DaedalusHKX's Journal: More "Oregon Justice". Hail Socialism. Sig Heil Marxism?

Infowars article on Oregonians abused by cops for filming an abuse of their property...
Quoted article from the Oregonian, as it were.

Lawful action... "Yes, I got it all on film. They had no right to come on this property."

CRIMINAL action: Cops taze the man, lawfully there and accuse him of "criminal trespass." And of refusing to surrender the camera "which could be used as a weapon."

Last I checked with "lawful use of force" he had to have actually THREATENED physical force WITH the camera for it to be considered as such.

Snippet:

Police officers followed a police dog onto the property during a search for a fleeing suspect. After the dog keyed on a car, officers broke out a window. Upset residents, insisting no one had run onto their property, started to videotape the police search.

When one woman was told to stop recording, she gave the videocamera to Waterhouse. He walked to the edge of the property, climbed up a dirt embankment and continued to record. At one point, he yelled to his friend, "Yes, I got it all on film. They had no right to come on this property."

He says in the suit that police immediately came after him, and yelled at him "put it down." Officers moved towards him, and he said, "Don't come after me." Waterhouse said seconds later he was shot with a bean bag gun and a Taser and fell to the ground.

Officers wrote in their reports that Waterhouse ran off, they chased and then bean-bagged and Tasered him. One officer wrote, "He had refused to drop the camera which could be used as a weapon."

Waterhouse was arrested, accused of criminal trespass and disorderly conduct. A jury acquitted him of all charges.

** Frankly I hope he takes the local government and especially the individual cops to the CLEANERS!! I hope he plunders the entire socialist treasury of every penny it has. **

Civil vs. criminal suits

[benhocking]

A civil suit against the government would most likely end up coming from the citizens' pockets. A civil suit against the officer(s) in question will most likely end up coming from their liability insurance. The latter is preferable to the former, IMO. A criminal suit against the officer(s) would send a much stronger message, however, as it directly penalizes the guilty party or parties.

Poetic justice

[benhocking]

Yes, poetic justice to those who are supposed to be upholding justice. I like it. It's not too over the top, and it would be nothing but good publicity (I'd wager) for those bringing the suit. Of course, I have no idea if it's possible in Oregon or not, but I definitely like the idea.

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

I don't see what is wrong with that. Marxist Hacker brings up how Oregonians are so proud of their "working" socialism, shouldn't that vaunted socialism foot the bill when it screws someone as well? Why is socialism good until it has to pay for its crimes and then the individual is responsible? Either NEVER hold individuals responsible, or ALWAYS hold them responsible... this dual enforcement system seems bullshit to me.

Just to make it clear...

[DaedalusHKX]

I say, make those cops pay out the ass, but at the same time, make the system pay for it as well. The less cash it has, the less cops it can hire, the more people can actually go and be productive instead of harassing honest people trying to live their lives.