It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => The Police State => Topic started by: IronDioPriest on August 01, 2011, 11:04:16 AM
-
It seems that in the absence of law or even political debate over a citizen's right to film the activities of police, the police are just claiming the authority to prevent it, and leaving it up to people to fight against it if they dare.
It is as if they've subtly added a "regulation" without a peep. Suddenly, they just begin arresting people, and we must deal with it.
Whole story and video at theblaze.com...
Caught on Video: News Cameraman Arrested For Filming Police Chase (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/caught-on-video-news-cameraman-arrested-for-filming-police-chase/)
-
I think there was one in Vegas too, guy got roughed up. Some LEO's are losing it...it appears that too many view all citizens as scum and they don't appreciate having their every move recorded. This is stunning to me on two points - First, the obvious, what are they doing that they fear people won't like? And secondly but not as obviously, how the frick do these morons think we feel about being watched by them 24/7/365 via traffic cams, security cams etc? How they can condone the one and not the other shows how fvcked up their thought process is. Sucks to be automatically assumed to be a dirtbag right off the bat, doesn't it bitch?! More garbage that can be laid at the feet of the multi-culti/diversity/pc asshats IMO! If people were able to exercise intelligent profiling we wouldn't be in a lot of stupid dangerous crap!
-
I saw the Vegas one, but hadn't seen the New York one.
In a recent discussion of this topic, the most upsetting about this was the reaction I got.........from Republicans. Several of them, including (and notably our mayor) told me that it was understandable because "The police have a difficult job and the cameramen weren't helping".
I was dumbstruck (I hope it isn't contagious!).
What this potentially means is that not only are your privileges or rights - even as a private citizen on your own property - are subject to the whim of the pigs (yes, I chose my words intentionally), but they are subject to revision, interpretation, or revocation at any time and for any reason (or none at all). As they continue to set themselves apart and above the people they work for, they had best learn to sleep lightly and keep their insurance paid up because there are waaay more of us than there are of them. This is entirely of their making.
-
In a recent discussion of this topic, the most upsetting about this was the reaction I got.........from Republicans. Several of them, including (and notably our mayor) told me that it was understandable because "The police have a difficult job and the cameramen weren't helping".
I was dumbstruck (I hope it isn't contagious!).
Upsetting, yes. Surprising, no; unfortunately. There is a certain brand of Republican/conservative that has a very reflexive support of all things "law enforcement". It is troubling, and very shortsighted. The rapid and extensive militarization of the domestic civilian police forces over the past 20 years does not bode well for liberty. It's a sledgehammer driving finishing nails.
-
One more lawsuit.
-
One more lawsuit.
Lawsuits are not effective if they settle out of court and the asshole gets to keep his job.
-
One more lawsuit.
Lawsuits are not effective if they settle out of court and the a$$hole gets to keep his job.
Well we sure as hell can't count on the ACLU to turn up any time soon.
-
One more lawsuit.
Lawsuits are not effective if they settle out of court and the a$$hole gets to keep his job.
Besides, it isn't like it comes out of his pocket or anything...
-
There are laws and court precedents making it illegal. The courts and legislatures are on their side b/c the 'ruling elite' need stormtroopers and skull-busters.
One of the logic-disconnects I see is how is me filming a cop abusing a perp different from teh dash-cam or a cctv at teh station filming him? And how on earth can a witness be told "You can't use the video, you just have to tell us what you saw and then we'll tell you you're lying."
I know the precedent used speaks to an old wire-tap[ping law and says you can't record sounds if teh target doesn't approve or if there's no warrant. The law hasn't actually caught up to video, IIRC, and from what I understand, if the videographer didn't record voices, there'd be no laws broken.
Government doesn't work for us anymore. At any level.
-
Government doesn't work for us anymore. At any level.
Close, "Government dosen't work for US" period