Pixiq

This seems so minor compared to what cops often do, but still, this cop should be forced to find a job guarding a warehouse, without a gun permit.

More typical thuggish behavior from the Blue Light Gang.

He's either supremely confident that he has the authority to deny anyone's constitutional rights on a whim, or he's so f*cking stupid that he doesnt even understand what a video camera does (or both)

Now, fellas. Let's wait to hear the rest of the story. Maybe there was a great danger awaiting the reporter at the police line. Maybe the officer was under strict orders to not explain his actions to citizens who lacked the good sense to do what he says when he says it. Maybe the reporter used a "karate blade hand" when he touched the officer, triggering his professional impulses to protect himself from any and all perceived threats. He might have even had a weapon, like, say, a potato peeler, a ball point pent, or even (heaven forbid) car keys. You just never know. After all they do have, like, the 10th or 11th most dangerous job in the country.

LJM:
you sure are talking alot of shit, just incase ya didnt know and needed to be told so then you would know.

BS by some more piggies is all that was, you and sheeple like you can try to explain it away and make fucking excuses for them, but, fuck you, and fuck them!

i have had it, when is this BULLSHIT going to end is what needs to be answered!

I know why cops don't like photographers/videographers. One told me a long time ago. I was on a line and got hassled and instead of acting defensive I just asked him )or her. I don't remember) seriously to tell me what it was all about. The officer told me that it was because it can make other people react either because they are pissed, themselves, at the photographers or because they are emboldened by the photographers.

I don't, for a moment, think this is a good reason to ban photography, but I do understand and even agree. But I think it is obvious that there is a public need for the information that photography and videography provide.

The NPPA is right on. Their tac is the only good way to handle this problem. The problem being that there is a hidden policy toward photography, something like "do whatever seems appropriate and necessary and pile up the usual charges against the photog just to get her outta the way" even though the photography itself is legal. I'm really surprised no other entity made the effort before. There has to be diplomacy and negotiations.

Photography is like so many other things that can be both helpful and harmful, like, say, FIRE or police themselves. Now, who would ban fire?

I wish they'd stop giving extra special privileges to cops. If a civilian was in a much older mans face, pushing them back and the other person raised their hand and lightly touched them, and the response was to shove the person who raised their hand to the ground, who do you think would be prosecuted for assault? Do you think if the aggressor went to the cops and said he wanted to press charges because he felt his "safety" was threatened by the smaller, 68 year old man raising his hand and lightly touching him they would put a warrant out on the older man? Just add the word cop and everything gets twisted. You could trip and accidentally brush a cop and they could beat the shit out of you and charge you with assault.

aah...in eddy murphy's famous words...

Makes you want to vacation in Milwaukee, doesn't it? "Thug of the day award" goes to...

And the "Thugs With Badges" club just got a new member.

Just another thug in a uniform.

I understand it's not an easy job but they picked it. Then they get all kinds of special privileges and don't come down on them when they do something wrong. It's time for that to change.

Once again the "Badge Bully" just shows us the type of person he really is. And as one person said earlier..

"And Cops wonder why people hold them in such low regards".

Rail Car Fan

Watch Chief Flynn's response here:

http://www.fox6now.com/videobeta/?watchId=34314117-3f88-42fa-87d0-575a4d...

Which pretty much boils down to, "If the cameraman had just done what the cop said, none of this would have happened."

Photographers need to learn one important question:
"Is is OK if I put down the camera and just stand here and watch?"

If the cop/security/TSA/etc/etc say "YES", you have them by the short and curlies because that one statement proves its photography, not your actions/closeness to the scene, that they're trying to prevent. Having the answer to this one question on tape will change everything.

While the nuances may be lost on the cop, they wont be lost on a judge. Video of this one question and answer can prove that the only thing the cop was trying to prevent was photography.