reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 questions why a swastika is not immediately considered anti-Semitic, while Speaker 1 explains the need for context. Speaker 0 expresses confusion and frustration, emphasizing the symbol's association with anti-Semitism. Speaker 1 mentions their role as a police officer and the need for distress to take action. Speaker 0 is dissatisfied with the response and seeks clarity on when a swastika is not anti-Semitic. The conversation ends with Speaker 1 reiterating their role and responsibilities.

The speaker is requesting to use the restroom but is being denied access. They argue that it is their right to use the restroom and express frustration about being excluded. The person denying access suggests using a different restroom, but the speaker insists on using the current one. The conversation becomes heated, with mentions of Zionism and Palestine. The video ends with the speaker expressing gratitude.

An individual confronts another, accusing them of doxxing people by taking and posting pictures of their faces online. The accused clarifies they are posting pictures of posters in public spaces. The accuser acknowledges this and recognizes they are also in a public space. The accuser then asks if the other person intends to stay with them.

A person confronted someone charging their car in their driveway without permission. The person said it was their house and charger. The car owner said they were pregnant and their car was about to die. They added they saw the charger and thought it should be charging. The car owner demanded the person stop recording them and their license plate, stating their husband is an attorney and the video shouldn't be posted anywhere. The person asked if they normally use other people's chargers. The car owner said they needed to go to the doctor and their car was dying. The person asked them to unplug and leave, or they would call the police. The car owner threatened to call their husband. The person repeated their request to unplug and leave.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 engage in a heated argument, with Speaker 0 expressing offense and disgust towards Speaker 1. Speaker 1 tries to diffuse the situation, suggesting they forget about it, but Speaker 0 believes the incident will be widely known. They discuss parking issues and freedom of speech, with Speaker 1 mentioning being on the autistic spectrum. Speaker 0 insists on recording the incident, while Speaker 1 asks them to stop. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 expressing fear and Speaker 1 acknowledging the threats made towards their children.

A man confronts another man about keying a Tesla, claiming there's video evidence online and that the license plate was recorded. The man being confronted initially denies the act, but then says "Oh, shit." The confronter expresses surprise that the police haven't contacted him yet. He questions why someone wearing a USA shirt and driving a Korean car would key an American car, suggesting the owner is likely a Democrat and possibly a woman. Neither the man accused nor his companion offer any explanation.

Speaker 0 questions why Rick parked so close. Rick responds that he is not supposed to be within 200 feet of a school.

Speaker 1 questions Speaker 0 about sleeping in a car at a park. Speaker 0 explains the sunshade was up due to rain. Speaker 1 asks about the window being up. Speaker 0 refuses to roll it down. Speaker 1 mentions park closing at sunset. Speaker 0 points out it's not yet sunset. Speaker 1 leaves, and Speaker 0 questions the encounter.

Speaker 0 asks whether you need to show ID, questions if that has a warrant, and asks if you don’t have an ID.

Someone confronts another person about putting stickers on their car, including stickers with curse words, and claims to have video evidence of them doing it twice. The person denies knowing anything about it and says they have no comment. The speaker expresses frustration that the person won't defend their actions or discuss the situation, despite initiating it by putting something on the car.

A person confronts an individual, accusing him of keying a Tesla, stating there's video evidence online and that the license plate was recorded. The accused denies the act, even after being told he was seen doing it. The speaker questions the motive, pointing out the accused's USA t-shirt, Korean car, and the possibility that the Tesla owner is a Democrat. The speaker expresses disbelief and wishes the accused good luck, hoping he learns a lesson. The accused then tells the speaker to chase him.

Speaker 0 notices: “Your trailer lights is off.” Speaker 1 responds that they’re trying to find it but can’t. Speaker 0 repeats the question and notes you don’t know where the lights are. They ask how long the CDL has been held, and Speaker 1 says two months. Speaker 0 presses: “And you don’t know where your lights is at? … How long you had your CDL?” Speaker 1 again says two months and that they’re trying to find the lights but can’t. Speaker 0 warns: “You’re driving in the dark.” Speaker 1 reiterates they’re trying to find it. Speaker 0 insists, “Listen. And you can’t be driving in the dark though. That’s crazy.” Speaker 1 says they know, they’re trying to find where the light is. Speaker 0 asks for the CDL: “Let me see your CDL.” After a moment, he says, “Never mind. You probably don’t got it.” He questions whether Speaker 1 has a CDL, then asks again to see it. Speaker 1 confirms two months with the CDL. Speaker 0 asks if Speaker 1 is from America; Speaker 1 replies no. Speaker 0 returns the CDL and says, “Here, take your CDL back. You good.” He adds: “Listen. I don’t think you should be driving. But I’m gonna let you go though.”

The speaker asks a person to move their vehicle because they parked in two spaces. The person refuses, accusing the speaker of racism. Despite the speaker's denial, the person continues to argue, calling the speaker racist. The situation escalates with both parties exchanging heated words. The person eventually leaves, still accusing the speaker of racism.

A person confronts an individual, accusing him of keying a Tesla, stating there's video evidence online. The accused denies the act, but the accuser claims to have witnessed it, noting the license plate was recorded. The accuser questions the motivation, pointing out the accused was wearing a USA t-shirt while driving a Korean car. The accuser speculates the Tesla owner is likely a Democrat. The accused and his companion remain silent. The accuser expresses disbelief, mentioning the accused is handicapped, and wishes him luck, hoping he learns a lesson. The encounter ends near a Chase bank.

Speaker 0 notices the trailer lights are off and asks Speaker 1 to find them, emphasizing that driving in the dark is unsafe. Speaker 1 repeats that he doesn’t know where the lights are and has been trying to locate them. Speaker 0 questions how long Speaker 1 has had his CDL, and Speaker 1 responds two months. Speaker 0 expresses disbelief that someone with a two-month CDL doesn’t know where the lights are, noting that he has been driving in the dark and stressing that it’s not acceptable. Speaker 1 reiterates that he’s trying to find the lights but cannot. Speaker 0 scolds him for driving in the dark and asks if he truly has a CDL, stating that he doesn’t want to be rude but implies that Speaker 1 may be causing an accident. Speaker 1 acknowledges awareness of the potential danger but continues to say he’s trying to locate the light. Speaker 0 asks to see Speaker 1’s CDL and then abruptly dismisses the request, muttering that perhaps Speaker 1 doesn’t have it. He repeats the question about the CDL and asks where it is, suggesting that the two-month CDL might not be valid or real. Speaker 1 confirms again that he has had the CDL for two months. Speaker 0 asks if Speaker 1 is from here or from America, indicating a language or origin line of questioning, and then hands the CDL back to Speaker 1, telling him to take it back and that he’s good to go but reiterates that he doesn’t think Speaker 1 should be driving. In closing, Speaker 0 reiterates his concern and lets Speaker 1 leave, acknowledging that he is not going to stop him but making it clear that he does not believe Speaker 1 should be driving. The exchange ends with Speaker 0 warning again that driving in the present condition is unsafe and implying that Speaker 1 may be unfit to operate a vehicle.

A person confronts another individual parked in a disabled parking space, stating their daughter is disabled and they need the space for easier access. They question whether the other person has a disability. The person parked in the disabled space suggests they find another parking spot and accuses the other person of lying. The first person reiterates that their daughter is disabled. The person in the space claims the other person's husband is disabled. The first person expresses disbelief and the other person suggests they move to another parking spot. The confrontation ends with one person closing their car window.

The speaker describes witnessing a person using a mobility scooter who was “literally going off the curb” and “jumping off the sidewalks with it,” not using ramps as expected. The speaker contends this behavior is reckless and says the person is disabled, arguing that they “shouldn’t even be doing stupid shit like that with it in the first place” and that they should “be taking care of his shit rather than wrecking it.” The speaker further claims that the individual was sent in to perform in videos to make things look good, suggesting that they were chosen because “Tommy can’t come close,” implying others could be used to create a better appearance for the videos. The dialogue then shifts to direct insults directed at Shane Patriot. The speaker calls Shane Patriot “one of the shitty Shane,” adds “Shut the fuck up,” and expresses personal dislike, saying, “I don’t like you. I don’t even know why you’re in here, motherfucker.” The speaker asserts a total disdain, declaring, “You’re just full,” and concluding with, “Fuck you.” The closing sentiment reinforces a hostile, confrontational tone toward Shane Patriot, with explicit profanity and a repeated refusal to engage in conversation, ending with “Fuck you.”

A car is running, and another is parked in the driveway. An unidentified person repeatedly states "No comment" and "Your chest passes" when asked who lives at the residence.

A lady in a wheelchair almost got hit by a car.

Officer Lamont Metro and Officer Leonard respond to a private parking lot where Speaker 1 is parked in a Jeep that Metro says is unusual for the area. Metro explains this is his area and zone, and he’s there often; seeing the Jeep raises questions about what Speaker 1 is doing. Speaker 1 refuses to answer questions, stating she has a right not to answer. Metro reiterates that if she’s not doing anything wrong, there should be no worry. Speaker 1 says she is obligated to help with no cooperation and that she has the right to refuse to answer questions. Metro says he has the right to ask simple questions and asks what Speaker 1 is doing. She again refuses to answer, stating she’s not breaking a law and will not aid the investigation. Metro asserts there is a right to ask for identification if she’s refusing to cooperate. Speaker 1 asks if Metro is going to punish her for not complying; Metro denies this and emphasizes his goal is to figure out who she is. She claims it’s on video that he would punish her for not cooperating, which he denies. He suggests the situation would go easier if they were polite, while she asks him to leave her alone and reiterates she’s not doing anything wrong. Metro asks if she works in the area, to which Speaker 1 responds it’s none of his business. He explains he has the right to detain on private property, though Speaker 1 challenges the concept of detention, insisting he has no crime. She questions what she would be detained for, as she refuses to cooperate or communicate. Metro presses, asking for her driver’s license, and she asks for a cause, noting a private parking lot and harassment is not what he’s doing. He counters that it is reasonable suspicion given the parking lot context and her presence there. Speaker 1 insists the situation is exactly what Metro is doing: harassing her. She refuses to step out of the car, even though Metro says she is detained and asks her to exit for a conversation. She requests a supervisor and repeats she does not care about his investigation, stating she simply wants to be in the parking lot. Metro calls for a supervisor and says he will contact one once she provides her ID. She again requests a supervisor. Speaker 0 (Metro) and Speaker 2 (Officer Leonard) describe the exchange as Speaker 1 being extremely difficult and insist they have a legitimate interest in knowing who she is. Metro clarifies that he’s here to speak with her and determine why she’s there; Speaker 1 remains non-cooperative, asserting she’s not obligated to tell him anything, while he maintains the authority to ask for identification and to request her to step out. The conversation ends with Metro asking again for Speaker 1’s ID, underscoring his need to know who she is.

The video starts with Speaker 0 repeatedly telling someone to get out of the car. Speaker 1 mentions that the person is still stuck. Speaker 0 continues to insist that the person should get out of the car. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 repeating the instruction to get out of the car.

Speaker 0 tells someone to get in the car and take off their hat because they don't want to go to a Trump rally. The person refuses and says they will take it off if it bothers the speaker. The speaker insists and calls the person difficult. The person explains they need the hat for sun protection while kayaking. The speaker offers to get another hat and expresses disbelief at experiencing discrimination. They leave to get another hat.

A person states that they and their husband drive Teslas. They learned that a friend is being disowned and uninvited from gatherings by friends and family simply for driving a Tesla. The speaker emphasizes that owning a Tesla is not a political statement or an attempt to impose beliefs on others. The friend is facing social consequences solely because of the car they drive.

Speaker 0 insists that Eunice Collins will be arrested, emphasizing that she is autistic and does not like people talking to her. Speaker 1 acknowledges this and agrees that she will be arrested. Speaker 0 mentions that they have been trying to avoid this situation for a while, as Eunice has not done anything wrong. Speaker 0 also mentions an officer who treated them unfairly, solely because Eunice has autism.

An individual is accused of writing a swastika on a Tesla using a key. The Tesla owner states that the act is a hate crime and that the key is being fingerprinted by the police to track down the individual. They also mention that Facebook tracked the individual down. The Tesla owner suggests the individual apologize to Facebook for writing the swastika. The individual apologizes, stating they have nothing against the car or the owner, but may have something against Elon Musk. The Tesla owner clarifies they own the car and it was bought and paid for. The individual admits their actions were misguided and unintentional.