YesReferences to “hood”, “turds”, “lowlifes” ect says a lot. I’m new to this site, I’ve read many disparaging comments referencing race, gender and homosexuality in other threads, is this typical on this forum?
YesReferences to “hood”, “turds”, “lowlifes” ect says a lot. I’m new to this site, I’ve read many disparaging comments referencing race, gender and homosexuality in other threads, is this typical on this forum?
The story doesn’t say anything about him trying to wrestle away a gun from a bad guy. He was trying to wrestle away a camera phone.+10000000000000 the section you quoted was not very well thought out.
We shouldn’t stop x car, because it contains armed bad men… We don’t want to face the repercussions of bad men shooting at us… Who the heck would want police officers that think like that?
you don't think they would STOP looking at the video to go harass the cops. you don't know much about turds and how they hate the cops and jump to have the chance to help some other turd and maybe even fight the cops. get a clue man. watch some videos about antifa and blm fighting cops maybe you will see what they do.
what you ain't understanding is what i already said. people there could tell other people where they are at then they will all come.
Please tell me you don't really believe that? For most of us I'd agree however, the lowlife's looking for their claim to fame by posting, what they hope will be the next viral video, depicting some tragedy affecting someone else are another thing. Most of them have no ethics and probably couldn't even spell it. Being humane is the last thing on their mind(s). They couldn't care less about who their thoughtless actions may effect, it's all about them. Case in point the scum who will stand around and record a rape in progress never even thinking to lift a finger to help the victim.
I'm not sure why you included me in your post unless you missed the fact that I agreed with OK Corgi Rancher when he said both sides have valid arguments. My focus was merely pointing out a downside on how it can, and undoubtedly will, be abused if some court gives those whose lives revolve around live-streaming and viral videos carte blanche to record whatever it is they want. My concern is for victims of some tragedy whose right to privacy may very well be trampled on merely so someone else can livestream their worst nightmares. Maybe you think the victims of these events have no rights of privacy to protect them against being recored? Truth be told never did I say a police contact should supersede any of our rights.These are post hoc fallacy examples and add no value to the discussion. Live streaming a police encounter in a public space does not in and of itself create ANY officer safety issue worth mentioning. Therefore the 1st and 4th Amendment concerns supersede any “what if” concerns.
Claiming these concerns is no more valid than all the liberals wailing about “wild west blood in the streets” when right to carry laws get passed.
Never side against citizen rights, because the State can and will turn on you at a moment’s notice. Don’t make it easier for them to subjugate you at their whim.
The story doesn’t say anything about him trying to wrestle away a gun from a bad guy. He was trying to wrestle away a camera phone.
Then the court case states the camera phone with live streaming may put a LEO’s safety at risk. They propose to make use of a camera phone with live streaming during a stop unlawful.
Where does it stop? If it is unlawful for someone to live stream the stop is it justifiable for the LEO to taze the person with the cell phone?
It’s a damn phone connected to social media.
Well it was spoken by a self proclaimed idiot.There seems to be some misunderstanding somewhere. Clearly, we have a right to record or live stream in public spaces. It is not a security issue. I too was commenting on the same section ok corgi rancher was, it had very high opportunity costs and wasn’t well thought out. This: “If you’re afraid of repercussions for stopping somebody maybe you should not have them pulled over in the first place.” is just dumb
But the intent of the statement was that if your pulling someone over to harass them needlessly or just for shits and giggles because you can. So much so, that the passenger in the car live streaming the encounter causes the situation to be unsafe for the officer. Maybe the officer should not have pulled them over in the first place.
It doesn’t matter which amendments they start re-writing to remove our rights in bulk. But if we give up that minuscule level of freedom for someone’s perceived safety. It will snowball. After the first is the second. Which is some that that nobody on this board wants trampled on. The first large scale freedom grab in my lifetime was post 9/11. Now you have to get a full body scan and groped to ride on a flying school bus.
In the context we’re discussing there is no legal right to privacy. Moral and ethical considerations would be the domain of public scrutiny and if appropriate, civil suit.I'm not sure why you included me in your post unless you missed the fact that I agreed with OK Corgi Rancher when he said both sides have valid arguments. My focus was merely pointing out a downside on how it can, and undoubtedly will, be abused if some court gives those whose lives revolve around live-streaming and viral videos carte blanche to record whatever it is they want. My concern is for victims of some tragedy whose right to privacy may very well be trampled on merely so someone else can livestream their worst nightmares. Maybe you think the victims of these events have no rights of privacy to protect them against being recored? Truth be told never did I say a police contact should supersede any of our rights.
I agree with recording/live-streaming a police contact. As long as they are not interfering with the officer I don't have any problem with that. Hell, I was recorded more times than I can count. It never bothered me because I knew wasn't doing anything illegal or unethical. Later, when we got body cams, which added to what our dash cams were capturing, I was recording myself as well as the people I was contacting. Unlike some officers, whose reasoning I won't speculate on, I was happy with the advent of dash cams as well as body cams. They helped me in more then one case to prove the accusations being levied against me were lies.In the context we’re discussing there is no legal right to privacy. Moral and ethical considerations would be the domain of public scrutiny and if appropriate, civil suit.
Enter your email address to join: