Need Wasabi - Sign PrankRecently, I came across this video while I was doing important research on police accountability issues wasting time on the internets. The original video, which can also be seen below, features Greg Benson (a middle aged guy who likes to have fun, but isn’t quite as funny as Ed Bassmaster) of “Mediocre Films” holding up silly signs on the side of a freeway off ramp, proclaiming such things as, “Ain’t No Skank (referring to himself), Free Cardboard, Penis (for no reason), Need Change for a Hundred, Will Work for $150k/Year Plus Medical and Dental,” among others. As advertised in the title, it is actually quite funny right up until the point where a cop shows up and issues Greg and Matt Orf, who is filming at the time, $400 worth of tickets for “trespassing on the freeway.”

It’s rather obvious in the first video embedded below, which is a sort of “behind the scenes” version of the prank video, that the California Highway Patrol trooper who stops them and issues the tickets is basing them on ridiculous and possibly false pretenses. First, he tells them they are trespassing because they aren’t allowed “on the freeway.” At best, that is a technicality, since they are at the off ramp, not the actual freeway. As proof, he points to a sign on the other side of the road, which is obviously intended to keep people from walking up the on ramp and onto the freeway, and then a “wrong way” sign that even more obviously is intended to keep cars from driving the wrong way up the off ramp (when that is pointed out by Greg, he replies, “it is a sign”).

He also states, “we like to stick ’em them in jail, too,” when Greg explains that they often see homeless people I ALMOST GOT ARRESTEDpanhandling there. That’s not exactly shocking, since it is rare when police miss an opportunity to harass, arrest, or abuse (and even kill) the homeless. Bullies like easy targets and homeless people rarely have lawyers representing them or any resources to fight back with. More often than not, they are willing to plead down to get out of jail as quickly as possible, rather than taking bogus harassment tickets to court. In fact, as is the case with Greg and Matt, most people in general will just accept these sort of tickets and pay them without really even looking into the true legalities involved. Unfortunately, that easy source of revenue is somewhat of a self-perpetuating cycle, which makes cops more likely to issue tickets like these for the easy money they represent. That’s why you should always know your rights and film the police.

“I ALMOST GOT ARRESTED” (Behind the Scenes Video)

Hilarious Signs Prank (Busted by COPS!)

ORF SIGNS (Prank BUSTED by the COPS!!!)” (This is Matt Orf’s version of the “Sign Prank,” which I don’t personally think is as funny, but who am I to judge.)

This is “Signs” by Tesla, just because it’s kind of a cool song.

More From “Mediocre Films”

MAIN CHANNEL: http://youtube.com/MediocreFilms
2nd CHANNEL: http://youtube.com/mediocrefilms2
YESHMIN CHANNEL: http://youtube.com/YESHMIN
WEBSITE: http://www.mediocrefilms.com
GOOGLE+: http://gplus.to/gcb
FACEBOOK: http://facebook.com/mediocrefilms
TWITTER: http://twitter.com/mediocrefilms
ASK GREG QUESTIONS: http://VYou.com/gregbenson

copblock-banner-320x90-knowyourrights

65 Comments

  1. Wow
    “Penis” sign

    And you think that’s funny
    Now You can see why we don’t take anything you do seriously.

    Childish

    1. Get the fuck over yourself T bag.

      1. Yeah he should. All of us engage in childish humor. To take this to “Now You can see why we don’t take anything you do seriously..” is, well, childish.

        Then counterpose “childish” to “child-like”.

        1. Ray:
          You’re right. It was more child-like.

          But:
          Homosexual sex obsessions.
          “Penis” signs
          Giving people “the finger”.

          Real grown up stuff.
          It reinforces the whole immaturity of thought thing the CBers demonstrate.
          “Nazi’s”
          “the Police State”
          “Militarized Police”
          “5000 police related deaths a year”

          All myths. All CBer go-too’s.
          Immaturity of thought, immunity of action.

          Typical of theCBer though.
          Caring only of themselves…..caring not about the families driving by. Do they have to care? Of course not. But that’s why nobody cares about them. They disrespect everyone else….caring only about self.
          It’s a great example of the “Only my rights matter” mindset.

          1. Actually, I wasn’t saying it was child-like. Child-like is the good qualities, the innocence. Childish is the other side.

            I’ve seen police humor, some gallows and understandable, the rest mostly childish. Your doing cognitive dissonance combined with a tribal confirmation bias.

            When a cop shoots someone with a cellphone who was that cop really caring about? He didn’t identify a real threat and obviously didn’t take enough time to do so. Get off your high horse.

            Everything you write about CBer’s applies to cops. One subculture attacking another. But one kills by mistake and gets a pass.

            Now to help you on your way, callousness is a quality of police. It’s not something to be proud of whatsoever.

          2. Ray:
            Wow.

            Nope nope nope.

            Callousness.
            Wow.
            From that goofy statement I’ll assume you think we should all hold hands and sing Grateful Dead songs?

            By comparison to most…..I have a very high EQ. I get it. But YOU would likely think that I’m a callous mo fo. Ex-narco guy. Former SWAT operator. I promise that if I have to smash you face in right now…..that I’d never blink and sleep good tonight. It’s not “callousness”. It’s more of allowing you to make your free will choices….but also holding you accountable for those decisions.

            But as for the CBers actions….they are child-like in their understanding of their own actions. And the thought of them being able understand something that is beyond themselves is laughable at very best. Theirs is at best a TV and movie understanding. (As is yours for the most part)

            Shoots someone with a cellphone? Depends on how it goes down. Tamar Rice is an excellent example.
            While his death is tragic….the officer who pulled that trigger clearly did the right thing. He CBers and this kids parents are of course blaming the police. Yet where were they when he was out there in at park threatening everyone else? If the one person in the longer version of the video that walks by while Rice is pointing his gun at them…..if that person had been carrying and shot this kid….do you think they should be charged? I don’t.

            A couple of weeks ago a shut down some idiot CBer on the thread about the guy “tac’ing” out and the strapping on his AR and storming down the street to the local PD.
            I asked that CBer if he had been carrying and that guy walked up to him and his family if he would perceive him as a threat. I was shocked when he openly admitted that he would see the guy as a potential threat and that if he was carrying….he’d grab his gun.

            You simply can’t get over the words of your fellow CBers. And even though Pete Tried to distance himself and even went so far as to claim its was a government conspiracy…..but the CBers are openly hostile and violent. They call for open violence…and not just against the police…but against anyone that doesn’t agree with their point of view.
            So when the police react to what they are presented with…remember that CBer call,for,violence….constant and endless resistance….they call,for others to intercede in any and all police actions.

            So overall……nope nope nope.

          3. “Operator”. LOL. That says as much about your fake ass as any other bullshit you could spew out.

          4. liar guy:
            Whatever dude.
            Nice to see that you yet again can’t stay on point

          5. I don’t think anyone believes you are or were a cop, maybe mall security

          6. WD:
            It matters not if you beleive me about my profession or experience or not….
            Everything I write is easily variable. Not by Alex Jones and his ilk….but by real sources

          7. if you were any part of SWAT, I hope somebody skins you slowly.

          8. Get your knife ready.

            I was the guy you hateed the most….I breached 90% of the time.

          9. It won’t be me T. That would be a threat. I will laugh when your grandchildren are hacked pieces and fed to dogs, but not as much as when your children are freed of their sight with a red hot spoon.

          10. I don’t believe the Grateful Dead did either “Kumbaya” or “We are the World”.

            Your paragraph starting with “By comparison to most…” is an example of callousness. You rationalize it with this paraphrase “he made the choice”. But, obviously callousness is in all the ways police act. The guy that died in the back of a police car because the two cops ignored his call for medical attention was an example of callousness. I explain it to you if you need it.

          11. Hit the button too soon.

            “You simply can’t get over the words of your fellow CBers.” I don’t have fellow CBers, I’m not a CBer. I comment here like you do. Given that you confuse me with CBers, I think everything you write with “CBer” in a sentence is likely confused.

          12. Ray:
            Of course. You back the CBer ways…thinking they’re good. You comment all the time how bad the police are.. You even March right along when they start with the goofiness about the P—-e S—e. But you don’t go out “activating” like they do….so you aren’t one of them.
            If that helps you sleep better at night……ok then.

            The Grateful Dead comment was a jab about the open dope love on this site. Way to catch it.

            Callousneess is the way police act.
            That’s really quite funny.
            Is it callous for me not to care about your feelings? Or care not to listen to you when you complaint bout something you don’t loke? Or listen as you bitch about the “victimless crimes” ?
            Or….should I look to protect the rights of those being affected by your actions?
            I pointed out on a different but recent thread how YOU brought up about “balancing rights”. I’ve written about just that on multiple occasions and you ….in your typical ignorance….mocked me because I wrote it. In other words….it GOOD when you say it….but BAD when I say it.
            Now…..I will definetly and gladly point out that the police officers in the field are rapidly loosing any discretion. And that’s really bad. But it’s the result of ill thought out lawsuits and court decisions. More and more state statutes and PD policies now have “shall” written in. Meaning….the officer can’t take any other actions.
            So what you see as “callous”…..is really just doing exactly what we are asked to do.
            The absolutely overwhelming amount of people hate activist like are shown on this site. Why? Because they don’t think its funny to have to look at some idiot holding a “penis” sign or take their kids out of the park because someone thought it was cool to write “fuck the police” everywhere.

          13. I know who the Grateful Dead are and I know their songs (Truckin’…livin’ on reds, vitamin C, and cocaine, or just Casey Jones). I also know you obsess over dope love to the point of where it’s all about dope love. I had fun with you. Truckin’…

            “You comment all the time how bad the police are..” Yes, this site is about when police are bad, from the viewpoint of others that aren’t the police. There are bad police, bad policy and procedures, and bad police culture. That doesn’t mean all police are bad, all policies and procedures are bad, or that everything about police culture is bad. I like very professional police, especially those that don’t say I’m seizing the camera as evidence, then delete the evidence and hand the camera back. You seem to me to think that it’s all really white knight, I think your ego is involved there, except for the rare incident. I see that as cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias. We differ.

            splitting…

          14. Your entire paragraph on why you aren’t callous is why you are callous. Again callous is letting a guy die in the back seat because you’ve heard it before. It’s insensitivity. Doesn’t matter what it’s based on, because that basis is the callous. What’s a callous? Another example of callousness is tightening the handcuffs to a point you know it will cause pain, even injury, and then ignoring the plea to loosen them.

            “Balancing rights”, a nice phrase, one you use as a bludgeon of self-righteousness like you’re wrapped in the holy cloth of the shroud of Jesus. I’ve asked you before to give the rights you are balancing when you deny rights, you’ve never responded. Yes, I think it’s bad when you use it because I think you’re enforcing you’re own prejudices as law because you have that power. I’m going to continue to use it to rub it in your face. Maybe you’ll actually ponder…

            I agree with you on descretion, but not if you mean it in the way you use “balancing rights”. If you mean it as to whether you arrest someone, I agree.

            ‘So what you see as “callous”…..is really just doing exactly what we are asked to do.” No, that’s not a callous or callous. That’s doing what the legal system requires. Callousness is your personal behavior, and in the aggregate the culture of cops. There’s a whole wide world of people that neither act nor think like your sub-culture. And, shockingly, they aren’t criminals. They’re actually good, ethical, moral people. Without being callous.

            “The absolutely overwhelming amount of people hate activist like are shown on this site…” Read, for G*d’s sake, read the social history of the US. We have a Bill of Rights to keep the majority from making it only what they want as a right by their prejudice at the time. You keep making that argumentum ad populum argument as if it isn’t a fallacy given the Bill of Rights. Don’t confuse graffiti with free speech.

            I noticed you made it all about the police. I have a feeling it isn’t “fuck the police”, it’s just “fuck”. I bet parents in a park with their kids would be just as offended by any phrase with “fuck”. Is it always just about you?

          15. Bludgeon. Nice. You used the same term just last week shit brick.

          16. Because you continue to bludgeon. I do agree it’s a nice term for what you do.

          17. You’re the 2nd biggest liar that posts on this fucking site, douchebag. LOL, such a fail, you can’t be best at anything.

          18. The guy makes “funny” vids for YouTube , he submits one video and you throw him in your “CBers who are always wrong no matter what” group. I hope some families did see and had a conversation about freedom of speech. You act like you care about other people but unless it’s someone you know or someone that looks like they are gonna invade Poland, I doubt you really do. In another post you were calling people trash that you were taking out. You have allowed yourself to dehumanize the public you swore to protect ( I don’t think yur really a cop) which is why more people are shooting back, the days of everyone trusting ” the boys in blue” are over and that’s the fault of ignorant fools like you. And also you suck.

          19. Modern police don’t care about anybody but themselves.

          20. Sorry people are misinformed at amount of police related deaths per year t and your correct it’s not 5000 it’s only 1000 citizens per year.

          21. steve:
            “It’s only 1000 citizens per year”
            Really…..where did you get THAT number?

  2. Nothing screams “I have no idea what I am talking about” more than when every fucking comment on yoru page is a picture comment. Take that feature away and see what type of well informed feedback you will receive. Idiots.

    1. So without the videos the words would have more worth?

      Could you point me to the pictures? If you meant the videos, look up.

  3. He was trespassing. I’m sure they have a lot of people who are ticketed. As the guy said, “An expensive youtube video”.

    1. Is it possible for a member of the public to trespass on public property? Logically, no. But that doesn’t stop a fat boy in a tan clownsuit from enforcing absurd, contradictory legal fictions

      1. It also won’t stop JC from salivating all over the cops penis.

      2. It maybe “public property” but the the law says you can’t stand there so he got a ticket. If you go to a state or city owned zoo, You can’t go into the cages to pet the lions. Though, I wish you would.

        1. A ticket for standing there. Fat boy sure earned his donut money that day

          1. If the law said you couldn’t scratch your ass, the authoritarians would still scratch their collective ass, but claim they didn’t because they always follow laws.

          2. You don’t understand. They would be prosecuting the scratches, not the person with the scratches.

        2. In your case, it is a wonderful thing that access to the animals is not generally allowed. You and your video camera should never be allowed around animals.

      3. Yes it is because public property doesn’t mean accessible to all whenever they like. A nuclear waste dump is on public property.

        What i don’t see is that he was on “the freeway”. He was standing on a corner.

        1. The term “public” is an abstraction that has no static meaning and can mean different things in different contexts. When the people who create such legal fictions use the term “public property”, they are usually talking about property that belongs to the people who call themselves “the government”.

          In order to believe that this organization should operate things like nuclear waste dumps or hazardous materials facilities, one probably needs to believe in the inherent authority of this organization over him. So if one does not believe in this inherent authority, he will unlikely believe in the ambiguous concept of public property.

          If the problem is individuals wandering onto government-owned ”public property” containing weapons or dangerous materials, the simple solution to this problem is to make association with this organization (government) voluntary. At that point, very few individuals would continue to finance or cooperate with this organization. The organization would be forced to cease its operations. Consequently, facilities containing weapons and dangerous materials would be acquired by private capital, razed, repurposed, upgraded, or whatever. Now, the private property owners will determine who is, and isn’t, allowed in these facilities. Voila, no more problem

          1. Ideologies have such a tendency to the absurd.

            You do realize that by the time the private individual or the private organization realized they had to shut down, the rest of us would be dying from small pox? You do know the history of both private and government mining of uranium? If not, ask the Dineh in Arizona.

            We have a history of both private and public bad decisions. Nitrates and phosphates destroy rivers and lakes, but no individual using them for purpose thinks beyond that purpose. It took government to see it (think of it as an aggrement of individuals). Yet government makes laws and pursues enforcement like an individual, it doesn’t look at the true costs either. It pursues for purpose without thinking beyond that purpose. It has no idea of the true cost anymore than the individual, it only knows purpose.

            Try ideology with a mix of pragmatism.

          2. You two are too funny.
            Both thinking that they are the smartest guys in the room and both relatively clueless.

          3. The only person that has a hang-up about being the smartest person in the room is you. You came here by self-pronouncement as the bringer of truth to the rest of us. That ego can only survive if it can maintain it’s the smartest person in the room. If it isn’t then it fails as the truth-bringer. It has no superiority.

            I came to argue. I didn’t bring truth with me. Argument can make truth.

          4. Said guy who nobody takes seriously

          5. People also have a tendency to be absurd. For example, the belief that some government is “pragmatic” but no government or ubiquitous government is absurd. What is the correct percentage of government? Enough to make you feel fuzzy and safe but not enough that you lose all of your property and your life to it?

            Do you want a government employee styling your hair, repairing the brakes on your car, or perhaps removing a tumor from your brain? Is there any reason to think they are competent and/or virtuous in doing the things you think they should be doing but less so when it comes to fixing the plumbing in your house?

            It’s well-established at this point that the banks and corporations that government purports to regulate have themselves become master. Through government, these corporate entities carve out whole markets for themselves, leaving nothing for the little guy. Corporations are more interested in lobbying government for favors and contracts than they are interested in providing a better, healthier, safer product to the consumer. They pollute the environment or crash the economy, and pay minuscule fines, because the fines are cheaper than providing a viable product or service to the marketplace

          6. “What is the correct percentage of government?Enough to make you feel fuzzy and safe but not enough that you lose all of your property and your life to it?”. Yes.

            I think when you argue from the extremes you forget the middle.

            I’ve bought plenty of viable products and services. My Mac is 9 years old and still going strong, my 52 inch flatscreen is still going strong, and both my cars are safer than those from the 90s (it’s the dominate reason why death and injury on USA highways have gone down even with more miles driven by a larger population).

          7. You failed to provide a correct percentage. If an army of government butchers, bakers, and candle stick makers marched through your town, would you salute and tear-up?

          8. It’s a fools errand to try to create a measure that the fool can point to to say “that’s the correct percentage”. Well, the extremists can because it usually apporaoching zero or 100. It’s not a correct measure because it can’t be measured in percentages.

            Since you like percentages, give yours first. You won’t, even second.

  4. I would bet he could get that thrown out. Sounds like a bunch of bull.

  5. Land of the free were you can trespass on your own ((state)) land on a highway paid for by you… for your use….. ummm wtf?

    1. That would be a good argument if all public property was open to all. Hey, everyone should have access to munition dumps or nuclear waste facilities.

      1. Your point presumes that a law is necessary to discourage a man from taking a bath in a vat of nuclear waste

        1. You’re presuming an idiot wouldn’t. Those laws are in place to deal with the idiots, those aren’t the laws that are based on the moral code we should all know (stealing, murder, etc., the ones truly about ignorance of the law being no excuse). I presume no one would drive the wrong way on a freeway for 10s of miles but Phoenix metro has had too many deaths in the last year to think that right.

          No I presume that people believing they have a right to wander around a nuclear waste site because it’s public property represent a real safety issue to the rest of us. Because they are idiots.

          I could have used biohazard sites.

          1. No law has ever stopped an idiot (or a fanatic) from breaking the law

          2. Oh, I agree. It’s never stopped murder or theft.. But it does give the guards at the gate a reason to stop you from sauntering into a nuclear waste dump or a biohazard facility because it’s public property so you have a right to enter.

            Wasn’t this about a right to enter any public property?

          3. Yes, and we’ve determined that there is no such thing as public property

          4. No, we’ve determined that there are gradations to the meaning of “public property” and free access by anyone whenever they choose. Really, if a biohazard lab was public property anyone of us should just be able to take our own private tour whenever we feel like it?

          5. If I don’t have complete access to it, then it isn’t my property; it belongs to another individual or individuals who built and operate it.

            This concept of involuntary property ownership to which you seem to subscribe creates toxic, unworkable relationships. For instance, apparently according to you, I am part owner in a biohazard lab to which I am barred access. I believe I am entitled to a full refund, having never wanted a biohazard lab in the first place – particularly a biohazard lab that refuses me – its co-owner! – entry

          6. Either/or is always simpler.

      2. Horrible argument and you know it.

        1. If I didn’t see the arguments from extremes, or excluded middle, I wouldn’t bring up biohazard facilities or nuclear waste dumps. If those areas were freely accessed by all some idiot would do a lot of harm.

          Public property has gradations of allowed access and for good reason.

          Edit: I agree with to an extent.

  6. I don’t think the guy was funny, but the overpaid revenue agent is certainly a clown.

  7. Where was the harassment? I saw a cop being cool to a guy explaining what he did wrong and issuing a ticket. How was that harassing?

  8. Black is not the combination of all colors. It’s the absence of all visible light, or, stated in another way, the absence of all colors.

  9. More wasted tax dollars on summoning a guy that was hurting no person or property.

    Complete joke.

  10. I want to make sure you don’t get hurt by extorting money from you in order to build more state property that I can then cite you for trespassing on…

  11. May just maybe it’s not so funny and the reason for no pedestrians should be obvious. However being he wasn’t really on the freeway the ticket was not necessary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *