re: Federal PA judge rules you can't freely record police

quote:

---

Except you cannot find one comment where I defended a criminal.

---

Hold on, I'll go read your posts. Brb

quote:

---

Police have phones, if they need something recorded then they can do it themselves. This is just one more excuse for people to bitch and complain about their "rights". Yeah we get it, you took a poli sci class.

---

ZOMG!!!!!!!!!!

Your contrarian shtick is so new and refreshing. It's not at all obvious and played out!

quote:

---

“Absent any authority from the Supreme Court or our Court of Appeals, we decline to create a new First Amendment right for citizens to photograph officers when they have no expressive purpose such as challenging police actions.”

---

Wow, what a weak, gutless rationale.

quote:

---

It means the judge is an idiot

---

The ruling pretty much nullifies anything this man has accomplished in life. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that any education this man has received was wasted.

These shameless a-hole cops are constantly trying to trample our civil rights and they finally got a damn judge to agree with them....at least in part. It's not going to stop until they can beat the shite out of people and arrest everyone that films it and beat the shite out of them too.

quote:

---

You would hope this gets overturned on appeal. Hope is a quickly fading thing these days though. This ruling isn't good for anyone

---

It's a waste of time. Nobody will pay attention to it. The ruling means absolutely nothing.

This is a ridiculous opinion that won't stand on appeal. The police are in a public place doing the work that they are paid to do by taxpayers. A person sees the police and starts filming. The person is not interfering with the work of the police officers; if he/she was interfering, then the police would have every right to ask the person to move away and, if the person refused, to make an arrest. But if a person is filming the police from a reasonable distance and is not interfering with their work, it is ridiculous to suggest that they have no right to film a public act by public officials.

The suggestion that the "right to record police only extends to instances when the person doing the recording is engaging in "expressive conduct" that in some way challenges or criticizes the officers" is just made up garbage. There is no such limitation on individuals filming the actions of public officials. Moreover, how would the police know whether the person filming them is engaging in "expressive conduct" while the person is filming them? There is no way of knowing the motivation for filming merely be observing someone filming the police.

Here is a brief description of the federal judge who rendered this brilliant opinion. It is not too hard to see why this person is not governed by a reasonable reading of the Constitution and law:

LINK

It's still funny and even got a bite in this thread