Jump to content

Federal Court Says You Can Record the Cops


Recommended Posts

Stolen from Nightgaunt's FB page:

http://gizmodo.com/5835723/federal-court-says-you-can-record-the-cops

A bystander, who was arrested for filming a public crime scene, wins in court, per the first amendment.

It's not so much what he did, but that it seems more people are staring to stand up for their rights and not taking shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now every one should mock the man who swore to protect the constitution but violated it.

Publicly every day to his face. Constant public ridicule is a reasonable deterrent.

I like this. I always agree with public humiliation as a form of punishment, but some people think I'm a jerkhole (which is quite possibly true).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No because they will call you a terrorist for having and referring to this tho it should be what you want to use.

Well, that would be no big deal.

I don't support our current President, or any of his policies...

According to our current Vice President, I'm a terrorist, and so is anyone who opposes the President in any way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that would be no big deal.

I don't support our current President, or any of his policies...

According to our current Vice President, I'm a terrorist, and so is anyone who opposes the President in any way...

"If you are not with us, you are against us."

George W. Bush

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If you are not with us, you are against us."

George W. Bush

Nice try.

I think that it is fairly obvious that you and I will probably disagree on most political matters for the foreseeable future.

I'm okay with that, and I don't think that's a bad thing.

I must say though, there is a distinct difference between what Bush said and what Biden said.

Bush said what you quoted, but he never called anyone who disagreed with him or his views, a terrorist; which is what Biden said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice try.

I think that it is fairly obvious that you and I will probably disagree on most political matters for the foreseeable future.

I'm okay with that, and I don't think that's a bad thing.

I must say though, there is a distinct difference between what Bush said and what Biden said.

Bush said what you quoted, but he never called anyone who disagreed with him or his views, a terrorist; which is what Biden said.

Don't get me started on those terrorists, rep or dem p & vp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this. I always agree with public humiliation as a form of punishment, but some people think I'm a jerkhole (which is quite possibly true).

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." - Thomas Jefferson

(Many people wont like the rest of the quote so I'll skip it =D )

Just depends on the crime / idea / person / goal. For some situations it works great, for others it causes bigger problems.

My common sense and current understanding of human nature tells me its good, but unfortunately that isn't strong enough evidence to know if it is actually true or not. What I believe, and what is true are separate. It helps to keep this in mind when I'm trying to learn (which should be 24/7) otherwise I close my mind to the possibility of correcting a mistake. Our common sense typically fails us as it works on small scales and is developed that way. What is true (or seems to be true) in our personal experience is often at odds with what really goes on in reality as a whole.

We often commit the micro-macro or "fallacy of composition" without realizing it. That is, what is true for part of something (my "micro" view) is true for the whole (Macro). This is often not true even though our common sense (and our egos) would tell us it is true. I commit this one all the time, its sort of built in. It MIGHT be true, but we need more to determine it, especially the more important the question is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Allen, of Bridgeport Illinois is currently facing a 75 year sentence.

Allison says that he recorded officers while they confiscated a car on his mother’s property. He also went to the police station with his recorder to speak to the chief of police about the seized property. Finally, when he was denied a court reporter in a court hearing, he recorded the proceedings himself and was arrested.

Allison syas that he refused a plea deal, which would have seen him serve no jail time, but would reinforce the statute that it is illegal to film police officers: “If we don’t fight for our freedoms here at home we’re all going to lose them.”

A judge is expected to rule on when the case will go to trial over the next two weeks.

This type of charge has been done before in different states, but charges have been dropped and the case thrown out of court. In Illinois, eavesdropping charges against Tiawanda Moore for recording patrol officers were dropped, after a jury quickly repudiated the prosecution’s case, taking less than an hour to acquit Moore on both eavesdropping counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Statistics

    38.9k
    Total Topics
    820.6k
    Total Posts
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 162 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.