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.
The police department responsible for choking Eric Garner to death after he allegedly sold some cigarettes on a street corner–and which eventually arrested the man who filmed Garner’s final moments–has apparently developed a new way to make sure such incidents don’t occur in the future.
Civilians need to ram it down the throat's of police that they are under civilian control, and part of that control is recording police encounters to protect the public.
I've had my phone taken from "Homeland Security" while handing out FIJA flyers at Federal Courthouses. Of course the goons had to give them back each time when we had the goons contact their superiors because it is not illegal to film anyone in public as when one is in public there is no reasonable expectation of privacy...
Respond to a benign action with assault and destruction of private property.
LOL, I have seen a lot of this sarcasm from you lately, and it is very humorous, and appreciated. You do realize however, the collectivists won't get it, because they actually believe it to be true. That is the sad state of affairs in our barbaric society...
From 2014 through 2016, the CCRB received 346 allegations of police interference with civilian recording efforts. The city watchdog, which is the largest police oversight organization in the country, was able to independently verify 96 such allegations out of the 346 made–or 28% total, the report says.
As for the rest of the complaints, 52% were lacking enough evidence for the board to make an accurate determination; 11% of reported incidents occurred but were found to be “lawful” and another six percent were determined to not have occurred at all.
Police interference with video recording is typically seen as an infringement of videographers’ First Amendment rights, but in some circumstances the CCRB found a legal justification due to safety concerns or because the person making the video was the one being arrested in the first place.
stright from the horse's mouth...but why let facts get in the way?
LOL, I have seen a lot of this sarcasm from you lately, and it is very humorous, and appreciated. You do realize however, the collectivists won't get it, because they actually believe it to be true. That is the sad state of affairs in our barbaric society...
It's interesting because among the statists it seems like police misconduct is the one thing that actually gives them "temporary sanity". At least a good deal of them.
We can tell them until we're blue in the face about how the entire mechanism of the State is based on aggression but it does no good until it's presented in cop-civilian interaction.
It's real. It's visceral.
An agent of the State being nothing but a bully. I just wish we could get them to see that the pen is mightier than the sword in many cases. Taxation and regulation are just as egregious but they occur on paper in a building downtown by a guy wearing a suit.
It should be illegal for anyone but law enforcement to video an arrest.
Your day will come.The state will need folks like you to run the gulags
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.
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.
