Name and Number Please?

Haha, So, If you had nothing to hide, you wouldn't mind identifying yourself for the camera?

But it's not a story if the guy just says his name, right, it's OK thanks goodnight be safe y'all.

Edit – I am quite frankly bemused by the behaviors on video here.

…maybe, since April, Lt. Maxfield changed his mind and threatened to "kick their ass" if they *DO* give their name???……jarhead temperments can be so,so, mercurial…(…look at the *license plate*. sure, different cops can drive the same cruiser at different times, but unless there's a good reason, they usually drive the same cruiser their whole shift…& unless I'm wrong, State Police plates can/do identify unique officers…so, 313, or 309, etc., does constitute a unique identifier on Staties' cars…Not all, but some/most cops do carry "Junior Police" stickers to give to kids…if you ask nice, they'll probably give you one…SEMPER FI/HOO-AH!

Another lame ass stunt by you assholes, you are a joke!

@Thomas:

Most of them have real jobs and all of them are doing something with their lives. Not having a GOVERNMENT job doesn't make them losers. Quite the contrary.

Public servants are required to identify themselves based on their own laws. What is so wrong with ensuring the "enforcers" abide by their own laws?

It's incredible that people will put up with this kind of lack of professionalism, which is saying a lot when regards to a law enforcement officer. There are no rightous reasons for them not providing the requested information, nor is there a reason it shouldn't be required of them to give it, and be polite when doing so. Most importantly, it should be a red flag to us all that they would wish not to.

This is indicative of their attitude. They resent you speaking to them as though you're not beneath them, or that they'd ever be held accountable to you. The concept that they're both beneath us, enlisted by us for reasons we specify, and accountable to us, would likely offend them to the point where they'd respond by proving how insignificant they think us to be, and how unaccountable they truly are.

Please keep up the good work. Hopefully there is at least one officer in Keene with some influence, who knows better, who can correct officers like this, or fire them. I'm not going to hold my breath, but at least it's a possibility with efforts like yours. Thanks!

BTW, a real public official would welcome witnesses as the truth would protect him/her. Only a corrupt one would have any reason to hide, and only one with some real misconceptions about the nature of their duties would ever behave the way this cop did (and only an ignorant, happy, slave would defend him).

They work for us, R. And as soon as that camera goes off, accountability ends. These are public officials, on the job, whose salary we pay. On the job means on the record — and if it were my boss asking the questions, I sure as heck would answer.

I find it sad that you are willing to excuse such obviously inappropriate behavior by police. Asking their name is "baiting" now? Give me a break.

R,

They're the supposed "professionals", with some sort of obligation. We are not obligated to behave in any way, as long as we aren't hurting anyone. They are free to retire, and enter another line of work if they're incapable of dealing with the implications of this.

In case you don't understand what this means, we are not required to be respectful of the police, as that is not against the laws we've created, which is their only concern while they're on the clock. Obviously, the majority of people treat them decently, even though we aren't required to by law. They, as our servants, are required to be professional, which includes checking their ego. If they don't like it, they can quit.

We're all free to not interact with people who behave in ways we don't approve of. If someone was being rude to a cop, or anyone else, for no reason, you & I are free to decide to ostracize that person. It, however, is not the concern of the state, or any bureaucrat. As soon as the cop hangs up the badge, & uniform, they're free, like any of us, to be as unpleasant as they'd like. While they're collecting a pay check, and entrusted with the responsibilities of being a civil servant, their only concern is being professional, and doing what we tell them to do.

R, another brainless useless defender of the state. Not matter what police do to people, you'll still be there polishing their billy club.

No raise for mediocre work. These men are afraid.

R,

If you're dealing with a good person, a cop or not, I'd agree that's likely going to be the case. No one likes dealing with someone who is discourteous, but it's all of our right to be discourteous if we want.. you just shouldn't pursue a career that requires you to deal with people if that's the case. If you do, it shouldn't be a surprise when your employer tells you to take a hike for it.

Just last night I happened to be around an officer who wasn't on duty. He was having a discussion with someone it seemed he was at least acquainted with. I heard the cop ask, "I thought you were trying to become an EMT?". The other guy responded, "I was, but I can't deal with people, man. I want to be a cop now". Thankfully, the cop said "If you can't deal with people, you don't want to be a cop.". The other guy said "Yeah, but as a cop you can slap the shit out of them.", and he began to laugh. It was comforting that the cop didn't laugh. I bring it up because this isn't the first time (it's not even one of the first 100 times) I've heard this kind of attitude, and whether this dude does go on to become a cop, or not, doesn't change the fact that he could, and several like him do.
I assume, R, that most of your experience with police have been positive. It seems that you're assuming that an officer wouldn't behave discourteously without being treated poorly in advance. That maybe the case, but I see no evidence of that in this video (even if it were, as Dalton said in Roadhouse, "Be nice. It's nothing personal"). This instance aside, I can't imagine you could think that the people demanding professionalism from their police could be a bad thing. Not all cops are small people, but small people are often drawn to the power we entrust in cops. It falls to us, and good cops like Lt. Shane Maxfield, to weed out these potentially very dangerous people, so that we end up with only courageous, & professional, men & women of integrity, who are capable of handling this truly difficult, and unique, position. If not, imagine how dangerous cops could be.

Thanks again, to you who are doing this Cop Watch stuff for all of us.

R,

Thank you. Always enjoy civil discussion.

I've seen Roadhouse more times then I care admit.

I couldn't resist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojPVOhHhwnk

Might not want to watch if you haven't seen Roadhouse yet.

True story: An EMT in Vt. got a DWI, lost his license, and therefore *WOULD HAVE* lost his job…I say "would have", because he just drove over to N.Y. State, rented a cheap apartment, and with the lease as "proof" of residence, got a new, clean & valid N.Y. State drivers' license…& kept his job…No easy answers, are there???…How many *OTHER* "public officials" *HAD TO* know???…quite a few, quite a few…c'est la vie!, c'est la guerre, c'est la mort…

A fine display of why freestate loons will never gain a meaningful foothold in New Hampshire. It's comical stuff. Priorities – tokin' in public and asking cops for their names. All in the name of freedom. Noble and productive work LOL When's the next fool going to cut hair on the state house lawn w/o a permit?

Mr. Ryder sent me an email, here is my reply:

"Hi Nick,

Good to hear from you…I've been on days off / shift change with a vacation day / training for about the last ten days, so last night was my first night back in a while.

I've watched the video from your link and I've spoken to both officers involved. It was explained to me that there's much missing from your edited online version of the video, but then I've encountered that before ("…storage space limitations / bandwidth issues, that portion of the tape for some reason was bad." I guess I believe it, I'm very trusting.).

Without going into details of what was told me by my (granted biased) officers, I will offer this:

#1 – Perhaps I'm just ignorant (I don't claim to be the sharpest tack in the box), but please cite the "law" we're bound by to tell you our names and badge numbers. I know there's a name tag law, but I'm not aware of anything compelling me to tell you my name and badge number (even if we HAD badge numbers, which we don't but you guys already knew that) if you're not involved in the incident.

#2 – In my opinion, it has been established long ago that the cops in Keene do not randomly pull citizens out of their cars and beat them like harp seals. We refrained from this EVEN BEFORE "Keene CopWatch" focused their many video lenses on us. With that in mind, the whole KCW thing seems to have devolved into what we used to call in the Marines a "harass-ex," that is, an exercise in harassment. An exercise whose apparent goal would be to goad the cops into doing something "blogworthy," such as spazzing out and stomping on someone's video camera, or saying something really idiotic. From experience, I would equate some of the KCW-ers with the kids we all used to know when we were young, the ones who on the school trip to the zoo would zing peanuts at the animals just to piss them off, knowing the animals couldn't do anything about it. Not all, of course, but some. A hobby, not a mission…"Hey, Playstation's boring, let's go out and mess with the cops."

#3 – Past KCW behavior alluded to in #2 includes trying to interfere with the car stop, whether it's yelling stuff at the cops or the people stopped. Sometimes approaching the cops or the people stopped, during the car stop. How about having KCW-ers "fan out" around the car stop, some of them open-carrying, sometimes pissing off or scaring the people the cops are dealing with? My guys are supposed to pay attention to what they're doing for a variety of obvious reasons, and it's hard for them to do that when the paparazzi try so hard to distract them. Additionally, as was noted on freekeene to much fanfare, you folks have our logs and our radio transmissions, and you know how to identify us through our call numbers, which you've done several times already quite quickly and easily. To say you needed the officers name right there on the street so you could get the video blog posting right or so that you could get to know him sounds fishy. We don't ambush people to get to know them.

#4 – KCW behavior aside, the actions and statements of many of your "group" in other forums (court, protests, forum postings, blogs etc.) make it quite unlikely that any officer would want to interact with most of you, besides a select few and me who are apparently masochists. Who would want to subject themselves to this kind of crap? Really. Ironically, we're touted as one of the 111 plus reasons to move to Keene, but it appears this causes you to shit on us more (see zoo animal analogy in #2 again). With a few notable (and appreciated) exceptions, we rarely get an even break. So why would an officer want to "get to know you?" Rarely is there mention of anything good the cops do (we saved a life last night, but that doesn't make good BLOG I guess.)

#5 – As for anything to "hide," Officer Lamoureux has nothing to hide except that he's an excellent DWI hunter and recently received an award for spotting, pursuing and assisting in the arrest of an armed robber (shotgun). Again, nothing bloggable there.

I will try to suggest a more positive interaction strategy for my officers. Don't expect them to talk to you if you interfere with what they're doing, if you crap on them or whatever. If you talk to them like a grown up, they will more than likely oblige. I don't think an "ass kicking" is merited here.

Have to go, craps hitting the fan. Back again…that was a suicidal woman with a knife, and a suicidal guy with a gun, same time.

Take care of yourself, hope lyf is booming.

Shane (uh, Maxfield 083)"

Shane,

I don't know all of the details, but I would like to make a few statements. Firstly, I do agree that KPD cops should get a fair shake when they do good things. Stopping the armed robber, saving a life, and exercising the discretion to leave the 420 participants (mostly) alone are all very praiseworthy.

I think you have a choice. You can behave as peace officers, who work for us and other average people, with a focus on protecting innocents from harm, or you can behave as law enforcement officers, who work for the beaurocrats/politicians, and enforce their arbitrary will upon us.

The first option makes you true public servants — doing what anyone has a right to do — protecting innocents from violent people, and otherwise helping to prevent harm. The main distinction from average people that peace officers have is their bravery and trustworthyness. To be a peace officer, it is not necessary to believe that one is exempted, by one's position, from moral laws that apply to others, because one does not do things that would be immoral for others to do.

The second option makes you rulers over the public — the threat of violence that politicians use to enforce their arbitrary will. This is not something anyone has a right to do — enforcing compliance, and meteing out punishments for behaviors that have harmed no one, but have violated the politicians' edicts about how we shall live our lives. Individuals do not have the right to use agressive (non defensive) violence to force complience or extract money, so to be the second kind of person, it is necessary to delude oneself that individuals can be exempted, by their position, from moral laws that apply to others.

Stopping an armed robber falls in the first catagory — protecting innocents. Any person has the right to stop an armed robber — you are only distingished from them by your willingess to act, and bravery. In this, you are acting as a public servant.

Ticketing/arresting someone for slowly rolling through a stop sign falls in the second catagory. It is not inherently an activity that would warrant a forceful response. No average citizen would have right to pull out a shotgun and start extorting money from someone for such an act, that has harmed no one, and is not even really dangerous. In this, you are acting as a ruler over the public, and are violating personal rights.

Helping convince someone not to kill themselves is in the first catagory — any good citizen may do it. It is public service.

Arresting someone for peacefully smoking pot is in the second catagory. No average person would have the right to take someone into custody who was minding their own business, just because they inhaled something the person didn't approve of — nor would they have the right to extract money from them.

The first role earns respect and admiration, from all peaceful people not intent on harming others. The second engenders fear and resentment, from peaceful people who slip up and cross arbitrary lines, and whose lives and freedom of choice are increasingly and continually restricted by politicans.

The first role empowers the concience — you do what you believe is moral and right, to help others. The second atrophies it — you must do whatever the politicians tell you to do, no matter if you believe it to be moral or right.

This is the conflict. Sometimes police are servants, helping others. More and more these days, they are rulers, enforcing compliance. The first should be assisted, as a helper of others. The second should be thwarted, as a tyrant.

We are at a crossroads, in this country. You, and all of us, have to make our own choice as to what we will be, and influence others to be. Men with conciences, who have the courage to stand for what is right, or apparachiks, who will do whatever they are told.

We know, from history, which kind of men cause peace, great reform, and enlightenment, and which enable slavery, tyranny, and oppression.

I hope you will make the right choice, to protect peace, liberty, and individual rights, and that you and others will choose to spend your limited time helping those who really need it, not enforcing arbitrary diktats.

That's a KPD I could get behind.

Regards,

Paul (Keene native, if that matters)

Believing that non-aggression is morally superior is a fiction?

I think YOU and all of your posts are a fiction, Ann.

Either that or you have a sadism issue that probably can't be resolved by any of us.

I hope that one of these days you'll look inside yourself and find the reason that you hate freedom.

And when you do, I hope you'll find the resolve within yourself to fight that fear.

I feel sorry for you, and yet I am afraid of you and those like you, who let fear rule them, and cannot be free.

What's sad is that you don't want anyone else to be free either, unless they're 'free' the way you think they ought to be.

Think about it Ann, think about the way you've been conditioned to think.

Those you fear and/or despise will never again think the way you do now. They have conquered that fear.

Will you?