3 ms·

Whether you believe it reasonable or not, a federal judge has reasoned it is unconstitutional. It could be appealed, but from the article it sounds like there

• DistractionRect 3y ago
  IANAL, but from a common sense perspective: - most police have body cams now, so presumably, their voices and actions are already being recorded - citizens interacting with police don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy, so they cannot opt out of being recorded So it seems fine that citizens can create their own copy of the incident that's already being recorded. To flip it on it's head, I can't think of a reasonable, let alone constitutional, argument for "I can record you but you cannot record me" Of course, this leaves out the case where they don't have body cams/aren't recording. In that instance, though, we already have a pretty strong precedent that people cannot have a reasonable expectation of privacy in public spaces. That's why we can take selfies, vlog, talk on the phone, etc regardless if people are in the background. Not to mention straight up record whatever is around - dashcams, security cameras, etc.
  • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > most police have body cams now, so presumably, their voices and actions are already being recorded These notoriously malfunction during abuse.