Police Brutality/False Arrest Advocate, Antonio Buehler, Gets Arrested Again

[The30YardSlant]

Why is it their own gain? What did he gain by being falsely arrested--again?

We're talking about Austin, Texas. It's not full of bad apples in terms of citizenry. How are people not normal because they get arrested? What does good mean? Bad? Seems a bit arbitrary to me....

I don't have sympathy for any of them. I'm sorry, but it's this kind of attitude that makes it that way. Cops see themselves as above the law for some reason, society owes them, whoa is them, etc. Those poor police officers breaking the law.

Some people will defend cops no matter which law they break. My guess is Antonio is acquitted on both counts.

Watch the video and point out which law he actually broke. I still fail to see that this time or the last time he got arrested. At which point did he break the law?

Your generalizations are what make your arguements weak. Saying that there are bad cops who see themselves above the law is accurate, saying that all cops are that way is as childish as it is inaccurate.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Your generalizations are what make your arguements weak. Saying that there are bad cops who see themselves above the law is accurate, saying that all cops are that way is as childish as it is inaccurate.

What argument am I making? Where did I say all cops?

 

[The30YardSlant]

What argument am I making? Where did I say all cops? I was referring to the local guys here in Austin, who I honestly am very ashamed of. This is where I live. I see it more than I want to, very often in fact.

It's pretty basic: The majority of the big stories about police either involve them being shot or doing something wrong. Police seldom see positive light cast on them aside from extraordinary circumstances (9/11, for instance). Otherwise, they are just doing teir job.

 

[jobberone]

Why is it their own gain? What did he gain by being falsely arrested--again?

We're talking about Austin, Texas. It's not full of bad apples in terms of citizenry. How are people not normal because they get arrested? What does good mean? Bad? Seems a bit arbitrary to me....

I don't have sympathy for any of them. I'm sorry, but it's this kind of attitude that makes it that way. Cops see themselves as above the law for some reason, society owes them, whoa is them, etc. Those poor police officers breaking the law.

Some people will defend cops no matter which law they break. My guess is Antonio is acquitted on both counts.

Watch the video and point out which law he actually broke. I still fail to see that this time or the last time he got arrested. At which point did he break the law?

Obstruction of justice. Failure to disperse. Breaking the peace. Public endangerment. Public nuisance. Encroachment of a crime scene. Disregarding a police officer. You want some more? If you think you can beat the system then you are mistaken. If a policeman warns you to do something and you don't there are multiple laws that can be applied. If you refuse to obey a policeman on the scene of a crime then you are going to get arrested and you are at the mercy of the prosecuting attorney and that policeman.

 

[jobberone]

Generalized statements are fine. Specific allegations against a specified local police department is political in nature. Stop that please.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Obstruction of justice. Failure to disperse. Breaking the peace. Public endangerment. Public nuisance. Encroachment of a crime scene. Disregarding a police officer. You want some more? If you think you can beat the system then you are mistaken. If a policeman warns you to do something and you don't there are multiple laws that can be applied. If you refuse to obey a policeman on the scene of a crime then you are going to get arrested and you are at the mercy of the prosecuting attorney and that policeman.

By and large, the public has the right to photograph the police. That right trumps all others you mentioned.

..don't forget a defense lawyer, a jury, and sometimes a judge amongst other things. There's more to these stories than the ones the cops tell.

Anyway, I'm out of here....

Have fun.

 

[jobberone]

By and large, the public has the right to photograph the police. That right trumps all others you mentioned.

..don't forget a defense lawyer, a jury, and sometimes a judge amongst other things. There's more to these stories than the ones the cops tell.

Anyway, I'm out of here....

Have fun.

Yes they can photograph from a safe distance all they want. Just don't get in the way for lots of reasons. I said I was out of here and I am. Most judges and juries and going to side with law and order.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Yes they can photograph from a safe distance all they want. Just don't get in the way for lots of reasons. I said I was out of here and I am. Most judges and juries and going to side with law and order.

I don't think I'd want to be giving sworn testimony in front of a jury if I were the police in either of these cases. I think law and order, in the case of this story, is on the side of the "defendant".

 

[TwoCentPlain]

So, the police (or gov't) have a "right" to put cameras at traffic lights and film citizens and give tickets. And the police have a "right" to use dashboard cameras during arrests.

Yet, citizens have no "right" to film a police officer doing "stuff." Face it, the only reason for the illegality of filming arresting officers is to protect them from possible charges/proof of police brutality.

Sorry, I am about as pro-police as you can be, but the law needs to be changed about filming and that police officer who attacked the girl in this thread's video should be in jail. That was an assault.

 

[Dodger12]

Well put. The idea that the police are entitled to more privacy on the job than we are in our own free time is preposterous.

It's not a matter of privacy. It's a matter of public safety and not harassing our cops and letting them do their job.

And you're totally neglecting the safety aspect which is the greatest concern not whether someone doesn't want to be filmed.

Yes they can photograph from a safe distance all they want.

JB, it doesn't matter how many times you say it, people just won't listen; they can't see the forest from the trees. It's an issue of safety, nothing more, nothing less. Video tape all you want, just do it from a safe distance. 50 feet is not unreasonable and there's not a thing that you can see/film at 20 feet that you won't or can't see/film from 50. The arrest scene is a crime scene and I think people lose sight of that fact.

 

[Dodger12]

So, the police (or gov't) have a "right" to put cameras at traffic lights and film citizens and give tickets. And the police have a "right" to use dashboard cameras during arrests.

Yet, citizens have no "right" to film a police officer doing "stuff." Face it, the only reason for the illegality of filming arresting officers is to protect them from possible charges/proof of police brutality.

Sorry, I am about as pro-police as you can be, but the law needs to be changed about filming and that police officer who attacked the girl in this thread's video should be in jail. That was an assault.

There is not an instance in today's society where someone isn't probably videotaping you, not just the police. Just about every cell phone is equipped with a voice recorder, a camera and video recorder. It has nothing to do with "rights". It's unreasonable for police in today's society to not expect to be video recorded. But it is unreasonable for someone to be too close video taping an officer.

It doesn't take a lot of searching on the net to find recent instances where officers were ambushed and killed while dealing with one suspect and another came up behind them. These officers don;t know who you are. I don't think it's too much to ask to keep a reasonably safe distance from an arrest or investigative scene.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

So, the police (or gov't) have a "right" to put cameras at traffic lights and film citizens and give tickets. And the police have a "right" to use dashboard cameras during arrests.

Yet, citizens have no "right" to film a police officer doing "stuff." Face it, the only reason for the illegality of filming arresting officers is to protect them from possible charges/proof of police brutality.

Sorry, I am about as pro-police as you can be, but the law needs to be changed about filming and that police officer who attacked the girl in this thread's video should be in jail. That was an assault.

I think it's covering up two things when these things happen. Number one, the brutality was the issue as to why he ever got involved. He was trying to ask why they were man handling a woman from San Antonio, who was in Austin allegedly drinking and driving. And secondly, they second arrest seems a little retaliatory in nature.

I will say, though, I'm friends with Antonio on facebook. And he does take it a little too far in terms of being a little immature. But his media savviness and his background in both the military and his education makes people listen to him and his group. And the result has been good in terms of people asking questions. I think that may be why they are proposing this new policy--to detour people from asking much and from him gaining any more momentum going into his trial....

But in terms of public opinion, I have his back because of his cause, but he's not the most likable guy, imo, because of how he goes about proving his point... not necessarily the fact that he has one, but he sort of come off as a jerk, which doesn't bode well for his entire group...

Anyway, just wanted to give a non-biased view without taking sides. He's not a perfect being. The cops are imperfect... but I think this comes down to what is right and wrong in terms of what the public does in general and/or how it views this whole issue as a whole--not necessarily in this case, but in terms of how this case applies to the rest of the public not living in Austin, Texas.

 

[WV Cowboy]

Doesn't matter. If she did something illegal, there is protocol when arresting someone. That right there is straight up police brutality.

Simple, clubbing his head against the wall could never be justified unless the guy was threatening the cop and he wasn't.

Like I said, you don't know what happened prior to that.

If the person had done nothing, then yes, that is brutality.

But, hypothetically, had they been chasing him/her for 30 minutes after an armed robbery or something, then that is not out of line.

You don't know what preceded that, .. you just don't know.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Without fully understanding the context of the situation, it's hard to make a judgement on why the office took the action he did. I suspect there is more to this then just what was filmed. This piece was clearly edited. Why is that? That's the real issue with people filming IMO. You only get the story that the edited version is designed to tell you. Not necessarily the whole story.

 

[Denim Chicken]

Without fully understanding the context of the situation, it's hard to make a judgement on why the office took the action he did. I suspect there is more to this then just what was filmed. This piece was clearly edited. Why is that? That's the real issue with people filming IMO. You only get the story that the edited version is designed to tell you. Not necessarily the whole story.

Sounds like the part in 'American History X' where Edward Norton is talking about the Rodney King beating.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Sounds like the part in 'American History X' where Edward Norton is talking about the Rodney King beating.

You think? That's interesting.

 

[WV Cowboy]

Sounds like the part in 'American History X' where Edward Norton is talking about the Rodney King beating.

Seriously ??

You are comparing something that was not much worse than what GaGa's security guard did to an autograph seeker, to the Rodney King beating?

Stand back and think about it, .. what is really your problem?

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Without fully understanding the context of the situation, it's hard to make a judgement on why the office took the action he did. I suspect there is more to this then just what was filmed. This piece was clearly edited. Why is that? That's the real issue with people filming IMO. You only get the story that the edited version is designed to tell you. Not necessarily the whole story.

And without film, you get the officer's side of the story and the female who was attacked in the video posted here, her story. And guess what happens? No one believes her story ... until they see the video (even if it is edited). Now we are a step closer to the truth thanks to the video.

I'm guessing the 15 yr old female said something to the cop and the cop didn't like it and pummeled her. Nothing in that video excuses the cop for his barbaric, uncalled for behavior. Despicable act by a police officer. It happens. It happens a lot less if the cop knows he may be filmed

 

[Denim Chicken]

Seriously ??

You are comparing something that was not much worse than what GaGa's security guard did to an autograph seeker, to the Rodney King beating?

No, I'm not. I'm comparing the poster's comments to the comments made by a character in a movie about a similar circumstance.

 

[JBond]

I'm not cleaning up any more posts due to language. From the forum rules: 4 - You will not include profanity or non-family friendly language in your posts.

Can we include mug shots of folks posting in the thread? Please, please, please!