4 ms·
> This is likely to strengthen the ability for people to document policing. God I hope this is the stupidest thing I read today.
by staticassertion 4y ago
> This is likely to strengthen the ability for people to document policing.
God I hope this is the stupidest thing I read today.
- ddingus 4y agoWell, it might be! Edit: I put the text of it above. Here's where the ugly is: "and without the permission of a law enforcement officer (LEO). (Sec. 1)" Yeah, that's not in line with the First Amendment at all. >The National Press Photographers Association sent a letter to Mr. Kavanagh in February that said the bill violated constitutional free speech and press protections. The New York Times Company was one of more than 20 media organizations that signed the letter, which said that the law would be “unworkable” at protests and demonstrations. I was thinking about the interactions I see sometimes on YT. Often, SCOTUS saying 10 feet is mentioned. The way I saw this was that often questioned bit of information was made explicit, and 8 feet. The media appears to take it an entirely different way. Just to be clear, I am an advocate of recording public officials, including the police of all kinds and perhaps didn't take the language of the bill in the same way many are.