Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-04-2012, 11:42 PM
 
45,542 posts, read 27,152,040 times
Reputation: 23858

Advertisements

Freezing the First Amendment


Cop Arrests NBC Reporters, Says Your First Amendment Right Can Be Terminated - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-05-2012, 12:09 AM
 
4,734 posts, read 4,328,449 times
Reputation: 3235
This kind of stuff happens all the time. Makes you wonder what happens when they know that there's not a camera rolling.

Simply put, there should be a federal law requiring cops to wear cameras in their uniforms 24-7s. And there should be federal oversight of police departments. Most officers are good, but what you have depicted in the video is a veteran cop who knows that he's breaking the law, knows that the charges are going to be thrown out, but is using his authority just to f*ck with someone legally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 12:20 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,094 posts, read 25,996,493 times
Reputation: 6128
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickenfriedbananas View Post
This kind of stuff happens all the time. Makes you wonder what happens when they know that there's not a camera rolling.

Simply put, there should be a federal law requiring cops to wear cameras in their uniforms 24-7s. And there should be federal oversight of police departments. Most officers are good, but what you have depicted in the video is a veteran cop who knows that he's breaking the law, knows that the charges are going to be thrown out, but is using his authority just to f*ck with someone legally.
I agree - with everything except your assertion that "most officers are good".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 12:23 AM
 
11,531 posts, read 10,286,380 times
Reputation: 3580
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickenfriedbananas View Post
This kind of stuff happens all the time. Makes you wonder what happens when they know that there's not a camera rolling.

Simply put, there should be a federal law requiring cops to wear cameras in their uniforms 24-7s. And there should be federal oversight of police departments. Most officers are good, but what you have depicted in the video is a veteran cop who knows that he's breaking the law, knows that the charges are going to be thrown out, but is using his authority just to f*ck with someone legally.
Not sure how the guy even passed the academy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 01:22 AM
 
3,614 posts, read 3,501,246 times
Reputation: 911
Can I get a summary? I have limited video access at the moment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 01:26 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,023,289 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
Can I get a summary? I have limited video access at the moment.
Appears they were on a public sidewalk in front of a hospital, the cop told the reporters to move across the street numerous times and they didn't. There appeared to be no reason why they should have to move. When they didn't move the cop said your first amendment rights can be terminated if you're causing a disturbance. They continued to stay after being warned again and they were arrested. Without knowing if in fact the sidewalk was public or if the cop had a good reason to tell them to move that is not apparent in this video I'll have to side with the cop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 01:28 AM
 
11,531 posts, read 10,286,380 times
Reputation: 3580
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Appears they were on a public sidewalk in front of a hospital, the cop told the reporters to move and they didn't. There appeared to be no reason why they should move. Without knowing if in fact the sidewalk was public or if the cop had a good reason to tell them to move that is not apparent in this video I'll have to side with the cop.
What the.....???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 01:35 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,023,289 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savoir Faire View Post
What the.....???
All sidewalks are not public property, if the sidewalk belongs to the hospital and they don't want you there you have to leave. Case closed.

Having said that it appears they are on a public sidewalk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 01:37 AM
 
3,614 posts, read 3,501,246 times
Reputation: 911
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Appears they were on a public sidewalk in front of a hospital, the cop told the reporters to move across the street numerous times and they didn't. There appeared to be no reason why they should have to move. When they didn't move the cop said your first amendment rights can be terminated if you're causing a disturbance. They continued to stay after being warned again and they were arrested. Without knowing if in fact the sidewalk was public or if the cop had a good reason to tell them to move that is not apparent in this video I'll have to side with the cop.
Well, if you're interfering with official business, you can be hauled in. But standing on a sidewalk recording an officer isn't enough (by legal precedent) to be considered interfering with official duties. You have to be, literally or figuratively, in the way of an officer trying to perform his job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 01:45 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,442,152 times
Reputation: 6541
The reporter and camera operator should have moved when so instructed. They can be charged with failure to follow a lawful order. “Failure to Obey a Lawful Order” is a misdemeanor and carries a maximum penalty of a $1,000 fine.

Officer Ward is correct, the First Amendment is not absolute. The press is not allowed to go where ever they please in order to obtain their story. The reporter and camera operator were on an island in the middle of the street, and the officer asked them to cross the street several times. When they refused to comply with the officer's repeated order to cross the street, the officer arrested them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:48 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top