4 ms·

>Additionally, videotaping military actions deemed vital to national security is a crime in the US. Interesting, I'm curious which law says filming in a public

>Additionally, videotaping military actions deemed vital to national security is a crime in the US. Interesting, I'm curious which law says filming in a public location the downing of an airliner by the military would be a crime? Can you please give me a link or citation so I can read more about this?

ghostbrainalpha 7y ago
In addition, the Grand Parent comment didn't mention that in the article the BBC is saying that the person who filmed the video is SAFE, and that is taking the blame. So Iran has arrested an innocent person in order to shift public anger onto them, for something that shouldn't have been a crime in the first place.
- boomboomsubban 7y ago
  >So Iran has arrested an innocent person in order to shift public anger onto them, Or they mistakenly arrested the wrong person to ensure the cameraman was not filming the missile at the command of an enemy nation. Arresting an innocent person is a necessary evil worldwide, convicting them would be forcing them to take the blame.
  - ghostbrainalpha 7y ago
    You can't "ensure they aren't working for an enemy nation" if it's the wrong person. Your presuming it was an accident they got the wrong person. I'm presuming it wasn't. Both are presumptions, but based on the the rest of their actions it seems like my presumption is more likely.
    - boomboomsubban 7y ago
      So you think they took the public relations hit of arresting the journalist but intentionally arrested some random person? Why?
boomboomsubban 7y ago
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-37 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-37 Several ordinance's in this chapter could certainly be used to arrest the individual. Whether the case would see a conviction is not certain, hopefully not, but more than enough to file charges.
- dontbenebby 7y ago
  I don't think you are familiar with the law. It's not espionage for a US citizen to photograph something from a public area that is out in public. Such a charge would not withstand a 1st amendment challenge IMO.
  - boomboomsubban 7y ago
    It can be barred for reasons of national security if it is nt espionage. And first amendment challenges would only matter at conviction. A person in the US having filmed a missile shot at a plane could be arrested like may have happened in Iran.
    - dontbenebby 7y ago
      Many people have filmed terrorist attacks in the USA. They may be compelled to turn over the footage to law enforcement, but they would not be arrested merely for taping.
      - boomboomsubban 7y ago
        People get arrested for filming cops on a regular basis, why do you find it inconceivable that someone would be arrested for filming a military operation?

ghostbrainalpha 7y ago

In addition, the Grand Parent comment didn't mention that in the article the BBC is saying that the person who filmed the video is SAFE, and that is taking the blame. So Iran has arrested an innocent person in order to shift public anger onto them, for something that shouldn't have been a crime in the first place.

boomboomsubban 7y ago
>So Iran has arrested an innocent person in order to shift public anger onto them, Or they mistakenly arrested the wrong person to ensure the cameraman was not filming the missile at the command of an enemy nation. Arresting an innocent person is a necessary evil worldwide, convicting them would be forcing them to take the blame.
- ghostbrainalpha 7y ago
  You can't "ensure they aren't working for an enemy nation" if it's the wrong person. Your presuming it was an accident they got the wrong person. I'm presuming it wasn't. Both are presumptions, but based on the the rest of their actions it seems like my presumption is more likely.
  - boomboomsubban 7y ago
    So you think they took the public relations hit of arresting the journalist but intentionally arrested some random person? Why?

boomboomsubban 7y ago

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-37 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-37 Several ordinance's in this chapter could certainly be used to arrest the individual. Whether the case would see a conviction is not certain, hopefully not, but more than enough to file charges.

dontbenebby 7y ago
I don't think you are familiar with the law. It's not espionage for a US citizen to photograph something from a public area that is out in public. Such a charge would not withstand a 1st amendment challenge IMO.
- boomboomsubban 7y ago
  It can be barred for reasons of national security if it is nt espionage. And first amendment challenges would only matter at conviction. A person in the US having filmed a missile shot at a plane could be arrested like may have happened in Iran.
  - dontbenebby 7y ago
    Many people have filmed terrorist attacks in the USA. They may be compelled to turn over the footage to law enforcement, but they would not be arrested merely for taping.
    - boomboomsubban 7y ago
      People get arrested for filming cops on a regular basis, why do you find it inconceivable that someone would be arrested for filming a military operation?