At the risk of being tarred and feathered
, I had to add my two cents. Having been on both sides of this type of issue (I was a street cop then a criminal investigator for 25 years), I can kind of see both sides. On the chaser's side, we all know (or maybe should know) where the actual "danger" zone is and how close we can get without being in jeopardy. We go places where normal people think everyone dies, and think nothing of it because we have the training, experience, and the love of Jesus in our eyes. We do provide a valuable service to the NWS, Emergency Management, and the local media by being the purveyors of "ground truth" of the storm environment. Having said that, local police and sheriff's deputies usually don't have even basic spotter training knowledge, and don't really understand that chasers are doing anything constructive. What I'm going to say next is under the assumption that the storm was in close proximity to the parking area. If not, then the deputy was probably way off base...not knowing for sure, here goes. Keeping traffic moving and limiting "rubbernecks" in an area impacted by some hazard (traffic accident, fire scene, storm damage, etc) is an important part of maintaining public safety. Even though it sounds like BS that the deputy wanted to keep other people from stopping and clogging the area, think about it...how many times do we get followed by John Q Citizen (or sometimes a whole convoy of them) in a storm environment just because we have a couple of antennas or some weather instruments on our vehicles? Happens all of the time. If other people were pulling over to see what was going on, the deputy should have rightly been concerned about traffic problems. Impeded traffic flow can limit escape options for drivers in case of worsening conditions or a turning storm. In the past, I asked people to leave areas where the public had full legal access but their presence was a possible hazard or impediment. I never had to curse people out or "slam" them against the car to gain compliance, but then maybe the deputy didn't take the Dale Carnegie course. If the deputy asked the guy to move, and the request was refused, the deputy was well within his legal rights to arrest the guy. According to the Texas Penal Code, anyone who refuses to comply with a "reasonable request" to vacate the area....not necessarily an order or demand...of a police officer of firefighter who is discharging their duties in "maintaining public safety by dispersing those to maintain public safety by dispersing those gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire, riot, or other hazard" is guilty of a Class B Misdemeanor. Keeping people moving out of an area of a hazard, regardless of their motives for being there, is part of maintaining the public safety.
It sounds like the deputy may have gone about it all wrong, especially if he was being verbally abusive, etc, but the unfortunate reality is when a police officer tells you to "move along" you need to do it. B*tch about it later, call the deputy "Barney" to your cohorts, complain to the Sheriff or the County Judge, etc, but plain and simple...move on. It is the responsibility of the police officer to protect the safety of the public. If he felt that restricting the use of a parking area normally open to the public was necessary to protect the public and keep others from creating a traffic hazard, that is his call. This is the same authority the police use to block access to areas after a storm. How many times do we as chasers "sweet talk" our way past roadblocks to do damage surveys or continue a chase so we can pass on information to the NWS, etc? The only reason we get through is the cops feel like being nice to us. They don't have to allow us to pass, even though the roads are public property.
This is how the Penal Code lays it out:
§ 42.03. OBSTRUCTING HIGHWAY OR OTHER PASSAGEWAY.
(a) A person commits an offense if, without legal privilege or
authority, he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
1) obstructs a highway, street, sidewalk, railway,
waterway, elevator, aisle, hallway, entrance, or exit to which the
public or a substantial group of the public has access, or any other
place used for the passage of persons, vehicles, or conveyances,
regardless of the means of creating the obstruction and whether the
obstruction arises from his acts alone or from his acts and the acts
of others; or
(2) disobeys a reasonable request or order to move
issued by a person the actor knows to be or is informed is a peace
officer, a fireman, or a person with authority to control the use of
the premises:
(A) to prevent obstruction of a highway or any of
those areas mentioned in Subdivision (1); or
(B) to maintain public safety by dispersing those
gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire, riot, or other hazard.
(b) For purposes of this section, "obstruct" means to render
impassable or to render passage unreasonably inconvenient or
hazardous.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.
Like I said, I will probably be tarred and feathered, but what the hell. A little controversy is good for the soul.
And to the person this vehicle belongs to, sorry, not trying to single you out.
