3 ms·

It's not 8 feet from the nearest cop. It's 8 feet from where the arrest is happening. So unless both the arresting officer and the arrestee come toward you, you

It's not 8 feet from the nearest cop. It's 8 feet from where the arrest is happening. So unless both the arresting officer and the arrestee come toward you, you can stay where you are and film.

njharman 4y ago
Quote me that line in the law that says that.
- refurb 4y ago
  https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/55leg/2R/bills/HB2319S.pdf https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/55leg/2R/bills/HB2319S.pdf IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON TO KNOWINGLY MAKE A VIDEO RECORDING 7 OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, "LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY" 31 MEANS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: 32 1. QUESTIONING A SUSPICIOUS PERSON. 33 2. CONDUCTING AN ARREST, ISSUING A SUMMONS OR ENFORCING THE LAW. 34 3. HANDLING AN EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED OR DISORDERLY PERSON WHO IS 35 EXHIBITING ABNORMAL BEHAVIOR. Edit: If you're the subject of police action, the 8 ft rule doesn't apply. A PERSON WHO IS 22 THE SUBJECT OF POLICE CONTACT MAY RECORD THE ENCOUNTER IF THE PERSON IS 23 NOT INTERFERING WITH LAWFUL POLICE ACTIONS,
  - scarecrowbob 4y ago
    I;m not savvy with law, but wouldn't an officer talking to you be engaging in " rQUESTIONING A SUSPICIOUS PERSON."
    - mlyle 4y ago
      If the police officer is questioning you as a suspicious person, "NOTWITHSTANDING SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION, A PERSON WHO IS 22 THE SUBJECT OF POLICE CONTACT MAY RECORD THE ENCOUNTER IF THE PERSON IS 23 NOT INTERFERING WITH LAWFUL POLICE ACTIONS,..."
      - tsimionescu 4y ago
        Aren't they "INTERFERING WITH LAWFUL POLICE ACTIONS" if they are trying to film while an officer is trying to get them to stop filming?
        Thorrez 4y ago
        In that case I don't think this law made it any worse. It was probably already illegal to interfere with lawful police actions.
  - njharman 4y ago
    > OR ENFORCING THE LAW. That's pretty all encompassing. Gives any cop at scene of incident any number of things to claim at the time or retroactively as reason you're in violation and to move 8ft back from them, not just 8ft from incident. Laws like this are horrible not because of the intent of spirit (which is to protect LEO and suspects from whacko's) but because they are written vaguely and poorly. Then abused by police / DA to suppress, oppress, threaten and selectively prosecute those standing up to their abuse.
sd8f9iu 4y ago
A cop is within 8 feet of you during a traffic stop. So if the cop puts you or another passenger under arrest, you have to stop filming. And if you were filming before and caught the cop doing something illegal, they are now incentivized to arrest you to make you stop. A bystander interfering with police has nothing to do with recording and is already illegal. This is clearly just an attempt to make it more difficult to hold cops accountable.
- Thorrez 4y ago
  There's an exception allowing you to record if you're in a car involved with something: > The same exception extends to anyone recording while in a vehicle involved in a police stop. >And if you were filming before and caught the cop doing something illegal, they are now incentivized to arrest you to make you stop. Wouldn't they be incentivized the exact same amount before this law? I don't see how this law makes that worse. >A bystander interfering with police has nothing to do with recording and is already illegal. Many specific instances are debatable whether it's interference or not. What if the cameraperson is 1 foot from the cop? 2 feet? 5 feet? 10 feet? This law makes it clear what the distance is so people don't have to debate in the moment or in the courtroom.

It's not 8 feet from the nearest cop. It's 8 feet from where the arrest is happening. So unless both the arresting officer and the arrestee come toward you, you can stay where you are and film.

njharman 4y ago

Quote me that line in the law that says that.

refurb 4y ago
https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/55leg/2R/bills/HB2319S.pdf https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/55leg/2R/bills/HB2319S.pdf IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON TO KNOWINGLY MAKE A VIDEO RECORDING 7 OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, "LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY" 31 MEANS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: 32 1. QUESTIONING A SUSPICIOUS PERSON. 33 2. CONDUCTING AN ARREST, ISSUING A SUMMONS OR ENFORCING THE LAW. 34 3. HANDLING AN EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED OR DISORDERLY PERSON WHO IS 35 EXHIBITING ABNORMAL BEHAVIOR. Edit: If you're the subject of police action, the 8 ft rule doesn't apply. A PERSON WHO IS 22 THE SUBJECT OF POLICE CONTACT MAY RECORD THE ENCOUNTER IF THE PERSON IS 23 NOT INTERFERING WITH LAWFUL POLICE ACTIONS,
- scarecrowbob 4y ago
  I;m not savvy with law, but wouldn't an officer talking to you be engaging in " rQUESTIONING A SUSPICIOUS PERSON."
  - mlyle 4y ago
    If the police officer is questioning you as a suspicious person, "NOTWITHSTANDING SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION, A PERSON WHO IS 22 THE SUBJECT OF POLICE CONTACT MAY RECORD THE ENCOUNTER IF THE PERSON IS 23 NOT INTERFERING WITH LAWFUL POLICE ACTIONS,..."
    - tsimionescu 4y ago
      Aren't they "INTERFERING WITH LAWFUL POLICE ACTIONS" if they are trying to film while an officer is trying to get them to stop filming?
      - Thorrez 4y ago
        In that case I don't think this law made it any worse. It was probably already illegal to interfere with lawful police actions.
- njharman 4y ago
  > OR ENFORCING THE LAW. That's pretty all encompassing. Gives any cop at scene of incident any number of things to claim at the time or retroactively as reason you're in violation and to move 8ft back from them, not just 8ft from incident. Laws like this are horrible not because of the intent of spirit (which is to protect LEO and suspects from whacko's) but because they are written vaguely and poorly. Then abused by police / DA to suppress, oppress, threaten and selectively prosecute those standing up to their abuse.

sd8f9iu 4y ago

A cop is within 8 feet of you during a traffic stop. So if the cop puts you or another passenger under arrest, you have to stop filming. And if you were filming before and caught the cop doing something illegal, they are now incentivized to arrest you to make you stop. A bystander interfering with police has nothing to do with recording and is already illegal. This is clearly just an attempt to make it more difficult to hold cops accountable.

Thorrez 4y ago
There's an exception allowing you to record if you're in a car involved with something: > The same exception extends to anyone recording while in a vehicle involved in a police stop. >And if you were filming before and caught the cop doing something illegal, they are now incentivized to arrest you to make you stop. Wouldn't they be incentivized the exact same amount before this law? I don't see how this law makes that worse. >A bystander interfering with police has nothing to do with recording and is already illegal. Many specific instances are debatable whether it's interference or not. What if the cameraperson is 1 foot from the cop? 2 feet? 5 feet? 10 feet? This law makes it clear what the distance is so people don't have to debate in the moment or in the courtroom.