Police Shoot 137 Times Into Car After Chase, Killing Unarmed Couple

Everyone is a dangerous crook.

This illustrates WHY police kill more innocent bystanders than the armed citizenry. The man at the scene when things start knows who the bad guys are.
But the State's policy of reserving deadly force for itself puts him in danger from the thug AND the police who respond to the scene.

There is no "permit" required for using a camera in a public place, and I'll thank Amy and KateC to stop advocating for one, please.

A simple phone call to the police to let them know what's going on would have sufficed.

a "permit" isn't needed; but, OMG how stupid can stupid be!

a simply heads up from someone standing outside would have been the smarter thing to do.

They are very lucky that someone isn't dead.

Congratulations, Amy. You just defeated yourself.

Casual use activities which normally involve noncommercial still photography or recreational videotaping would not require a permit or fees. Casual use means noncommercial activities occurring on an occasional or irregular basis that ordinarily result in little or no impact to public lands, resources, or improvements.

Did you miss the part of the article where it said, "at a group of college filmmakers"?

These are plainly amateurs doing a project for school, not professional or commercial. And thanks to the part that you just quoted, we now see that they did not require a permit. They are nothing more than college kids with a video camera, filming on private property and most likely with the owner's permission.

So, again, no permits needed; you just proved it. And again, I will thank both you and KateC to stop advocating for them; there's too much regulation as it is.

Again, simple phone call to the police would have sufficed. I majored in Theater in college and have filmed commercials professionally. I know my shit on permits, and you, obviously, do not.

Sorry, I will stand by what I said, thanks. The part you quoted proves

It was done on private property, no professionals involved. It was a noncommercial activity, it was a one-time deal, with no impact to public resources.

I'd take that to court if I had to. And I'd win, too. Easily.

It's not a video for your kid's birthday party. Even a student film needs a permit--and frankly, any actual film student knows this. USC requires student films to have permits. Also, there were no signs posted, so anyone wandering into the coffee place could sue the "students" if they use that footage without releases. (The coffee shop isn't a public place--it's a private place--but they didn't tell the owner what they planned, which is also grounds for a lawsuit.)

"A simple phone call to the police"--what planet do you live on? It's sure not Planet Hollywood.

I'm wondering where these guys were students--they declined to tell the police where they went.

"The officers responded to the shop after receiving a 911 call from a woman who reported seeing an armed, masked gunman inside Classic Coffee in Glendora"

Think what you want, ladies. The description of what does not require a permit fits the college project to a T.

I'm done trying to explain it to you.

And the presence of a permit would not have stopped that woman from calling 9-1-1, so that point is fabulously moot.

One of the officers, unaware of the filming, knocked the gun from the actor's hand and handcuffed him, drawing a peaceful climax to what could have been something far worse.

Actually, that sounds like it could have been interesting. "Far worse" would be The Lone Ranger or After Earth.

Attempts to reach the film's director were unsuccessful. The students declined to tell police what college they attended.

Fred Sparling, who owns the coffee shop, told the San Gabriel Valley Tribune the crew had advised his manager that they were shooting a Christian movie and didn't mention the robbery scene until they arrived.

I get the feeling this ain't USC Film School ... and probably isn't a film school at all, just some students filming something for a class project at the local Bible college.

=========================

Police said there was nothing to indicate a short movie was being shot. No one was outside to warn customers, there were no signs, and no permit had been pulled.

When officers arrived, there was no question in their mind that a robbery was occurring, Staab said.

It's rare "to go into a coffee shop and see someone carrying an AR-15 rifle and wearing a mask," he said.

I would think at least posting a person and/or a sign outside would be common sense.

=========================

Anyone else amused that the police captain's name coud be pronounced to rhyme with "stab?"

A simple phone call to the police to let them know what's going on would have sufficed.

So, if I'm going to rob a bank, I'll just call the cops and tell them, "it's a film project."

I just want to bask in the irony for a moment here.

Patrick, who advocates for the TSA fingerbanging babies in the name of national security in clear violations of constitutional law gets bent out for shape over film regulations requiring people to make sure permits are filed in order to keep cops from accidentaly shooting civilians when someone calls 911 on the guys with the AK47's?

And no one else has noticed this MASSIVE cognitive dissonance for more than six hours now?

Now this is an interesting predicament I find myself in. Amy has asked me to stop replying to this topic, but I'm being attacked by Conan, who is normally a decent and fair-minded individual. But not this time. He wants to attack someone who isn't allowed to defend himself.

And luj, who is a liar, plain and simple. He seeks to bully me into committing myself into a position that I refuse to give by spreading really sick lies, essentially calling me a pedophile.

If anyone cares to challenge him on it, I would suggest asking him to prove where I advocated "fingerbanging of babies." When he fails to produce it, because I never said it, you'll have to ask him where he came up with such a graphic, sick and really disgusting idea.

You have a very good arrangement right now when it comes to attacking people you hate. I suggest you take advantage of it. Of course, it makes you both cowards, but hey, self-respect obviously is not something that's important to you.

"I'm done trying to explain it to you."

Did you notice you were wrong - or is it the rest of the world again?

What an obnoxious person.

Patrick, if your going to ignore me then ignore me. The tell the person right next to me I'm not talking to him even though I am responding to him game is fucking childish

As to where I got the idea.

Well, you TSA agent touch your junk, they even touch your junk so excitedly they insert their fingers into peoples junk, even children on occasion.

And while you claim never to have given a position on this subject you in fact have.

You have been invited on scores of occasions, some even dumbed down to the point where all you had to give was a one word answer, to say you disagree with the situation inflicted on law abiding citizens via the TSA.

Know what you did? You REFUSED to disagree. And by process of elimination that leaves the other option which was agreement.

And I never called you a pedophile. A pedophile is someone attracted to prepubecent children. I didnt even label the TSA agents pedophiles cause I highly doubt the get off on the kids, the get off on the control and power.

Which would make them autarchiphiles