The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 13    Average: 3.5/5]
41 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 8824
Rating: 3.5
Category:
Date: 06/23/12 04:00 PM

41 Responses to Motorcyclist Arrested So Cop Could Get His Camera

  1. Profile photo of CATAPLT
    CATAPLT Male 30-39
    7 posts
    June 20, 2012 at 9:16 pm
    Link: Motorcyclist Arrested So Cop Could Get His Camera - LEO admits to pulling over a motorcyclist to get his camera just before arresting him for a minor misdemeanor
  2. Profile photo of Boresome
    Boresome Male 30-39
    81 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 4:11 pm
    So , how is Soviet-Murica theese days ...
  3. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 4:39 pm
    I`m usually the first to criticise when Police step over the line, but, tbh, I don`t see anything wrong this time. Sure, it was a BS stop, and an excuse appears to have been plucked out of thin air as justification for another motive (none of us is perfect, and there`s a lot of laws in the book to choose from if you want to stop someone). However, the cop wasn`t just being a dick for the sake of it. He was trying to prevent a repeat of some pretty dangerous and antisocial behaviour, and he didn`t assault the person he was arresting or use excessive force despite provocation. I`m with the cop this time.
  4. Profile photo of danagamer
    danagamer Male 30-39
    701 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 4:49 pm
    "He was trying to prevent a repeat of some pretty dangerous and antisocial behaviour..." yeah that`s fine. He needs to find a way to do that with out violating an individual`s rights.
  5. Profile photo of nettech98
    nettech98 Male 50-59
    1043 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 5:01 pm
    If you think someone has evidence of a crime, you get a warrant or a subpoena. You don`t find some excuse to seize their property.
  6. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 5:05 pm
    "He was trying to prevent a repeat of some pretty dangerous and antisocial behaviour..." yeah that`s fine. He needs to find a way to do that with out violating an individual`s rights.

    Which rights did he violate? I notice they didn`t show that concealed licence plate that he was arrested for. After a legitimate arrest, you can search a person`s belongings for further evidence, which is what happened.

    As I say, I`m the first to criticise excessive force or unreasonable practices. All I saw here, though, was a beligerent biker getting stopped from doing something illegal, by being legitimately detained for another lesser offence. That`s not violating anyone`s rights, even the arrestee`s; looks all square to me - good policing.
  7. Profile photo of FreedomFrie
    FreedomFrie Male 30-39
    243 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 5:11 pm
    just going to get worse
  8. Profile photo of WeePee
    WeePee Male 18-29
    612 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 5:13 pm
    seems like a pretty smart idea. check a guys camera for illegal activity.
  9. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36870 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 6:19 pm
  10. Profile photo of Genocyde
    Genocyde Male 30-39
    712 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 7:22 pm
    A few facts. The motorcyclist is right, he committed no crime and therefore the camera (his personal property) cannot be siezed. In order for a legal siezure to be performed the officer has two options. 1. He can only sieze without a warrant if he makes an arrest
    2. He must obtain a warrant.

    He will now, in a court of law, have to prove that the license plate was indeed obstructed. If he cannot do that then the cyclists rights against illegal search and siezure were violated.
  11. Profile photo of Genocyde
    Genocyde Male 30-39
    712 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 7:26 pm
    ::Sure, it was a BS stop, and an excuse appears to have been plucked out of thin air as justification for another motive (none of us is perfect, and there`s a lot of laws in the book to choose from if you want to stop someone).::

    Okay so if it was a bullpoo stop with a justification being plucked out of thin air and you state also in the same paragraph...

    ::I`m with the cop this time.::

    I suppose you`ll be just turning yourself in to your local police force on some BS charges and giving them reasons out of thin air?
  12. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2106 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 7:52 pm
    Shoot first,ask the cop why later.
  13. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 8:14 pm
    I suppose you`ll be just turning yourself in to your local police force on some BS charges and giving them reasons out of thin air?

    No, I wont be needing to do that. But then again, I wont be using the freeway for stunt riding any time soon either. I made clear that my support of the police in this case was based on the reasonableness of their underlying motivation for the stop (and the fact that there actually was some legitimate lesser offence that the person could be arrested for - a concealed licence plate). I don`t have one of those on my vehicle either.

    So, what is your point, caller?
  14. Profile photo of thelonious
    thelonious Male 40-49
    3290 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 8:18 pm
    Wow, this cop needs to be discharged.
  15. Profile photo of carmium
    carmium Female 50-59
    6381 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 8:44 pm
    Since when is having something allegedly blocking a clear view of your license plate an arrestable offense?! I doubt most officers give more than a warning for that!
    And MacGuffin? You`re out of your mind.
  16. Profile photo of swoop408
    swoop408 Male 18-29
    1754 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 8:59 pm
    I hate cops. WHY DO WE ALLOW THEM TO DO THIS?!?! One day the people will get sick of the power that corrupts the police force. I hope I`m around for it because I`ll be at the front of that drating charge.
  17. Profile photo of freedan104
    freedan104 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 9:39 pm
    Macguffin: As usual your ignorance astounds me; the cop obviously pulled him over hoping to check his helmet cam to catch OTHER bikers as stated by the COP when he approached the driver. It is NOT illegal to have a helmet cam, the cop then decided that the charge of obstructing his license plate was going to be used instead to save his ass. Maybe where you’re from its okay to give up your rights without a fight, but here in America we tend to frown on someone abusing their authority in such a manner.
  18. Profile photo of Skrubz
    Skrubz Male 18-29
    19 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 10:29 pm
    You could see in the video dude`s plate wasn`t even concealed.
  19. Profile photo of OddNumber
    OddNumber Male 18-29
    201 posts
    June 23, 2012 at 11:15 pm
    and thus McGuffin makes my brain hurt once more

    we can see your hatred or at least vile dislike of motorcyclists is showing

    but when a cop pulls a BS charge like this out of his ass, the usual outcome isn`t arresting him, then proceeding to say he has suspicion that the film might have proof of illegal stunts or some other BS, then proceeding to detain him and get irritated that the arrested guy is making sense, then going about shoving him into the cop car and then slamming the door (leg could have been wedged in there, and that is likely to injure the guy)

    how is this even up for debate, whether or not the motorcyclist did/film something wrong prior, does not warrant the cop to act in such a way

    I thought i was "to protect and serve", not "to maim and harass"
  20. Profile photo of furrything
    furrything Male 50-59
    1351 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 12:01 am
    Hey Sheeple: Don`t forget, if you`ve nothing to hide, you`ve nothing to fear....just keep chanting that `til it becomes second nature to think. The powers that be will love you for it!
  21. Profile photo of Lord_Jereth
    Lord_Jereth Male 40-49
    725 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 7:53 am
    MacGuffin:

    "He was trying to prevent a repeat of some pretty dangerous and antisocial behaviour..."

    What you fail to realize is that you are arguing for the idea that "The ends justify the means." I once saw a film about that back in school. It was a fairly old black & white film and was pretty grainy. Also, it was fairly hard to understand at the time. It was all in early 20th century German.

    Just step into this shower, my dear. Everything will be just fine. Never mind that pile of bodies over there in the corner. We know best. We know what this country needs. Thank you for your cooperation.

    8-) LJ
  22. Profile photo of BoredFrank
    BoredFrank Male 40-49
    2374 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 10:38 am
    Is there no cop deeck MacGuffin won`t suck?
    Apparently not.
  23. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 11:23 am
    What you fail to realize is that you are arguing for the idea that "The ends justify the means.

    Which would only become a problem if you were to go on to believe that the ends *always* justify the means.

    I`m the first to criticise US Police where there`s reason to (ask anyone that`s actually read any of my posts on IAB if they honestly believe I`m a fan of US cops? - you`ll soon find that the very notion will be widely considered ridiculous given the way I`ve criticised actual police brutality on here in the past). This case in hand isn`t about some low-intelligence thug cop arresting some helpless girl for the "assault" of blowing bubbles on him.

    ...
  24. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 11:23 am

    This is a person that was arrested because there was good reason to believe he was intent on making a public nuisance of himself, and endangering other drivers. Sure, he actually got arrested for something more trivial, but the cop`s actions were proportionate, legal, and they had the desired effect of preventing a more serious offence. I`ve no problem with that at all.
  25. Profile photo of CoyoteKing
    CoyoteKing Male 18-29
    2988 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 11:43 am
    @MacGuffin: you said "This is a person that was arrested because there was good reason to believe he was intent on making a public nuisance of himself, and endangering other drivers."

    does that mean officers, in your mind, should be able to arrest any anyone that looks like they may possibly cause trouble in the future? that they have the right to arrest before any crime is done? so they can just arrest any person because of their skin color, tattoos, clothing, vehicle they are driving, or have a cell phone that has a camera on it, or a dash cam? where do you draw the line on "intent on making a public nuisance of himself, and endangering other drivers"

    because if that`s the road your going down than can we keep women from driving since most at horrible drivers, lol
  26. Profile photo of freedan104
    freedan104 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 11:52 am
    Macguffin: So in your argument of "good reason to believe he was intent on making a public nuisance of himself" would imply that we should arrest all people who LOOK dangerous. I would hate to wear a hoodie after dark around you.
    The fact is he was doing NOTHING illegal, that in itself was an abuse of power for the cop to stop him. Unless there was a call that a biker with a helm cam was causing a disturbance, there was no legal grounds to pull him over. The cop FURTHER abuses his power by creating a ridiculous charge just to justify himself. So we have two wrongs on the cop and nothing on the biker, yet you`re still on the cops side? You are assuming that he will do something dangerous in the future. Sorry but we don`t live in a Minority Report society yet.
  27. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 1:00 pm
    does that mean officers, in your mind, should be able to arrest any anyone that looks like they may possibly cause trouble in the future?

    In a word, no. As stated several times, my opinion concerns this officer on this occasion only. Now, what`s yout point?
  28. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 1:09 pm
    would imply that we should arrest all people who LOOK dangerous.

    If I had actually said that, you would of course have been right to criticise me for holding such a stupid point of view. I didn`t say it, however, so it`s irrelevant.

    The main objections each of you has given to my support of this officer on this occasion have been based what you imagine *might* happen in a hypothetical future if > insert gross exaggeration of this cop`s behaviour applied to a future hypothetical scenario here <.

    ...
  29. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 1:10 pm
    That`s called a "slippery slope" fallacy. It`s a fallacy, because we`re not talking about any future hypothetical scenario: we`re talking about this cop, on this occasion, taking actions that apply in these circumstances only. Do any of you actually have a view about whether the motorcyclist being detained was actually about to participate in a repeat offence that endangered other road users? And if you think that he was, do you believe it was inherently wrong for him to have been prevented from doing so by legal means?
  30. Profile photo of CoyoteKing
    CoyoteKing Male 18-29
    2988 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 1:25 pm
    "does that mean officers, in your mind, should be able to arrest any anyone that looks like they may possibly cause trouble in the future?


    In a word, no. As stated several times, my opinion concerns this officer on this occasion only. Now, what`s yout point?"

    than how can you possibly justify it this time? that`s my point. your either a troll or a hypocrite. probably both. i know you love to troll.
  31. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 1:43 pm
    than how can you possibly justify it this time? that`s my point. your either a troll or a hypocrite. probably both. i know you love to troll.

    I justify it this time on exactly the grounds I stated below: that the officer`s actions were proportionate, legal and had the desired effect. It`s amazing how often people like you will leap to accusations of trolling/stupidity/hypocrisy/etc when you can`t find a flaw in a simple argument. So predictable.
  32. Profile photo of OddNumber
    OddNumber Male 18-29
    201 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 4:15 pm
    what I believe this assclown of a cop pulled the biker over for was for the license plate holder/fender eliminator, if this is the case (it`s difficult for me to see if there`s one, but I`d wager it to be the case) then the cop is in the wrong, FULLY
    most fender eliminators aren`t covered under DOT (they don`t test them to see if they fall off their in the wind or could be an issue in collisions, but if you look at them, the bolts are the same grade as stock, there`s less material to fly off if broken), so in technicality, the cop COULD have pursued to pull the guy over for such, BUT he uses the "the plate`s obstructed" line, which fender eliminators are made so the plate is NOT obstructed

    assclown cop is an assclown and in the wrong, let alone how he managed it is a gross misuse of authority, just so you know MacGuffin
  33. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3362 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 4:18 pm
    MacHuffin: "This is a person that was arrested because there was good reason to believe he was intent on making a public nuisance of himself, and endangering other drivers."

    Based on what evidence?


  34. Profile photo of freedan104
    freedan104 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 4:43 pm
    Macguffin: I love how you`re trying to backpedal here. Your first comment was how he was trying to "prevent" some action on the biker’s behalf, and then you say how that the cop believed he was intending to create a nuisance. ‘Prevent’ means that an event HAS NOT occurred yet, so does ‘intended’, so when you say that “we`re not talking about any future hypothetical scenario” that’s a load of BS because you are assuming that the driver was going to create a disturbance. At the time of the stop, the driver was doing nothing wrong in the cop’s eyes, which is why he had to go back to his car and come up with another excuse for pulling him over.
    You’re a troll because in the same comment where you state “we`re not talking about any future hypothetical scenario”, you ask questions assuming that the driver was going to do something wrong. I love how you don’t see the main point here: That the motorcy
  35. Profile photo of freedan104
    freedan104 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    June 24, 2012 at 4:46 pm
    Motorcyclist was being targeted for the camera on his head and not on his actions. It irritates me that you`re trying to defend your ignorant opinion and how you pick the smallest nuances of other people`s comments to respond to. The troll comment, the `dangerous looks` comment, but not the idea that your view on the situation is inherently wrong.

    Go back under your bridge Trollette.
  36. Profile photo of photomstr
    photomstr Male 50-59
    766 posts
    June 25, 2012 at 3:19 am
    you `mercans better get your civil rights in order the rest of the world is laughing
  37. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36870 posts
    June 25, 2012 at 7:10 am

    biker targeted for the camera, cop even said so.
    Cop makes up the excuse to arrest him.
    "Partially covered plate" ? That`s a ticketable thing, NOT an arrest thing.

    This cop is a dick.
  38. Profile photo of dm2754
    dm2754 Male 40-49
    3357 posts
    June 25, 2012 at 10:05 am
    >Based on what evidence? >

    its called REASONABLE SUSPICION. cam are use by gang members so he could be a gang member for having a cam

    "(1) the consensual
    encounter, which may be initiated without any objective level of suspicion; (2) the
    investigative detention, which, if non-consensual, must be supported by a reasonable,
    articulable suspicion of criminal activity; and (3) the arrest, valid only if supported by
    probable cause." United States v. Smith, 594 F.3d 530, 535 (6th Cir. 2010) (quoting
    United States v. Waldon, 206 F.3d 597, 602 (6th Cir. 2000)).iii
  39. Profile photo of freedan104
    freedan104 Male 18-29
    79 posts
    June 25, 2012 at 11:43 am
    DM: Your walking a very very fine line. That`s like saying that every kid who has a cell phone may potentially be carrying video footage of his friends committing a minor crime, so therefore all teenagers cell phones should be screened for video evidence. It`s ridiculous.

    Reasonable suspicion usually applies only when a crime has been committed and a person matches the description or a person is acting out of the ordinary. It is not to be used to take away the rights of citizens to be unlawfully searched without a warrant. And you`re doing exactly what Macgruffin did, you`re assuming that that the cop has a right to stop the person for his camera. That individual can deny the cop the right to search his property without a warrant, which means the inital arrest to GET the camera was unlawful. So before you start throwing out precendents, first understand the crime being committed. Heres a hint, there wasn`t one in this case.
  40. Profile photo of Idlerlee2
    Idlerlee2 Male 18-29
    135 posts
    June 25, 2012 at 2:35 pm
    "its called REASONABLE SUSPICION. cam are use by gang members so he could be a gang member for having a cam"

    Are you going to suggest that every CNN van with a camera mounted on the roof or close to any window is a crip drive by wagon just waiting to be called into action?

    You have to be a world class cretin to not recognise that the police officer was completely in the wrong by: Suggesting he can take possession of private property without reasonable cause.

    Driving on the highway under ths speedlimit is not probable cause. Driving a motorcycle is not probable cause. By that definition, every black, white or hispanic person in the US should always be stopped for just about everything because someone with their particular skintone once killed a guy.

    Do you European immigrants currently residing in the USA have any sense of self respect left?
  41. Profile photo of insane_ai
    insane_ai Male 30-39
    823 posts
    June 25, 2012 at 5:18 pm
    Why didn`t the rest of the bikers stop and beat this cop`s ass on the side of the road?

    Figure that out and you will know why the cops keep doing this crap.

Leave a Reply