Greg, I agree with your overall comments, as they are straight up and down from the book. The words we read in them carry no emotions, only what we add to them. As you are probably aware, if this was a confrontation between two individuals alone, the verbal exchange would carry a different weight. Seeing that there are probably some "extenuating" and electrically charged circumstances in todays dally environment, that Im not surprised. At times, we just do not know when to fold the tent and come back at another time. Anytime someone in authority perceives a challenge to their responsibility or domain, the back kind of bolts upright. The other person then gets into the same frothy spirit and from there on it is a challenge as to who can P** higher on the wall. We all have been there and done that even before we crawled out of our diapers. Once in that mode, the Queensberry rules fly out the window. I never argue with anyone in uniform not even the doorman. My $0.02 and IMHO ofcourse.
Wish I had not read your list, but tell me it aint so! glad you stopped at 8. lol
Starsage wrote:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/07/the-war-on-cameras/singlepage
To me it boils down to those who abuse power want to keep that abuse hidden.
In public, if there is nothing wrong going on then filming it is not a crime as long as you are not interfering with the authority.
I'm happy for the kid. He didn't suffer one of L.A.'s famous law enforcement beatings while defending his rights.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.