5 ms·

The original law it was proposed to be at 15 ft and they changed it to be 8 ft because of questions like this. Since courts have already upheld that police can

The original law it was proposed to be at 15 ft and they changed it to be 8 ft because of questions like this. Since courts have already upheld that police can keep non-party bystanders away from a scene at a reasonable distance codifying an 8 ft limit as a minimum reasonable distance is unlikely to be overturned by a court. Considering that police training routinely would keep people 20 to 25 ft away codifying this minimum distance at 8 ft is actually a big win and is probably closer than what courts would allow should it be challenged. It's also important to keep in mind that this distance does not apply to people who are party to the police interaction nor does it apply to passengers in a vehicle that are. It also does not apply to people in a house or a confined private space who are not a party to the police interaction. There are a great many exceptions to this if you actually read the law. Basically the 8-ft distance only applies to people who are not a party to the police interaction.

mlyle 4y ago
> Considering that police training routinely would keep people 20 to 25 ft away codifying this minimum distance at 8 ft is actually a big win " C. THIS SECTION DOES NOT ESTABLISH A RIGHT OR AUTHORIZE ANY PERSON TO MAKE A VIDEO RECORDING OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY." So, police can still attempt to keep people 25' away, and use other laws, they just can't charge them with this new misdemeanor.
woodruffw 4y ago
> Considering that police training routinely would keep people 20 to 25 ft away codifying this minimum distance at 8 ft is actually a big win and is probably closer than what courts would allow should it be challenged. This says nothing of either the constitutionality or propriety of keeping people 25 feet away, instead using it to bootstrap other limitations. The police are trained to do all sorts of absurd and patently unconstitutional things; the fact of that matter isn’t strong support for a law that further enables them to do so.

mlyle 4y ago

> Considering that police training routinely would keep people 20 to 25 ft away codifying this minimum distance at 8 ft is actually a big win " C. THIS SECTION DOES NOT ESTABLISH A RIGHT OR AUTHORIZE ANY PERSON TO MAKE A VIDEO RECORDING OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY." So, police can still attempt to keep people 25' away, and use other laws, they just can't charge them with this new misdemeanor.

woodruffw 4y ago

> Considering that police training routinely would keep people 20 to 25 ft away codifying this minimum distance at 8 ft is actually a big win and is probably closer than what courts would allow should it be challenged. This says nothing of either the constitutionality or propriety of keeping people 25 feet away, instead using it to bootstrap other limitations. The police are trained to do all sorts of absurd and patently unconstitutional things; the fact of that matter isn’t strong support for a law that further enables them to do so.