I agree - the report is confusing and unclear as to the time line.

It says she was 'walking to her car' as they approached and yet at later it says she had to turn on her engine to wind down the windows which caused them to try and break the windows. Even the part where it says one jumped on the hood of the SUV while another pulled a gun implies she had got into the car at this point - so did they pull the gun after she apparently walked away from them, got into a car and started it?

The knee jerk 'omg! agents over reacting!' is predictable given the way the article is structured, the headline used and the way it was written.

Lets say the sequence of events was;
- girl exist store and walks towards car
- 6 people approach holding a badge and ask her to stop
- girl gets into car and locks the door
- agents then ask her to wind window down
- at which point she starts car
- agents react because it looks like she is trying to get away (jump on hood, pull gun)
- at which point she then drives off

Given that sequence of events, where someone is apparently trying to get away from the people in question I'm less inclined to go all 'omg! agents on a power trip!'.

But, as with all things we only get half a muddled story which leads to people biasing it with their own views...

But even if that's the case, it takes 6 of you? And you jumped the hood and pulled your gun? Over beer? And tried to break the glass. Over beer? Why not just take down their license plate? And it's two girls. Someone's taking underage drinking too seriously. And they even pulled over for actual cops.

But yes, the article is unclear and the timeline does seem to be a bit out of sorts.

Did they pull the gun before or after she hit them with the car? I think that makes a big difference in my opinion here.

If you're in your car and people are trying to break in the windows, I don't think it makes much of a difference. This is my opinion of course.

Standard behavior for much of law enforcement in most of the country.

I'm guessing that the cops here are investigating the store, not the people. Even if these were under-aged adults (what a strange phrase) with alcohol, then the cops would primarily want to use their purchase as evidence against the store/clerk. So, the cops' behavior is even worse and more disproportional than it seems at first (ie, they must have known these women were no threat).

Incompetence + meathead + lazy. Never expect better from law enforcement, and take this into account when prescribing their duties and limits. (Also take into account when dealing with them.) You cannot depend on discretion with this sort.

Hopefully, the attention will have some negative impact on the careers of the officers involved. Doubt it though.

Phantom, the girls could be exaggerating the extent to which they were intimidated. Or they were needlessly frightened by the innocuous.

Or, most probably, these were typical cops. When the girls got close to the car, they came from several directions shouting "Down on the ground!", "Hands up in the air!" and "Don't move!".

The frightened girls hurry into the car and lock the doors. Now the cops, half of whom are dressed like homeless, are shouting at the windows, spraying saliva like rabid dogs. No longer trying to id themselves and angry at perceived lack of respect, they try to take control through additional uncoordinated intimidation. Two of them use tasers on the vehicle, for the heck of it. Guns are drawn. Someone jumps on the hood. It's like zombie survival here.