How to stop the police from breaking the law, Arizona style.

[woodwork201]

Why wouldn't she?

Was my error; the law is written to allow the recording even in Arizona.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Because it's the type of law that people can use to get around things. Oh, you're videoing me, I walk towards you, you've broken the law, bam.

As I stated earlier on that very point, that's not what this law is being written to do. You guys are extrapolating hypotheticals. It's not being put out there so that you can't record your own encounter with the police if they get within eight of you. It's to stop other people from running up on them and crowding them and putting them in a dangerous situation.

The girl who recorded Chauvin killing Floyd was well beyond eight feet and she recorded the whole thing perfectly fine.

 

[woodwork201]

No, in fact, most cops don't mind abusive ... it's an everyday part of the job and it's actually quite amusing at times. People who abuse cops are rarely original thinkers and their abuse tends to be pretty basic and unoriginal.

View attachment 668341

It's about distance.

In many cases, the person being interacted (this includes mental health patients, drug or alcohol affected, people threatening self-harm or suicide, and well as suspects of offenses) will become more aggressive when a bystander interferes.

This not only puts the safety of police at risk, but also that of the do-gooding bystanders.

Film ALL you want. Abuse all you want (but, I implore you to be creative). But keep your distance, for my safety, as well as yours.

If you put your hands first on the cop, not him on you, that's assault. If someone were to attack me while I was armed with a gun, and I am almost always, I would generally assume they were trying to harm me and would take my gun to use on me or others.

A cop physically attacked by anyone should, in my opinion, take the same view. Attacking a cop in any way, small ways or full on, should be assumed to be an attempt to disable him and likely to take his gun and use it on him or others. Attack a cop and the cop should shoot.

The cops in many cities that were abused and humiliated so badly by their leadership in their departments and their civil leaders, showed amazing character. I hope there is a law that stands up constitutionally that can be used to arrest someone who gets in their face like that but rioting is already illegal and when the riot is declared then they should have arrested everyone in sight.

 

[woodwork201]

Hahaha….you whacks are hilarious….NOBODY legitimate has EVER felt compelled to film cops while they’re performing their public service…NOBODY!
What does that tell you?

Define legitimate.

These people who work for these websites and youtube channels are not criminals or defending criminals; they're defending your rights. It doesn't get more legitimate than that.

In one case I posted earlier today, a mother records her son being attacked by the police in his own front yard because he asked the cops whey they were searching his car when he wasn't in it, no traffic stop, it was parked in front of his house, and they had no warrant or probable cause. How is she not legitimate?

Blind defense of any group just shows ignorance. Your blind defense of the cops, no matter what, shows stupidity.

 

[woodwork201]

You can lead some people to the facts but it seems you can't make them actually read.

I was posting behind. I finally got the message that the law allows them to record their own interactions or for passengers in a vehicle to record.

 

[frigidweirdo]

All the filmer has to do is back up and maintain his distance. There are already laws against interfering with police. Aggressive bystanders are often arrested for that.

Right..... So if there are already laws about interfering with the police, why do they need this law?

 

[woodwork201]

The “fact” is…only thugs and degenerates film cops doing their job….beat their asses!

The Stasi would have loved you.

 

[AZrailwhale]

yeah but youre licking their boots,,

so you would give up your rights to a cop to stay out of court,, well arent you a good little useful idiot,,,


what if the cops reason is in violation of the constitution and his oath??

the constitution is the cornerstone of a free society and youre defending cops that break it on a regular basis,,
its not about [picking a fight its about standing up for your rights,,,

Then you get the lawyers to handle it. Going against a cop in the field is always a losing proposition. He is armed, he deals with whatever situation you are in daily and his actions are presumed to be justified. It's not bootlicking to de-escalate a situation by cooperating and not making a bad situation worse. Ninety percent of the people shot by cops have your attitude and if they had used their brains rather than their balls, could have walked away.

 

[fncceo]

Attack a cop and the cop should shoot.

You have a very interesting habit of thinking in absolutes.

That kind of thinking gets people hurt or killed.

I hope this is just you pontificating and you actually don't live your life according to such a rigid ideology.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Hahaha….right! Everybody is “mentally ill” says the leftist freaks.

The woman had dementia. You'd have cheered the gestapo herding Jews into boxcars.

 

[progressive hunter]

Then you get the lawyers to handle it. Going against a cop in the field is always a losing proposition. He is armed, he deals with whatever situation you are in daily and his actions are presumed to be justified. It's not bootlicking to de-escalate a situation by cooperating and not making a bad situation worse. Ninety percent of the people shot by cops have your attitude and if they had used their brains rather than their balls, could have walked away.

whos talking about fighting a cop,, this is about standing up for your rights when a cop decides to abuse them or worse dosnt even know the law and does it,,

and dont forget not everyone has tens of thousand of dollars to fight it in court where the cops word always over rides your word

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Police brutality violates the 4th, 8th, and 14th Amendments. No one has argued for cameras in the faces of cops.

If I need to explain how police brutality violate the 4th, 8th, and 14th, you should just stay out of legal and constitutional discussions; I suggest a nice kitting forum for you.

knitting forums at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

Police violence against citizens also violates the Fifth Amendment right to due process of the law.

 

[frigidweirdo]

As I stated earlier on that very point, that's not what this law is being written to do. You guys are extrapolating hypotheticals. It's not being put out there so that you can't record your own encounter with the police if they get within eight of you. It's to stop other people from running up on them and crowding them and putting them in a dangerous situation.

The girl who recorded Chauvin killing Floyd was well beyond eight feet and she recorded the whole thing perfectly fine.

And the problem here is, why is the law written in the way it is?
If the problem is people getting too close to the police while they're dealing with a situation, make that the law. (Someone else says such a law already exists)

All this law seems to add is for the ability for the police to abuse it. Nothing else.

 

[progressive hunter]

The woman had dementia. You'd have cheered the gestapo herding Jews into boxcars.

I found out a long time ago broke loser is best if you put him on ignore,,

 

[Jarlaxle]

My point is that even if most cops are not violent criminals and want to do good, they are protecting other cops who are bad, and are still not speaking out against illegal legislation, like Prohibition, the War on Drugs, asset forfeiture, mandated sentences, etc.
So even good cops end up being responsible for the bad things happening.
They are complicit, by their silence if nothing else.
In the case of George Floyd, they could easily have prevented his death, which they must have known was happening right in front of them.

There are no good cops.

 

[progressive hunter]

There are no good cops.

of course there are,, theyre just hard to find,,

 

[fncceo]

Right..... So if there are already laws about interfering with the police, why do they need this law?

To be fair, the law removes ambiguity. No one trying to interfere with police doing their duty actually believes they're interfering.

No one filming police believes they're hindering police if they are standing in the middle of a potentially unsafe situation with their phone in front of them.

Cops in a situation don't have time to explain it to them.

This makes things nice and easy ... film all you want. Say whatever you want. Just do it from a relatively safe 8 feet away.

Removing the ambiguity makes things smoother for you and removes a layer of confusion from the situation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And the problem here is, why is the law written in the way it is?
If the problem is people getting too close to the police while they're dealing with a situation, make that the law. (Someone else says such a law already exists)

All this law seems to add is for the ability for the police to abuse it. Nothing else.

The ‘eight feet’ provision alone is ridiculous and arbitrary, an indication of the law’s true intent: conceal the violence and criminality of law enforcement.

 

[fncceo]

There are no good cops.

 

[AZrailwhale]

This Arizona law isn't about crowds all around yelling and shouting. That would be distracting and, therefore, interfering. This law is about a person, presumably peacefully and quietly because the law applies to peacefully and quietly, recording a public servant doing the public's business in public. It doesn't forbid yelling and shouting; it only forbids recording.

The effect of this law, whether intended or not (I suspect it is) is to prevent any driver from recording the interaction with the police. The driver is always within 8 feet when the cop is at the door of the car.

How many times has it been said here, if you have nothing to hide then why do you care if someone does a background check or if you have nothing to hide then why do you care if the cops stop and frisk, or if you have nothing to hide, why do you care if the dogs sniff your car?

If the cops have nothing to hide, why do they care if they're recorded?

The law specifically exclude people interacting with cops. If wouldn't affect the driver in a traffic stop.