Cops: No Snarky Nor Positive Title

[MissThundercat]

Detroit Police Commissioner says a sex worker "unexpectedly" jumped in his truck.

Bold strategy, Cotton.

[Kepler]

An apparent victory for us over the Nazis, for once.

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.

The ruling July 21 from U.S. District Judge John J. Tuchi permanently blocks enforcement of the law that he suspended last year.

The Republican-backed law was signed by former Republican Gov. Doug Ducey in July 2022, but enthusiasm for the restrictions faded and legislators refused an opportunity to defend the law during an initial court suspension. Republican state Sen. John Kavanagh, who sponsored the measure, has said he was unable to find an outside group to defend the legislation.

The law would have made it illegal to knowingly film police officers from 8 feet or closer if the officer told the person to stop. And on private property, an officer who decides that someone is interfering or that the area is unsafe could have ordered the person to stop filming even if the recording was being made with the owner's permission.

"The law prohibits or chills a substantial amount of First Amendment-protected activity and is unnecessary to prevent interference with police officers given other Arizona laws in effect," Tuchi ruled.

[Slap Shot]

An apparent victory for us over the Nazis, for once.

While I am fine with this in general, if you're familiar with many of the ****bags that are "1st Amendment Auditors" you'd understand why they would have preferred to have at least an 8-foot cushion between themselves and "innocent bystanders". 8 feet is more than close enough to film what they need to yet gives say a single officer who might find himself trying to do the right thing while in the middle of more than a few people a bit of necessary breathing room. I've seen countless videos of these 'frauditors' that overly inject themselves into the situation in ways that are completely unnecessary. Why does someone need to be inside of 8 feet to film what's happening?

[Kepler]

While I am fine with this in general, if you're familiar with many of the ****bags that are "1st Amendment Auditors" you'd understand why they would have preferred to have at least an 8-foot cushion between themselves and "innocent bystanders". 8 feet is more than close enough to film what they need to yet gives say a single officer who might find himself trying to do the right thing while in the middle of more than a few people a bit of necessary breathing room. I've seen countless videos of these 'frauditors' that overly inject themselves into the situation in ways that are completely unnecessary. Why does someone need to be inside of 8 feet to film what's happening?

I don't buy it. I'm a lot less worried about "frauditors" than murderers in police uniforms carrying the power of the state.

[Slap Shot]

I don't buy it. I'm a lot less worried about "frauditors" than murderers in police uniforms carrying the power of the state.

So you don't think you can adequately film a cop from 8 feet? I don't buy it.

[unofan]

So you don't think you can adequately film a cop from 8 feet? I don't buy it.

A person who had been pulled over filming the traffic stop from within their own car is within 8 feet.

Cops will abuse the 8 foot limit that is unnecessary when interference with official acts is already on the books.

"Stop filming!"
"I'm 12 feet away! No!"
Cops take 3 steps towards you.
"Now you're not."

[Slap Shot]

A person who had been pulled over filming the traffic stop from within their own car is within 8 feet.

Cops will abuse the 8 foot limit that is unnecessary when interference with official acts is already on the books.

"Stop filming!"
"I'm 12 feet away! No!"
Cops take 3 steps towards you.
"Now you're not."

From within your car if you're the involved party could easily be written in as exempt, and despite there being distance laws previously on the books it didn't lead to cases of drivers being told to stop filming. Also cops can always try to abuse the rules and they can be sued for it. Which cases are you aware of where photographers were ordered to film from an unreasonable distance?

[Bronco]

From within your car if you're the involved party could easily be written in as exempt, and despite there being distance laws previously on the books it didn't lead to cases of drivers being told to stop filming. Also cops can always try to abuse the rules and they can be sued for it. Which cases are you aware of where photographers were ordered to film from an unreasonable distance?

So the people that filmed George Floyd's murder should go to jail? They were within 8 feet, and the cops were trying to get them to stop filming.

[Slap Shot]

So the people that filmed George Floyd's murder should go to jail? They were within 8 feet, and the cops were trying to get them to stop filming.

Nothing I said previously suggests I'm against the cops being filmed. I fully support it and if people can they should do it every time they have the chance.

Specifically in the case of Floyd, did Minneapolis have distance laws in place at the time? If so bystanders were still allowed to film and I'm willing to bet their distance was closer to 8 feet than not.

Yesterday I watched a video of some rando dude on a beach in Florida that started assaulting people for what appeared to be no reason. Guy was likely drunk or on something. One single cop was the first to respond and tackled him down. After several seconds of trying to subdue him while completely surrounded on all sides by people withing just a few feet, one of this guy's friends jumped in and tried to pull the cop off. Most people who watched the video would not find fault with the cop's handling of the situation to that point.

Now while that is not 100% analogous to citizens filming cops, I can understand why the police would like to have some buffer room so they can focus on the task and not have to worry about someone sneaking up behind them.

Find a spot in your driveway and mark it. Measure 8 feet. Film the spot and tell me you can't adequately record it.

btw I didn't read up on this ruling but I wonder if cases such as Chavez v City of Oakland or Branzburg v Hayes were mentioned.

[Bronco]

Nothing I said previously suggests I'm against the cops being filmed. I fully support it and if people can they should do it every time they have the chance.

Specifically in the case of Floyd, did Minneapolis have distance laws in place at the time? If so bystanders were still allowed to film and I'm willing to bet their distance was closer to 8 feet than not.

Yesterday I watched a video of some rando dude on a beach in Florida that started assaulting people for what appeared to be no reason. Guy was likely drunk or on something. One single cop was the first to respond and tackled him down. After several seconds of trying to subdue him while completely surrounded on all sides by people withing just a few feet, one of this guy's friends jumped in and tried to pull the cop off. Most people who watched the video would not find fault with the cop's handling of the situation to that point.

Now while that is not 100% analogous to citizens filming cops, I can understand why the police would like to have some buffer room so they can focus on the task and not have to worry about someone sneaking up behind them.

Find a spot in your driveway and mark it. Measure 8 feet. Film the spot and tell me you can't adequately record it.

btw I didn't read up on this ruling but I wonder if cases such as Chavez v City of Oakland or Branzburg v Hayes were mentioned.

You are making a law that will dole out some form of punishment for people filming cops. If it is a distance then the bad cop simply moves closer to the photographer and they get in trouble. It will certainly happen. What if the cop is breaking the law in a room smaller than eight feet? Do they just not get filmed? Carte blanche to do whatever they want in small rooms doesn't sound like the way to go.

I do understand what you are saying. If people are getting in the way of legitimate police action, then they too should be ruled as obstructing justice.

[Slap Shot]

You are making a law that will dole out some form of punishment for people filming cops. If it is a distance then the bad cop simply moves closer to the photographer and they get in trouble. It will certainly happen. What if the cop is breaking the law in a room smaller than eight feet? Do they just not get filmed? Carte blanche to do whatever they want in small rooms doesn't sound like the way to go.

I do understand what you are saying. If people are getting in the way of legitimate police action, then they too should be ruled as obstructing justice.

No. The punishment would not be for filming - it would be for filming too closely. A speeding ticket isn't for driving fast it's for driving too fast. Stay 8 feet away and film to your heart's content. And again laws like this already existed in some states and I've not heard of any abuse on the part of the police regarding them. Now it probably has happened, but that's not a de facto reason to not have such a law in place given the bigger picture.

Really? All the cop has to do is move closer? That would force the cop to move away from whatever he's investigating. Most of the time they're also filming already. And your less than 8-foot room scenario is far too slippery slope. I'd love to hear of instances where said laws were exploited before I'd be convinced they're unwise.

On the contrary I've seen plenty of videos from 1A Auditors where police have asked them to move back, but not to stop filming so you seem to be objecting to non-issues.

I've said my piece.

[unofan]

From within your car if you're the involved party could easily be written in as exempt,

You're right, it could be. But it isn't, and won't be because this isn't about reasonableness, it's about curtailing all filming of cops.

[Slap Shot]

You're right, it could be. But it isn't, and won't be because this isn't about reasonableness, it's about curtailing all filming of cops.

If that's true and the law would be able to prevent filming from within your car then it's a bad law and I'm fine with it being stricken.

[Kepler]

Nuke the South.

[SonofSouthie]

Another 'one bad apple'.

Hull police officer charged after alleged assault of 72-year-old neighbor caught on video.

https://www.boston.com/news/crime/20...?p1=hp_primary