A federal judge has ruled that an Arizona law limiting how close people can get to recording law enforcement is unconstitutional, citing infringement against a clearly established right to film police doing their jobs.
Hopefully the Supreme Court doesn’t override this decision when it get appealed to them.
Tell us you don’t understand the supreme courts abortion decision without telling us …
who asked
However poorly, they may be trying to get at the Roe decision was about privacy, and that would have been the only leg that the pigs could have stood upon in regards to their being filmed. I may be giving them too much credit, but i have been actively try to be hopeful that some shred of humanity still exists in this world.
You… You do know the supreme court does more than one thing right?
If I had entrepeneurial spirit I would start a company called CopCam. A cheap but good camera, very recognizable as a camera with a red light on the front and big letters COPCAM. You’d attach it to the dashboard and it would come with a short overview of legislation per state (or european country depending on the market) of your rights as a citizen to film a traffic stop. I would hope cops would recognize it as a sogn they stopped someone who is well aware of their rights and os filming the whole thing, and this way they would behave.
Edit for slogan: copcam: to observe and protect.
There is a flaw in your logic. Cops hate people that know their rights more than anybody. The sooner you assert your rights, the faster they misbehave. After all, it’s not like there will ever be an consequences for them.
Bystander cellphone videos are largely credited with revealing police misconduct — such as with the 2020 killing of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis officers — and reshaping the conversation around police transparency. But Republican Arizona lawmakers initially said the legislation was needed to limit people with cameras who deliberately impede officers.
