You can now get a citation for making direct eye contact with a cop

[Umbran]

Neither do I, but stupidity is not a reason to be in jail.

Incorrect. It can be. For example, the crime of negligent manslaughter (and many instances of vehicular manslaughter) and several other crimes amount to, "You were dumb, and something bad happened as a result."

Abuse of power should never be excused

In neither case do we have the entire story, but in neither do we have clear evidence of abuse of power.

Noose-guy initiates aggressive posturing towards the officer while operating a vehicle - that, right there, is probable clause to pull him over, if only to determine if he's impaired by alcohol or drugs, as that behavior is unusual. Having done that, it is entirely on the up-and-up to peg you for any obvious technical issues the cop may find. In effect, the guy shouted from across the street for the cop to come and search him for actionable items, so the guy drives away with several tickets. No abuse of power.

The other gent got pulled over, and therefore (despite the news these days) we can assume there was likely a legally actionable issue at hand. While we do not know the full story, we can probably assume the interchange did not *end* with the donuts comment. Continuing in that line (failing to give straight answers to questions, for example) would eventually amount to obstructing the officer in the line of duty, which is itself actionable. While abuse of power is possible in this case, it is also possible the officer was legally justified.

In both cases, though, we have people being stupid when they shouldn't have. Rather than rail against the thing that *might* have happened, we note the thing we do know happened - stupidity.

There is a major point to note that it is possible for *both* the citizen and the cop to be in the wrong. Just because a cop may have overstepped his bounds does not excuse wrongs by the suspect.

 

[Ryujin]

Incorrect. It can be. For example, the crime of negligent manslaughter (and many instances of vehicular manslaughter) and several other crimes amount to, "You were dumb, and something bad happened as a result."

More like, "You chose to do something that you should have known was stupid", I would think.

In neither case do we have the entire story, but in neither do we have clear evidence of abuse of power.

Noose-guy initiates aggressive posturing towards the officer while operating a vehicle - that, right there, is probable clause to pull him over, if only to determine if he's impaired by alcohol or drugs, as that behavior is unusual. Having done that, it is entirely on the up-and-up to peg you for any obvious technical issues the cop may find. In effect, the guy shouted from across the street for the cop to come and search him for actionable items, so the guy drives away with several tickets. No abuse of power.

The other gent got pulled over, and therefore (despite the news these days) we can assume there was likely a legally actionable issue at hand. While we do not know the full story, we can probably assume the interchange did not *end* with the donuts comment. Continuing in that line (failing to give straight answers to questions, for example) would eventually amount to obstructing the officer in the line of duty, which is itself actionable. While abuse of power is possible in this case, it is also possible the officer was legally justified.

In both cases, though, we have people being stupid when they shouldn't have. Rather than rail against the thing that *might* have happened, we note the thing we do know happened - stupidity.

There is a major point to note that it is possible for *both* the citizen and the cop to be in the wrong. Just because a cop may have overstepped his bounds does not excuse wrongs by the suspect.

In the case of noose guy he was momentarily impaired by stupidity. Your analogy is spot-on.

 

[Umbran]

More like, "You chose to do something that you should have known was stupid", I would think.

Yeah, fair enough.

 

[Kramodlog]

Incorrect. It can be. For example, the crime of negligent manslaughter (and many instances of vehicular manslaughter) and several other crimes amount to, "You were dumb, and something bad happened as a result."

Now you're just being pedantic.

 

[Kramodlog]

More like, "You chose to do something that you should have known was stupid", I would think.

Ain't being stupid sort of being oblivious to your stupidity?

 

[Staffan]

I think that we have far too many cases where cops get in people's faces for no good reason. Folks should not get pulled over for being black, and such.

However, if you *actively and directly* seek to cheese off the cops, I have a hard time having a lot of sympathy for you.

As a matter of principle, mocking and challenging authority are inherently good things.

That doesn't mean it's generally a smart move, but the world would be a better place if authorities were mocked more often and thus learned not to take themselves seriously.

 

[billd91]

I think that we have far too many cases where cops get in people's faces for no good reason. Folks should not get pulled over for being black, and such.

However, if you *actively and directly* seek to cheese off the cops, I have a hard time having a lot of sympathy for you.

But see, that's when the abuse of power is at its greatest. Cops shouldn't get to throw people in jail because they piss them off. That's personal tyranny in action.

 

[Ryujin]

Ain't being stupid sort of being oblivious to your stupidity?

The difference between it being just plain stupidity, and rising to the level of criminal stupidity, is essentially a wilfulness in the act. For example you throw a cinder block over your two metre high fence onto the sidewalk, knowing that people could be walking by, and don't bother to check first to see if anyone was there. You crush someone's head and kill him. Criminal. Whether or not you are truly oblivious to your own stupidity, the measure is that a reasonable person would have known the danger. Barring mental defect or extenuating circumstance, you're on the hook.

This can also apply to a failure to act. If you know that the grating over the alligator pit under your front step is loose and don't repair it, and the mailman falls through and is eaten, then your also on the hook (in many jurisdictions, but not all).

This is why the woman who stopped on the road to help the poor little duckies get off the road recently, near Montreal, was guilty of dangerous operation of a vehicle causing death.

 

[Ryujin]

But see, that's when the abuse of power is at its greatest. Cops shouldn't get to throw people in jail because they piss them off. That's personal tyranny in action.

In most cases yes, however, if you actively seek to piss them off during an investigation, it's obstruction.

 

[Lhorgrim]

But see, that's when the abuse of power is at its greatest. Cops shouldn't get to throw people in jail because they piss them off. That's personal tyranny in action.

That's true... if it actually happens. Every story I've ever been told about someone being thrown in jail "just for pissing off a cop" has failed to stand up to any scrutiny. An officer just can't take someone to jail without a criminal charge.
It can look that way sometimes though. Say I stop a car for a traffic violation. Driver refuses to provide ID or give his/her information. I could take that person to jail for a simple traffic violation because I'm unable to cite them to court. Also they will not receive a bond at the jail until they see a judge unless they provide their info or ID. I never had that happen. I always warned people what would happen, and they always gave me enough info to issue the ticket. In some states refusal to sign a ticket will get you a trip to jail. In KY the tickets aren't signed by the recipient. If you don't take care of the ticket or come to court...Failure to Appear warrant.
When you hear the stories about people getting arrested for "mouthing off" I would ask that you view them with some perspective. Often the person telling the tale will leave out some details that might change the scenario.
I am positive that there are officers that lose their cool and make bad arrests. They are responsible for those arrests and if a supervisor doesn't nail them, the prosecutor, the judge, or a defense attorney will. Also, the actual victim of a false arrest has recourse. If you are arrested, you will get your day in court if you want it. Any defense attorney worth their salt will crucify an officer that made a bad arrest. That includes public defenders. They may be overworked, but I've never met one that didn't know their business. The ACLU is just waiting for good cases of officer misconduct if the public defender doesn't have the time.