Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would say tell us about it, except that there are plenty of cases where the courts did not comply with the law against police. 2 examples that come to mind immediately, are Michael Slager and Derek Chauvin.It's a case where the courts did not sign with the law.
But as you film you move when the officer does if he gets closer.Yep, I read it.
The problem is, right, that if it's illegal to film within 8 feet, all the officer has to do is to get withing that range of the person who is filming, in order to make their filming illegal.
Think about it.
If you want to make a law, make it a law about interfering in police work. Not the filming.
But as you film you move when the officer does if he gets closer.
That means you can't film your own interaction with the police even though, if they choose, if they don't intentionally (or "accidentally") turn it off, they can film you. Weird.But as you film you move when the officer does if he gets closer.
They do it now to illegally intimidate videographers. When the law gives them power they'll do it far more often.If the officer moved toward the filmer, that would be shown on the video, so not too likely that cops would be doing that.
You live in a different world... No one, neither political left nor political right, would argue that the courts follow the law.The courts follow the law, and they are not cop-haters. If the law becomes 8 feet, the courts will follow that.
But you just said the courts follow the law.I would say tell us about it, except that there are plenty of cases where the courts did not comply with the law against police. 2 examples that come to mind immediately, are Michael Slager and Derek Chauvin.
You can already be arrested for interfering with any emergency service worker, police, fire fighters, paramedics .. etc. Being so close that your inhibit the ability of workers to do their job or cause them to be concerned for your safety is considered interfering.
You can also be asked to stop filming if there is a minor involved and there are concerns for their privacy. Failure to comply with a lawful order can get you arrested.
I've seen vids posted where "reporters" are far closer, being told to get back and NOT getting back AND verbally harassing or inciting while filming.
I've seen vids posted where "reporters" are far closer, being told to get back and NOT getting back AND verbally harassing or inciting while filming.
It really depends on the cops at the scene. If they aren't being interfered with, they will just ignore it. If you're a cop, you don't mind having your picture taken. It happens a thousand times a day. Everyone has a camera and every public street, shopping mall, and store has CCTV cameras everywhere. Most people never realize how many times a day they are being photographed.
Sometimes, the cops on a job are just too damn busy to deal with other people, even if they are interfering to some degree. To arrest someone for hindering requires that you disengage from what you're doing, explain to the idiot who is hindering what they are doing, give them an opportunity to stop and, when they don't, arrest and baby sit them before going back to your original job.
It's frequently not worth the effort.
Luckily we have a wonderful court system that would notice the cop doing something like that DUHH. You know the great bipartisan law system that laughed all your crap about election fraud out of 70 plus courtrooms and everyone in the world except you conspiracy nut jobs know it......Yep, I read it.
The problem is, right, that if it's illegal to film within 8 feet, all the officer has to do is to get withing that range of the person who is filming, in order to make their filming illegal.
Think about it.
If you want to make a law, make it a law about interfering in police work. Not the filming.
Reporters are special case, particularly stingers. They will push the limits of a cordon and frequently just ignore it. They will stick a camera into a busy cops face and ask details about what is happening. They will ask for people's names and other personal information.
When told to back off, they will frequently argue, claiming the right to be there.
Cops are told to not give them any details and refer them to the police media liaison.
You are a dim witted ding bat. Your leftist view point is that an officer of the law, when knowingly committing a crime is saying to himself------guess I better move closer to someone filming than 8 feet so that the world can get a better look at me committing this crime. So what if the film is illegal and can be challenged, I want my criminal action well documented so that I have a better chance of being fired, lose my pension and maybe going to jail. Only an ass backward Biden voting fool would think this, even remotely possible.Yep, I read it.
The problem is, right, that if it's illegal to film within 8 feet, all the officer has to do is to get withing that range of the person who is filming, in order to make their filming illegal.
Think about it.
If you want to make a law, make it a law about interfering in police work. Not the filming.
Perhaps, we should start looking up these people after the fact, using their own posted vids as the evidence needed to punish them.
Yeah, that's going to work out well - no video evidence of any police interactions.I've seen vids posted where "reporters" are far closer, being told to get back and NOT getting back AND verbally harassing or inciting while filming.
This could be good.
And really. I think it should be expanded to include all people. No one should be filmed at close range, against their will. More and more we see it being used as a tool of intimidation.
did it slip by you that all they have to do is have another cop walk up on you and force you to move back further??Huh? Just stand 9-10 feet away, dope! That's all! Did that one slip by you? They just don't want you in their business where they have to worry about you being some crazy with a knife while they are already dealing with some other loon.
who are you to say they arent reporters??And that doesn't seem to be working. AND many reporters are not really reporters now. THey are often agitators, using the idea of "reporter" as a thin cover.
Arizona to ban people filming police officers within 8 feet
Opponents of the law have said it violates the constitutional right to free speech and a free press.www.bbc.com
"
A law in the US state of Arizona will ban people from filming police officers at short distances, with possible fines or jail for those who don't comply.
Critics call the law a threat to free speech and the right to a free press.
Police are often filmed by bystanders and footage has occasionally resulted in officer misconduct being exposed."
If it's not filmed, it's not illegal.... WAYYYHEYYYYY!!!
And the police will lose. The courts have consistently ruled that people can film.
They do it now to illegally intimidate videographers. When the law gives them power they'll do it far more often.
progressive hunterLuckily we have a wonderful court system that would notice the cop doing something like that DUHH. You know the great bipartisan law system that laughed all your crap about election fraud out of 70 plus courtrooms and everyone in the world except you conspiracy nut jobs know it......
