VIDEO: Mixed Response to Copwatch – Appreciation and Anger
Well, besides the usual antics (turning on the lightbar then driving, perhaps speeding, ahead so we’d follow, then turning off the lightbar, etc), the KPD was friendly as usual Saturday night. The police presence seemed heavy, but they claimed it was a normal Saturday night.
As before, some drunk white kids did not appreciate or like copwatchers. After watching their friend pepper sprayed and held to the ground, we approached an SUV with 3 people remaining inside. The girl in the back very much appreciated us, but the guy next to her got angry at us. Nick told him that we were there to make sure the cops didn’t hurt him. This combined with the soothing of the girl who liked us being there did calm him down. The girl in the front seat however, was not pleased at all (her boyfriend was the pepper sprayee). She was yelling at us, and particularly 280, who had the camera, to go away. The girl in the back seat tried to calm her down, while the guy was asking for a lighter. The girl in back also wanted a lighter, but the police would not allow 280 to approach.
After the girl up front refused to calm down, we left the scene to watch from a nearby parking lot. After the cops began to leave, we again approached the SUV. I apologized to the woman in front who was still hysterical and now began to threaten us. We managed to give a lighter and a WARNING flier to the girl in the back. Even though the guy had just been given a free lighter, the antics of the woman in front had whipped up his anger again and he stepped out of the vehicle and indicated he was ready to fight all four of us. By this time KPD was already back and intervening with him. We all decided it was time to go. Here’s the video:
This was another bummer for me. I understand that people are drunk and certainly upset at being pulled over and their friend pepper sprayed, but it amazes me how many choose to be angry at copwatch. Even though 280 told her early on that he wasn’t recording her but instead recording the cops, she remained violently angry at him, yelling about how he doesn’t have “permission” to record her. This is why, usually before I pull out a camera I will ask the person (during an uneventful stop) who is being victimized if they want me there to keep an eye on the cops. Usually, they say no and I’ll leave. Since when we arrived the guy was already on the ground being handcuffed, the cameras came out immediately and nothing anyone said could calm this woman down.
I think copwatchers should always deescalate the situation. If dealing with a carload or group of drunks and even one of them doesn’t want you there, it seems the right choice is to completely leave the scene. Your thoughts? Discuss on this forum thread.
On the good news side, we did encounter a car of black males in their 20s being pulled over. We got out and I approached after the trooper went back to his car and asked the driver if we could keep an eye on things. He said yes after looking surprised at first, and I gave him a WARNING! flier and suggested he say no to any searches. He seemed to appreciate that bit of unsolicited advice, and we stood and observed for the entire stop. Afterwards the driver waved at us when they pulled away, and we waved back. A much needed boost to a downer of a night.
I really felt like the black guys appreciated us. Just as we arrived, another cop pulled in behind the trooper to double the intimidation. Who knows what the police would have tried if we hadn’t arrived. I’m not saying all the cops around here are racist, but I bet you there are far more black guys in jail than there are as a percentage of Cheshire county’s population.
Finally, props to KPD for doing their job the right way and intervening in a tense situation with angry drunks. If real protection were your full time job instead of having the additional responsibilities of collecting revenue and arresting peaceful people, I’d happily support you.
Comments
69 Comments on VIDEO: Mixed Response to Copwatch – Appreciation and Anger
It seems that the cop doesn’t know the law about recording on public property…
My initial reaction to this article would be to point out what you are already clearly learning: that the police don’t have an easy job, and that people can be quite irrational when they feel like you’ve insulted them or their sig. other. Just to be clear i’m not excusing this guys behavior toward you, just pointing out that folks get irrational when under pressure… it is what it is.
That said, why did you wait so long to peace out? if some one doesn’t appreciate your service, screw em, just leave. Also, if you felt the need to apologize, it might have been better to do i the next day when the person has had some time to come to their senses. Its always best to walk away when you sense some one is starting to lose control and is becoming aggressive.
I’d also point out that as a private citizen you can do that: leave a tense situation. Cops on the other hand may be expected to stay around, and thus their job requires them to stay around and put up with whatever crap or danger may transpire.
You were filming on public property and had the right to record, but when someone does not want you there (I think they are stupid for asking you to go away.) I would leave…
The people asking you to leave can’t go anywhere else, (where they can’t be recorded on film) because the police won’t let them.
I don’t like how you make issue of race in this post, especially since you tend take issue with people who make similar generalizations. Just my thoughts…
I agree with dwarf a/b the reference to race. I don’t want to put words in ians mouth, but my guess is that the may have been trying to make it similar to a police blotter wherein the physical descriptions of the subjects are noted, particularly when a name is withheld of not known. That said the proper term for a white person for purposes of legal descriptions is Caucasian, and for ‘kids’ is teenagers or young adults.
I also think that maybe the copwatchers should set up a meeting with the dept. and ask for some advice about how they should go about doing this stuff. The cops have a lot of experience with understanding how one should behave in these situations. I think you have a responsibility to not cause any interference to whats going on whilst doing this for many many reasons, and discussing what you intend to be doing with the cops might help you achieve that goal.
just to cite some reasons:
-Your presence became distracting to both the police and the subjects at the scene, which at the least delays any potential to a resolution
-several times the officer had to turn his back to the stopped vehicle… We can’t see on the tape what transpired before the stop, you don’t know who the stopped individual are, you don’t know if they may be dangerous, you don’t know squat. YOU may not be concerned about that, but its not fair to possibly endanger other people by causing a distraction.
-If you want people in the community to believe that you are actually doing a public service by ensuring that police aren’t engaging in misconduct, then you should make an effort to be as ‘out the way’ as possible unless you suspect there may actually be wrongdoing…unless of course you have other goals…
Let me know if you think my comments are helpful or if you would like me to further elaborate my thoughts…
-D
A true showcase of Ians (and friends) ignorance.
I actually happen to know the girl who is requesting you do not film her and I can totally sympathize with her frustration.
What if her employer happens to come across this globally blogged footage of her being questioned by the cops?
You seem so suprised their is resistance to someone requesting that their image is not displayed across the internet and submited for discussion, critique and critisism.
I dont know even where to begin regarding the racisism displayed here
You always preach against agression but I think you yourself Ian are filled with it and though it may not be expressed physically, you certainly display it in other forms.
“I actually happen to know the girl who is requesting you do not film her and I can totally sympathize with her frustration.”
Public property folks, this is what you get…
After reading your article on your point of view of what happened that night I’m disgusted that you think you had any idea of what was going on. Yes, I was very angry with you guys for filming us, but I was not drunk. That’s your first incorrect assumption. And how can you possibly know the relationships of the people in the car? If you’re going to write articles and make videos that are supposedly “helping people” I would think it best to make sure you get your facts correct. I was angry mostly because it’s none of your business what we were doing or what was happening to us. That was my car being filmed and I heard my name on the tape which is still not okay with me. I think that if I ask, which I had been the entire time you were filming, that you shouldn’t be allowed to film people without their permission or use the audio if they are asking otherwise. I understand that what you are doing is trying to help people, but you are not helping the situation if someone is repeatedly asking you to leave. It’s disrespectful and my life is NOT someone else’s entertainment. Go for it, keep the video up, but please be respectful enough to edit the audio on the video and somehow get my name off of it. If you have further questions, feel free to E-mail me back. My address is enclosed.
I think you should do what the angry woman in the front seat wants ian. she makes some good points….
WTF is up with the copwatcher saying, “yeah like he hurt your friend.” (time 1:54) Its just agitating the situation…
Thank you D.
One more thing to think about- Why would you want to help someone who is asking you not to? Is that because we’re a “car full of white drunk kids”, and you’re assuming we’re not educated enough on knowing our rights and the laws in NH? I’d have to say you’re sadly mistaken. Finding loopholes in the laws on filming in public domain doesn’t make it okay to tarnish someone’s reputation for all to see online. How about you practice what you preach, and respect the rights of others.
AWiFS, i am not a member of copwatch…I assume you are directing ur questions to ian & folk.
Lots of good input here. My suggestion is to be a non-entity to the players in the event, far enough away that you don’t distract the cops, or the people. I wish we had guys like you in our community. By being *in the background* you achieve your goal, and do not interfere with the process. If the *authorities* get out of hand you got great video and they can be held accountable. It would be great if the *citizens* came back here and gave us their account of the situation. While you have the right to shoot video on the street, a higher level of discretion may be in order to achieve *The consent of the governed*. Thanks for your good work.
Well, after reading the forum thread on this matter, I’m positive that you have NO respect for the public in Keene. I am not a “privileged white drunk” who goes around driving Mommy and Daddy’s SUV. That’s MY car that I pay for all by myself, thank you. Not to mention, I also pay for my own secondary education. But thanks again. You two are far more prejudice than anyone else involved in that tape.
I think you’re right angry woman, private citizens should not be taped if they don’t want to be. I think it should be copwatch policy to leave if a person requests not to be filmed.
I think what you guys are doing is admirable. In situations like this, there is no perfect protocol. If there was, there would be no need for Cop Watch since the police officers would already have that protocol. On a side note: gosh, seems like you got some really nice and professional police officers up there.
I wonder if the individual who was so opposed to you filming her on public property takes this passion to protest CCTV recording by the state. That would be awesome if she directed her passion in that area.
Cop Watch might need to make some more inroads with the community through public relations and education so that the community can better understand your positive and helpful mission. The police in these videos should not be the compliant nice guys versus the private citizens you’re trying to protect.
Where’s the victim?
The video was taken as a response to cop behavior. A dispute over the video is far less important than a conversation about why cops are our harrassing and detaining people.
AWiFS, Does it really matter how well you know your rights if you aren’t even allowed to borrow a lighter? Shouldn’t you be more upset about the armed man that took your freedom away?
Ian et al.,
Clearly there is no such thing as a “right not to be filmed in public”. However, if the purpose of Cop Watch is to help people and to win hearts and minds, then when those being detained by the police ask you to leave at least STEP THE FUCK BACK. The blog post is not exactly great journalism either.
For what it’s worth.
Ok, I just got a chance to watch the video and it isn’t as bad as people made it sound. Good job guys, I shouldn’t have been so hasty. Still, the journalism sucks.
” I think it should be copwatch policy to leave if a person requests not to be filmed.”
One of the people wanted it, another didn’t, what do you do? Asking nicely would have been preferable to screaming profanities at people. Besides that, it was mainly the cop being filmed.
“ANGRY WOMAN IN FRONT SEAT”,
I apologize – I was pretty upset at how my friends and I were received by you and jumped to a conclusion.
I’m glad to hear I was wrong about you. I’d never have made that jump had you treated my friend with the camera like a human being rather than threatening to smash his face in. Perhaps you would also like to apologize?
I figured you were likely drunk based on your anger; clearly you weren’t trashed or you’d not have been allowed to drive home. We’d likely have gathered such information from you had you not been threatening us with violence.
As far as the video goes, that’s Andrew (280)’s video on coconut’s youtube account. I’m not in control of it. Perhaps one of them will comment here.
I was one advocating we leave, but your friends in the backseat wanted a lighter, so that’s why we came back. Clearly, that was a mistake and I apologize.
TO: Scott and any/all of the judgemental people watching this video
NONE of the people in the car wanted to be filmed, these kids filming were told to leave by all parties in the car at one point or another. The police even told them we didn’t want them there. When Free Keene kept the cameras rolling anyways, my two friends in the back decided to just let it happen. I chose to continue asking them to stop filming because it was my car and you would think that they would be respectful enough to consider my wishes to protect my privacy. Even after that- they continued to do so, hence the reason I got so angry and started screaming at them.
When I’m treated with respect, I’m more than happy to give it right back.
I had been called a “privileged, angry, disrespectful, white kid who drives mommy and daddy’s SUV around and has her parents pay for school” before I even knew this was online. I had to receive a phone call from someone to even find out that it was posted up here.
TO FREE KEENE, FOR THE RECORD ONCE AGAIN-
Privileged? Ha. I pay for my car and my school.
Angry? I was then, yes. But now I just feel bad for those kids who had nothing else to do on a Saturday night than film someone getting arrested for their entertainment.
Disrespectful? Damn right. And you could just re-read my previous responses, but I can explain once more. When you treat someone with respect, it’s what you’ll get in return. When you don’t, well- now you know what can happen. All you’ll do is anger the people you’re trying to help, oh and then badmouth them online.
This video simply confirms what is obvious to any objective person who has read many of the postings on this site: the heart of what motivates FreeKeeners is an extreme narcissism-based neurosis that seeks to justify itself with a fantastical ideology. Cops face all sorts of potential dangers when making a traffic stop, particularly at night. They may encounter people who are drunk, angry, violent, abusive – you name it. Among their tasks is to avoid getting hurt and, whenever possible, to defuse whatever difficulties (a mild term) that might arise. I am amazed at the tolerance of the cop in this instance, particularly in light of the fact that the presence of the camera clearly heightened the anger and intensity of at least some of the people involved. The notion that this cop had to spend time being distracted by a compensation-addled misfit with a camera while trying to deal with a potentially dangerous situation is outrageous, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was actionable. If a cop has stopped a drunk driver (a GOOD thing, wouldn’t you agree?) and is dealing with a carful of impaired people, he/she should be able to accomplish that task, not only humanely and reasonably, but safely and efficiently. I wouldn’t be surprised if impeding that effort is a violation of some sort; I would hope so, and that it would be enforced.
By the way, if “reputation” is a thing of great value, as has been asserted so often on these pages, your obsession with performing uninvited surveillance ranks highly in the FreeKeene Hypocrisy Hit Parade (admittedly a long list). You decide to film people in whatever state they happen to be in (good, bad, indifferent), you film them when/where YOU wish (leaving aside the issue of filming in court for the moment), and then you control how their image is presented to the public at large. A lot of people would feel violated by suddenly having a camera shoved in their direction. Practically speaking, a camera is not necessarily a neutral implement; it can do wonderful things, but it can also do great harm to people’s reputation, sense of privacy and sense of safety. But your ability to reason is so stunted by your adolescent mindset that, amazingly enough, it seems that you haven’t considered that possibility. In this regard, the camerman’s weak protestation “I’m trying to make sure they don’t hurt you” was just priceless, as was Ian’s typically idiotic/passive-aggressive statement:
“…it amazes me how many choose to be angry at copwatch.”
Do remember, Ian: Liberty is always, Always, ALWAYS about YOU.
Wow Ian, thanks.
Like I said- Keep the video up. Just get my name OFF it.
I’ll apologize when my name is off the video, because that is where I DON’T agree with what you guys are doing.
Bottom line, if it’s public property then anyone has the right to videotape what happens there.
That said, if copwatch irritates too many people it may be counter-productive to the project’s goals. That’s obvious.
If it were me, I would not have said anything to those people in the car. Telling people you are protecting them when they have not engaged your protection services is paternalistic nonsense. It’s contrary to the principles of liberty.
ANGRY,
For all I know, NIck “coconut” will remove the audio clip. We’ve yet to hear from him. Though an apology might help his motivation. You needn’t apologize for being angry, that’s understandable given the circumstance. I would suggest an apology for the threatening (I think it was of Andrew “280″, but it may have been all of us) you did. That was what was out of line, in my opinion. He’d given your friend in the backseat a lighter, and had himself threatened as a reward!
Just a suggestion.
I was the one that edited and made the choice to post this video. I didn’t write the article, but the video is my responsibility.
It took a while for me to decide what to do with it, as it DOES NOT cast FreeKeene CopWatchers in the best light.
But it was a situation that happened, and deserved to be reported on.
I want to stress that CopWatch gets a lot of positive response, and even the angry woman in this video appears at least sympathetic to what we are trying to do. I hope she will re-consider in the future allowing cameras to roll on the police that may harm her or pry her for information. I appreciate her posting here, and because of it will do as she says and remove her name.
I hope her and her friends educate themselves on what they are and are not required to tell police in such a stop again.
Ian,
Apologizing to the woman was the right thing to do. Thank you for having the courage to do that.
Also-
George Donnelly, I agree with you completely.
Thank you Ian and Nick, and I do apologize for the threatening. It was uncalled for, and I appreciate the chance to explain myself to you guys and everyone else who has seen it.
However- it doesn’t change my opinion on filming people who don’t want to be filmed. I do own that car, it’s my property and I would hope in the future that ALL of the Free Keene crew will respect situations like that, and look at them from the other point of view. The police wouldn’t let us leave the car, leaving me with no choice other than to be filmed. Although you guys did an okay job of avoiding filming me after- I have an anxiety disorder that being filmed during an already stressful situation wasn’t helping and shortly after had an anxiety attack while driving- which is NOT a good or safe thing to have when operating a motor vehicle. I hope you will take that into consideration as well, that you might not know who it is that you are filming and if they have any preexisting health conditions that you helped flare.
As for taking the video down, if you want it to serve the purpose that you were trying to help people– keep it up and posted. It might just do that for my friend- with the audio. I just DON’T want my name said, that’s all. I’d like my privacy respected. I’ll let you know if the person being arrested feels differently.
Thank you again.
and it’s another PR coup from the “we’re the good cops” squad of fools who demonstrate with such stunts that they’re not only happy, but insistent (and indignant) in pummeling victims with what FKers supposedly assert is a crime that shouldn’t exist: “public” property.
“hey, it’s ‘public property’. fuck you! see how it sucks? we notified you. we followed ‘the law’.”
great job, FK arrogant schirmps. little could better demonstrate what really drives the FK performance-fartists, those PR masters.
free PR tip couplet, idiots:
1) obscure all ID’ing info (including audio) from those targeted (by badged criminals or you) who haven’t agreed under calm circumstances to have their shit interweb’d.
2) publish nothing that doesn’t rise above showing what stand-up jackasses from hell you wannabe-TV-star (all-star!) narci-drips are. in other words, if it isn’t extraordinary evidence of material badged-criminal hooliganism, revictimizing the victims is dreck.
Bottom line, if it’s public property then anyone has the right to videotape what happens there.
a despicable abuse of language from an obvious liberty-newbie/statist. “public property” is an impossible fiction, and “right” is a word not applicable across reality/fiction lines. how some of you were apparently drawn to even the mimicry of liberty precepts is a mystery.
As I stated in my post, I typically ask people if they want to be watched/recorded. I’m sure Andrew “280″ (the cameraman) will take this method under advisement.
I’m still not sure what the policy should be when we arrive on the scene during an arrest, as we did in this case. Perhaps film the arrest, but continue to ask permission from others not being arrested? I suppose we could also try asking the arrest victim.
Open to ideas…
Thanks ANGRY WOMAN IN FRONT SEAT for all of your incite. Not filming people that don’t want to be filmed makes a lot of sense.
I’m so sorry that you had a panic attack. I once had a panic attack while driving and it was not a good situation at all.
It goes without saying that I’m sorry someone was arrested, especially a passenger. Passengers don’t have to show ID.
If the angry woman would have been pulled from the car and had her teeth kicked in by the police I’m sure she would feel differently. That being said, it is my opinion that if a private citizen doesn’t want to be filmed they shouldn’t be. However someone does need to watch-dog these cops and I for one am glad someone is doing it.
What if copwatch hadn’t been there and that woman took the same agressive stance with the police? Having no one there to hold their feet to the flame could have definitely ended badly for her.
I can agree that I might not want to be filmed but the cops should be on camera as much as possible.
amazedreader… why do you even waste your time here? You obviously like to be abused by the police and the State.
Yeah, I’m a a big advocate of copwatch in general, but I don’t think this episode was handled correctly. Thanks to Angry Woman from coming here to post about her experience. I’m sure that your comments will help the Keeniacs do a better job in the future.
Risking “Well, why don’t you SHOW us how to do it,” I will say that I think that the best way to handle copwatch is to let the victim know what you are doing, give him a flyer, and leave if he doesn’t want the encounter recorded. If he does, fade into the background and record.
Overall, while this one didn’t go well, I’m sure it will be a valuable lesson for those involved in this particular incident, and for those doing copwatch elsewhere. Keep up the good work guys.
When you FreeStaters want some perspective on your nonsense, take a look at countries where there really are NO freedoms. (Of course, maybe you’re just trying to prevent the USA from becoming a country like these, right?)
When you FreeStaters want some perspective on your nonsense, take a look at countries where there really are NO freedoms.
“somewhere things are worse” is not an argument, despite the frequency of its invocation by brainwashed clods/slurps.
Hey, Charley Hardlyaman, isn’t that word in post 81182 above, spelled, “shurmps”???…no “c”, w/”u”, not “i”…it’s a type of latex microphone cover, right?…///As for the rest of you whiny assed bitches – ALL of you!…I wish copwatch had been there when Eli Rivera & Randy Tefft duped Officer Lundin into helping Rivera & Tefft commit a fraudulent arrest of myself…”Defamation” my ass. ELI RIVERA IS A BULLY W/A BADGE. Fuck you, ELI. Fuck you, Tefft. There, I feel better…YEAH, VIDEO ME NEXT!…
To Copwatch,
Screw “Angry Chick”. You have every right to record anything and anybody in public. If she don’t like it tough shit. It was her own raving lunatic behavior that made her look bad not anything you did. In the future I suggest you don’t have any interaction with the people the cops are dealing with. Just be a detached, objective recorder and reporter of events. Definitely don’t offer them a lighter.
I got tired of reading all these comments, so please excuse me if the points made are redundant.
1) You have no right to privacy in public.
2) It’s not about you. They’re not just trying to help you. They’re watching the police in hopes of encouraging them to behave professionally, and if not, to have evidence to hold them accountable. If I were in their shoes, I wouldn’t have stopped recording because you wanted me to.. I might have stopped recording out of respect for the fact that the officers were going to have to put up with you.
3) If the Cop Watch people weren’t there recording the situation, you were still being recorded by the officer’s camera in their car (assuming you were in front of their car), as well as any other camera you might have been in the line of sight of.
4) You’re wrong to feel entitled to tell other people what they can, and can’t, do if they’re not harming anyone. Some advice.. (I haven’t seen the video) you’re on camera far more often then you know. If you don’t want to be embarrassed by some sort of footage of you, don’t act like a jackass outside of the privacy of your home.
A suggestion to the Cop Watch people.. You may wish to offer the police a card as well, and let them know that you would be willing to provide them with footage if they need it. The police I used to know appreciated anyone who would record what they’re doing, as it would protect them from people making false claims against them. Times have certainly changed.
LSNL’s message indicates a disease rampant among “libertarians” — confusing rights and asshole behavior. more often than not in voluntarist circles it’s wrongly assumed that all criticism of an action is asserting that the object of the criticism is acting outside of rights. worse, these newbies/rockheads/liars assume that all acts within natural rights are defensible across the spectrum of morality or even mere courteousness. why? because they’re within natural rights. that’s puke talk.
murray rothbard, despite his few but profound flaws, nearly always got this straight, and included cautions for morons who might read what he wrote. that an act is merely not subject to just thwarting via force hardly recommends it. asserting “[y]ou have no right to privacy in public” as if that’s dispositive is a useless joke.
You’re wrong to feel entitled to tell other people what they can, and can’t, do if they’re not harming anyone.
and there, in black, was the self-contradictory creed of a closet RINO asshole. if the FKers, according to LSNL, are entitled to act against the wishes of those being taped, the subjects of the taping are entitled to tell them they can’t. they aren’t harming anyone by doing so.
If you don’t want to be embarrassed by some sort of footage of you, don’t act like a jackass outside of the privacy of your home.
sounds like something a badged criminal would say. no mere coincidence.
You may wish to offer the police a card as well, and let them know that you would be willing to provide them with footage if they need it.
here, piggy piggy.
yeah, and do the same for your local conventional rapists, burglars, thieves, etc.
statists out themselves every time.
Simple answer. Don’t feel obligated to protect the people who don’t want to be filmed. You can still film them if you feel it will lead to others being harmed in the future. Either way its up to you, not them.
The video was ripped down and re-posted with the requested audio edits from the woman upset at the time. If you had a youtube comment there, go make it again. I like getting comments 
The filming is ok, as long as there is no intentional agitation. Look.. honestly you guys are there to catch the police doing something wrong. No other reason. In reality, objective filming is a benefit to all… it is called NEWS (or was before the last election). Decide what you are going to be, then be it. Activist, News Reporter, or Commutity Super Sleuth.
There’s more to libertarianism than an axiom or two.
There’s more to libertarianism than an axiom or two.
false — exactly why libertarianism (assuming you mean liberty) prevails as the only political philosophy founded directly on a single clear principle. true libertarianism (i.e., voluntarism) is only one axiom:
all humans are created equal with regard to rights.
there it is. every material object of the philosophy flows solely from that. if you agree with that statement, you must be a voluntarist or scoundrel. no other option.
“you must be a voluntarist or scoundrel”
I prefer the latter
bwahahaha
The sad reality is that a day does not go by, not a day, where I don’t read some horror story of somebody being sodomized with a tazer. Absolutely these folks have better things they can be doing on a saturday night. It just so happens doing what they can to keep an eye on police encounters is of higher value to them. Surely the friends and family of that young man who was shot to death in Swanzey last week would have been thrilled if someone had filmed the incident, rather than leaving it to the word of the officer.
And for the accusations of narcissism, the people doing the cop watching in that video are some of the friendliest, most helpful and humble humans I have yet to know. So everybody just stop forming preconceived notions of a strangers character. It’s juvenile.
Not sure why footage after the arrest is still posted – shouldn’t it have been about the arrest? Too bad you weren’t there sooner because he was thrown to the ground, after putting his hands behind his back and cooperating, then pepper sprayed. You can obviously hear him asking them why they did what they did when he wasn’t resisting. If anyone saw the entire incident, please email me.
“ANGRY WOMAN IN FRONT SEAT”: I’m curious why, rights aside, you don’t want to be filmed. Why is that important to you?
To me, recording video is preserving the truth of an event. It seems to me like anyone who values truth should be okay with non-disruptive video-recording–but maybe I’m missing something.
I’m sorry you felt hurt by the cop watchers’ actions, and I think future watchers will take more care not to film those who don’t want to be filmed.
I don’t think that’s an axiom of libertarianism. I consider myself a libertarian but I don’t think people have natural rights. Natural rights are as real as the social contract. It’s all made up, by philosophers.
So rights are basically fictions. How do you decide which rights are best?
In a way, this is new ground that is being trod in the interactions between government employees and their supposed employers.
Personally, I would welcome any video footage that could be obtained for me, by anyone, in any encounter I found myself in with the armed tax feeders.
I also understand ‘Angry’s wishes to not be recorded.
I am far from being in a position to teach anyone here anything, but here is my view.
If you don’t believe in the (flawed) concept of ‘public’ property, then acting like it means something when you want to shoot a video is disingenuous, no matter what you stated OR actual intent might be.
I believe that everyone involved in this incident has learned a valuable lesson here, and I hope they retain it.
Just like the man who wants to take his own life or allow himself to be eaten, there are some people you just can’t help, and some others who simply don’t want your help, no matter how benificent your assistance might turn out to be in the long run.
‘Angry’ made her choice and it would seem her wishes were disrespected by the very people who should understand better than anyone what the implications of real free choice are.
I’m glad Ian and Nick apologized to her, and I hope this incident will not soon be forgotten.
Even if the result is harmful, free choice must win out over any percieved protection or service.
The ‘for your own good’ stuff doesn’t fly when the tax feeders do it, and the nobility of one’s cause is never justification to behave like a tyrant.
To do so, and think it is the right thing to do, is a very dangerous place to be philosophically and could damage the reputations of others who are doing the same things peacefully and consensually.
I agree with the goal of this service, but the execution here was poor.
With all that said, basically this whole movement is new, with many people new to the ideas of liberty and still struggling to overcome their indoctrinations. The anger of ‘Angry’ should stand as a beacon to all of us to remind us that as individualists, we can’t just be running around helping people who don’t want help.
Kinda reminds me of the people forced to evacuate hurricane zones…
Thanks
Oh, and Patrick, it’s natural to wonder why, but why doesn’t matter. If somebody (not being paid by me to provide a ‘service’) doesn’t want to be recorded by me, I don’t record. If ‘Angry’ wants to share her reasons here, that is her choice, just as it is if she does not.
I don’t think the question is necessarily disrespectful, but it is a bit nosy…
BTW the cops refusal to allow free people to have a cigarette lighter in their own car was childish and stupid, but I can’t call it a justification to continue recording someone who emphatically asserted that she did not wish to be recorded.
People aren’t going to believe you when you tell then you respect their individuality, if they have that sort of thing for an example.
Tread carefully…
This line uttered by the videographer (way too generous a designation in this case, but what the heck) was an absolute classic, from the standpoint of massive egocentricity rendering a person moronic:
“I’m not filming her”.
The greatest resource the often somewhat paranoid opponents of the FreeKeene “movement” have is the FreeKeeners themselves. It’s the “gift that keeps on giving”.
I ask yet again, shouldn’t this have been about the arrest and nothing else? I thought you’re group was all about people being arrested and mistreated/overpowered? Those in the vehicle were not under arrest and had nothing to do with being stopped, so I don’t blame them for not wanting to be recorded. Perhaps they don’t want their family to see or their school or their employer. Perhaps the person being arrested doesn’t want to be film either.
In the meantime while all the discussion is on whether to tape someone that doesn’t want to be, that young man was mistreated after putting his hands behind his back for arrest and being thrown to the ground, handcuffed, punched in the face, THEN sprayed. Too bad no discussion has been taking place about that. However, if you saw it, please email me.
@LPViper: Good point. I was trying to determine her reasons, but it’s not important.
Don’t Lose Sight,
I’m not sure what relation you have to the incident, but it appears you were either a witness, or have talked directly to witnesses. I regret that we were not there for the initial stop and arrest to capture it all. That’s probably the reason nobody is talking about it unfortunately, but if he was hurt by police, it deserves talking about.
As for the people in the vehicle, they were under arrest, because they claim they were not allowed to leave their vehicle. They were being detained and pryed for information.
Good afternoon to all.
It’s a wonder that their are still people arguing about this. I never once asked for the video to be taken down. I just asked for my name to be taken off of it for fear of an employer coming across that. It wouldn’t have been hard to identify me considering my car, my friends, and my name was all on that video, and if I hadn’t been asking, and then screaming for them to stop filming- I’m sure my face too. I wasn’t getting arrested or in trouble, there was no need to show me on tape. Plain and simple.
Free Keene is there to help people getting arrested or harassed by the police. I was not. The police in Keene have actually always been very kind and always been fair with me.
With that being said, It is true that they haven’t been so fair with my friend. Before you guys got there, two police unlocked the passenger side door, through the already open window. They then opened the door and asked him to get out. He got out, put his hands behind his back and they threw him on the ground face forward and continued to use excessive force, all the while he was yelling that he wasn’t resisting and asking them why they were doing those things to him which from my account was being pepper sprayed and having 2-3 cops sitting on him/ using unnecessary force. (You can watch the end of his arrest on the video) I later heard and from the victims own words that he “felt beat up” the next day.
Free Keene did exactly what they wanted to, and that was to catch the police being un professional.
Kudos to them.
I also want to THANK them again for respecting my wishes, and taking my name off it, despite all the assholes who have been telling them to “screw her”.
What purpose does it serve to keep my name in the video? Everything else is still there.
ANGRY,
Welcome to the comments section of the blog. Bickering seems to be the point of them, generally. Don’t pay the hecklers any attention. They are just random internet people.
I’m glad the people who matter in this case, you and the copwatchers, were able to use this blog to come to a mutual understanding and appreciation!
Welcome to the Free Keene blog, ANGRY.
Question: Did the cops recognize your friend or did he provide ID?
Neither. He gave his name.
Not legal advice, but my understanding of their rules:
For future reference, passengers don’t need to speak to the police. Drivers need only provide license and registration. Remember to ask questions instead of answering them. Or, don’t say anything at all if you aren’t comfortable asking questions like, “Am I free to go?”.
The more you tell a cop, the more likely you are to get arrested for something.
For more, look for the Antiterrorist on YouTube, and good luck out there!
I don’t think that’s an axiom of libertarianism.
shaking head and grimacing.
I consider myself a libertarian but I don’t think people have natural rights. Natural rights are as real as the social contract. It’s all made up, by philosophers.
bringing up yet another stumbling block for the easily confused. there needn’t be a single crumb of evidence for natural rights. they are not a logically provable factor. sheen aside, natural rights is simply the least assailable doctrine, by far — the most pristine foundation of vapor. a philosophy by default.
for if one disputes (not merely professes ignorance of) natural rights — that all humans are created equal with regard to rights — he therefore asserts that one human has more rights than another. (in other words, you are not a libertarian if you dispute the axiom.) this assertion goes beyond the unprovability of natural rights, as follows:
natural rights
- are humans created equal with regard to rights?
yes.
social “contract” (ha!) or other disputation of natural rights
- are humans created equal with regard to rights?
no.
- which humans are superior, and why?
any theory other than natural rights requires the answering of “which humans”. the doctrine of natural rights suffers least from such arbitrary foundation, for the question cannot even exist when all humans are in the same rights class. no selection.
such analysis is impossible for the average lunkhead, but there’s hope; the analysis is usually unnecessary. forget attempting to prove the unprovable, and instead ask those interested whether they believe “all humans are created equal with regard to rights”. voluntarism is required logically if they assent to that premise. getting people to understand rights and downstream logic is the barrier, especially when their bread and butter depends upon scoundrelly behavior, but debating natural rights is usually a waste given that most accept the premise. it’s always a waste to pretend that natural rights may or must be proved.
Don’t pay the hecklers any attention. They are just random internet people.
one for the archives.
Angry Woman,
I was the person with the video camera. I apologize for not responding until now, but I’ve been away at work for 3 days.
First let me apologize for not being able to deescalate the situation, and offer my condolences to your friend who was arrested.
I’m glad that you took the effort to come to FK and share your thoughts. In my defense, I did not get the opportunity to ask any of you if it was ok if I filmed before the situation escalated. It was nearly impossible to get a word out. I understand that you were in an agitated state, and that’s why I’m not offended at all by you yelling at me. I only approached the vehicle after I had heard the girl in back say that it was ok to record, and when you asked me to stop filming, I had also heard your friend tell me to stay, so I stopped filming you and only you. There were a lot of people yelling/talking to me at once and I was trying to wait for a consensus from you and the other passengers, but the cop distracted me from my goal. I was only there trying to help, and I’m sorry I failed.
I don’t feel that I did anything wrong. According to the law, I was in the right. I couldn’t care less what the law says about recording on so called “public property,” but I do care about what is morally right. That is why I stopped filming you when you asked, but it is also why I kept filming the cop and your friends when they asked me to stay.
I don’t have a lot of time to constantly check this comment section, but I will respond again to you if you would like me to.
Thanks
Thanks for sticking with us. I can see why you’d want your name taken off the video. I’m glad that it was. Sorry for what happened w/the COPS. Remember, KPD means: “When the Kings Puppy Dogs get a 911 call, they get hot, they become the Kids’ Play Dolls!……..After we taze a few keene pigs, they’ll settle down, or transfer to Swanzey…..Q: What does Swanzey Police Dept. have, that KPD doesn’t??? A: A “one clip/one kill” policy….KPD just sprays bullets like a fire hose…Remember Carl Patten @ Beaver Street Market a few years ago???…I think he hit like 8 different houses with stray shots…never even hit the guy he was shooting at…maybe the couch enforcer died, or moved away? “The Keene Police, in the *eternal* PURSUIT of JUSTICE!” DAMN! Justice can run like a mutha fucka!/…. PS: Do you prefer “AWIFS”, or “AWiFS”???…most of us, the ones who count, anyway, like you either way!…*grin*…
Hahahaha Why thank you very much, “*NOT* Brad”. Doesn’t matter much to me.
To Andrew,
It’s cool. I understand the reason why you guys do what you do. I just hope you guys don’t loose sight on why you’re doing it. 
*NOT* “Brad” doesn’t matter much to me, either. I liked your comment on the “topless breasts” posts…it made me laugh out loud!
Some suggestions for possibly avoiding situations like this in the future:
I know that an informational flyer of some type that could be given to those who have been stopped was being considered. Perhaps included something saying that any video tape that is taken will not be posted/used AT ALL *unless* police misconduct happens. Also, perhaps consider destroying video tape after a certain amount of time if it does not contain police misconduct – which would avoid any issue of having the police attempt to use the video against whoever had been stopped.
Simply stop if the people who are involved don’t want to be taped. If something happens, you can’t say that you didn’t offer them protection, hindsight is often 20/20. The next time it happens, they won’t be so quick to tell you to go away and chances are, they will be saying things to their friends like, “Wow, I wish I hadn’t told them to go away.”
Getting the word out in Keene about CopWatch would seem like the most straightforward way of informing the public about what you’re attempting to do. If I’m not mistaken, Keene is a pretty small town, yes?
*Door to door flyering
*Flyers up at coffee shops, laundry mats
*Hand out flyers outside of movie theaters/sports games/malls/concerts – etc.
*Take up a donation for a small ad in whatever free publication you have there that advertises local events, restaurants and whatnot
Simply stop if the people who are involved don’t want to be taped. If something happens, you can’t say that you didn’t offer them protection, hindsight is often 20/20. The next time it happens, they won’t be so quick to tell you to go away and chances are, they will be saying things to their friends like, “Wow, I wish I hadn’t told them to go away.”
all that nonsense is based on the false premise that the taping is solely for the protection of direct victims of an incident.
Post your comment below. Login in the far right column to get rid of CAPTCHA. If you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
Want to discuss rather than just comment? Visit the Free Keene Forum.
Supporters of FK
Recent Forum Topics- Pledged Free-stater heading to "The Shire" later this year February 8, 2012
- Ruby Ridge February 7, 2012
- FBI is watching February 7, 2012
- New February 7, 2012
- Free Minds Radio 02/05/2012 February 5, 2012
- HELP . . . Still unable to access . . . February 5, 2012
- Marijuana decrim bills up for vote February 5, 2012
- Episode 35 - Anarch-Elitism February 5, 2012
- HB 1533 -- fines for hurting legislators' feelings February 4, 2012
- HB 1494 -- "Your papers, please" February 4, 2012
- Recent Forum Posts
- Re: FBI is watching February 8, 2012
- Re: Avoiding Federal Cell Phone Tax February 8, 2012
- Re: Pledged Free-stater heading to "The Shire" later this year February 8, 2012
- Pledged Free-stater heading to "The Shire" later this year February 8, 2012
- Re: FBI is watching February 7, 2012
- Ruby Ridge February 7, 2012
- Re: FBI is watching February 7, 2012
- FBI is watching February 7, 2012
- Re: Bearcat petition at city council meeting February 7, 2012
- Re: Bearcat petition at city council meeting February 7, 2012