murica! Cops With Guns Drawn Takedown Crying Girl in Stormtrooper Costume Outside Star Wars-Themed Restaurant

[Steven P. Administrators]

Quote

Police with guns drawn have allegedly tackled and arrested a sobbing 19-year-old girl wearing a Stormtrooper costume while working outside a Star Wars-themed restaurant in Lethbridge, Alberta.

 

The teenager, whose name is Ashley, was dancing outside the Coco Vanilla Galactic Cantina restaurant on May the fourth, to mark the day Star Wars fan celebrate the franchise. The day is a play on the phrase “May the force be with you.”

 

Footage of the incident was captured by a witness who later uploaded the arrest to social media.

 

The video shows a number of officers surrounding the confused girl who was clearly struggling to hear their commands under her helmet.

 

Officers arrived at the restaurant after receiving a number of 911 calls that there was somebody outside the premises with a gun.

 

“Apparently a couple of people had called 911 and said that there was somebody with a gun,” Brad Whalen, the restaurant owner said. “A number of police officers had shown up to our business with guns drawn on our employee.”

 

According to Whalen, the young girl was left with a bloody nose after police tackled her to the ground before handcuffing her.

 

Whalen said the responding officers should have had more common sense.

 

“When all the things fit in the box – you’ve got the signs, you’ve got the music, the atmosphere,” he said. “A duck is a duck when it’s walking like a duck.”

 

The young girl is not facing any charges.

Source & full article: https://caldronpool.com/watch-cops-with-guns-drawn-takedown-crying-girl-in-stormtrooper-costume-outside-star-wars-themed-restaurant/

 

 

No comment.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

/facepalm

 

 

[shockz]

Sounds like a nice lawsuit to me.

[neufuse Veteran]

Ugh.. only in the USA.... oh um wait Canada 😛

[Zinomian]

I am typically ready to defend cops (man they have a hard job!), but here? WTF!  The girl literally gave herself up.....could have asked to take the helmet off, and put down the toy....ugh. as posted before /hugefacepalm.....maybe even double!

[JaredFrost]

15 minutes ago, Zinomian said:

I am typically ready to defend cops (man they have a hard job!), but here? WTF!  The girl literally gave herself up.....could have asked to take the helmet off, and put down the toy....ugh. as posted before /hugefacepalm.....maybe even double!

I tend to agree, the police showed very poor situational awareness here, didn't seem interested in deescalating the issue when the public tried to explain the situation, an investigation into their conduct is warranted.

On the flip side though, they're going to be the joke of their district, "Look out Bill! it's Boba Fett!"

 

I also take issue with the news article, they over dramatised it likely for clicks, at no point was she tackled, the situation was completely unwarranted though.

[Zinomian]

Just now, JaredFrost said:

I tend to agree, the police showed very poor situational awareness here, didn't seem interested in deescalating the issue when the public tried to explain the situation, an investigation into their conduct is warranted.

On the flip side though, they're going to be the joke of their district, "Look out Bill! it's Boba Fett!"

 

I also take issue with the news article, they over dramatised it likely for clicks, at no point was she tackled, the situation was completely unwarranted though.

I did a quick search, and while the video doesn't show it properly, she was if not tackled, forced to move her face in a way where she actually suffered an injury to her face/nose area (a picture clearly shows blood stains on the street, enough for me to say "ouch, that had to f**** hurt*).

 

I also tend to think like you...some articles are overly dramatized, in this case though....kind of on point (minus the tackled part to some degree).   Another local article stated that the girl was actually arrested and taken inside of a police car....later released at the arrest site.  WHY?!

 

I know the cops must be on edge because of what happened a week or so ago, but man....just wtf.

 

[+Warwagon MVC]

What were they so worried about? Storm troopers are lousy shots, they can't hit anything.

[FloatingFatMan]

Who is stupider though? The moron cops who clearly left their brains in their other uniforms that day, or the brainless idiots who dialled 911 to report someone with a gun?

 

 

[macrosslover]

21 minutes ago, FloatingFatMan said:

Who is stupider though? The moron cops who clearly left their brains in their other uniforms that day, or the brainless idiots who dialled 911 to report someone with a gun?

 

 

That's how nearly all interactions like these happen, the people who's first instinct is to call the police, many times don't use common sense and say what a minute, I think she just has on a costume.

[TheLaughingMan]

Just another day in Murica

[DocM]

In an open carry state someone walking around with a weapon wouldn't be a reason for cops to do this.

 

Cities like Birmingham MI have paid huge lawsuit settlements when their cops did something like this; a young man was carrying his shotgun to a gunsmith's shop. Judge reamed the cops a new one.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

2 hours ago, TheLaughingMan said:

Just another day in Murica

Canada?

37 minutes ago, DocM said:

In an open carry state someone walking around with a weapon wouldn't be a reason for cops to do this.

 

Cities like Birmingham MI have paid huge lawsuit settlements when their cops did something like this; a young man was carrying his shotgun to a gunsmith's shop. Judge reamed the cops a new one.

This has nothing to do with open carry.

 

If this happened in an open carry state ... and _if_ that had been a real gun ... the cops could have (and legally) considered it brandishing/unlawful display/etc (pointing, waving and/or displaying a firearm with intent on causing fear).  Open carry != doing whatever you want with your weapon out in public.

 

Of course, the cops in this video are idiots....

[DocM]

4 hours ago, Jim K said:

>

If this happened in an open carry state ... and _if_ that had been a real gun ... the cops could have (and legally) considered it brandishing/unlawful display/etc (pointing, waving and/or displaying a firearm with intent on causing fear).  Open carry != doing whatever you want with your weapon out in public.

 

MI has no brandishing law; zero, zip, so carrying it in your hand(s) rather than across your chest or on your shoulder isn't illegal.

 

"With Intent" depends on the situation.  Was it mostly pointed downward, upward, in transition, or at an angle intersecting the ground? As you said, this situation didn't justify the cop's reaction.

 

Quote

Of course, the cops in this video are idiots....

 

Agreed!! 

[adrynalyne]

7 hours ago, TheLaughingMan said:

Just another day in Murica

Except it’s Canada. Read the article next time. 

[adrynalyne]

8 minutes ago, DocM said:

 

MI has no brandishing law; zero, zip, so carrying it in your hand(s) rather than across your chest or on your shoulder isn't illegal.

 

"With Intent" depends on the situation.  Was it mostly pointed downward, upward, in transition, or at an angle intersecting the ground? As you said, this situation didn't justify the cop's reaction.

 

 

Agreed!! 

Might wanna catch up on your local gun laws. 
 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(tlyakac5zlztgefrfjrlcsk1))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-750-234e

 

[DocM]

8 hours ago, adrynalyne said:

Might wanna catch up on your local gun laws. 
 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(tlyakac5zlztgefrfjrlcsk1))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-750-234e

 

That's a 2015 revision about pointing a firearm at someone with intent, not just carrying it in your hands as she was. Notable is that the revision does not define it, which the Michigan State Police notes in their policy statement. In many states that would be called brandishing, but not here.

 

Open Carry itself is also legal here because there's no law against it. Don't even need a permit so long as the firearm is legally possessed/obtained.

 

State Police

 

"In Michigan, it is legal for a person to carry a firearm in public as long as the person is carrying the firearm with lawful intent and the firearm is not concealed. You will not find a law that states it is legal to openly carry a firearm. It is legal because there is no Michigan law that prohibits it; however, Michigan law limits the premises on which a person may carry a firearm."

>

"MCL 750.234e provides that it is a 90-day misdemeanor for a person to knowingly brandish a firearm in public. Brandishing is not defined in Michigan law and there are no reported Michigan cases that define the term"

 

Bold: AKA an exclusion zone, which are well defined. 

Edited May 9, 2020 by DocM

[adrynalyne]

2 hours ago, DocM said:

That's a 2015 revision about pointing a firearm at someone with intent, not just carrying it in your hands as she was. Notable is that the revision does not define it, which the Michigan State Police notes in their policy statement. In many states that would be called brandishing, but not here.

 

Open Carry itself is also legal here because there's no law against it. Don't even need a permit so long as the firearm is legally possessed/obtained.

 

State Police

 

"In Michigan, it is legal for a person to carry a firearm in public as long as the person is carrying the firearm with lawful intent and the firearm is not concealed. You will not find a law that states it is legal to openly carry a firearm. It is legal because there is no Michigan law that prohibits it; however, Michigan law limits the premises on which a person may carry a firearm."

>

"MCL 750.234e provides that it is a 90-day misdemeanor for a person to knowingly brandish a firearm in public. Brandishing is not defined in Michigan law and there are no reported Michigan cases that define the term"

 

Bold: AKA an exclusion zone, which are well defined. 

You said nothing of pointing at someone, you said nothing of intent.  You said, no brandishing laws. Zip. You were wrong, regardless of how you want to define brandishing.

 

You are even contradicting yourself. Are you going to sit there and tell us that when you said brandishing, you meant it in a way that other states besides Michigan do? While you yourself live in Michigan, under MI law? Sure. 🙄

 

 

Edit: found this. 
 

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(aktwbqyxmo1lh2iiwja3x1h4))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-750-222

 

c) "Brandish" means to point, wave about, or display in a threatening manner with the intent to induce fear in another person.

 

Pretty open to interpretation. Someone walking across the street with an unholstered firearm in their hand can easily  be construed as threatening and as for intent, that’s one word against another. Not that it matters how it’s defined or interpreted, you said no brandishing and are now backpedalling. Man up, own your mistake, then move on. 
 

 

Edited May 9, 2020 by adrynalyne

[PsYcHoKiLLa]

This takes a special kind of stupidity, one most likely worthy of promotion in the police force.

[LaP]

On 5/6/2020 at 6:13 PM, neufuse said:

Ugh.. only in the USA.... oh um wait Canada 😛

Bah Alberta is wanabe USA 😉

On 5/6/2020 at 7:20 PM, warwagon said:

What were they so worried about? Storm troopers are lousy shots, they can't hit anything.

Gosh the good old warwagon is back i thought we lost you for a while

[Steven P. Administrators]

56 minutes ago, LaP said:

Bah Alberta is wanabe USA 😉

Gosh the good old warwagon is back i thought we lost you for a while

God bless warwagon!

[Circaflex]

I love that your tag is murica, like its some sort of jab, yet this took place in Canada. 🙄

[Steven P. Administrators]

3 minutes ago, Circaflex said:

I love that your tag is murica, like its some sort of jab, yet this took place in Canada. 🙄

Ironic huh? 😛 

[Brandon H Supervisor]

6 minutes ago, Circaflex said:

I love that your tag is murica, like its some sort of jab, yet this took place in Canada. 🙄

technically it's not completely wrong either 😛

 

Canada is part of the North American continent. We don't hold exclusive rights to the term America in the USA 😉 (though we like to think we do lol)

[Circaflex]

1 minute ago, Brandon H said:

technically it's not completely wrong either 😛

 

Canada is part of the North American continent. We don't hold exclusive rights to the term America in the USA 😉 (though we like to think we do lol)

Let's be honest with ourselves, anytime uses the "murica" slang, they are referring to the US and generally do so as an insult.