4 ms·

Right? Along with: >The order also blocks the defendants from seizing any photographic, audio and video recording equipment and press passes from people in th

Right? Along with: >The order also blocks the defendants from seizing any photographic, audio and video recording equipment and press passes from people in those two categories, as well as from ordering them to stop recording or observing a protest. I feel like I'm living in Bizarro World. You have to actually have committed a crime in order to be legitimately arrested? Police can't just take your lawful property? Police can't order citizens to "not observe" what is happening? We needed a restraining order to acknowledge this?

xtian 6y ago
All “police reform” measures I’ve seen simply codify things cops would be doing already if their culture and systems weren’t completely irredeemable. It’s nothing more than a tactic to distract and fragment consensus.
- mtgx 6y ago
  The law-abiding culture of authorities was completely corrupted post-9/11. It was "everything goes" from that point forward. And too many people said nothing against it or even supported it. And I'm sure at the time many were dismissing comments about the "slippery slope," too. Well the slippery slope was very real, and now we've arrived at the bottom of the slope and it's much harder to change back the culture or revert the policies. It will probably require people dying before they are changed back (just like in the Civil Rights era).
contrarianmop 6y ago
In the United States, much like in similar authoritarian countries, the police appears to be able to arrest journalists without probable cause. Happened live where journalists reporting live have been arrested and / or beaten. A sad state of affairs.
- stronglikedan 6y ago
  > the police appears to be able to arrest journalists without probable cause. Happened live I haven't seen any stories/vids where they arrested journalists without probable cause in the US recently. Would you happen to have any links to share?
  - joshribakoff 6y ago
    https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/us-ambassador-responds-to-assault-of-australian-journalists-by-police-outside-white-house-20200602-p54ywn.html https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/us-ambassador-res... https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/29/black-cnn-reporter-arrested-on-air-minneapolis-protests-george-floyd-killing https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/29/black-cnn-re... https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1284526898991828992?s=20 https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1284526898991828992...
    - stronglikedan 6y ago
      Thanks. I know the CNN crew were definitely arrested for cause, but I hadn't heard about the Australian crew. Although, I'll have to do more research on that one, because the link doesn't really give much context as to why they were confronted in the first place.
      - jessaustin 6y ago
        What was the cause? They were taking pictures too disruptively? I can't believe I've been forced to defend CNN...
        kyleee 6y ago
        They were told to move out of that specific area
        jessaustin 6y ago
        So what? Unlawful orders are unlawful. The reporter and camera operator were not obstructing anything. They were in a position to observe, which is what the public wants them to do. Police will disagree, but police have lied so much that no one believes them anymore.
- pensatoio 6y ago
  Yeah, but these aren’t police, they’re feds who are deployed within the scope of codified law. This reads like judicial activism, nothing more.
  - xtian 6y ago
    Their only identification is a little patch which reads “POLICE”. You’re saying that’s fraudulent?
  - jungturk 6y ago
    The judge is noting that there are competing concerns at play here (as is often the case) and clarifying for participants the priority of those concerns. Specifically, the statutes that authorize these policing actions are inferior to the constitutional guarantees in this case given the situation on the ground.
  - SauciestGNU 6y ago
    I think you've got it wrong. The rights as defined in the Bill of Rights apply more strictly to the federal government than they do to the states. In fact, it took the Fourteenth Amendment and over a hundred years of judicial interpretation to "incorporate" a subset of the Bill of Rights to apply to state governments.

xtian 6y ago

All “police reform” measures I’ve seen simply codify things cops would be doing already if their culture and systems weren’t completely irredeemable. It’s nothing more than a tactic to distract and fragment consensus.

mtgx 6y ago
The law-abiding culture of authorities was completely corrupted post-9/11. It was "everything goes" from that point forward. And too many people said nothing against it or even supported it. And I'm sure at the time many were dismissing comments about the "slippery slope," too. Well the slippery slope was very real, and now we've arrived at the bottom of the slope and it's much harder to change back the culture or revert the policies. It will probably require people dying before they are changed back (just like in the Civil Rights era).

contrarianmop 6y ago

In the United States, much like in similar authoritarian countries, the police appears to be able to arrest journalists without probable cause. Happened live where journalists reporting live have been arrested and / or beaten. A sad state of affairs.

stronglikedan 6y ago
> the police appears to be able to arrest journalists without probable cause. Happened live I haven't seen any stories/vids where they arrested journalists without probable cause in the US recently. Would you happen to have any links to share?
- joshribakoff 6y ago
  https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/us-ambassador-responds-to-assault-of-australian-journalists-by-police-outside-white-house-20200602-p54ywn.html https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/us-ambassador-res... https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/29/black-cnn-reporter-arrested-on-air-minneapolis-protests-george-floyd-killing https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/29/black-cnn-re... https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1284526898991828992?s=20 https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1284526898991828992...
  - stronglikedan 6y ago
    Thanks. I know the CNN crew were definitely arrested for cause, but I hadn't heard about the Australian crew. Although, I'll have to do more research on that one, because the link doesn't really give much context as to why they were confronted in the first place.
    - jessaustin 6y ago
      What was the cause? They were taking pictures too disruptively? I can't believe I've been forced to defend CNN...
      - kyleee 6y ago
        They were told to move out of that specific area
        jessaustin 6y ago
        So what? Unlawful orders are unlawful. The reporter and camera operator were not obstructing anything. They were in a position to observe, which is what the public wants them to do. Police will disagree, but police have lied so much that no one believes them anymore.
pensatoio 6y ago
Yeah, but these aren’t police, they’re feds who are deployed within the scope of codified law. This reads like judicial activism, nothing more.
- xtian 6y ago
  Their only identification is a little patch which reads “POLICE”. You’re saying that’s fraudulent?
- jungturk 6y ago
  The judge is noting that there are competing concerns at play here (as is often the case) and clarifying for participants the priority of those concerns. Specifically, the statutes that authorize these policing actions are inferior to the constitutional guarantees in this case given the situation on the ground.
- SauciestGNU 6y ago
  I think you've got it wrong. The rights as defined in the Bill of Rights apply more strictly to the federal government than they do to the states. In fact, it took the Fourteenth Amendment and over a hundred years of judicial interpretation to "incorporate" a subset of the Bill of Rights to apply to state governments.