G20 Toronto cop who was afraid of girl blowing soap bubbles sues YouTube for "ridicule"

Discuss

171 Responses to “G20 Toronto cop who was afraid of girl blowing soap bubbles sues YouTube for "ridicule"”

  1. Mitch says:

    If his actions warranted ridicule then he should expect ridicule. If a cop near me did something like that I would mock him every time I saw him.

  2. portside says:

    Hey BoingBoing,

    Do you think you guys could post some things about good policing?

    Cops have some of the hardest jobs around. Many of them constantly put themselves in harm’s way for our sake. But I won’t deny that even the most progressive nation’s police are flawed, as is every living thing. I know that if I were a cop, I would dread the day G20 came to my city.

    If we’re going to tar and feather the bad cops (which we should rightly do), let’s show a little support for the good ones who do their damnedest to keep our streets safe, even if they did pinch us for underage drinking freshmen year of college.

    By the way, are there any cops who read BoingBoing? I’d love to hear their opinion on this situation.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Has constable Josephs “Bubble’s” killed himself yet? He seems to be suffering from several mental illnesses; i.e. severe narcissism, low-self-esteem, over compensation, hyper-tension, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Add to that the public humiliation and eventual awareness that his frivolous litigation will fail, can only bring about his own self destruction. Those that armed and promoted this sick man as a police officer ought to be held accountable for his actions and forced to resign and perform community service.

  4. Anonymous says:

    He was wearing sunglasses. The chances of a soap bubble somehow magically penetrating those sunglasses are somewhere between 0.0 and 0.0. How can we expect a police officer to do his job when he is sh!t scared of, all things, soap bubbles? Will a crook wielding a feather be able to defeat this officer?

    Secondly: if he’s so worried about a soap bubble and “detergent” in the bubbles, he clearly must not take a shower. How long can a person who does not take showers last on the police force?

  5. Anonymous says:

    Look up the some of the standoffs between Canadian police and First Nations’ individuals that have occurred over land disputes. They are chilling. Check Wikipedia under Oka Crisis.

  6. Anonymous says:

    It sounds like the usual knee-jerk “she must have been asking for it” is slowly giving way to “he shouldn’t have done it, even though she must have been asking for it”. I’m glad to see society is making progress.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Cute shorts – casual, yet aggressive.

  8. adamnvillani says:

    This guy’s a disgrace to his entire country. Any time a Canadian starts talking about how superior they are to the U.S., I can always remind them of Officer Bubbles. I think the entire Canadian populace should sue this guy for defamation of character. Aren’t Canadians supposed to be nice?

  9. Sequoia says:

    To those who say that she was “just blowing bubbles” or describe bubbles that hit the cop as “errant,” gimmeabreak. Clearly she was trying to antagonize the cops.

    That a cop can arrest someone for “getting them upset” (I once had a friend arrested for assault after giving an officer “the finger;” and you’ll be ‘shocked-shocked’ to learn that it was at a protest gathering) has always baffled and angered me. As mentioned above, these are peopled legally empowered to commit acts of violence, so even a hint of the attitude this cop had is inexcusable. To put it another way, if someone sees red when they get insulted or “bubbled,” is it a good idea to give them handcuffs and a gun?

    The cop was within his rights to be annoyed, but I think the best recourse would be (OMG here it comes) to act like a reasonable person. To wit: “Hey, can you please stop blowing bubbles on me? I don’t mind if you blow them, I’d just prefer you not do it on me. Thanks.”

    This next bit isn’t directly relevant to the officer bubbles affair, but ignoring such a request would likely lead to a violent interaction in any setting. It’s not just cops that get mad when you blow bubbles on them. :p

    • chouette says:

      Actually, it is not clear to me that she was trying to antagonize the cops. In an interview, she said she was “keeping the mood light” and had asked the lady cop if she minded her blowing the bubbles. Only then did the other cop approach and initiate the incident in the videotape:
      http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/07/17/g20-bubbles-prompted-arrest-threat/

      • MatthewFabb says:

        It’s ironic that she was arrested for carrying eyewash (as part of the Toronto Street Medics) which she could have used to help out anyone if anyone had gotten bubbles in their eye. :-)

        If you look at the news article chouette posted, police apparently searched her bags earlier and were okay with her medical supplies. It was later she was arrested for the eyewash saying that she could throw it into the police’s faces and temporarily blind them. Which sounds like just a found excuse to arrest her during that particular sweep of the crowd.

        The article mentions she didn’t mean to antagonize the police, with this quote: “I realize now maybe the bubbles weren’t the greatest idea — but still, it’s bubbles, I was just keeping the mood light.”

  10. chouette says:

    Shouldn’t the PM have invited the cop and the young lady over for a beer by now? Don’t they know how to handle these sorts of things in Canada?

    • gadgetgirl says:

      Re: having the cop & the woman over for a beer at the PM’s — remember it was the PM that picked the banking district/downtown core of Toronto for the G20 debacle in the first place.

      Harper’s no Obama. He’s more like a George W. Bush zombie robot.

  11. Anonymous says:

    To be fair to the cop, if she’d have spilt her bubbles on the ground, they may have had a terrible impact on the local ecosystem, or made for hazardous conditions on the road. He probably only arrested her because she was in violation of health and safety laws (I notice she wasn’t carrying a slippery when wet sign with her).

  12. Teller says:

    The edited part shows the young woman shooting the female officer. Then, we see the arrest.

  13. hastepost says:

    All you fools posting negative comments about Mr. Bubbles- he’s taking names and he’ll be kicking your ass!
    The ‘girl’ had an eyewash kit in her pack. Clearly, she knew (or intended for) her bubble blowing to be possibly injurious. Mr. Bubbles came to the aid of a ‘girl’ officer who did not have protective eyewear, and cleverly deflected the possibly harmful bubbles toward himself. Commendable action, this is what a billion dollars in law and security can achieve!

    The Harper Conservatives are building new prisons to deal with the likes of Miss Winkel, as well as other perpetrators of (as yet) exponentially increasing unreported crimes.

    • efergus3 says:

      An eyewash kit? TERRORIST! Or maybe she was prepared for the usual tear gas/mace.

      • Anonymous says:

        Yes, surely the tear gas/mace which had never been deployed in the city ever before, and only once during this event. There was nothing ‘usual’ about this.

  14. Shroomy says:

    She’s real purty.

  15. Art says:

    Picture it.

    You’re 16 years old.

    What could be cooler than saying that you were arrested at a G20 Conference?

    Ultimate neighborhood and school respect for months! :)

  16. Anonymous says:

    ninja bubbles killed his family.

  17. Anonymous says:

    while this was happening, i was being detained about ten feet away. there had just been a press conference on the sidewalk, about a block away from this site, and lots of us had left the conference and walked back towards this spot.

    these two officers were two of many blocking the road/entrance to a space rented by a g20 activist group. there weren’t just a few of them. there were TONS. and while their coworkers mostly searched a tour bus that was literally minutes from hitting the road home to montreal, onlookers such as myself boo’d and yelled at them to knock it off. after about ten minutes, my friends and i realized it was a bad scene and decided to leave the area. we got about six feet (to the right of where this happened) and then we were circled by cops and detained. for three hours. (this is not the incident captured in that picture of riot cops trapping people at an intersection in the rain… that happened two hours after this happened. the city was a seriously terrifying place for 48 hours.)

    at around the two and a half hour mark of us being detained on the sidewalk for having been standing on the sidewalk, friendly t.o.p.d.ers with bikes were replaced by fully-padded, fully-armed, seven foot tall OPP guys. we thought we were really screwed. for what? standing on the sidewalk? jeering at cops for arresting people for having bandanas and eyewash?

    bubble girl was probably part of the group of people initially watching the cops search the bus. maybe she stayed when i walked away. i don’t know if she was detained too, but it seems like it. after finally questioning everyone and checking IDs, the cops seemed to select random people from the detained group and shove them in vans. i’m not kidding when i say that i observed them arrest mostly people of colour, young punky-looking people, and anyone who seemed to be from quebec.

    anyway. i hope i’ve helped to set the scene a little better. this was not the case of a protester looking for a fight. this was a case of someone witnessing something ridiculous after a weekend of episode after episode of disgusting police behaviour, and doing something non-violent and whimsical to draw attention to its ridiculousness. the news cameras who attended the press conference were still in the area and filmed the entire thing, but unsurprisingly it did not make the news. in fact during the earlier part of our detention one young quebecois woman was thrown against the back of a CP24 newsvan and her arms were twisted so bad she repeatedly screamed in pain, while we were all forced to watch from the sidewalk. bet she was arrested for resisting arrest.

    the attitudes from the cops who detained us varied, some were silent, some joked with us, some seemed genuinely apologetic, but there were plenty of those who acted like bubbles. you could see that they were disgusted by our mere existence. after what i saw that weekend, i have no doubt that bubbles was privately congratulated by his superiors. too bad the general public feels differently. my heart bleeds.

  18. deckard68 says:

    “so he’s entering a parent role.”

    At best he’s using abusive authority techniques intentionally — asking her questions then purposefully interrupting her answers, using an abusive-father tone to put her on an unequal footing, etc.

    At worst that is his real personality. Pity his actual children, if so.

    But it is calculated. He’s not just on a steroid rage. He’s practiced being a dick.

    • sgnp says:

      I agree with you on these points. As you’ll see in the comment I wrote above the one to which you responded, this is a standard method that cops (in my experience, anyway) use to deal with people who are trying to have a bit of fun at their expense.

      It will “work” in the sense that in normal circumstances a person who’s just trying to have fun can get shut down pretty easily when a parent or authority figure tells them in no uncertain terms that it is NOT fun time.

      As you said, it’s calculated. It’s supposed to shut her down, to reduce her to the role of a child who’s in trouble.

      Still, if that’s the only tool you have at your disposal, its effectiveness is reduced in the current day when cameras are much more present.

      Whether the female officer has different training, or just decided to approach things differently because she has a different frame of reference, she was interacting with the protester in a way that doesn’t reduce them into parent-child roles.

      Whether Officer Bubbles decided to step in because he thought it wasn’t going to work or because he became impatient, I don’t know.

  19. Keneke says:

    Snot nosed kids need to be taught to respect their elders.

    That being said, the policeman really did go over the line.

  20. Anonymous says:

    I’m trying to find the “offensive cartoons” on youtube… have they been taken down?

  21. Anonymous says:

    I had never seen the cartoon until after reading this article. Maybe he just likes attention?

  22. Anonymous says:

    Why no link to the Officer Bubbles cartoons to understand why he’s so upset. Impounding schoolbuses, arresting Santa. All he did was abuse police powers and tie up the legal system with frivolous actions.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/MisterOfficerBubbles#p/a

  23. grikdog says:

    Ossifer Pup was a model of restraint compared to this unfixed moron. You’d think the shorts he was wearing might have set the agenda for his day to Moderation In All Things.

    I would recommend the old Don Ho song, “Tiny Bubbles,” as a fit vehicle for group derision if he’s spotted doing Coed…err…Crowd Control again.

  24. redesigned says:

    My understanding is that she asked the female officer about the bubbles. The aggressive cop came up and stood directly in front of her which he did not need to do. She stopped when asked. She was then targeted by the cop and held for two days for no good reason.

    Most importantly though, she is cute and he looks like a d-bag! ;-P

  25. jfrancis says:

    Well the lawsuit should help his online rep

    :/

  26. mgfarrelly says:

    If you don’t want to be mocked, don’t do things deserving of mockery, in public and in front of numerous cameras.

    If his family is being threatened they should go after the people issuing the threats, not people engaged in mockery of his antics.

    That this clown still has police powers is a shame.

    • A.Lwin says:

      My thoughts exactly! If you don’t want people to know what you did, don’t do it in the first place.

      After all, it is the fundamental of all science that any action will cause a reaction.

  27. EeyoreX says:

    Christ, what a badly media-trained asshole!

    I mean, at this point in history, is’nt it allmost endearing that som people still think they can make this kind of bad publicity go away by throwing the book at it?

  28. video says:

    wow. what a nutcase. the female officer next to him seems really embarrassed and rightly so.

  29. knoxblox says:

    I wonder what Officer Bubbles would have done to the young man in the iconic Bernie Boston photo “Flower Power”?

  30. Awesomer says:

    So it’s a civil offense in Canada to make fun of people?

    • Anonymous says:

      yes. We (canada) never had a case like the Larry Flint defamation case. And if we had had a case like that Flint would have lost. i’m not being snarky here. Canadian courts are different.

  31. Anonymous says:

    I feel for the guy. We dealt with a lot of fine lines in the middle east this is nothing more than “it” in your face. The girl was being a little snoby to the female officer.

    But umm… How are bubles a detergant ? And the cop kept going after he got his point across. This situation just makes other much more controlled police officers look bad.

    My point ?
    Seriously there are bigger things to worry about in the world than colored bubbles.

    • Anonymous says:

      Well, soap bubbles are made from SOAP, which is a DETERGENT. Think about it.

      That said, charging someone for assault by blown bubbles.. the bubbles are blown by the wind, so the girl can’t control where they go. She could have just blown them straight up however.

      • knoxblox says:

        I have to get a little nitpicky here, so I apologize beforehand.

        Although soap and detergents are both used for cleaning, the word detergent is used to differentiate between soap and other surfactants. Not all detergents are soaps, and even water can be considered a detergent if used for cleaning.

        So, by his logic about detergents, she could even be arrested if she used some water to wash her face — and a little of it splashed upon him, which makes the argument that much more absurd.

    • Anonymous says:

      So she was “snobby?” Well, whoopie-do! Police are civil SERVANTS! They work for US! So long as they continue to behave as if WE need to respect THEM when they show no respect to us, who PAY THEIR SALARIES, I will certainly continue to be “snobby” towards them.

  32. ultranaut says:

    Streisand Effect ENGAGE!

  33. Crubellier says:

    Knoxblox, I imagine he’d have opened fire. That young man was interfering with government property!

  34. TimInBC says:

    Let’s see, is there ANYthing this dimwit could have done that would be more likely to ensure continuing ridicule? Don’t think so – a lawsuit is the shiznit. Where do we line up to ridicule this guy some more?

    Not to mention the obvious disrespect for his partner, who seemed to have the situation under control.

  35. Alex says:

    Up until now, the rest of the world HAD forgotten about these shenanigans.

  36. Art says:

    Does anyone here know precisely what occurred during the “moments later” and exactly how long it lasted until we see her taken inside?

    I am very disturbed by that editing. I don’t like feeling that I am being manipulated.

  37. Anonymous says:

    This won’t end well.

  38. Anonymous says:

    He can sue away, but Officer Bubbles is still an idiot. There is no excuse for shameful behavior by police- and spare the argument that they deal with so many dangerous or stupid people, or that the world is dangerous. If he is sueing over cartoons- Hell, some cops deserve ridicule. We should fear criminals- not police. Lazy bully cops like him who derive a perverse pleasure from trapping protesters and intimidating/abusing them because they can make me sick. If you like to bully people and want to get paid while getting your sadistic jollies- become a cop! Was he chasing armed robbery suspects or psycho killers that day? No, he was making the world safe from soap bubbles! Pepper spray, tear gas, tazers, clubs, fists, dogs, horses, rubber bullets- or live rounds, can do much more damage than any imagined threat from toy bubbles. He was looking for any excuse to exert police powers- and did that oh so sweet and kind lady cop try to diffuse the situation?- heck no. Sorry Bubble Girl, you’re on the wrong team! The populace should have EVERY RIGHT to free assembly and protest. It has been made frighteningly clear world over by armies of thugs in black body armor- or soldiers (no real difference these days) that the public has no real right to publicly voice their opinions. So unless you are a masochist- think hard about how strongly you feel about an issue and what you have to risk before you attend a protest and potentially find yourself in Bubble Girl’s situation. Cops can break down your door, trash the place, shoot your dog, beat your wife, arrest you, take your kids, and give your mother a heart attack- without recrimination, at the slightest hint that there may be a small amount of illegal drugs in your home- and no apologies if they are at the wrong house. If you want trouble, just ride a skateboard/bicycle on a sidewalk, or cross a street on foot against the light. Look too happy about walking down the street while looking too poor or ethnic, report a crime, or wish a cop a nice day- and you are asking for trouble. Cops protect and serve their own interests to arrest and convict- and beat the crap out of people or get away with murder. Whatever you do, don’t let a cop think you short changed him at the counter or stole his pen- it could get you beaten or killed. Bubble Girl was lucky to simply be yelled at by a maniac and arrested. Is it any wonder so many people hate cops?

  39. AudioTherapist says:

    What a steamingly massive douchebag, someone please remove any and all legal powers from this moron.

    Boing Boing has almost a moral duty to reprint every one of those cartoons for the edification of its readers and mortification of that complete tosser.

    Kudos to the girl with the bubbles for remaining calm and polite throughout. Bubble cops female partner also deserves an award for professionalism above and beyond the call of duty

  40. spool32 says:

    Those who call for the officer to be fired have forgotten that the entity preventing swift job-related retribution gains its power to protect his job from the people who protest his behavior.

    in other words, if you want people to get canned for acting like idiots, stop supporting unions.

  41. doug_in_pdx says:

    You know, there are two kinds of harm…

    Material harm, as in ones person is diminished in a real, provable way. Trauma, financial damage, and other things constitute this. There is material harm in property damage and loss too.

    We have the assault law for that material harm.

    Then there is the idea of being offended, a non-material harm, where the main characteristic of it is the victim can both self-identify as the victim, and be as “harmed” as they want to be.

    That’s expression, in a nut-shell, and we’ve worked on this problem as people for as long as we could express ourselves.

    I find it extremely difficult to believe that a soap bubble isn’t expression, and that it can somehow be a material harm.

    If one of those protesters had expressed themselves verbally to the police, the same result would have occurred and most of us would consider that arrest unjust, because part of the professional conduct expected of our authorities is to know and understand and have the character to differentiate between material harm and expression, and also to realize the implications on failure to do that on the general perception of what is just.

    The core problem here isn’t that expression. At least in the US, it’s supposedly protected. It is the lack of character demonstrated by that officer. And maybe it’s not even his fault! We all respond to our norms, which have significant influence on our behavior. This problem appears to be systemic, and it’s growing, producing the results we see in the video.

    The norms, for quite some time now, are decidedly authoritarian and totalitarian, exceeding the healthy boundaries many of us are accustomed to.

  42. blackboar says:

    Poor sap. Someone needs to tell the guy about the Streisand effect.

  43. tamgoddess says:

    Cory, it would be so great if you could write “woman” when you’re talking about an adult female. Seriously, it’s way past time to get this basic stuff.

    • chawke says:

      Tam – I understand how at first glance calling this woman a girl, then a young girl would be off-putting.

      However – being a writer, I think Cory deliberately called this college-age woman a girl to deliberately make the point that she is indeed young and not a threat to this police officer. Also – to add to the emphasis of the officer acting absurd, he chose the words ‘young girl’ because she was blowing bubbles, something young girls (and boys) do. Would the officer act the same way if a real young girl or boy blew bubbles at him?

      I think this is why Cory described her to be a YG. You know – the writer’s artistic license thing.

      Now time for me, a 39 YO man to make a somewhat bitchy statement
      ——————————————
      I have known so many women who take offense, to the point of acting bat-shit crazy – when someone – man or woman – calls a female over 18 a girl — yet call males — even young looking 29 year olds – boys. When called on it they say it’s different, that calling an 18 year old female a girl is much worse than calling even a 26 year old-ish man, a boy.

      Ok, ok – assert the ‘grrrl’ movement bullshit. Whatever.

      But let me say this – I fucking hate the ‘Boys Will Be Boys’ attitude that allows guys of all ages to get away with all kinds of shit that would have a woman or girl burned at the stake or have a scarlet letter pinned on her.

      Insisting that even 16 YO girls should be called women, but that it’s OK to call a 25 YO male a boy, is really contributing to the ‘boys will be boys’ attitude. It’s doing females a bigger disservice than the 25 YO ‘boys.’

      ——————————–

      Another thought – Cory is what, like, in his late 30′s? Maybe he calls college-age guys ‘boys’ also. When I was college-age I f’ing hated being called a boy, but at 39, I have to hold my tongue because I just naturally will refer to a college age a boy or a girl. Really – it might just be a function of Cory’s age. At Schuls I’ve attended, I’ve been in study groups with people over 65, 70 and they would refer to anyone around their kid’s age or under as a kid, boy or a girl. No insult intended. My sister is 20. I still think of her as a girl – an adult – but I refer to her as a girl. I’ve met several 70 YO-plus ‘boys’ and ‘girls.’ One of my friends, 63 at the time invited me to visit his elder male discussion-book-reading group. Being the youngest, me friend’s nickname in the group was ‘The Kid.’ They dubbed me during my visit, ‘Baby Boy’ – no offense meant or taken – just for fun. When the groups members see me, they’ll call me B.B. as my nickname. Why? – ’cause they like me.

      Maybe this explains Cory’s verbiage. I dunno, just my two bits.

    • pidg says:

      Yo, he already writes “she” when it could be either (“If your child is smart, she already rejects Apple”), he’s doing his bit for equality d00d.

      • mickeymao says:

        Firstly, using non-gender-specific pronouns or alternating pronouns instead of using ‘he’ as a default doesn’t get you a gold star, it just demonstrates the same level of basic cluefulness we should all expect of ourselves. Good on Cory for achieving that; lots of people don’t. But it doesn’t mean tamgoddess can’t politely call him on if he screws up on something else. Some people might even consider it – gasp! – helpful.
        Secondly, the too-common “X is not a sexist, how DARE you offer constructive suggestions” attitude (or worse, the “X sometimes treats women with basic respect, so shut up and be grateful” attitude, which I really hope is not how you meant to come across) is much, much more damaging than calling a grown-up ‘girl’.

      • tamgoddess says:

        Sorry, I don’t buy into that “you’ve already got enough equality, so shut up now” line of thinking. This is a very smart man who can change his behavior, or I wouldn’t even bother pointing it out.

        • Nadreck says:

          Adult woman?! Who’s an adult? I’m the Godfather of one of that girl’s friends: who ended up in the same jail cell later in the day. She’s certainly not 18 and I seriously doubt that she’s even 16. Teenage woman?

          Doubtless people are using the old maturity standards before we started dumping estrogen look-alikes into the environment. In these here parts it’s not unheard of for an 11 year-old to have her first period. The church volunteer who pushed my Aunt’s wheelchair around is 34D-26-36, 6′ 2″ and 14 years old.

          Anyway, “boy” and “girl” have always had relative (you’re 65 years old but younger than me) and a social group (Methuselah and the boys) registers as well as a literary device for emphasising frailty (as in she weighs about as much as Officer Bubbles’ thigh). I’m tired of people scribbling out all of the meanings of a word until they find one that let’s them be righteously offended.

          Also, in the interests of the general discussion on this point, I point out that the person in question, and a lot of her friends. are exactly the sorts who are heavily into the sort of hyper-complicated, politically correct linguistic games that would put the protocol officers at Buckingham Palace to shame. I have no doubt that she would complain if any such were breached.

    • Sagodjur says:

      Not trying to be a jerk, but not every adult female is offended by being called a girl. Not everyone thinks it’s a pejorative term.

      If you can get in touch with the adult female who got arrested in the video and confirm that she’s offended by being called a girl, you may have a point. If you can show that Cory used the term with the intention of denigrating her, you may have a point.

      • DoctressJulia says:

        I am offended when I am referred to as a ‘girl’ (I am 35), and I don’t know ANY woman who isn’t. Think about it.

      • tamgoddess says:

        So, if I wanted to call all black people the N word, I only have to get permission from one of them? Saweet! I am ready to start the offense!

        • jerkzilla says:

          Is there a “Godwin’s Law” for “the N-word”? Something like: the longer an argunment is regarding a word you personally dislike, the greater the odds are that you will say that it’s just like using “The N Word”.

    • DoctressJulia says:

      THIS. WOMAN WOMAN WOMAN. Thank you.

  44. bersl2 says:

    Problem, Officer Butthurt?

  45. Anonymous says:

    OFFICER B IS A REAL NUTTER AND SHOULD BE MADE TO TAKE A “CLASS” CLASS BECAUSE HE HAS NON NOW!

  46. jowlsey says:

    Dear Officer Bubbles,

    We respect your authoritah. Really we do.

    Love,

    The Interwebs

  47. irksome says:

    Geez people, lighten up on the poor guy.

    Haven’t you ever gotten soap in your eye? It really stings!

  48. PlasticRhino says:

    i’m sorry but i’m not following the trend here. how much more passive aggressive can she be. she’s blowing bubbles at them at point blank range. antagonism is what it is

    if you were standing at the bus stop and the person next to you was blowing bubbles in your face you would ask them to stop.

    look i despise the government as much as the next “awake” person but she’s antagonising the situation. just because she’s using bubbles it’s supposed to be ok?

    • Hopeful_Greis says:

      “Ask” yes. Throw a hysterical sh*tfit and threaten to call the police and have that bus stop person arrested, no. I am really not sure if you are being subtly sarcastic or you really are that out of touch with reality. A large, physically imposing man with a club and the authority to split her head open on a whim vs. a young woman half his size blowing bubbles, not at him, but generally in his direction. Your sense of balance is pretty off.

    • Kaden says:

      Excellent point.

      There *is* the whole thing about ‘antagonizing’ not actually being a criminal offense in Canada, but we can just let that slide in the interests of law + order.

      Have you considered running for public office?

    • bzishi says:

      It may not be what you think. The woman, Courtney Winkels, noted that Officer Bubbles came up to her when she was talking to the woman officer. He then got in her face which is why she was so surprised when she was threatened to be arrested. She said she asked the woman officer if blowing bubbles was an issue, and the reply was that it was not. The camera makes it look like it was a line of police, but it was actually just the woman police officer chatting with Winkels (until Bubbles came over).

      In any case, she stopped blowing bubbles and was later arrested in a sweep for carrying eyewash. The charges against her were dropped after she spent 2 days in jail.

    • social_maladroit says:

      she’s blowing bubbles at them at point blank range.

      So what you’re saying is that bubbles are a non-lethal weapon. Excellent point.

    • Anonymous says:

      The policeman is choosing to stand in front of her; shes simply on a picket line. He could take two steps back and be out of her way. The reason he stood his ground and didn’t simply remove himself from the situation was because he’s jacked up on power and felt he should get preferential treatment simply because he’s paid to keep law and order. He’s there to protect their rights, not quash them.

      The whole point of the video is that it’s highlighting the attitude the police are taking towards a group of people that they ‘should’ be protecting, but in reality are waiting for an excuse to arrest.

      Doing something annoying isn’t against the law, it’s a social thing. There’s a big difference between you telling someone to stop and a member of the police acting on it as if it were a crime.

      Antagonism isn’t a crime; the only possible reason you would ever be arrested for it (in the UK at least) is under a ‘public order offence’, i.e. an excuse to arrest anyone for any reason you want ’cause they’re doing something I don’t like very much’. Let me put that into context. If I called someone a nobhead and they called the police, they would be ignored – possibly even lambasted for wasting their time. If I called a policeman a nobhead, I would be arrested. THAT is abuse of power and it happens every day – preferential treatment over the very people the police are installed to protect.

      Police aren’t special people, they’re people paid to protect the public; when a member of the public is annoying the police that’s their own problem, not a matter for the legal system.

      They should be in place to enforce the law, not get respect.

  49. deckard68 says:

    Come on everybody, let’s all get extradited to Canada! The “Officer Bubbles Must Be Fired” Facebook group:

    http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/group.php?gid=124326254278279

  50. Anonymous says:

    Ha, in the US the cartoons would be protected as freedom of speech. As well as parody. Will be interesting to see what happens in Canada. I have seen cops act like this in a few places. They try to intimidate.

  51. EMJ says:

    A young girl – would that be someone who is 6 years old?

    Is everyone younger than Cory either a young boy or girl?

  52. social_maladroit says:

    Hopefully, someone will post the video that so offended Officer Bubbles somewhere else and share the link. (Hint, hint…)

    I wonder how many times people have gotten his name and said, “Wait, aren’t you Officer Bubbles?”

  53. tobiasaurusrex says:

    Concerning Defamation of Character: “to constitute actionable defamation, the statements must be false and expose a person to hatred, ridicule, or contempt.” Well, he’s been exposed to hatred, ridicule, and contempt – the key factor here is that it’s true, it’s not a false film. He really is an @$$hole, and he and only he is responsible for how he is portrayed. There are no false statements. He has no case. The cartoons are simply the ridicule and contempt that are his due based on his real actions.

  54. ADavies says:

    Officer Bubbles! Officer Bubbles! Officer Bubbles! Officer Bubbles!

    I just like saying that.

  55. Hopeful_Greis says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKTl1wkjZk8
    Animation adds at start and finish. Could not find the described ones with Obama etc. YouTube is notoriously spineless and probably pulled them as soon as Bubbles coughed.

  56. Anonymous says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBqDY2cFbM8

    reminds me of this scene in “Postal”

  57. fubbs says:

    wait, why should this guy be expected to put up with someone antagonizing him like this? Are we really this programmed to side with anyone that is being confronted by a cop, regardless of what they are doing? Yes, bubbles. How cute and non-confrontational. What if she had thrown the bubble mix in his face? Would that be confrontational enough? Where do you draw the line? It’s easy to sit back and judge this guy, but ask yourself how you’d react if someone sat down next to you at your computer and started antagonizing you like this.

    • Snowrunner says:

      What if she had thrown the bubble mix in his face? Would that be confrontational enough? Where do you draw the line?

      If we play “What If” then by that logic a cop can randomly arrest whoever he feels like, because…. What IF they would run someone over with their car? Or what IF they would have [use your imagionation].

      You may want to rethink the whole “Thought Crime” trip you’re on.

    • PFR says:

      “What if she had thrown the bubble mix in his face? Would that be confrontational enough?”

      And what about the person recording the incident? What if they hit the officer with their camera?!?!

      And to think of it, each one of those protesters has hands… what if they hit the cop? Surely we must ban hands from all further protests!

    • Anonymous says:

      Most of a policeman’s job consists of dealing with difficult people. If they’re not any good at it, perhaps we may be justified in judging them harshly for it, seeing as how we pay their wages.

    • deckard68 says:

      Fubbs, you evidently never saw the video, in which he was twenty feet away from her bubbles. He walked up and stood directly in front of her by choice. He could have stood anywhere. Furthermore, you sound like you aren’t even familiar with the image of war protestors placing flowers in the barrels of National Guardsmen’s rifles. Learn your history before you lose your rights.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      I propose that we prophylactically sterilize all police officers since children are notorious carriers of dangerous bubbles.

  58. Anonymous says:

    Can we get a good list of offensive video links. That’s why i am suffering through all the trolls.

  59. video says:

    @ fubbs: obviously, throwing bubble mix in an officer’s face would be confrontational. however, blowing bubbles from a child’s bubble-blowing kit is not confrontational. sure, the officer has a right to be annoyed, that’s the point. but arresting a person because an errant bubble touched them would be downright absurd and what i would call an abuse of power. yes, she’s taunting them. but guess what. she’s got the right to do that. the line, as you’ve suggested, is blurry enough for that to still be an option. yes, i side with her. she’s done nothing worthy of being arrested in this video and she stopped blowing bubbles when she was asked to do so. and to answer you question, the reason that he should be expected to put up with someone antagonized him like this is because it’s his job to put up with it. he’s supposed to be a police officer, not a storm-trooper.

  60. Anonymous says:

    The comment re a young girl was in quotes and attributed to Godott.

    All this is about is Big Brother flexing its power. They have to justify the hear billion dollar price tag protecting the dignity of useless bureaucrats. It wouldn’t surprise me if security hadn’t infiltrated protest groups and instigated some of the violence.

  61. Baldhead says:

    Similar to Christine O’ Donnell claiming that showing videos of her saying stupid shit is “slander” this is a clear case of not understanding the definition of what you accuse. Defamation is when people LIE about you. Allowing a recording of you doing or saying stupid things isn’t lying. Sue yourself for defamation, you might have a chance at winning.

  62. farwest says:

    As with many such things, the young woman was acting like a passive-aggressive idiot AND the police officer was acting like an overly-empowered tyrant.

    Both were wrong in this case, though not equally so. The officer has more power and thus “won” the situation by sending the woman to jail on false grounds. His karmic retribution was to be ridiculed and mocked on YouTube. He was therefore more wrong, and got just desserts if you ask me.

    And yet I find both of them guilty of being kind of terrible human beings. The woman gained nothing by blowing bubbles, though she probably thought in some vague sense that she was as morally upstanding as the Viet Nam protesters who placed flowers in the barrels of riot police guns in the 1960s.

    Her vague sense of moral entitlement is reprehensible in the same way that his actual misuse of power is.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Her vague sense of moral entitlement is reprehensible in the same way that his actual misuse of power is.

      I think that you’ve permanently lost the right to use the word ‘moral’, since you obviously have no idea what it means. Also: ‘entitlement’, ‘reprehensible’ and ‘power’.

      • farwest says:

        Rethinking my comment, I take some of it back, and especially the last sentence. I do realize that the police officer’s actions were radically worse than the woman’s. He abused power, while at the worst she was maybe guilty of being a bit annoying.

        Very real abuses of police power happen all the time, and very often to people who don’t provoke the police in any way. But I’ve also been present at a number of peaceful protests where provocateurs needle the police out of some vague anti-authoritarian mission, and frustrate some of the real goals that other protesters might have.

    • EH says:

      The woman gained nothing by blowing bubbles

      What about the tiny bit of freedom that the officer decided to be so intent on removing? You may not think blowing bubbles is a great exercise of freedom, but then why would it be such a big deal to the officer? Saying she gained “nothing” is to reveal this contradiction. That is, apparently the bubble blowing wasn’t meaningless.

    • zio_donnie says:

      I am entitled to blow bubbles. So are you. Cops are not entitled to intimidate people with implied violence or bullshit jurisprudence. Your “morality” is indifferent.

  63. Anonymous says:

    The police were on a testosterone-charged free-for-all that day and all civil rights done away with.

    No human being was harmed by any of the so-called “activists” yet hundreds of them now face serious charges.

    However, the emergency wards in Toronto were full that day of bruised and battered people caused by the violent tactics of overzealous police.

  64. jjb says:

    Ya, that cop sure was angry… I bet he didn’t feel appreciated at all. He (over) reacted to being antagonized almost like he was some kind of human…all emotional and shit.

    If it were me, I would have left the areas before it got to that point, given it was pretty obvious what the outcome would be. I would probably have skipped the idea of blowing bubbles at cops in the first place.

    All I can say is that I really feel that woman was brave and doing her part to show once and for all that cops are still cops.

    • dequeued says:

      Don’t give me that “he’s only human” line.
      We’re all only human.
      He’s a *professional*, he should conduct himself like one at ALL TIMES while he’s on duty.

      If a surgeon became overly emotional while he was performing surgery, and accidentally botched an operation, would you still try to defend him, after all, he’s only human, right?

      No, he has a responsibility to put his emotions aside, and, sometimes, to swallow his pride, while he’s in uniform.
      We all do.

      Would a daycare worker be forgiven for losing her temper and striking a child? Even once?
      Even if the child threw food at her?
      Could she get away with losing her temper even once after being a 15 year veteran in the field?
      Would the daycare worker’s union rush to defend her?
      No, she’d probably be arrested.

      So, no, a cop doesn’t have the right to lose his temper and lash out at a member of the public, not even once, not even if a suspect is giving them shit and being a complete asshole.

      The public is trusting them, and massively privileging them, they don’t get to abuse that trust, ever.
      If officer McWussypants can’t handle having bubbles blown at him, he isn’t fit to wear the uniform, and probably couldn’t handle a more tense life and death situation.
      Even the other officers were laughing at his stupidity.

      He needs to be immediately suspended from the force, and have his status as a police officer reviewed, because he’s clearly incompetent and can’t handle his job.

  65. Rockslide says:

    I would have to say that they are both idiots. She was obviously trying to get a reaction just like this with her passive aggressiveness. She was actively trying to provoke the officers for her camera. I’m sure that her and her friends are ecstatic at the outcome and feel justified in their protest or whatever junk this was. Is it really martyrdom if you light your own fire?

    Equal however, is the idiocy of the police officer. There are so many better ways he could have handled the situation. Even the delivery of his words would have completely changed the situation. He overreacted in full and needs several doses of valium before he starts the day.

    I think it is wrong to label one a victim and the other the aggressor. They are both out of line in my book.

  66. Mark Frauenfelder says:

    If he sincerely apologized, a lot of the teasing would go away. But he is too insecure to do that, so instead he lashes out with a lawsuit. He’s an unhappy man.

  67. The Mudshark says:

    I think Officer Bubbles is a pretty cool guy, eh kills aleins and doesn’t afraid of anything.

  68. desiredusername says:

    a parallel reference

    By the way, the broader context of the story. link

  69. Anonymous says:

    “Officer Bubble needs a hug” might make a nice new meme

  70. zyodei says:

    When will people realize that this while system is totally insane. Giving a small group of people guns, and them hoping they will “protect” us. It’s so stupid! So insane! It’s an invitation to blatant criminality, as we see all over the world.

    Privatize the police – no government whatsoever. This doesn’t mean the government hires a company to do it, but rather completely stops being involved in the service 100%. If store and home owners in a neighborhood want police, they can hire them. That way, the police actually have an incentive to keep people happy. Might not be perfect, but it seems like the best way to prevent abuse and violation of stupid laws that I have heard of.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      You really, actually, honest-to-god just described Somalia.

      • zyodei says:

        To some extent, yes; but their police force collapsed in a war. I am not advocating any sort of war to overthrow the existing state/police monopolies, but simply building a new system to replace them.

    • adamnvillani says:

      Privatize the police – no government whatsoever.

      Thank you for answering the question, “How could this situation become more common and probably worse in many cases?”

      • zyodei says:

        Well, that is hardly a rebuttal.

        Frankly, fellow, that is simply a dogmatic answer.

        Who would pay for police to come into their neighborhoods and harass their residents or customers?

        How would this not act as a huge detriment to police abuse?

        If you have any sort of reasoned, logical argument, I welcome it!

        And this is, I suppose, is an anwer to Antinous:

        This system is much more similar to what we have in malls, stores, etc.

        We pay private guards for police protection of the stores.

        I have certainly heard stories of security guards, say, enforcing stupid laws.

        But how many times in your life have you heard of “security guard brutality?”

        I’d be willing to bet there are more instances of police brutality that have taken place only today than have taken place in the entire history of mall security guards.

        • Antinous / Moderator says:

          I’d be willing to bet there are more instances of police brutality that have taken place only today than have taken place in the entire history of mall security guards.

          Apparently your computer sends, but does not receive information. And you don’t own a television. Or read newspapers. Private security is much worse than public police forces, who are generally trained to some reasonable standard. What you have described is every oppressive oligarchy from the patricians of Rome to Hitler’s gangs to the warlords of Somalia.

          • zyodei says:

            I think you’re not quite following me here. Both of the first two examples you give are of highly centralized state apparatuses. The second are warlords in an active civil war. None of them bear any particular relevance to what I am mentioning.

            The thing is, in order for there to be an Oligarchy, there must be a strong state for the rich to take over. It is simply way to expensive to pay to create a whole police/state apparatus out of your own pocket.

            Perhaps an ultra rich person could create their own little fiefdom..but so what? Do you think that Warren Buffet could even afford to purchase the whole of Omaha, Nebraska? And he’s the richest person in the country.

            Everyone has some money, and millions of people own property. Thus this idea would, it seems, radically decentralize the provision of these services.

        • Anonymous says:

          Who would pay for police to come into their neighborhoods and harass their residents or customers?

          Every single person with an axe to grind against their neighbors and some money to spare, the way some people try to do with the real police forces?

          Forget the relatively centralized oppression of oligarchies. I don’t understand how what you’re proposing is different from people hiring armed gangs to protect them from the other armed gangs.

  71. social_maladroit says:

    Do a Google Video search for “Officer Bubbles”. Someone’s putting the cartoons back up on YouTube as fast as they’re being taken down.

    Geez, Officer Bubbles…did you really have to arrest Santa?

  72. Anonymous says:

    If I was Josephs’ lawyer, I’d show up to court in a suit made of bubble wrap.

    “Don’t you DARE pop it or you’re f**cking FIRED!!!”

  73. Anonymous says:

    Sounds like a very sad man. I’m in the UK but, having read a lot about this sort of thing across the pond, surely there is no way that YouTube can be held responsible? Is that what is called “safe harbour” (to use the English spelling!(. Also, since when is a bit of mockery and satire against an incident that actually happened (he cannot deny it) been grounds for legal action? If that was the case, there’s many a TV program or newspaper cartoon that would be a candidate. This item sounds like one of the biggest loads of rubbish I have heard in a long time. Streisand effect, anyone?

  74. Art says:

    After hearing from extremists on both sides of the isle and scrolling through the usual trolls, I think we capped out here at 160 comments. Good show!

    Remember. No one in these videos ever experiences a bad day after their vid goes viral. 15 long minutes of questionable fame is worth it’s weight in gold.

    My guess is that the officer and bubble blower will end up as partners on “Dancing with the Stars”.

  75. Fef says:

    For perspective, look no further than the officer right next to Officer Bubbles.

    Check when Bubbles escalates the drama by saying, “If the bubble touches me, you’re going to be arrested for assault” (0:22). I wish the camera hadn’t pulled away from her so quickly, because the other officer looks like she’s about to laugh — that’s the “are you f–king kidding me?” look.

    After that, she looks like she’s trying to maintain the awkward balance of not discrediting the authority of a partner who is acting like an idiot.

  76. Anonymous says:

    He should win. He’s indeed totally ridiculous

  77. Anonymous says:

    Bubbles = Mind Control

    Come on didn’t you feel better just before OB started talking?

  78. shoesoul says:

    The least this sorry excuse for a police officer deserves is the boot. For everyone one good cop, there are 10 like these. To think he still has the audacity to sue youtube for an outrageous sum of money! Seriously, you’re suing YOUTUBE? Haha. Give me a break man, they must not pay the cops that well up there in Canada for him to sue. How do you even come up with a sum of that magnitude, maybe it’s for every bubble the girl blew.

  79. fighttapowa says:

    Got charged with sexual assault while licking my lips as a female police officer walked by.

    In my defense, she was smokin.

  80. Blackbird says:

    Quid Pro Quo. He can have his lawsuit…song long as he’s charged with impersonating a ‘peace’ officer.

  81. fighttapowa says:

    In brilliant strategy, YouTube’s lawyers show up to court in suits made of bubble wrap.

    “Your Honor, if they pop imma LOSE IT!!!”

  82. Andrew W says:

    In googling about for the poor, delicate Mr Josephs, I see he’s posted as his job description “I collect Human garbage.”

    http://sistersagesmusings.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/officer-bubbles-fbprofile2.jpg

    Says much for his attitude towards the people he’s policing.

    To the person who said the woman should have just left: I may be wrong, but I think this incident happened during the kettling.

    She’s annoying, yes, but annoying isn’t an arrestable offence.

    • knoxblox says:

      If that truly is his profile, then he must have been living life to the fullest and apparently forgot to laugh along the way.

  83. Anonymous says:

    If I were a chief of police and I saw a video of an officer acting like this — like a fucking idiot — he would be fired. That’s about all there is to that in my mind. This guy is a fucking idiot. In my opinion, that officer should not be allowed to be a peace officer or in any way put in an office of the public trust. I’m not kidding about that. I don’t set the bar very high, but this behavior is reprehensibly stupid. This guy appears to be a jackboot fucking idiot thug. I hope he loses his lawsuit and spends the rest of his life in abject poverty.

  84. Anonymous says:

    Officer Bubbles can do what everybody else who doesn’t like a comment has to do. Report it for moderation. If entire nationalities, ethnicities, minorities and sexes have to appeal for the removal of hate speech, why should mister sensitivity compel special treatment?

    I am guessing that Canada has some equivalent of a right to assemble and free speech, since he seems to have an acute sense of what is unprotected and libelous speech. Youtube’s legal response should be three words. My heart bleeds. No way should that dude be given anyone’s real identity, he’s a typical unstable civil servant. He should consider himself lucky he doesn’t get canned if they have to pay for a false arrest suit. Get him counseling and be done with it.

  85. Lucifer says:

    I don’t agree with the girl being arrested. However, I do believe that in the verbal exchange shown in the clip that the officer was in fact respectful. He was forceful but gave a clear and pretty reasonable explanation as to why he did not want her to continue blowing bubbles near the officers’ face and gave a pretty simple warning about what would happen if she kept doing it.

    • dragonfrog says:

      You got a funny definition of respect there, Lucifer. If you “respected” me in that way, I would immediately write you off as a d-bag unworthy of even a second of my time.

      • sgnp says:

        Yes. It’s pretty obvious that if you take out the “assault” and “arrest” terms he’s talking to her like one might a child:

        “Put it awaaaaay.”
        “The discussion’s over.”
        “Knock it off.”

        English doesn’t have the distinction of formal/informal speech like the Romance Languages do, but talking to an adult like a child is thought to be pretty disrespectful.

        I’d say that he doesn’t have the tools to ask an adult to stop blowing bubbles near him, so he’s entering a parent role.

        This would have gone much better if he’d let the first officer handle this.

  86. Anonymous says:

    What if she was simply breathing on him? Would that be an arrestable offense?

  87. Godott says:

    The “young girl” description is purely my error — not Corey’s. I have a daughter the same age, who even looks similar, so I projected my paternal relationship on to how I perceived and described this young woman. To those who are offended, your point is well taken — and the lesson is learned.

    • Mark Frauenfelder says:

      Good on you, Godot. If officer bubbles showed 1/2 the humility and decency you demonstrated here then no one would be making fun of him.

  88. Chang says:

    That cop is an asshole. Ain’t no one going to give him respect for being afraid of bubbles. Just look at the female cop. She’s smiling until Officer Joseph’s begins to shit his pants about the bubble girl. Sheesh

  89. bcsizemo says:

    So I’m gonna be the asshat that sees the glass half the other way.

    I agree that the officer is being rude and bullying the “girl”…

    But, at the same time he gave her an order to stop blowing the bubbles. Which she didn’t comply with. And was arrested.

    Now that is over stepping his bounds, yes, but he told her to do something she failed to do it, and look what happens.

    It’s not like she was doing a sit in or something. If she was just sitting there, no talking, no moving…then yeah he provoked the whole thing. But this is simply passive aggressive behavior even if she didn’t intend for it to come off that way. In reality if you fail to obey a police officer you are going to get arrested 99% of the time.

    I’m not saying he acted in a way that I want to see police behave. But given the current actions of most police this is what I’ve come to expect.

    • deckard68 says:

      “But, at the same time he gave her an order to stop blowing the bubbles. Which she didn’t comply with. And was arrested.”

      Actually, she did comply, and was not arrested at that time for bubbles. Would have been quite a fun day in court if she had. Later in the day when the police did a mass arrest as a show of force, she was one of those swept up.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      he gave her an order to stop blowing the bubbles.

      You’re okay with the cops just making shit up and having the power to enforce their delusions and fantasies?

      • Blackbird says:

        I don’t know if its the same everywhere…but here, the law is “Failure to obey a LAWFUL command” … people usually forget about the ‘lawful’ part when they talk about this ….

        • Anonymous says:

          So it is against the law to blow bubbles where you live?

          The police can’t make up the rules, they just enforce them, bud.

          • Blackbird says:

            That was in response to something said earlier. I was simply making the point that “failure to follow commands” is NOT what the law states, it’s ‘failure to follow LAWFUL commands” … and no, it’s not illegal to blow bubbles here in Toronto … Kite flying was prohibited though … seriously…

            People seem to think that ANYTHING an officer says you should do…but they have to be within the law in telling you what to do.

  90. AirPillo says:

    > What does the scouter say about his Streisand level?

    > IT’S OVER NINE THOUSAAAAAND!!!

  91. Robbo says:

    In filing this ridiculous lawsuit Constable Josephs proves himself to be a whining, self-important thuggish dick. The only thing he’s gonna get out of this is more ridicule. Whatever lawyer he’s paying to pursue this should have advised him of that. It’s sad and it’s funny. Can’t wait to get my own official Constable Josephs Bubble Wand. Yo, Constable Josephs – blow me.

  92. Anonymous says:

    Why is he still employed?

  93. Anonymous says:

    My boss is a chemical engineer I and work with two other chemical engineers and a chemist, and I can assure you that soap and detergent are two different things.

  94. Anonymous says:

    Quick, someone post a video making fun of him for suing cause his feeling got hurt.

    He didn’t have a problem arresting people and humiliating them for trivial (or even legal) actions.

  95. Anonymous says:

    It is an abuse of power when police can “order” one to stop doing something that is perfectly legal. Soap bubbles are not going to do any harm to the officer and his partner any more than they harm my 7 year old niece when we play with them. They are TOYS, for heaven’s sake.

  96. Anonymous says:

    >> To those who are offended, your point is well taken — and the lesson is learned.

    Hey, this is the internet. There’s no maturity allowed on the internet. Now go indignantly start a flame war or something.

  97. Kerouac says:

    His threat was to arrest her for assault if one of her bubbles landed on him. That alone should earn this guy a lifetime of mockitude!

  98. Bulone says:

    There’s no doubt that what she doing is provocative act and wrong. But, if you look things in perspective, he is a police officer on duty and he should have kept things professional and maintain his composure like the lady officer rather than being cantankerous. He isn’t common civilian standing at a bus stop and somebody comes to blows bubble in his face to snap in such manner. If he were wise enough, he would know better to refrain from acting unprofessional especially when tons of camera aiming at him.

    • The Mudshark says:

      All other things aside blowing bubbles is a playful and innocent thing to do and she probably was even thinking it would remove some tension from the situation. Her startled look when that huge guy suddenly starts threatening her would indicate as much.

      I don´t know about you, but I most certainly wouldn´t “snap” for someone blowing a few soap bubbles my way at a bus stop. Would you, seriously? Provocative act? Give me a break!

      • Art says:

        Hey Mudshark.

        Just for clarification. If you were on a NYC subway and this guy was in plainclothes standing next to you, I GUARANTEE that you wouldn’t dare blow bubbles in his direction.

        In NYC,it’s just rude and dangerous to your health.

      • Bulone says:

        “All other things aside blowing bubbles is a playful and innocent thing to do and she probably was even thinking it would remove some tension from the situation.”
        I don’t understand how would anyone expect tension be removed from blowing bubbles in person’s face?(Unless, of course, she is a mentally challenge person.)I think, her startle face is just an attempt to cover-up her act as an innocent one. As I said earlier, that doesn’t give officer bubble the right to act as a complete jerk.

        • sgnp says:

          I would absolutely love to see an influx of cops who can take a joke like the female officer at the beginning.

          Officer: What’s your name?
          Protester: My name is a mystery.
          Officer: Oh? (smiles at Officer Bubbles)
          Protester: No…I’ve got nothing to hide.

          Bubble floats past Officer’s right shoulder, where Officer Bubbles would be, off-camera. (We can see his arm at :13)

          Officer Bubbles: If [the/a] bubble touches me, you’re going to be arrested for assault.

          I love the delighted look on the female officer’s face before the “bubble touches me” part. Then there’s a brief melting from, “This is kind of fun,” to “oh, here he goes.” I get the impression that she might have thought it may have gone differently.

          I think the people who are calling bullshit on the “I was just innocently blowing bubbles to make everyone in the crowd feel happy and then the cops decided to mess with me,” interpretation are doing so because they’re putting themselves in the protester’s position.

          The cops ask you who you are, you say that your name is “a mystery,” and then you blow a bubble past the right shoulder of one towards where another one is standing. (:22)

          I’ve been caught up in whimsy before, and I have a hard time believing she didn’t think, “Hey, I’m going to blow a bubble at the cop!” I’m not saying she thought, “I’m going to get arrested to prove a point,” but just that she knew she was blowing a bubble at a cop.

          For those who like to quibble over these things, there could be a second bubble blower, or that a bubble could have been swirling around and then happen to land in that position. At the very least, she blows bubbles in the direction of the officers down an empty alley at (:10)

          Officer Bubbles says she’s baiting them, kind of an “I’m not touching you,” game one might play with their sibling so they’ll get in trouble if they smack you.

          The other interpretation is that she’s engaged in a bit of clowning for the crowd. In that case, the reason it’s funny is because she’s blowing bubbles if not directly at then at least between the police officers, an act of mischievous defiance.

          The things about cops, at least in my experience with cops in Illinois and Missouri during my high school and college years, is that they don’t like to guess what your intentions are, and they don’t like ambiguity in situations. That’s why attempts at humor and jokes fall flat with them so often. Heck, just being overly talkative can get you barked at.

          While I think the female officer’s take on this is great, Officer Bubbles is taking the track with which I’m more familiar.

          When I was in my teens and twenties, if a police officer asked you your name and you gave a goofy answer, he or she would immediately adopt a kind of, “Angry Parent” tone. You need to take what’s happening seriously, they’d say, because you can be funny all the way to jail. It worked on me every time, and it seems exactly like what he’s going for here.

          I always took it to be a way to kind of dispel the magic that fun can produce, rewrite the narrative to a simple one where they were in charge.

          I’m actually really curious about this. Did those of you who say Officer Bubbles should be fired for pulling this authoritative tone grow up dealing with cops who talked differently when they felt they were being messed with?

          I’m down with the idea of, “We need to live in an enlightened society where cops need to be able to take a joke now that it’s 2010, so let’s make this guy an example,” but it seems strange to me that this would shock anybody.

        • The Mudshark says:

          I don’t understand how would anyone expect tension be removed from blowing bubbles in person’s face?(Unless, of course, she is a mentally challenge person.)

          In the same way giving flowers to cops at a demonstration could be expected to remove tension (one would hope). Color me mentally challenged then for not recognizing that a soap bubble floating in my general direction is serious business.

          • sgnp says:

            Things like blowing bubbles at or handing flowers to the police are great protest tools because if they get hostile they’re undermining their authority by overreacting and if they do nothing they’re undermining their authority by standing there looking foolish.

            Once she was asked for her name and she made a joke instead of answering, he felt that his authority and the authority of the female officer was being challenged and had to regain control. He didn’t feel threatened by the soap bubbles, he was threatened by the fact that she wasn’t taking them seriously.

            While I wouldn’t go so far as to use the term “mentally challenged,” I’m jaded enough to this process. If her “I was just trying to make people happy,” answers aren’t at least partially an act, and she REALLY had no idea that this would be considered provocative to someone who thrives on authority, she seems to possess an innocence normally seen in cartoon animals that teach people how to spell.

            I honestly think his reaction would have been the same if the protester had made him a balloon animal or held up a kitten for him to pet.

          • The Mudshark says:

            To me the problem seems to be that people like officer bubbles are concerned primarily with enforcing their authority, not with doing their job. It´s people like that to whom soap bubbles, flowers, balloon animals and kittens would probably all seem equally provocative, which is not a disposition I would prefer the people entrusted with a society´s protection and wellbeing to have. In any case I would have a bloody hard time taking them seriously myself.

          • sgnp says:

            To make it even simpler, people like Officer Bubbles think that enforcing their authority is *necessary* to do their job. They see the two as synonymous and therefore can’t conceive that they could ever conflict.

        • dragonfrog says:

          Bulone, where on earth do you get the idea she was blowing bubbles into his or anyone else’s face?

          She was blowing bubbles into the air. She asked the nearest police officer, who was the one most likely to be touched by a stray soap bubble, if she minded, and the officer said that no, she didn’t mind.

          Officer Bubbles wasn’t even anywhere near the bubbles, and she certainly wasn’t blowing them in his face – he came over specifically to yell at her and threaten her, even though he wasn’t affected by them. If he really was worried about the bubbles, he could just have said something like “Excuse me ma’am, I’d like you to stop blowing bubbles because I’m worried someone might get soap in their eyes.”

          It would still be a ridiculous request, but at least he would look less like a jerk.

          Really, let’s get some perspective – if the bubbles were really dangerous, if they really do hurt even a little, on the off chance you did get one in your eye, why do we consider them perfectly safe for four-year-old kids to play with? I have spent plenty of time around little kids playing with bubble wands, and never once seen one of them complain of soap in their eyes. If toddlers can handle themselves safely around pretty soap bubbles, shouldn’t cops be able to do so?

  99. Anonymous says:

    One of the best parts about this is that the random guy that walks through and lectures the cop is a King st. lawyer in Toronto! I wonder what his take on all this is…

  100. Anonymous says:

    What lawyer would file this frivolous complaint?

  101. A.Lwin says:

    I have a question, since when did police organizations or governments start taking lessons or modeling themselves after Germany 1938?

    I come from a country where not only the police but the entire government is corrupt (but at least that’s expected by everyone who lives there), never thought these so called developed countries like US, Canada, UK, etc would be no better off.

  102. Felton / Moderator says:

    He was afraid one of the little bubbles would collide with his ego, popping it like the overinflated bubble it appears to be.

Leave a Reply