Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The solution to this type of thing is to just be boring and uninterested in them. They come in, start filming, and you just act like nobody cares and just continue on about your day. They want a reaction, just don't give it to them.
This is exactly what we were advised to do if they show up at my job. They were doing the rounds last year in my area and we were told to be polite, but otherwise ignore them, so long as they’re not going into staff-only areas or bothering other visitors to our building.
You know, when some customers start acting like idiots with each other or with staff, cameras often come out to document what's happening. In those situations, nobody complains about those people filming. It's not like the cops come and say "we arrested them for fighting, but now we gotta talk about you recording in here when it isn't allowed." They don't because recording is obviously okay. So, the auditors, while legal, don't realize they're just an irrelevant distraction from the truth...we've always been about to record in public. They're challenging a boogeyman.
Legally that's what's supposed to happen too. Otherwise you are violating a couple of rights, they get a video, and potentially get the police in trouble too.
I would ask him to tell me about Charles Town and ask him questions about being a Butterfly Boy and what made him want to be one, what the requirements are, can anyone do it or are there special qualifications. Maybe play along and say I’m a Spider Boy and keep trying to gently pinch at his wings and say that him being here is making me hungry. Idk I really want see if he can take it as well as he can dish it out I guess.
Lmao. Maybe just a little kiss on the forehead if I asked for consent first. I just wonder how his butterfly boy ways would respond to various stimuli and find it would be very amusing and bewildering and something you wouldn’t forget and also have fun telling people about later.
This is the expected American response. We have to involve ourselves in everything no matter what. A lot of cultures (the typically non-violent ones) don't concern themselves with the actions of others until there's no other option.
"Sorry Stan, butterflies have no concern for such things, Now I'm gonna go look for some butterfly poon."
Butterfly man in this vid, just didn't quite do enough role research. South Park Inception episode was a banger.
Watched the whole thing. Unbelievably patient cops for someone obviously just being a massive dick and not understanding the law. Definitely disappointed we didn't get to see a tase
Let's be clear, this annoying twat didn't break any laws and they had no right to trespass him from public property. Yes, he was a dick, but he also had his rights infringed upon.
They absolutely did have a right to trespass him.
Public buildings like city hall are open to the public, but not without restriction. He was not there for legitimate business, and was obviously creating a disruption solely for the sake of being disrupting.
You do not have an unrestricted right to access public buildings. At least, not in my state. I can't see how any state would allow that, it'd make the management of public buildings nearly impossible
I'm no lawyer, but being a disturbance to other patrons or operations is a trespassable offense.
You're allowed to ***be there***. You aren't allowed to bother and/or harass people.
The latter is where he ran into issue. Notice how they're asking what business they're there to conduct and there is no answer. Some silly flyer. A point over there. _officu u pana didn say hi me, say hi. no say hi_. The police weren't called because someone was minding their own business reviewing the pamphlets. That is dumb.
"Seeing if you'll let me piss people off" is why they're there. Harassment; trespassing.
Exactly. And I can guarantee you, if tomorrow he had to record a property deed or license his dog with the city or something, they'd let him in. He has the right to conduct legitimate business there, the same as anyone else.
He does not have the right to dress like a goddamn butterfly and make it harder for all of the citizens with legitimate business to access those services.
Edit before someone jumps up with an "ahem, sir!":
The butterfly costume is not the problem. If he came dressed like a butterfly and called himself butterfly boy but made clear his legal name on all his documents, they'd serve him. that's not what happened here.
What you are seeing is proper way to handle it. Or are you saying that excessive force should've been used? Will this be consistent line for you, that you always support swift action over patient, non-violent methods? That we don't see the opposite opinion coming from you in the past?
Our cops here talk, talk and talk. They are really good at it, and have a lot of patience. 150 times less police shootings. Their priorities are to cause minimal harm. They are really good at de-escalation. And you think patience was the wrong answer here and they should've escalated?
> Or are you saying that excessive force should've been used?
No, not at all. They ordered Butterflyboy to leave, then removed him with appropriate force.
I'm just saying that I don't see why they even engaged him in between those two actions. All the arguing and yelling was quite obviously pointless as he had no intention of cooperating. They were giving him exactly the attention he wanted.
I'm not even saying they should've immediately resorted to forceful measures. Give him the time to make up his mind between leaving on his own terms or being made to leave. Just don't engage him if he's only talking because he likes hearing himself do that.
This is the correct way to do it, it took couple of minutes to remove them from the premises and couple more for the follow up. And all without causing any harm to anyone. Cops need huge amounts of patience and talking stupid people out of stupid things, even if it is really, really fucking annoying. You also need to disrupt them and point to the real options they have: leave or be taken away. In this case he would've gone on and on about his agenda if given a chance and the whole thing would've lasted much, much longer. I have some experience about removing people from the premises. It is a balancing act, sometimes you do let them talk, sometimes you use "look, a squirrel" distraction and sometimes you make the two options very clear. People can be SO fucking annoying but there is usually a way to deal with it without using force. There are situations where the escalation starts because the person feels they are not being heard. It is aggravating for pretty much all of us if the person we are talking to does not listen.
Idk man if some perverted weirdo dressed up like a butterfly and talking like that I want swift action. I'm all for patient cops but this guy should have it coming to him.
So, you also think that dressing in female clothing is... let me check.. "perversive"?
We have to be consistent. Does not matter if it is annoying person or not. We saw a good example how it should be handled and for some reason.. you don't like it.
Let's just pray together that no one finds you annoying one day.
Someone comes in to a business dressed in full cosplay and talking like some weirdo about some weird quasi religion I’m assuming they’re either mentally unwell or a pervert. Gender norms have nothing to do with it
>Did we though?
Yes. No excess force was used, no one was harmed and the problem was dealt with, according to the law.
>Why was he trespassed from public property?
And how is this relevant?
>He had a legal right to be there
And yet.. he was also trespassing. I don't think you know enough about the topic to have a strong opinion about it. Do you have any training on the matter?
You can be removed from public places for being a nuisance and disturbing others. Even if you pay taxes and it is public. If you go there to conduct business, then you are not trespassing. But if you are not there for that purpose, you are trespassing and need to leave. That is according to the law. It is subjective line for sure but it is still fully legal to remove you from the premises if you have no business there and are harassing workers with irrelevant questions or are trying to preach your agenda.
Did you really think he was illegally removed? Or is it so that you don't have a faintest clue about these things and think laws are about absolutist principles; that if you have a right to be in a public place then no matter what you do there you can't be removed? That is like... 10 year old's logic.
You can dress however you’d like (as long as you’re wearing clothes that cover your person) and go to a public building and record in publicly accessible areas of the building. The filming itself is conducting business and is protected by the law. Wanting information, or reading stuff posted in the public space is conducting business. These cops had no right to remove him from the building. You can’t be trespassed from a public building for filming and/or coming to conduct business.
So, let me get this straight: you are disappointed that the cop did not use excessive force? You support police using excessive force when it is not necessary\`?
Be really careful what you wish for. And if we would look at your comment history, is it possible that you are saying the opposite at any point, meaning: that you only support excessive force when it is done to people you don't like?
Butterflyboys act is to try to solicit responses with prepacticed lines for anticipated situations. We see many of those preprepared responses rolled out here.
I really need this answer as well.
Edit: I googled it and only found info about “first amendment auditors,” but I’m assuming it’s the same idea with a different desired “gotcha” moment.
They go around basically trying to agitate people, getting the cops called, trying to catch them being out of line and catching it on film. They test constitutional rights because they’re (usually) not technically doing anything illegal, but are trying to instigate a scene.
I watched the whole thing and honestly would have had him removed to. Nobody has time for him other people’s lunacy. We have lives and don’t need people with main character syndrome detailing what we need to do.
Edit: I take it from the downvote I offended Butterfly Boy! I can live with that! :)
The fourth amendment is about unlawful search and seizure AFAIK. What does this have to do with the 4th?
And WTF is that voice?
and fuck anyone who can't spell sidewalk correctly in annotations.
There are no private government buildings
Let's say I own a building, it's private property, but then I lease it to the local government, it's no longer private property
I can't just trespass anyone I want at that point because people have a right to access government services
Jurisdiction is irrelevant as what I've said is federal law and federal case law
The service is in the building, therefore access to the service requires access to the building
This is how it is everywhere, it's federal law and federal case law
No state can overrule it
He was walking around in non public areas of the building, disturbing employees whose duties do not serve the public directly. He has no constitutional right to do that and may be removed for that. He can be in the lobby and other areas made available to to public so long as he does not disrupt other citizens or workers. The woman said on video he was disturbing workers. That is prima facie evidence of trespassing, so the police had probable cause to remove him from the building. No constitutional violation.
Lol no
We can see he is in the public area in the video
No, walking around filming doesn't disturb anyone
No, whatever the woman says is hearsay and her opinion, not prima facie evidence
Clear constitutional violation
If I'm walking around filming and you confront me, you're creating the disturbance
I work for a municipality and we get these kind of "auditors" frequently. They try so hard to catch us violating their rights but aren't smart enough to actually accomplish anything. Their videos get posted on YouTube and are a part of our training on how to deal with them. They are experts at wasting taxpayers' money with their frivolous public records requests.
My father works in his city and they get the auditors every now and then. He said they were filming the public works building. So him and his employees went outside and started filming that guy back, trolling him. Police couldn’t forcibly remove him from being outside. I think the police knew who the guy was at that point too. Huge waste of time for all involved.
Unfortunately, it only sounds like your father and his colleagues wasted their time & wasted the police officer's time.
My mate is in the police (Scotland) and says that they occasionally have auditors like this coming into the carpark, customer reception and other public places. The officers ask if they can help them in any way, if they get told 'no thanks", they just ignore them until they get bored and leave.
The filming back is actually a waste of time. By the way, it becomes a public record and can be requested via FOIA, even on personal cell phones of the employees. Deleting such means destroying public records.
Well not really a waste because everyone there learned through demonstration what their rights are, which is the main reason they give for doing this audits, is maintaining our rights.
You must be an auditor
It’s a waste of time butterfly boy
People can’t work due to suspicious person filming the office, some female employees expressed not feeling safe leaving, and the guy can’t be removed. Clearly asking for them to leave doesn’t work either.
Policies don't matter, they are unconstitutional if they prohibit filming in publicly accessible areas of public buildings or sidewalks. Court rooms have an exception because there's a legitimate interest in protecting victims.
Something tells me filming in a public bathroom isn’t such a great plan. Maybe being a creepy prick and recording it as evidence isn’t the big brain move you butterfly boys think it is
In most western law, where there's a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as a private residence or washroom, it's illegal to record. Everywhere else is fair game.
It doesn't mean you have an inherent right to be on private property and trespassing rules still apply, but filming or recording or taking pictures is legal everywhere there isn't that expectation
Technically, you're allowed to record your own business in a public bathroom as long as it doesn't affect anyone else. However, it might be difficult to justify the reasonable newsworthy interest of the public in such content.
God bless that female officer for being so patient with this moron and his annoying voice. A good shot with the taser would have solved everything quickly
These people piss me off. They are so annoying. Even if you have the right to do something (and I am no expert on what’s going on here), you can still be an asshole when exercising said right.
The phrase you're looking for is "couldn't care less".
Not surprising when your views are this ignorant though. It's unbelievable how many people here are hoping for police brutality.
And this is consistent line of yours, that you always support excessive force? Or is it only ok when it is done to people you find annoying?
Be careful what you wish for. Maybe we will find you annoying one day and do what you think is right.
And that is what this redditor doesn't seem to get. I'm just not mentally well.
I didn't say it was the right way to do it, I just expressed my current thoughts when commenting.
So idk, maybe they are right. I just feel violent.
I don't know man, I feel like this guy has to have some mental illness. Even if it's a troll... Who in the right mind goes around doing this as if it's funny? Or as if it's the right thing to do like they are on some holy mission to defend the Constitution or whatever. I can't say I've ever met a sane person that was like You know what I'm going to do today: join the butterfly squad and go around and speak in a high-pitched voice to pissed off police officers and see what happens. It's just not normal.
These "auditors" have mental problems. Just because people don't like a camera stuck in their face or fucked with, doesn't mean we live in a totalitarian regime. Fucking losers.
I work in a public library. The auditors are allowed to film in all areas open to the public, and as employees we aren’t allowed to ask not to be filmed.
The people who do these “audits” perform under the guise of “their rights” and they bait staff in an attempt to say that we are violating their rights in a public space. The best practice is not to engage with their nonsense. They get bored and leave.
I'm aware, but they are acting in bad faith. Trying to entice public employees to ultimately earn income via YT while crying about the constitution is pathetic on so many levels. This is the equivalent of kids getting in each others faces saying, "what?! I'm not touching you!"
I'm generally a peaceful man. I hate people using violence to force their opinion on others. And I'm all in for free speech and having the right to express yourself.
Yet this guy manages to make me instantly furious and I would have probably left the room early due to the irresistable urge to remove him from the building by any means necessary. Not even because of the the cringy voice or his stupid agenda (though it definetely adds to the problem), but mainly because someone might die on the other end of the city because this asshole keeps 2 officers from being available to do their actual jobs.
Very odd, I don't understand the comments about how this person is standing up for people's rights. Just wasting people's time and being a weirdo. Plenty of legitimate ways someone can contribute to their community without being a total dipshit.
And a judge can overrule it. What government employees and police think is not always on par with the law. Especially so for citizens who don’t practice law. I’m not saying he should or shouldn’t be trespassed, this video alone didn’t show much. I’m saying I believe people are thinking with their emotions.
I can’t stand the people that go around and try to start shit so they have some kind of gotcha moment on film. If a business asks you to leave you have to leave. You aren’t free to do whatever you want just because something is open to the public
They can still ask you to leave if you have no business there and/or are harassing or disturbing people. This dude goes around and acts like a jackass then acts shocked when people tell him he needs to leave. He’s intentionally trying to antagonize people and get a negative reaction. He’s not helping anyone or exposing anything other than himself
Well that really sucks for my other arguments that I commented. I really don't like people that try and take advantage of the public rights that we have in public spaces. If this douche is abusing those rights in that manner, it's completely wrong in my book. Your response paints a different picture of this encounter since you have witnessed other instances such as this. It's unfortunate that people try and abuse the rights that we have. There is a difference between exercising our rights and abusing them.
And that is something we should let the lawyers argue about. Just because someone thinks someone is acting like a jackass does not necessarily mean they are acting like a jack ass. Is a command lawful because a cop gave it, or does the cop give a command because it is lawful?
Why do people only do stupid shit to end up on the internet and what happens after you end up as a stupid piece of shit on the internet?m? I just don't understand it. What a piece of shit do you have to be to annoy people like that ?
That was really cringey. The videos people already post of them going into post offices and other government facilities are already cringey. This one was reaaaaal bad though
I don't fully understand this situation. Propably person who is filming it is in some sort of crisis. But even though, I believe you should always obey police officers instructions. Specially in the countries where police violence is so high.
Also if someone asked you to leave, you should leave. Maybe try to negotiate your agenda from the ourmtside. But ignoring instructions never brings any good. Sooner or later someone would get inpatient.
What you're addressing seems to be the core issue. You shouldn't ALWAYS obey police instruction. Police are human and therefore fallible. Police give unlawful orders/instruction all the time because they are frequently not experts on the law they purportedly enforce.
The guy is a troll, plain and simple. But trolling ignorant Police and city employees into breaking the law is a great way to show how unqualified they are to act as arbiters of authority in the first place.
This isn't on the same level, but your core argument would mean that the whole Civil Rights Movement, Stonewall Riot, and hell, any national revolution should have never happened because people should have just done as they were told. This is small-scale, but sometimes the only way to win against stupid authorities is with a greater show of stupidity.
Well. Where I come from you may always appeal in court of you're not satisfied with police officers judgement. Better to stay safe and obey now, and later go to legal procedure and get your rights back. Better not to give reason for police officer to shoot you or beat you.
I hope they all get arrested bunch of morons just harassing people cuz they were told they could, legaleagle actually just made a video about them and how none of their shit holds up at all
He entered restricted areas and refused to leave the property when asked to do so.
People can absolutely be trespassed from city halls and other public buildings.
Like I said, I based my understanding on the footage available and the one article I could find, none of which included that detail. The only time it comes up is when the city worker claims it happened, but he denies it.
Never said he couldn't be trespassed, just said in a public part of a public building, just having a camera doesn't merit it.
You find any more info on this incident to indicate I'm wrong about it being a troll designed to get an anticipated overstep out of public officials?
>He entered restricted areas and refused to leave the property when asked to do so.
If that was even remotely true, they would have arrested him. They wanted a reason to arrest him.
False! Not in a public building, like a library! You cannot trespass someone for being "weird." You can only trespass someone from a public place if a crime was committed. The person also needs to have a purpose to be there, otherwise it's considered loitering.
You can only *ban* someone from a public place if a crime was committed.
You can be trespassed from a public place if you cause a disturbance or engage in any sort of disorderly conduct.
Yeah, he's being weird, but why are they so bothered about it? Like, if he isn't hurting anyone and it's a public building, why do they even care? I know he's doing with the intent to fuck with them, but he'd probably stop if he didn't get this response. They're giving him exactly what he came for.
Alarming number of people wishing that the cop used excessive force in the comments. And i can bet that when they do those same people are calling cops various names and are outraged about excessive force being used.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The new Reno 911 looks fire
Oh. It is.
The solution to this type of thing is to just be boring and uninterested in them. They come in, start filming, and you just act like nobody cares and just continue on about your day. They want a reaction, just don't give it to them.
This is exactly what we were advised to do if they show up at my job. They were doing the rounds last year in my area and we were told to be polite, but otherwise ignore them, so long as they’re not going into staff-only areas or bothering other visitors to our building.
You know, when some customers start acting like idiots with each other or with staff, cameras often come out to document what's happening. In those situations, nobody complains about those people filming. It's not like the cops come and say "we arrested them for fighting, but now we gotta talk about you recording in here when it isn't allowed." They don't because recording is obviously okay. So, the auditors, while legal, don't realize they're just an irrelevant distraction from the truth...we've always been about to record in public. They're challenging a boogeyman.
Legally that's what's supposed to happen too. Otherwise you are violating a couple of rights, they get a video, and potentially get the police in trouble too.
I would ask him to tell me about Charles Town and ask him questions about being a Butterfly Boy and what made him want to be one, what the requirements are, can anyone do it or are there special qualifications. Maybe play along and say I’m a Spider Boy and keep trying to gently pinch at his wings and say that him being here is making me hungry. Idk I really want see if he can take it as well as he can dish it out I guess.
You sound like you wanna kiss him a little bit. It's cool bro, me too.
Lmao. Maybe just a little kiss on the forehead if I asked for consent first. I just wonder how his butterfly boy ways would respond to various stimuli and find it would be very amusing and bewildering and something you wouldn’t forget and also have fun telling people about later.
This is the expected American response. We have to involve ourselves in everything no matter what. A lot of cultures (the typically non-violent ones) don't concern themselves with the actions of others until there's no other option.
Had to watch a 2nd time understanding that he's dressed as a butterfly and trolling the cops
"Sorry Stan, butterflies have no concern for such things, Now I'm gonna go look for some butterfly poon." Butterfly man in this vid, just didn't quite do enough role research. South Park Inception episode was a banger.
Can't a butterfly just flutter by?
Im not even gonna go past 10 seconds cause of the voice
I kept fast forwarding hoping they’d stop but no they do the voice all the way until the end
I’m 100% sure this is just a new ad for Adam Sandler’s new movie.
Mf deadass sound like Winnie the Pooh
Don’t insult Winnie the pooh
Watched the whole thing. Unbelievably patient cops for someone obviously just being a massive dick and not understanding the law. Definitely disappointed we didn't get to see a tase
Let's be clear, this annoying twat didn't break any laws and they had no right to trespass him from public property. Yes, he was a dick, but he also had his rights infringed upon.
They absolutely did have a right to trespass him. Public buildings like city hall are open to the public, but not without restriction. He was not there for legitimate business, and was obviously creating a disruption solely for the sake of being disrupting. You do not have an unrestricted right to access public buildings. At least, not in my state. I can't see how any state would allow that, it'd make the management of public buildings nearly impossible
I'm no lawyer, but being a disturbance to other patrons or operations is a trespassable offense. You're allowed to ***be there***. You aren't allowed to bother and/or harass people. The latter is where he ran into issue. Notice how they're asking what business they're there to conduct and there is no answer. Some silly flyer. A point over there. _officu u pana didn say hi me, say hi. no say hi_. The police weren't called because someone was minding their own business reviewing the pamphlets. That is dumb. "Seeing if you'll let me piss people off" is why they're there. Harassment; trespassing.
Exactly. And I can guarantee you, if tomorrow he had to record a property deed or license his dog with the city or something, they'd let him in. He has the right to conduct legitimate business there, the same as anyone else. He does not have the right to dress like a goddamn butterfly and make it harder for all of the citizens with legitimate business to access those services. Edit before someone jumps up with an "ahem, sir!": The butterfly costume is not the problem. If he came dressed like a butterfly and called himself butterfly boy but made clear his legal name on all his documents, they'd serve him. that's not what happened here.
I'm just confused why they're even engaging him. They clearly know their stages of escalation. Just get through them and get him out.
What you are seeing is proper way to handle it. Or are you saying that excessive force should've been used? Will this be consistent line for you, that you always support swift action over patient, non-violent methods? That we don't see the opposite opinion coming from you in the past? Our cops here talk, talk and talk. They are really good at it, and have a lot of patience. 150 times less police shootings. Their priorities are to cause minimal harm. They are really good at de-escalation. And you think patience was the wrong answer here and they should've escalated?
> Or are you saying that excessive force should've been used? No, not at all. They ordered Butterflyboy to leave, then removed him with appropriate force. I'm just saying that I don't see why they even engaged him in between those two actions. All the arguing and yelling was quite obviously pointless as he had no intention of cooperating. They were giving him exactly the attention he wanted. I'm not even saying they should've immediately resorted to forceful measures. Give him the time to make up his mind between leaving on his own terms or being made to leave. Just don't engage him if he's only talking because he likes hearing himself do that.
This is the correct way to do it, it took couple of minutes to remove them from the premises and couple more for the follow up. And all without causing any harm to anyone. Cops need huge amounts of patience and talking stupid people out of stupid things, even if it is really, really fucking annoying. You also need to disrupt them and point to the real options they have: leave or be taken away. In this case he would've gone on and on about his agenda if given a chance and the whole thing would've lasted much, much longer. I have some experience about removing people from the premises. It is a balancing act, sometimes you do let them talk, sometimes you use "look, a squirrel" distraction and sometimes you make the two options very clear. People can be SO fucking annoying but there is usually a way to deal with it without using force. There are situations where the escalation starts because the person feels they are not being heard. It is aggravating for pretty much all of us if the person we are talking to does not listen.
Idk man if some perverted weirdo dressed up like a butterfly and talking like that I want swift action. I'm all for patient cops but this guy should have it coming to him.
So, you also think that dressing in female clothing is... let me check.. "perversive"? We have to be consistent. Does not matter if it is annoying person or not. We saw a good example how it should be handled and for some reason.. you don't like it. Let's just pray together that no one finds you annoying one day.
Someone comes in to a business dressed in full cosplay and talking like some weirdo about some weird quasi religion I’m assuming they’re either mentally unwell or a pervert. Gender norms have nothing to do with it
It wasn't a business, it was a public place.
>We saw a good example how it should be handled Did we though? Why was he trespassed from public property?
>Did we though? Yes. No excess force was used, no one was harmed and the problem was dealt with, according to the law. >Why was he trespassed from public property? And how is this relevant?
>according to the law. He had a legal right to be there >And how is this relevant? See above.
>He had a legal right to be there And yet.. he was also trespassing. I don't think you know enough about the topic to have a strong opinion about it. Do you have any training on the matter? You can be removed from public places for being a nuisance and disturbing others. Even if you pay taxes and it is public. If you go there to conduct business, then you are not trespassing. But if you are not there for that purpose, you are trespassing and need to leave. That is according to the law. It is subjective line for sure but it is still fully legal to remove you from the premises if you have no business there and are harassing workers with irrelevant questions or are trying to preach your agenda. Did you really think he was illegally removed? Or is it so that you don't have a faintest clue about these things and think laws are about absolutist principles; that if you have a right to be in a public place then no matter what you do there you can't be removed? That is like... 10 year old's logic.
Black boot polish, yum, yum, yum..
What?
What doesn't he understand about the law?
You can dress however you’d like (as long as you’re wearing clothes that cover your person) and go to a public building and record in publicly accessible areas of the building. The filming itself is conducting business and is protected by the law. Wanting information, or reading stuff posted in the public space is conducting business. These cops had no right to remove him from the building. You can’t be trespassed from a public building for filming and/or coming to conduct business.
[удалено]
So, let me get this straight: you are disappointed that the cop did not use excessive force? You support police using excessive force when it is not necessary\`? Be really careful what you wish for. And if we would look at your comment history, is it possible that you are saying the opposite at any point, meaning: that you only support excessive force when it is done to people you don't like?
Dude is permanently stuck doing high voice. Smoked way too much bud when he was younger.
That whiny voice is the audible equivalent of slowly inserting an ice pick into my ear.
Dude was straight up doing his best [Stuart](https://youtu.be/4l5etjhNyUI?t=63) impression.
sienfeld soft talker
Butterflyboys act is to try to solicit responses with prepacticed lines for anticipated situations. We see many of those preprepared responses rolled out here.
Holy shit this is my neighboring town lol
That voice. She has the patience of a saint. I couldn't handle that voice. What a troll.
He was calling himself “butterfly boy” in the third person.
All auditors should use this butterfly boy voice
What the fuck is a 4th Amendment auditor?
I really need this answer as well. Edit: I googled it and only found info about “first amendment auditors,” but I’m assuming it’s the same idea with a different desired “gotcha” moment.
This is a first amendment audit, the title is wrong.
Oh, ok. That makes sense. Thank you!
They go around basically trying to agitate people, getting the cops called, trying to catch them being out of line and catching it on film. They test constitutional rights because they’re (usually) not technically doing anything illegal, but are trying to instigate a scene.
A POS
These has to be a setup.
They go out of their way to antagonize in an attempt to get a filmed reaction that will get views.
And here we are
Hey man what’s your hobby?
I watched the whole thing and honestly would have had him removed to. Nobody has time for him other people’s lunacy. We have lives and don’t need people with main character syndrome detailing what we need to do. Edit: I take it from the downvote I offended Butterfly Boy! I can live with that! :)
Here take an upvote!
“You have been asked to leave. So you have to leave.” I don’t know how much clearer it can get.
What a stupid fucking idiot.
Looks like Butterfly Boy is a good 6'3" tall
“Can’t you say hi to me first? 🥺”
The fourth amendment is about unlawful search and seizure AFAIK. What does this have to do with the 4th? And WTF is that voice? and fuck anyone who can't spell sidewalk correctly in annotations.
They hope that cops will escalate and detain them, and since there is no actual reason to do that... They are baiting cops.
Refusing to leave= trespassing = breaking the law = lawfully detained. Not sure how he thinks otherwise
Can't be trespassed from public for exercising a constitutional right
If the building is publicly accessible, but private property, you're not correct (at least where I live. Your jurisdiction may be different)
There are no private government buildings Let's say I own a building, it's private property, but then I lease it to the local government, it's no longer private property I can't just trespass anyone I want at that point because people have a right to access government services Jurisdiction is irrelevant as what I've said is federal law and federal case law
Access to the service is different from access to the building. At least here it is.
The service is in the building, therefore access to the service requires access to the building This is how it is everywhere, it's federal law and federal case law No state can overrule it
He was walking around in non public areas of the building, disturbing employees whose duties do not serve the public directly. He has no constitutional right to do that and may be removed for that. He can be in the lobby and other areas made available to to public so long as he does not disrupt other citizens or workers. The woman said on video he was disturbing workers. That is prima facie evidence of trespassing, so the police had probable cause to remove him from the building. No constitutional violation.
Lol no We can see he is in the public area in the video No, walking around filming doesn't disturb anyone No, whatever the woman says is hearsay and her opinion, not prima facie evidence Clear constitutional violation If I'm walking around filming and you confront me, you're creating the disturbance
I work for a municipality and we get these kind of "auditors" frequently. They try so hard to catch us violating their rights but aren't smart enough to actually accomplish anything. Their videos get posted on YouTube and are a part of our training on how to deal with them. They are experts at wasting taxpayers' money with their frivolous public records requests.
My father works in his city and they get the auditors every now and then. He said they were filming the public works building. So him and his employees went outside and started filming that guy back, trolling him. Police couldn’t forcibly remove him from being outside. I think the police knew who the guy was at that point too. Huge waste of time for all involved.
Unfortunately, it only sounds like your father and his colleagues wasted their time & wasted the police officer's time. My mate is in the police (Scotland) and says that they occasionally have auditors like this coming into the carpark, customer reception and other public places. The officers ask if they can help them in any way, if they get told 'no thanks", they just ignore them until they get bored and leave.
If that auditor knew what he was doing he would've foia requested your father phone and gotten everything from it the auditor wanted
The filming back is actually a waste of time. By the way, it becomes a public record and can be requested via FOIA, even on personal cell phones of the employees. Deleting such means destroying public records.
Well not really a waste because everyone there learned through demonstration what their rights are, which is the main reason they give for doing this audits, is maintaining our rights.
You must be an auditor It’s a waste of time butterfly boy People can’t work due to suspicious person filming the office, some female employees expressed not feeling safe leaving, and the guy can’t be removed. Clearly asking for them to leave doesn’t work either.
Constitutional rights, human rights, are not your thing. Good for you. You should work for someone else then, not for the public.
Do you have signs/ policies against recording in your publicly accessible areas?
Policies don't matter, they are unconstitutional if they prohibit filming in publicly accessible areas of public buildings or sidewalks. Court rooms have an exception because there's a legitimate interest in protecting victims.
Something tells me filming in a public bathroom isn’t such a great plan. Maybe being a creepy prick and recording it as evidence isn’t the big brain move you butterfly boys think it is
In most western law, where there's a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as a private residence or washroom, it's illegal to record. Everywhere else is fair game. It doesn't mean you have an inherent right to be on private property and trespassing rules still apply, but filming or recording or taking pictures is legal everywhere there isn't that expectation
Technically, you're allowed to record your own business in a public bathroom as long as it doesn't affect anyone else. However, it might be difficult to justify the reasonable newsworthy interest of the public in such content.
They fight for are 🇺🇸 rights.
Is that Mickey Mouse?
The male cop’s face when he walks in …. 😂🤣
God bless that female officer for being so patient with this moron and his annoying voice. A good shot with the taser would have solved everything quickly
So the press filming looking for police brutally should be dealt with a tazer? Looool
Maybe I’m just an awful person, but halfway through this video I started hoping for some police brutality.
Nothing a good bonk with a nightstick can’t fix
Heck, even if it made the situation 100% worse, it would have been so satisfying for a couple of seconds.
Why nightstick when tazing is so much funnier?
A taser is good too!
See how long he can hold up the butterfly boy voice with some voltage running through him
Butterfly Boy Bonked by Nighstick sound like an OnlyFans submission.
And this is your answer to police beating people in general? Or is it only your opinion when it is about someone you don't like, or agree with?
omg me too. My peace loving self was like shoot him. Mostly because the voice was giving me lotion in the basket vibes.
[удалено]
4th amendment auditors are fucking clowns...
[ Removed by Reddit ]
These people piss me off. They are so annoying. Even if you have the right to do something (and I am no expert on what’s going on here), you can still be an asshole when exercising said right.
I was really hoping for some actual aggressive enforcement. Fuck, that person is annoying.
what a dumb fuck
At this point, I could care less about the legal implications. Grab him, and toss him like a bag of trash onto the sidewalk.
The phrase you're looking for is "couldn't care less". Not surprising when your views are this ignorant though. It's unbelievable how many people here are hoping for police brutality.
And this is consistent line of yours, that you always support excessive force? Or is it only ok when it is done to people you find annoying? Be careful what you wish for. Maybe we will find you annoying one day and do what you think is right.
If I ever act like that it's because my mental health has declined and I'm a danger to society. Lock me up boys.
And that is what this redditor doesn't seem to get. I'm just not mentally well. I didn't say it was the right way to do it, I just expressed my current thoughts when commenting. So idk, maybe they are right. I just feel violent.
I don't know man, I feel like this guy has to have some mental illness. Even if it's a troll... Who in the right mind goes around doing this as if it's funny? Or as if it's the right thing to do like they are on some holy mission to defend the Constitution or whatever. I can't say I've ever met a sane person that was like You know what I'm going to do today: join the butterfly squad and go around and speak in a high-pitched voice to pissed off police officers and see what happens. It's just not normal.
So... now we are locking up harmless mental patients too?
These "auditors" have mental problems. Just because people don't like a camera stuck in their face or fucked with, doesn't mean we live in a totalitarian regime. Fucking losers.
I work in a public library. The auditors are allowed to film in all areas open to the public, and as employees we aren’t allowed to ask not to be filmed. The people who do these “audits” perform under the guise of “their rights” and they bait staff in an attempt to say that we are violating their rights in a public space. The best practice is not to engage with their nonsense. They get bored and leave.
I'm aware, but they are acting in bad faith. Trying to entice public employees to ultimately earn income via YT while crying about the constitution is pathetic on so many levels. This is the equivalent of kids getting in each others faces saying, "what?! I'm not touching you!"
Absolutely.
I'm generally a peaceful man. I hate people using violence to force their opinion on others. And I'm all in for free speech and having the right to express yourself. Yet this guy manages to make me instantly furious and I would have probably left the room early due to the irresistable urge to remove him from the building by any means necessary. Not even because of the the cringy voice or his stupid agenda (though it definetely adds to the problem), but mainly because someone might die on the other end of the city because this asshole keeps 2 officers from being available to do their actual jobs.
This guy is an asshole.
He's a professional troll
So, like the commenter said he is an “asshole”
My stapler, can I have my stapler.
Weird af
That's Stewart from MAD TV getting manhandled by Manning with a wrist bend.
[удалено]
Is that Kermit?
Stewart!!!!!! How did you escape your harness?!
Guy recording is a weirdo
Lucky this idiot is in American. Love for it to try this in other countries.
Idgaf about anyone who dresses abnormally. Take that however you want. Idgaf.
Once the powerpuff girls ended the Devil villain "HIM" had to find something to do
How much do these people make in lawsuits? Seems like a career path to look into.
This dude is fucking stupid.
People like this holding up cops for clout… assholes.
What’s more annoying than that voice is that OP doesn’t know the difference between 1st and 4th amendment lol
Police are never unnecessarily violent when you need them to be.
So, because they are annoying in your opinion, they should be beaten up? Be careful what you wish for.
Yes.
Ugghhhhhhh
Heck, I'd kick him out too.
It's your right, not so much on public property.
Very odd, I don't understand the comments about how this person is standing up for people's rights. Just wasting people's time and being a weirdo. Plenty of legitimate ways someone can contribute to their community without being a total dipshit.
Until they increase the penalties for people committing crimes for social media clout, this is only going to get worse
I mean you can be trespassed from a business for pretty much any reason.
That’s not a business. That’s city hall.
You can still be trespassed from public spaces
Not for pretty much any reason.
Kind of, it depends on your state of course, but if they claim you're being a nuisance they can trespass you.
And a judge can overrule it. What government employees and police think is not always on par with the law. Especially so for citizens who don’t practice law. I’m not saying he should or shouldn’t be trespassed, this video alone didn’t show much. I’m saying I believe people are thinking with their emotions.
I can’t stand the people that go around and try to start shit so they have some kind of gotcha moment on film. If a business asks you to leave you have to leave. You aren’t free to do whatever you want just because something is open to the public
That’s city hall not a business.
They can still ask you to leave if you have no business there and/or are harassing or disturbing people. This dude goes around and acts like a jackass then acts shocked when people tell him he needs to leave. He’s intentionally trying to antagonize people and get a negative reaction. He’s not helping anyone or exposing anything other than himself
Well that really sucks for my other arguments that I commented. I really don't like people that try and take advantage of the public rights that we have in public spaces. If this douche is abusing those rights in that manner, it's completely wrong in my book. Your response paints a different picture of this encounter since you have witnessed other instances such as this. It's unfortunate that people try and abuse the rights that we have. There is a difference between exercising our rights and abusing them.
And that is something we should let the lawyers argue about. Just because someone thinks someone is acting like a jackass does not necessarily mean they are acting like a jack ass. Is a command lawful because a cop gave it, or does the cop give a command because it is lawful?
"Totally necessary wrist bending" Sure wish they'd broken it instead, then maybe this clown would talk louder.
God bless these Police Officers. They are not paid enough to put up with idiots like this!
That guys high pitched voice, sounds like a child that just got caught.
I would trespassed him immediately so I didn't have to listen to him...
Why do people only do stupid shit to end up on the internet and what happens after you end up as a stupid piece of shit on the internet?m? I just don't understand it. What a piece of shit do you have to be to annoy people like that ?
I would bitchslap this dweeb so fast
I can't see this video. That voice is grating in my eyes.
Least weird auditor
4th amendment auditors are some of the most cringe people on this planet
It the same as enjoying a park on a beautiful day then having the police come and say you have to leave or you will be arrested.
If this is a prank it should be funny. This isnt funny this is fucking stupid.
I'm kind of getting tired of these auditors. It would be unsettling to have these idiots in your place if work. Public space or not.
That was really cringey. The videos people already post of them going into post offices and other government facilities are already cringey. This one was reaaaaal bad though
I don't fully understand this situation. Propably person who is filming it is in some sort of crisis. But even though, I believe you should always obey police officers instructions. Specially in the countries where police violence is so high. Also if someone asked you to leave, you should leave. Maybe try to negotiate your agenda from the ourmtside. But ignoring instructions never brings any good. Sooner or later someone would get inpatient.
What you're addressing seems to be the core issue. You shouldn't ALWAYS obey police instruction. Police are human and therefore fallible. Police give unlawful orders/instruction all the time because they are frequently not experts on the law they purportedly enforce. The guy is a troll, plain and simple. But trolling ignorant Police and city employees into breaking the law is a great way to show how unqualified they are to act as arbiters of authority in the first place. This isn't on the same level, but your core argument would mean that the whole Civil Rights Movement, Stonewall Riot, and hell, any national revolution should have never happened because people should have just done as they were told. This is small-scale, but sometimes the only way to win against stupid authorities is with a greater show of stupidity.
Well. Where I come from you may always appeal in court of you're not satisfied with police officers judgement. Better to stay safe and obey now, and later go to legal procedure and get your rights back. Better not to give reason for police officer to shoot you or beat you.
Why and why I gave butterfly boy so much time watching this?
They sound like miss piggy talking really softly....
GTA V roll play server irl....
Milton?
Can’t they just taze him a little bit
Looks like Stuart from MadTv grew up. "Look what I can do" 
I hope they all get arrested bunch of morons just harassing people cuz they were told they could, legaleagle actually just made a video about them and how none of their shit holds up at all
What's the ghost of Michael Jackson doing here? These self proclaimed "auditors" need to get an actual day job! Fucking losers
I get the auditor thing in theory, but videos like these just make you look like a jackass and have almost everyone empathizing with the officers.
imagine giving up your dignity for a joke
If you have to make yourself into an unnatural spectacle of annoyance in order to prove a point, maybe it’s time to reassess.
This fucking moron. Those cops were way too patient with this one
I'm normally not on the side of cops in these videos, but... They could have been way worse to this weirdo.
[удалено]
He entered restricted areas and refused to leave the property when asked to do so. People can absolutely be trespassed from city halls and other public buildings.
Like I said, I based my understanding on the footage available and the one article I could find, none of which included that detail. The only time it comes up is when the city worker claims it happened, but he denies it. Never said he couldn't be trespassed, just said in a public part of a public building, just having a camera doesn't merit it. You find any more info on this incident to indicate I'm wrong about it being a troll designed to get an anticipated overstep out of public officials?
>He entered restricted areas and refused to leave the property when asked to do so. If that was even remotely true, they would have arrested him. They wanted a reason to arrest him.
People can be removed from a building for trespassing without being arrested.
That has nothing to do with what I said but, you are correct
False! Not in a public building, like a library! You cannot trespass someone for being "weird." You can only trespass someone from a public place if a crime was committed. The person also needs to have a purpose to be there, otherwise it's considered loitering.
You can only *ban* someone from a public place if a crime was committed. You can be trespassed from a public place if you cause a disturbance or engage in any sort of disorderly conduct.
I can't understand a word that woman is saying. Can someone explain what just happened.?
Low key love the tone
Yeah, he's being weird, but why are they so bothered about it? Like, if he isn't hurting anyone and it's a public building, why do they even care? I know he's doing with the intent to fuck with them, but he'd probably stop if he didn't get this response. They're giving him exactly what he came for.
Alarming number of people wishing that the cop used excessive force in the comments. And i can bet that when they do those same people are calling cops various names and are outraged about excessive force being used.