for police officers is being eroded? Pro-police people shoudn't support that guy - he makes other cops jobs more difficult. People see a guy acting like that and assume all cops are like that. I support our Police officers, they do a difficult job that requires a great deal of patience, but 'patience' is the key word. The Police are there to protect the community, not rule the streets. And that means you will have to deal with arseholes - but being an arsehole shouldn't be against the law.
Otherwise I'd be looking at some serious jail-time! 
173
Post by: Shaman
Being a disrespectful donkey-cave should be against the law.
21853
Post by: mattyrm
Did you guys even read the story?!
It started small and everyone got into it, and lots of people were involved and having a good time. And then this dick pulled his piece out and everyones faces dropped after a "light and playful" bit of fun.
Im stunned people here are defending the cop. (well not stunned, i come to expect it from many people)
When i was in Kabul and the rear gunner from a US convoy fired a burst into the crowd from his 50 cal, killing several people as a result and starting two days of riots after one of the civilians threw a rock at their vehicle, no doubt you would defend him as well. It was Oklahama national guard if anyone is interested (they also tried to go on a joint patrol with us and one of them had his IPOD in one ear)
All three things are summed up in one word.
Unprofessional.
Being an elitist Royal Marine, i found many many members of the armed forces to be unprofessional, and this is the exact same thing. Sure a cop CAN whip his gun out whenever he likes. But its not acting with the calm and cool manner that is expected of you. A complete and utter overreaction.
I just left the RM, i might apply for the police force, and if someone throws a snowball at me i wont act like a fething penis with little dick syndrome and start threatening people.
The man is a tool. And doubtless his mates at the station will be ripping the piss out of him for this as we speak.
14828
Post by: Cane
Agreed 110% with mattyrm
That cop was acting like an asshat and likely got chewed out by his superiors since the article has quotes from the higher-ups basically disapproving what he did. When a bureaucrat that you work for openly criticizes your actions like that to the media you just know they're getting some flak at the workforce.
15594
Post by: Albatross
Yeah, it's worth pointing out that the guy's colleague was talking to the crowd in a friendly and decent manner saying 'OK guys, just go back and get on with the snowball fight, no problems' and generally trying to diffuse the situation. He also directed people as to where they could lodge official complaints, and conducted himself in a dignified manner. The people seemed to calm down a bit after that.
21853
Post by: mattyrm
Yeah his mate was squared away, as i said, its fething obvious the guy is a total tool, his mate who turned up half way through will have been saying to him as soon as the crowd left
"mate, your in the fething gak here, what the hell did you whip your piece out for?!"
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Obviously, he was in fear for his life.
From a damn snowball!
20700
Post by: IvanTih
He was right the snowballs were hidden bombs. 
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I still don't see anyone defending the cop. I sure as hell am not.
I'm just saying that the cop did have a right, after it was made clear he was a cop, to want to arrest that guy for throwing a snowball at him. It is assault. No ifs, ands or buts.
Try it. Throw a snowball at a cop and see where it gets you. It'll get you a fine, some jail time or both.
20956
Post by: Empchild
Here's the problem and I really don'tknow how t feel on this one. The cop should not have pulled his weapon, but we do not know his side of the story as of yet. He was a first responder to a situation that honestly should not have been happening. Yes I know it is a snowball fight, but it was in the middle of a major city, and with the amount of people it was for the most part riot like situations. Now if people had put ice, and what not in the snow balls that could seriously mess a dude up. Also the people should not have started to throw them at his car or him. I know he was a plain clothes officer, but that is still assualt believe it or not peeps. I asked the cops down the hall from me. Now all this said yes pulling out his weapon was excessive, and thank god he didn't fire it, but at this time we do not know the full story so jumping to conclusions and condeming the man is wrong. These people should also not be having a snowball fight in the center of a city, if it were the burbs on a residential street then it would be a wholeeeeee different tune, but it wasn't. Let's remember what these city cops deal with people. Often they roll into a situation like that and it's a set up to ambush them. As stated I think he did act excessive, but I am reserving judgement until all the facts are out. At the most though I feel suspension for a month or two without pay. Now if it was me I wouldn't have pulled a weapon that much I will say.
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
mashable.co wrote:The undercover cop was attempting to drive his Hummer down a snow-covered street when revellers pummelled the vehicle with snowballs; he then got out of the car and pulled his gun out, presumably as a way to scare off the crowd.
Damn right I pulled my gun out, and your all lucky I didn't shoot you in the face!!! Goddamn hippies...
14828
Post by: Cane
Fateweaver wrote:I still don't see anyone defending the cop. I sure as hell am not.
I'm just saying that the cop did have a right, after it was made clear he was a cop, to want to arrest that guy for throwing a snowball at him. It is assault. No ifs, ands or buts.
Try it. Throw a snowball at a cop and see where it gets you. It'll get you a fine, some jail time or both.
I realize what you're trying to say and I agree with the notion of not trying to purposely piss off someone else however this news story kind of defeats your point of "it'll get you a fine or jail time" since if I read correctly none of that happened. In fact it was the better cops that told TFG with the gun to stop being an asshat and he's been punished behind the scenes already.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I'm still not sure how the cop acted like an F'ing pig. I grew up around farm animals and pigs roll in mud and grunt and eat a lot. I saw this cop doing neither in the video.
Maybe he ate a dozen donuts and grunted while doing so but I clearly only saw snow, no mud, and didn't see the cop rolling in anything.
I just find it odd that in the article it mentioned some of the people were throwing snowballs at cars, mainly hummers and that is why the cops hummer was hit. I'm surprised somebody didn't get out of their vehicle and start laying into the people throwing the snowball. Someone throws a snowball at my car it's on.
14869
Post by: Wrexasaur
Empchild wrote:Often they roll into a situation like that and it's a set up to ambush them.
OH SNAP! IT'S AN AMBUSH!!!
fateweaver wrote:Someone throws a snowball at my car it's on.
Hence, the main reason why all of us appreciate the fact that you are not a police officer. I do look forward to hearing about you in the news though...
*headline* "Man guns down pack of college students after his right mirror got knocked out of calibration".
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Apparently in Washington you can do anything that isn't murder.
Pretty laid back cops to let a snowball fight involving dozens of people (or more) happen in downtown D.C. I live in a state where we see snow 8 months out of the year and not once do I recall cops letting people throw snowballs at cars.
I guess that's the most baffling part is that the cop (the good guy to most) basically said at the end they could keep on throwing snowballs. That too me is not exactly a good cop thing to do as what would happen if someones BMW got dented or cracked window from a semi-frozen snowball and that person decided to lash out? Than you'd have a riot and with mob mentality probably a driver beaten to death by idiots doing what they want WITH police permission.
A GOOD cop would have told everyone to break it up and go home just to prevent further occurrences like that happening.
So yeah, dumb cop to pull a gun on a crowd throwing snowballs at his vehicle but IMO an even dumber cop to let a snowball fight involving dozens of people in the middle of downtown continue.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Fateweaver wrote:I'm still not sure how the cop acted like an F'ing pig. I grew up around farm animals and pigs roll in mud and grunt and eat a lot. I saw this cop doing neither in the video.
Maybe he ate a dozen donuts and grunted while doing so but I clearly only saw snow, no mud, and didn't see the cop rolling in anything.
I just find it odd that in the article it mentioned some of the people were throwing snowballs at cars, mainly hummers and that is why the cops hummer was hit. I'm surprised somebody didn't get out of their vehicle and start laying into the people throwing the snowball. Someone throws a snowball at my car it's on.
I admire your community spirit.
There's nothing like an impromptu snowball fight to get the blood racing and make you feel alive.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Wrexasaur wrote:Empchild wrote:Often they roll into a situation like that and it's a set up to ambush them.
OH SNAP! IT'S AN AMBUSH!!!
fateweaver wrote:Someone throws a snowball at my car it's on.
Hence, the main reason why all of us appreciate the fact that you are not a police officer. I do look forward to hearing about you in the news though...
*headline* "Man guns down pack of college students after his right mirror got knocked out of calibration".
Hmm, where in my post does it say I'd pull a gun and shoot that person. "It's on" means they'd get a right hook to the jaw. Granted I have my piece(s) in my cubby hole or under the front seat but I don't just go around randomly drawing my gun on people.
There are days I'd love to but I do obey the laws and realize the laws are there for a reason. Afterall, to draw my gun on someone without a good cause is a felony meaning I lose my right to draw a gun on someone who I need to draw it on because all I'd have would be my finger to point.
So yeah, quit trying to put words into my posts because nowhere in the above quoted statement did I mention pulling a gun. Automatically Appended Next Post: Kilkrazy wrote:Fateweaver wrote:I'm still not sure how the cop acted like an F'ing pig. I grew up around farm animals and pigs roll in mud and grunt and eat a lot. I saw this cop doing neither in the video.
Maybe he ate a dozen donuts and grunted while doing so but I clearly only saw snow, no mud, and didn't see the cop rolling in anything.
I just find it odd that in the article it mentioned some of the people were throwing snowballs at cars, mainly hummers and that is why the cops hummer was hit. I'm surprised somebody didn't get out of their vehicle and start laying into the people throwing the snowball. Someone throws a snowball at my car it's on.
I admire your community spirit.
There's nothing like an impromptu snowball fight to get the blood racing and make you feel alive.
I just think there are better places to conduct a snowball fight. Like the park or someones back yard. The guy who twitted it in the first place obviously felt he could get by conducting a snowball fight in the middle of D.C and the most baffling part is that the local law enforcement, except for one cop who didn't see the humor in it, let it happen.
Again, I'm not defending the cop. He was in the wrong and even I know that. I'm not a gun-toting loon that can't see the wrong in pulling your piece for no reason but I also am baffled at the fact that dozens of people were allowed by local authorities to not only throw snow at one another but at innocent people and their cars. That to me smacks of potential for a lawsuit if someone gets hurt or vehicle damaged and it was made publicly known that the D.C police allowed it to happen.
Do to liability issues that kind of thing would NOT be allowed to happen in most cities.
But please, keep assuming I'm defending the cop and that I'm all against having fun.
14828
Post by: Cane
D.C. Assistant Chief Pete Newsham, head of the investigative services bureau: "We have to see what the entire circumstance was," Newsham said Sunday. "But just a snowball fight, not in my mind. That doesn't seem a situation where we would pull out a service weapon."
Even the D.C. Department of Transportation seemed to embrace it, Tweeting on Saturday soon after the fight began: "SNOW UPDATE as advertised, there is a large snowball battle at 14th and U. Keep it safe."
Seems to me the cop was just being TFG. His peers and superiors pretty much acknowledge that his actions were poor.
Police said initially that the detective had not flashed his weapon. On Sunday, the officer was placed on desk duty after Twitter, blogs and YouTube appeared to show otherwise.
Sounds like the police officer or the higher-ups also got caught smudging the details. Puling out a firearm in a friendly snowball fight is a dumb, dangerous, and a TFG move. That detective seems a little out of touch on how to handle such situations. I can maybe understand if someone called the police about getting hurt or being pissed but none of that seemed to have happened.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Fateweaver wrote:I'm still not sure how the cop acted like an F'ing pig. I grew up around farm animals and pigs roll in mud and grunt and eat a lot. I saw this cop doing neither in the video.
Maybe he ate a dozen donuts and grunted while doing so but I clearly only saw snow, no mud, and didn't see the cop rolling in anything.
I just find it odd that in the article it mentioned some of the people were throwing snowballs at cars, mainly hummers and that is why the cops hummer was hit. I'm surprised somebody didn't get out of their vehicle and start laying into the people throwing the snowball. Someone throws a snowball at my car it's on.
You know, it's funny that hardly anyone has mentioned that.
Because it even says as much in the article, that after awhile it ceased being just everyone having fun--and a point came where the snowballers were throwing at any vehicles that were on the street and rolling down their windows to ask the snowballers to get out of the way.
And then it became a point where they were just throwing at any gas guzzlers, due to the "crowd's political leanings".
Hum. Sounds almost like it was an illegal protest/demonstration at that point...
But either way. It was silly of the guy to pull his gun, and it was even more fething stupid of the police to confirm him as an undercover.
Congrats crowd. You just exposed an undercover officer! Automatically Appended Next Post: Cane wrote:
D.C. Assistant Chief Pete Newsham, head of the investigative services bureau: "We have to see what the entire circumstance was," Newsham said Sunday. "But just a snowball fight, not in my mind. That doesn't seem a situation where we would pull out a service weapon."
Even the D.C. Department of Transportation seemed to embrace it, Tweeting on Saturday soon after the fight began: "SNOW UPDATE as advertised, there is a large snowball battle at 14th and U. Keep it safe."
Seems to me the cop was just being TFG. His peers and superiors pretty much acknowledge that his actions were poor.
Police said initially that the detective had not flashed his weapon. On Sunday, the officer was placed on desk duty after Twitter, blogs and YouTube appeared to show otherwise.
Sounds like the police officer or the higher-ups also got caught smudging the details. Puling out a firearm in a friendly snowball fight is a dumb, dangerous, and a TFG move. That detective seems a little out of touch on how to handle such situations. I can maybe understand if someone called the police about getting hurt or being pissed but none of that seemed to have happened.
Department of Transportation does not equal District of Columbia Police Department, broski.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Cane wrote:I realize what you're trying to say and I agree with the notion of not trying to purposely piss off someone else however this news story kind of defeats your point of "it'll get you a fine or jail time" since if I read correctly none of that happened. In fact it was the better cops that told TFG with the gun to stop being an asshat and he's been punished behind the scenes already.
They arrested someone who they thought threw the snowball at the cop but then let him go (which was a good thing, since he wasn't the guy).
They certainly would have arrested the thrower if they were able to.
Empchild wrote:Now if it was ice and the cop had to go to the hospital I could see a arrest, but at the most all he should have done was detaine the person who throw it(if they could figure who) and take them to their parents. I think he needs to remember the crap he pulled as a kid.
The crowd appeared to be mostly college age. They weren't young children.
Albatross wrote:Yeah, it's worth pointing out that the guy's colleague was talking to the crowd in a friendly and decent manner saying 'OK guys, just go back and get on with the snowball fight, no problems' and generally trying to diffuse the situation. He also directed people as to where they could lodge official complaints, and conducted himself in a dignified manner. The people seemed to calm down a bit after that.
You thought so? It seemed to me that it wasn't until the other officer was there, and conducting himself in an appropriate manner, that everyone started to swear and chant at Bailer. Presumably because they no longer feared being shot.
While the gun flailer deserved criticism it's kind of sad to see how everyone takes advantage of the person trying to ease down the conflict...
Fateweaver wrote:I just find it odd that in the article it mentioned some of the people were throwing snowballs at cars, mainly hummers and that is why the cops hummer was hit. I'm surprised somebody didn't get out of their vehicle and start laying into the people throwing the snowball. Someone throws a snowball at my car it's on.
Depending on the consistency of the snowball they may not have been much of a worry. Of course, intentionally hitting the cars of strangers not participating in the snowball fight isn't an acceptable form of amusement in either case, no matter what childish appeals are made by the participants.
14828
Post by: Cane
Department of Transportation does not equal District of Columbia Police Department, broski.
Yea, its not like I also included a quote from a police official..right "broski"?
And if the head of the DoT says its okay that only helps the snowballers case and makes the cop look like TFG which he was/is.
7375
Post by: BrookM
I'm guessing this is going to escalate soon? This guy pulled a gun, so the next time there will be a SWAT team, or will the National Guard be called in to deal with it?
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Ah Kan, but you forget that only the cop who pulled his gun was in the wrong, that the fact the snowballers started throwing snowballs at "gas guzzlers" is somehow irrelevant.
If you watch the video on youtube it's convenient how the dude in the crowd with the camera ONLY captures what the cop did, that somehow the rest of the fight captured on camera fails to show people throwing snowballs at the cars of innocents and wasn't posted on youtube. Appears to me someone is trying to protect the like-minded tree huggers who started turning the snowball fight into a political protest.
Reminds me of how Fox edits out certain portions of clips to make themselves look right. Funny how nobody has mentioned that in this thread.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
...
So if that's the case, I guess because the PD issues their officers sidearms and body armor, the DoT should do the same?
Different Departments are...gasp...different.
And it's funny that it says they want to y'know...look at the whole situation. There could be any number of possible explanations once you go into the realm of undercovers. Burnout is common, as is slipping too far into the persona.
It doesn't excuse what he did, but it does explain it. Oddly enough. Automatically Appended Next Post: BrookM wrote:I'm guessing this is going to escalate soon? This guy pulled a gun, so the next time there will be a SWAT team, or will the National Guard be called in to deal with it?
No no no, SWAT teams are for when the snowballers join forces with the sledders. National Guard is for when those damned pesky snowballsledders get in touch with the snowmobilers.
And God help us when they join forces with the snowcatters!
14828
Post by: Cane
Orkeosaurus wrote:Cane wrote:I realize what you're trying to say and I agree with the notion of not trying to purposely piss off someone else however this news story kind of defeats your point of "it'll get you a fine or jail time" since if I read correctly none of that happened. In fact it was the better cops that told TFG with the gun to stop being an asshat and he's been punished behind the scenes already.
They arrested someone who they thought threw the snowball at the cop but then let him go (which was a good thing, since he wasn't the guy).
They certainly would have arrested the thrower if they were able to.
Considering the bad press and after the videos showed up showing that the officer did in fact brandish his weapon after reporting he didn't...I wouldn't count on the person getting any real jail time or a fine. But a cop basically can try and take you in for anything I suppose.
7375
Post by: BrookM
Kanluwen wrote:BrookM wrote:I'm guessing this is going to escalate soon? This guy pulled a gun, so the next time there will be a SWAT team, or will the National Guard be called in to deal with it?
No no no, SWAT teams are for when the snowballers join forces with the sledders. National Guard is for when those damned pesky snowballsledders get in touch with the snowmobilers.
And God help us when they join forces with the snowcatters!
Is that the part where the prez sheds a single tear and mutters "May gawd have mercy on our souls"?
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Fateweaver wrote:Ah Kan, but you forget that only the cop who pulled his gun was in the wrong, that the fact the snowballers started throwing snowballs at "gas guzzlers" is somehow irrelevant.
If you watch the video on youtube it's convenient how the dude in the crowd with the camera ONLY captures what the cop did, that somehow the rest of the fight captured on camera fails to show people throwing snowballs at the cars of innocents and wasn't posted on youtube. Appears to me someone is trying to protect the like-minded tree huggers who started turning the snowball fight into a political protest.
Reminds me of how Fox edits out certain portions of clips to make themselves look right. Funny how nobody has mentioned that in this thread.
Well of course the like-minded treehuggers start documenting when a cop does something. There was an incident at UNCG a couple years back where a student was hooting and hollering and flipping the bird at a bunch of riot cops when they had some politico on the campus.
That part, of course, wasn't filmed.
After the riot cops brought out the tear gas due to the student and his buddies threw a molotov?
Oh, it was police brutality!
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Cane wrote:Considering the bad press and after the videos showed up showing that the officer did in fact brandish his weapon after reporting he didn't...I wouldn't count on the person getting any real jail time or a fine.
It doesn't seem unlikely to me. If they went through the trouble of arresting someone without sufficient evidence to do so I don't see why you think they wouldn't have arrested the person if they actually knew who he was.
He assaulted a police officer. That's not taken lightly, nor should it be, especially in a situation like this.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Kanluwen wrote:
Because it even says as much in the article, that after awhile it ceased being just everyone having fun--and a point came where the snowballers were throwing at any vehicles that were on the street and rolling down their windows to ask the snowballers to get out of the way.
And then it became a point where they were just throwing at any gas guzzlers, due to the "crowd's political leanings".
Hum. Sounds almost like it was an illegal protest/demonstration at that point...
It doesn't say that, it says this:
The Washington Post Article wrote:Some cars passing by rolled down their windows to taunt the warriors -- and were consequently pelted with snow. Gas-guzzling Hummers became a particular target, Grishkoff said, because of the crowd's political leanings.
14828
Post by: Cane
Kanluwen wrote:...
So if that's the case, I guess because the PD issues their officers sidearms and body armor, the DoT should do the same?
Nope, wasn't saying that at all and you just went off on your own idea. You just focused on the non-police official quote despite there being a police official's quote in the mix as well.
Different Departments are...gasp...different.
Yup.
And it's funny that it says they want to y'know...look at the whole situation. There could be any number of possible explanations once you go into the realm of undercovers. Burnout is common, as is slipping too far into the persona.
Its also funny that the police initially said that he didn't pull out his weapon but quickly changed their tune after the vids were posted. And I think you're thinking about The Departed in this case even though it seems that undercover cop seems to mean detective not dressed in a police uniform which is a norm for them as opposed to infiltrating a crime network.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Sorry, I choose not to recognize your statement! 
I coulda swore I saw it different on the BBC's article however.
14828
Post by: Cane
Orkeosaurus wrote:Cane wrote:Considering the bad press and after the videos showed up showing that the officer did in fact brandish his weapon after reporting he didn't...I wouldn't count on the person getting any real jail time or a fine.
It doesn't seem unlikely to me. If they went through the trouble of arresting someone without sufficient evidence to do so I don't see why you think they wouldn't have arrested the person if they actually knew who he was.
He assaulted a police officer. That's not taken lightly, nor should it be, especially in a situation like this.
Considering all the bad press they got from this, I doubt any charges would've been pressed. I'm going to nitpick here and say I didn't say they wouldn't get arrested but serving real jail time or getting charged/fined for a snowball assault? Not likely.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I think the problem is that some posters don't consider throwing a snowball at a cop (or any individual) as assault. Maliciously throwing a snowball at a cop is assault. SOMEONE threw a snowball at the cop because they wanted to insult the cop further or were taking out their anger on him for halting their little political "tantrum" for a few minutes.
Gotta love how an undercover cop was exposed. He'll probably never be an UC again with his face plastered all over youtube.
GJ tree huggers.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
I don't know that he has the material to be a cop of any sort.
14828
Post by: Cane
DELETED Whoops sorry, I'll respond once I read up on that post.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8425683.stm
The BBC wrote:
Witnesses describe the scene at the snowball fight - footage from Reason.TV
A senior police official in Washington DC has said an off-duty officer who drew a gun at a snowball fight behaved in a "totally inappropriate" way.
Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier said video footage left "no doubt" the officer drew his gun after his vehicle, a Hummer, was pelted with snowballs.
The footage showed an angry crowd gathering, chanting: "You don't bring a gun to a snowball fight".
Ms Lanier said the officer had been placed on desk duty.
She said he had not denied the allegations.
Is a statement, Ms Lanier said she had reviewed all the video footage of the incident taken by the public and it was "very obvious" the officer had drawn his police-issue gun "in response to the snowballs hitting his vehicle".
"I have no doubt about this, nor has the officer denied the accusations," she said.
"Let me be very clear in stating that I believe the actions of the officer were totally inappropriate!
"In no way, should he have handled the situation in this manner."
Assistant Police Chief Peter Newsham told reporters the detective, who has not been officially named, had more than 25 years of experience.
"He has a very good reputation," he told the Associated Press.
'Disturbing'
The incident took place on Saturday, as a large crowd of people were taking part in a mass snowball fight in the US capital during a blizzard.
Snow in Washington DC, US (19 December 2009)
Washington DC has been hit by the worst snow storms in years
Snowballs were thrown at the man's car and as he got out he exposed his gun briefly, always pointing towards the snow on the ground.
Panicked residents can be heard shouting, "He's got a gun," but others continue to throw snowballs his way.
At one point on the video - shown on YouTube - the man identifies himself as a "detective", but refuses to give his full name.
Then he proceeds to admit to pulling his gun.
"Yes I did because I got hit by snowballs," he tells angry residents who demand to know his badge number.
He challenges them to "throw another snowball".
The confrontation ended only when other policemen were despatched to the scene, and managed to calm everyone down.
Ms Lanier said the officer's actions "in no way, reflects the training and the standards" of the Washington DC Police Department.
She said it was disturbing that the "negative actions of one officer" had eclipsed the work of the police force during the blizzard.
14828
Post by: Cane
Fateweaver wrote:I think the problem is that some posters don't consider throwing a snowball at a cop (or any individual) as assault. Maliciously throwing a snowball at a cop is assault. SOMEONE threw a snowball at the cop because they wanted to insult the cop further or were taking out their anger on him for halting their little political "tantrum" for a few minutes.
Gotta love how an undercover cop was exposed. He'll probably never be an UC again with his face plastered all over youtube.
GJ tree huggers.
Was he really UC like how Hollywood thinks of it like in The Departed?
Or was he undercover like basically all detectives are undercover that don't wear the blue uniform? I don't see in the article where it says he was undercover but won't be the first time I misread something.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Obviously he does or he wouldn't be. He made a dumb choice and thankfully nobody got hurt, the cop included. Yeah it could have gotten really ugly real quick but on the other hand the situation (snowball fight) should not have been allowed to happen in the first place.
It stopped being an innocent snowball fight when the fighters started throwing snowballs at innocents in cars. Yeah the article said the fighters "claimed" some passers by dared them to throw snowballs at them but it also says they were throwing snowballs at "gas guzzlers" due to political leanings.
Appears to me they say they were dared because they want to cover up the fact they willfully targeted people not initially involved.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
At any rate, police were on the scene, they did not have to call the Riot Squad or SWAT Team, and they hustled away the gun pulling cop.
On the basis of that evidence we must suppose that either the police were accepting of the snowball situation or that the crowd was so heavily armed that there was not point in offering any resistance.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Actually Fate, he DOES "dare them to keep throwing snowballs" after he's reholstered his gun and they're talking smack at him while he's on the radio.
Kinda funny how that one works.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Fateweaver wrote:Obviously he does or he wouldn't be. He made a dumb choice and thankfully nobody got hurt, the cop included. Yeah it could have gotten really ugly real quick but on the other hand the situation (snowball fight) should not have been allowed to happen in the first place.
Overreacting in that manner puts innocents at risk and causes far more significant problems down the road for future dealings between the police and the city's citizens. If he's served 25 years he's probably not some sort of unbalanced lunatic. What he did was still unacceptable, though. He's hurt the integrity of his department. I think the NYPD DC police department should consider this carefully when deciding what to do about his actions. It stopped being an innocent snowball fight when the fighters started throwing snowballs at innocents in cars. Yeah the article said the fighters "claimed" some passers by dared them to throw snowballs at them but it also says they were throwing snowballs at "gas guzzlers" due to political leanings.
Appears to me they say they were dared because they want to cover up the fact they willfully targeted people not initially involved.
It sounds like this was going on in part. I don't know to what extent this was going on, though. While I would condone any realistic attempts to punish those who are actively trying to hit people not looking to be involved in the snowball fight, I don't know that its feasible given the bedlam of the whole thing, and the fact that a snowball hitting a car probably isn't going to do any actual damage.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I don't see the relevance in wether or not he was a "Hollywood" UC or a non-Hollywood cop dressed as a civvie.
He was wrong, he admits it and as much as some posters want to think otherwise "I" admit he was wrong but the crowd was no more right and I wonder just why or how people were permitted to throw snowballs at cars that they felt were not green enough or who's passengers supposedly dared them to throw snow.
It seems as if the D.C law enforcement is only worried about saving their rep and not looking into the other matter at hand; a mini-political demonstration.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Orkeosaurus wrote:Fateweaver wrote:Obviously he does or he wouldn't be. He made a dumb choice and thankfully nobody got hurt, the cop included. Yeah it could have gotten really ugly real quick but on the other hand the situation (snowball fight) should not have been allowed to happen in the first place.
Overreacting in that manner puts innocents at risk and causes far more significant problems down the road for future dealings between the police and the city's citizens.
If he's served 25 years he's probably not some sort of unbalanced lunatic. What he did was still unacceptable, though. He's hurt the integrity of his department. I think the NYPD should consider this carefully when deciding what to do about his actions.
It stopped being an innocent snowball fight when the fighters started throwing snowballs at innocents in cars. Yeah the article said the fighters "claimed" some passers by dared them to throw snowballs at them but it also says they were throwing snowballs at "gas guzzlers" due to political leanings.
Appears to me they say they were dared because they want to cover up the fact they willfully targeted people not initially involved.
It sounds like this was going on in part. I don't know to what extent this was going on, though.
While I would condone any realistic attempts to punish those who are actively trying to hit people not looking to be involved in the snowball fight, I don't know that its feasible given the bedlam of the whole thing, and the fact that a snowball hitting a car probably isn't going to do any actual damage.
What the hell does the NYPD have to do with anything?
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
You're right, what do they?
For some reason I was thinking this was NYC, instead of DC. (Fixed)
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Is it actually illegal to take part in a political demonstration in the USA?
I thought you guys were pretty keen on freedom of speech and stuff.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I suppose Kan the cop felt what they were doing was illegal and so he "dared" them to keep throwing snowballs at people not involved in the fight.
For the most part snowballs are harmless but what's to say that someone wasn't going to decide to pack a rock or some ice with snow and throw it.
It's also the act. From 50 feet away a paintball shot from a paintball gun at a car is not going to hurt the car (I know this for fact) but if you go firing paintballs at cars, even at a range that won't hurt the vehicle you will be jailed, fined or both.
So yeah, the fact that it was known to DC police and the DoT and nothing was done to stop it still baffles me as it COULD have gotten out of control and a mob of adults should not be allowed to gather for something like that, especially when it started becoming a political protest.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
You threw me for a hell of a loop there Ork
I thought there was ANOTHER gun/snowball incident in NYC.
We all know how that would end either way.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
You can protest legally if your actions do not directly affect those not involved or have the potential for harm.
Throwing snowballs at cars because you don't think they are "fuel efficient" is not a peacable demonstration and could result in injury or property damage.
Obviously DC didn't get any complaints (that we know of) but that doesn't make what started happening right.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Empchild wrote:pulling out his weapon was excessive, and thank god he didn't fire it,
If he did, somebody would have been right to put him down - that's ADW and no badge in sight. Automatically Appended Next Post: Kanluwen wrote:Actually Fate, he DOES "dare them to keep throwing snowballs"
Works for me.
9079
Post by: FITZZ
Well,I'll certainly sleep better knowing the streets are safe from snowball hurling scallywags.
Seriously,the officer over reacted to the point of being ridiculous,he should be fired.
18471
Post by: Lord-Loss
That cop is a complete idiot, they shouldnt allow people like that to become cops.
What a frigging killjoy.
5470
Post by: sebster
Fateweaver wrote:Gotta love how an undercover cop was exposed. He'll probably never be an UC again with his face plastered all over youtube.
Tee hee.
A guy's car is hit by a snowball. He gets out of the car, identifies himself as a cop to the large number of people present and then draws a gun. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that he probably wasn't on any kind of Donnie Brasco operation, and if he was he really, really shouldn't have been.
10093
Post by: Sidstyler
A couple things...
Bad place for a snowball fight, especially seeing as how the whole thing was organized and pre-planned. Why not a park or something more sensible? The middle of downtown doesn't sound like a good idea.
Throwing snowballs at people who don't want to be involved, especially cars, is stupid. Sure, it's a snowball, they're just having fun, but I'd be pissed off too if I was going about my business and some freaking gak starts throwing gak at me, or my car. I've already been victim of a hit and run twice now, which did $550 worth of damage to my car that I've still yet to fix...I do not take that crap lightly. I don't want anyone doing anything to my car, I don't care if it is just snow, it's a huge sign of disrespect and you will pay if you so much as scratch the paint.
We'll never know for sure unless we were there, but personally I doubt the claims that the drivers were "taunting" them. More likely they rolled down their windows to tell them to get the hell out the way or to yell at them for hitting their car.
Once the snowball fight stopped being fun, it should have stopped. You don't start throwing them at cars and making a political statement out of "boredom", that's not a snowball fight anymore.
The cop shouldn't have drawn his gun, in fact he probably shouldn't have even gotten out of his car. But that really is over the top, and I personally find it disturbing that a cop is so eager to draw his weapon in a situation like that. Definitely excessive.
My opinion: the idiots brought it on themselves for acting irresponsibly and throwing gak at cars. The cop made a huge mistake and is now paying for it. Some people don't know when to keep their mouths shut.
EDIT: Jeez, that was more...colorful than I planned on it being. Well most of the language is filtered so hopefully I won't get in trouble for that. Again.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Oh I'm sure parts of the recording were left off youtube. Since no crime has been deemed as being committed by the snowball throwers they won't ever be required to show the entire thing, only what the want people to see.
They play the part of the victims which is laughable because for a few moments the cop was a victim and anyone they threw snowballs at for driving "gas guzzlers" were victims too.
I was shocked when I read they were D.C college students and not UC Berkely students.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Good to see that good old paranoia isn't dead yet. 
241
Post by: Ahtman
Kilkrazy wrote:Is it actually illegal to take part in a political demonstration in the USA?
I thought you guys were pretty keen on freedom of speech and stuff.
You can but need a permit. We are also keen on bureaucracy. 
Emperors Faithful wrote:Good to see that good old paranoia isn't dead yet.
WHO TOLD YOU?! Is it safe?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Fateweaver wrote:I still don't see anyone defending the cop. I sure as hell am not.
I'm just saying that the cop did have a right, after it was made clear he was a cop, to want to arrest that guy for throwing a snowball at him. It is assault. No ifs, ands or buts.
Try it. Throw a snowball at a cop and see where it gets you. It'll get you a fine, some jail time or both.
Arrest is one thing. He had no right under color of law to draw the weapon. I restate: he should be charged with assault with a deadly weapon and fired.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Maybe he thought that the snowball was a WMD?
13916
Post by: bigfood
Could it be possible that the officer drew his weapon not for defense or threatening the crowd in a ´bad´ way but to
´play along´ in a kind of way? He didn´t point the weapon at anybody I think,and later he just stood there, kicking snow and maybe even trying to form a snowball, too ( I think at the beg. of video)
I know you don´t `play` with guns, but I think it´s possible that he thought : Hah, they´re throwing snowballs at me. Then I will look if i am able to scare them. It´s like a game getting out of control.
Some people in the crowd are very agitated and you can see how fast it turns into a mob. I can undertand that you get aggressive if you feel threatened, but I felt sorry for the officer when he was
hit by the ball and shouted at. I think the game getting out of control is what happened here, with good intentions on both sides in the beginning and an aggressive mob that was dealt with in a hard way in the end.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Oh I'm not denying he should be punished somewhat for pulling his gun. It was pointed at the ground the entire time so it's not as if he threatened anyone with it. Perhaps he felt by having it out that the crowd would disperse on it's own but even so I agree he should be punished.
The snowball that was thrown and hit him in the back as he turned to leave was thrown at him AFTER the fact. He had the wrong guy but someone threw a snowball at him after the situation was diffused. THAT is assault.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
bigfood wrote: Could it be possible that the officer drew his weapon not for defense or threatening the crowd in a ´bad´ way but to
´play along´ in a kind of way?
Only if that "weapon" were an squirt gun toy and instantly visible as such (candy-coloring / blaze orange tip).
The guy was brandishing a loaded weapon in public, claiming to be a police officer but refusing to identify himself or provide his badge number.
There is no "playing" there, but if you think so, try it as a civilian, and see where it gets you. Automatically Appended Next Post: Fateweaver wrote:Oh I'm not denying he should be punished somewhat for pulling his gun.
It was pointed at the ground the entire time so it's not as if he threatened anyone with it.
He should be fired for cause.
The simple fact that he's unholstered a deadly weapon is threat in and of itself.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
:edit: Having read more of the thread now it looks like it's just fateweaver. Shock. Post edited.
The guy probably had a considerable amount of stress beyond what happened that day if he reacted in such a way.
221
Post by: Frazzled
JohnHwangDD wrote:
The simple fact that he's unholstered a deadly weapon is threat in and of itself.
Exactly. Even a police officer cannot draw a weapon unless there is potential threat of lethal harm to themselves or others (or evidently you throw a snowball at their tank of a truck).
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
So throwing a snowball at someone is considered assualt in the US? Must suck. If it snowed over here much I'd be chucking globs of the stuff left, right and center.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Most people wouldn't bother to call the cops for having a snowball thrown at them but if a person felt inclined it is technically assault.
If it didn't end up a jury thing the judge would most likely throw it out unless the snowball caused bodily harm.
Not probable it'd be assault but possible and against a cop, if the cop wanted to it would be assault.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
As if that would hold up in court. (Insert skeptical orkmoticon)
I suppose the cop would have to say "Bah Humbug" before reading his rights.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Again not probable but possible.
I sure as hell am not going to test that theory by throwing a snowball at a cop. Feel free to do so yourself and let me know how that goes for you.
What the cop did was dumb. What the crowd of mostly college kids was doing was dumb, even if it was allowed. It went from a simple snowball fight to attacking innocents based on the car they drove. Just funny how the video on youtube only shows the cop doing something wrong when it was proven the kids did something wrong too (throwing snowballs at cars) but that part of the video is left conveniently off youtube.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Good God! 
Those...those fiends were throwing snowballs at cars?!?
Those scoundrels!
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Emperors Faithful wrote:Good God!
Those...those fiends were throwing snowballs at cars?!?
Those scoundrels!
Once it stopped being a friendly all-comer snowball match and became hurling snowballs at cars that they disapproved of due to their political beliefs...it's a protest/demonstration.
Which requires a permit, advance scheduling, and police presence to ensure it stays peaceable. When you start throwing things at passerby, it's not a peaceable protest/demonstration.
Since they did none of those things, and were having a giant snowball fight/anti-gas guzzler movement in the middle of a busy intersection they were technically in violation of the law.
If it had remained just a bunch of people enjoying the snow and not chanting f**king pig or lobbing things at the officer as he was leaving, it would be a far different story.
But hey. Focus on the fact that those poor innocent hippie douches were brutalized by people telling them to move out of the road.
15667
Post by: Emperors Faithful
Emperors Faithful wrote:Good God!
Those...those fiends were throwing snowballs at cars, which may or may not have been enviromentally friendly?!?
Those scoundrels!
Is that Ok? (We really do need a sarcastic Orkmoticon)
722
Post by: Kanluwen
It doesn't change the fact that the crowd was also in the wrong in this situation, no matter the actions of the officer.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
Kanluwen wrote:It doesn't change the fact that the crowd was also in the wrong in this situation, no matter the actions of the officer.
Yes, they were engaged in an unlawful snowball fight.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
That and it only takes one snowball to contain a chunk of ice or a rock, on purpose or not (sometimes when you scoop up a large handful of snow and pack it you don't always know that it's just pure snow) to cause damage and or personal injury.
That is why in the city I live in you stand on the street hurling snowballs at people you'll either get your ass kicked, arrested, or both (most likely both).
The cop was in the wrong and should be punished. The crowd was in the wrong the minute it became an illegal protest/assembly like Kan pointed out. It's not a matter of the cop being TFG as many, especially the poor hippies who's parents are paying for them to be able to even be called students, are pointing out. It became both sides are wrong and rather than focus on just the officer they Police Chief should have been fining the students who were throwing snowballs at cars. If nobody wanted to take blame arrest the lot until the guilty confess. Automatically Appended Next Post: ShumaGorath wrote:Kanluwen wrote:It doesn't change the fact that the crowd was also in the wrong in this situation, no matter the actions of the officer.
Yes, they were engaged in an unlawful snowball fight.
Shuma, you are the master of attacks. I see you learn from HBMC or Albatross (or both).
The snowball fight wasn't unlawful but a snowball fight is no longer a snowball fight when you start hurling snowballs at cars, especially for political reasons. It then becomes an illegal protest.
But way to ignore facts just to further stroke your own ego.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
That and it only takes one snowball to contain a chunk of ice or a rock, on purpose or not (sometimes when you scoop up a large handful of snow and pack it you don't always know that it's just pure snow) to cause damage and or personal injury.
All someone needs to do is slip on some ice and they can kill people with their cars. Cars are terrible.
The cop was in the wrong and should be punished. The crowd was in the wrong the minute it became an illegal protest/assembly like Kan pointed out. It's not a matter of the cop being TFG as many, especially the poor hippies who's parents are paying for them to be able to even be called students, are pointing out. It became both sides are wrong and rather than focus on just the officer they Police Chief should have been fining the students who were throwing snowballs at cars. If nobody wanted to take blame arrest the lot until the guilty confess.
Glad the name calling came into this. You guys almost managed to assemble a legitimate counter-argument together. Fortunately it broke up on entry because you guys couldn't stop saying hippie.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Emperors Faithful wrote: (We really do need a sarcastic Orkmoticon)
Like what? ":eyeroll:"?
Yeah, because that'd improve politeness on Dakka a hundredfold. :eyeroll:
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
ShumaGorath wrote:That and it only takes one snowball to contain a chunk of ice or a rock, on purpose or not (sometimes when you scoop up a large handful of snow and pack it you don't always know that it's just pure snow) to cause damage and or personal injury.
All someone needs to do is slip on some ice and they can kill people with their cars. Cars are terrible.
The cop was in the wrong and should be punished. The crowd was in the wrong the minute it became an illegal protest/assembly like Kan pointed out. It's not a matter of the cop being TFG as many, especially the poor hippies who's parents are paying for them to be able to even be called students, are pointing out. It became both sides are wrong and rather than focus on just the officer they Police Chief should have been fining the students who were throwing snowballs at cars. If nobody wanted to take blame arrest the lot until the guilty confess.
Glad the name calling came into this. You guys almost managed to assemble a legitimate counter-argument together. Fortunately it broke up on entry because you guys couldn't stop saying hippie.
K. Green lover. Is that more PC Shuma. Throwing snowballs at people driving cars that aren't fuel efficient sounds like something Green Lovers would do. Most of the adult green lovers I know were hippies during that generation. Now instead of protesting Vietnam they protest cars getting less than 80mpg (which is to say everything but a bicycle).
Not sure where slipping on ice would result in death by car but great way to try to discredit me. Try again though because that statement is epic fail. Throwing a snowball with an unknown chunk of ice or a rock in it is very probable. I have this feeling you live in a state that never sees snow meaning you don't know what the feth you are talking about.
It does not matter what name we called those students. It cannot be denied that the minute they started protesting due to political views it was illegal. If I catch a black man breaking into my house and in court use the N word to describe him the judge will not throw the case out on the grounds he still broke the law.
So saying our counter-argument is void because I used the term hippie is just you wanting to make me look bad. Sorry but the argument Kan and I set forth is no less valid because I used a derogatory term to describe "green lovers".
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
K. Green lover. Is that more PC Shuma.
It's not so much about the term as it is about you not being able to formulate an opinion without either inventing or tearing down a group that exists in the fantasy playground that is your head. Oh those terrible hippie snowballers. It cannot be denied that the minute they started protesting due to political views it was illegal.
You.. Don't.. Know how the law works..
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
I think Moderators should have Internetz gunz. That would improve politeness.
I would soon stop any illegal virtual snowball fights if I had an Internetz gun.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Okay, let me spell it out for you in elementary english so that even you can understand it.
People who don't give a gak about the world going green do not care how fuel efficient a persons car is.
People who do care about how fuel efficient a persons car is or isn't will comment or rally against a group of people driving said car.
Those snowballers were throwing snowballs at cars they deemed "fuel inefficient". That narrows us down to 1 of 2 groups of people. Those that don't care and those that do. I'll give you 2 guesses Shuma to figure it out. I'll even give you a hint. It's not the group that doesn't care.
If you speak out against something you are obviously not in favor of it. I speak out against rape and pedophilia so it's obvious to anyone that I'm against those practices.
So, lets try again. That fantasy playground does not exist in my head. It was said they threw snowballs at hummers and other SUV's for political reasons. That obviously made it an illegal protest and obviously it was protesting how "ungreen" hummers and SUV's are.
The only way it wouldn't have been a protest in regards to hummers not being "green" is if they were protesting SUV's having red paint jobs or working headlights or tires that were of a certain height or made of chinese rubber and not US rubber. But I'd have to say it wasn't over any of those things.
So again, good try on the attempt to discredit me but it was epic fail.
I'm going by what Kan said. Far as I know you must obtain a permit to hold a demonstration or rally and unless someone in the crowd snuck down to the courthouse and got the necessary permit required I'm pretty sure that throwing snowballs "to protest fuel inefficient vehicles" aka "political reasons" is illegal demonstrating/rallying.
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
Fateweaver wrote:I speak out against rape and pedophilia so it'd obvious to anyone that I'm against those practices.
Really?
You actually feel a need to tell people that rape and pedophilia are bad?
I thought that, by default, people would be against both of them.
Thanks.
For the record, I'm against rape and pedophilia too.
And animal cruelty. That's wrong, too.
Also, I don't like people who drive slow in the left lane. Those people should be shot!
With snowballs!
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I don't protest against them but by speak out I mean I'll never defend a rapist or pedo for any reason and I don't think pedo or rapists deserve a fair trial (though this isn't the thread to discuss that in).
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
and I don't think pedo or rapists deserve a fair trial
Then how do you determine that they were guilty? Do you really have no idea how the law system works?
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
I won't get into this with you Shuma, we've danced this dance before.
In some cases, like with MJ it couldn't be proven. In other cases like lets say it's videotaped and the perp is clearly identified through visual and DNA evidence then no, they should not get a fair trial. They should be taken behind the courthouse and have a .45 put to the dome.
I mean as a DA how can you defend a man who is clearly guilty of molesting or raping someone? The only plea I could think of is insanity and that is so overused it shouldn't even be allowed 50% of the time.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
I mean as a DA how can you defend a man who is clearly guilty of molesting or raping someone? The only plea I could think of is insanity and that is so overused it shouldn't even be allowed 50% of the time.
And when I get you convicted falsely in order to have you thrown in jail you're trial will be swift and harsh. Just like the king wanted.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Fine, I will reword that statement to say "Rapists and Child molesters proven guilty should not get jail time but should be shot".
Does that fit more into your perfect little, grass is green all over, world Shuma?
Or is that still unfair to the man who can only seem to get off when he is fondling a preteen boy or girl?
5421
Post by: JohnHwangDD
I'm just gonna step away from the thread and leave you two lovebirds with some privacy now. Good thread while it lasted, tho.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
Fine, I will reword that statement to say "Rapists and Child molesters proven guilty should not get jail time but should be shot".
Does that fit more into your perfect little, grass is green all over, world Shuma?
Yes, because the whole world knows what you mean when you say "without a fair trial". Especially when you aren't even talking about the fairness of the trial but the severity of the punishment. Automatically Appended Next Post: JohnHwangDD wrote:I'm just gonna step away from the thread and leave you two lovebirds with some privacy now.
Good thread while it lasted, tho.
No this things been dead on arrival since it landed.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
Get over yourself Shuma. Who the feth died and elected you God. Far as I know Obama is still alive (unfortunately) so unless God.....err Obama handed you the Presidency (God help us all I'd for sure leave the country then) I think you need to step down off the thrown you made in your parents basement out of Life cereal boxes and cookie dough.
But yeah you are right. If eyewitness and DNA can prove a man raped a woman/man or a little girl/boy he should be executed without trial. If it can't be proven right away but he/she is found guilty than it should be immediate death penalty with no appeals.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
If eyewitness and DNA can prove a man raped a woman/man or a little girl/boy he should be executed without trial.
It's a function of the trial to bring that evidence together and actually prove it. Get over yourself Shuma. Who the feth died and elected you God. Far as I know Obama is still alive (unfortunately) so unless God.....err Obama handed you the Presidency (God help us all I'd for sure leave the country then) I think you need to step down off the thrown you made in your parents basement out of Life cereal boxes and cookie dough.
How much do you really have to say before the mods slap you on the wrist?
722
Post by: Kanluwen
ShumaGorath wrote:Kanluwen wrote:It doesn't change the fact that the crowd was also in the wrong in this situation, no matter the actions of the officer.
Yes, they were engaged in an unlawful snowball fight.
Psst. Political leanings indicate a protest.
If a KKK member organized a snowball fight in downtown DC, and SUDDENLY it turned into them hurling snowballs and verbal abuse against any black/ethnic passerby--your ass would be in here hollering for them to be arrested.
Yes, it was a SNOWBALL FIGHT. We get that smartass. What you seem to fail to comprehend(or choose to ignore, as the case may be) is that the moment the crowd began throwing snowballs at people in "gas guzzlers"--it becomes a political action.
The fact that the police didn't break it up at that point was silly, but still. The laws are on the books. And what to your wondering eyes should appear...
The District of Columbia wrote:A. DC Charges
Incommoding. This is blocking vehicle or pedestrian traffic on the streets, sidewalks, and other walkways. This is by far the most common charge we see when protestors sit down in the street. Sidewalks are trickier because you generally have a right to engage in free speech activities on the public sidewalks; but if you so clog them that no one else can use the sidewalks, you might be charged with incommoding. Maximum penalty is a $250 fine and/or 90 days in jail. DC Code § 22-1107. The charge of disorderly conduct is essentially the same. DC Code § 22-1121.
Note that Obstructing bridges connecting DC and Virginia is punishable by an additional fine of at least $1,000 and up to $5,000, and/or up to 30 days in jail. DC Code § 22-1123.
Failure to obey a Police Officer. Often called "failure to disperse," this charge is possible when the police decide to close a street or clear a path and you refuse to move. The order they give you must be "lawful," which means that if the police issue an unconstitutional order, there is no offense in ignoring it. But police authority is very broad and we won’t know if the order was unconstitutional until trial. If the order turns out to have been lawful and you failed to obey it, you can be fined $100-$1,000. DC Muni. Reg. §§ 18-2000.2 & 2000.10.
Resisting or interfering with a police officer is a violation of the same law as assault on a police officer (below). You may not stand in the path of an officer (especially if they are trying to make an arrest) or pull away from them or help another person to pull away from an officer trying to make an arrest. In addition to violating this law (which is quite serious in itself -- up to 5 years), you may be charged with aiding and abetting (below). Resisting arrest is unlawful even if the officer has no rightful basis for arresting you.
False statement. This can come up with forms you are asked to complete before being released. If you put something untrue on a form that says making a false statement is punishable by criminal penalties, you can be fined $1,000 and/or be sentenced to 180 days in jail. DC Code § 22-2514.
The following charges are inconsistent with compliance with the Nonviolence Code of Conduct that everyone involved in the A16 action has agreed to follow. We therefore do not expect to see these, but mention them in case of overcharging by the police.
All participants in this particular action are asked to agree to these action guidelines. Having this basic agreement allows people from many backgrounds, movements, and beliefs to work together. They are not philosophical or political requirements or judgments about the validity of some tactics over others. These guidelines are basic agreements that create a basis for trust so that we can work together for this action and know what to expect from each other.
1) We will use no violence, physical or verbal, towards any person
2) We will carry no weapons
3) We will not bring or use any alcohol or illegal drugs
4) We will not destroy property
Assault on a Police Officer. Any unwanted touching of a police officer is an assault. Touching anything they are holding (nightstick, bullhorn, etc.) is the same as touching the officer. Same for throwing anything at an officer, even if you only accidentally hit them. This is a serious offense, a felony, with a possible $5,000 fine and/or 5 years in prison. DC Code § 22-505.
Destruction of property. Less than $250 in damage is a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum $1,000 fine and/or 180 days in jail. More than $250 in damage is a felony, with a maximum penalty of a $5,000 fine and/or 10 years in prison. DC Code § 22-403. Even if there is no "destruction," there is a separate crime of defacing public or private property. DC Code § 22-3112.1.
Rioting or inciting to riot. A group that acts violently and creates "grave danger" of injury or property damage can be fined up to $1,000 and/or sentenced to 180 days in jail. If anyone is harmed or if more than $5,000 in damage occurs, everyone to urged others to take part can receive up to 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
Unlawful assembly; profane and indecent language. Most jurisdictions have laws like this on the books. As applied to political protest and speech, they are generally unconstitutional and unenforceable. Only individuals in the crowd who become violent or threatening can be convicted under this law. Maximum punishment is $250 fine or 90 days in jail. DC Code § 22-1107.
Obstruction of justice. Interfering with a police officer is illegal. Please see resisting or interfering with a police officer above, as the conduct described there is a serious crime. However, bad television has confused some people as to what "obstruction of justice" means. It is not illegal to tell someone being arrested to keep quiet, to ask for a lawyer, etc. It only becomes obstruction of justice if you threaten a witness, intending to intimidate them into refusing to testify truthfully, or if you destroy evidence. DC Code § 22-722(a) & 723.
http://www.portaec.net/library/action/exercising_your_rights.html Enjoy the link.
Funny how if you watch the tape...there's quite a few of those being broken. Funny how y'know...the crowd was just being a whole bunch of angels and only recording what they wanted put out there.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
ShumaGorath wrote:If eyewitness and DNA can prove a man raped a woman/man or a little girl/boy he should be executed without trial.
It's a function of the trial to bring that evidence together and actually prove it.
Get over yourself Shuma. Who the feth died and elected you God. Far as I know Obama is still alive (unfortunately) so unless God.....err Obama handed you the Presidency (God help us all I'd for sure leave the country then) I think you need to step down off the thrown you made in your parents basement out of Life cereal boxes and cookie dough.
How much do you really have to say before the mods slap you on the wrist?
So once proven do you still feel a child rapist should be put in jail for 5 years and then let out only to do it again? or possibly do it again?
Shooting someone in the head and killing them instantly will in most states result in a needle in the arm. Shouldn't forcing yourself sexually on a teen or preteen boy/girl garner the same punishment. If I was 10 I'd rather be shot in the head then suffer being raped but that's just me so maybe I am a nutjob.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Good luck getting re-elected as mayor of a town where people get arrested for snowball fights because they are "illegal political demonstrations."
722
Post by: Kanluwen
As stated repeatedly--under the color of law, the snowball fight ceased being a friendly get together and became an illegal political demonstration when they singled out specific cars(e.g. the "gas guzzlers").
If the cop hadn't pulled his gun out, either way, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Well, unless the police had told the snowballers to disperse for an illegal protest, in which case we'd have the same people in here calling for the police officers who told the crowd to disperse to be fired for being killjoys.
14852
Post by: Fateweaver
It was, by definition, an illegal demonstration (or became one).
Protesting against something is illegal unless you have necessary permits.
That and pelting cars and innocent bystanders with snowballs is also not legal, in fact it's assault.
Several laws and ordinances broken but funnily enough the video only showed the "bad cop".
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Thread locked for becoming tiresome.
|
|
