|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Blacksquirrel
   |
Posted - 2011.09.01 20:40:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Blacksquirrel on 01/09/2011 20:40:57
Normally I dont get uppity over government on goings or politics. I have an opinion, but mostly dont make much of it.
Courageous Illinois Man Faces 75 Years In Prison For Recording Cops
However this is BS. People are getting more jail time than murder and rapists for video taping cops.
It also brings up constitutional issues. The biggest being freedom of the press.
Really there's no reason to have this law besides saving face when the police screw up.
|
Blacksquirrel
|
Posted - 2011.09.02 13:35:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Blacksquirrel on 02/09/2011 13:38:25
 Originally by: VKhaun Vex
Edited by: VKhaun Vex on 02/09/2011 06:14:36
Another ******ed anti-police thread based on nothing.
WATCH YOUR OWN GOD DAMNED VIDEO
This guy is not in jail, and the prosecution has no case. The guy is going to end up winning a law suit. No system is perfect because no system is made up of perfect people. The cops did something stupid. Their friends are trying to cover. It's not going to fly. When he's in jail THEN you can make a thread throwing around ideas like constitutional or freedom of the press. Until then this is no different from any other court case.
I say the person who made this thread is a moron.
He hasn't had his say back yet or a trial so I must be correct.
Thats how this works right?
First it's not an anti police thread. I dont paint the cops with a single brush. I dont think they're fascist. If there are bad cops or bad laws fix the bad cops or the bad laws. (Such as this one) The cops in this case were enforcing the law (Even if it is stupid) So I dont really blame them.
Well sir it's not primarily about just "This" case now is it? It's about a law that has unconstitutional elements in it. It's bogus law to begin with that serves no function to the public good. No the guy has not beaten it yet. He could still loose.
The very fact that people get arrested for this is ridiculous. Matter of fact in Chicago a women got arrested for this, and put on trial because she recorded a cop sexually harassing her (after she called them for help) Then when she tried the (Honest way) to get justice. They gave her the run around, and tried to ignore it, and hide it. So she recorded that conversation...She requested actions be taken, (Now with proof of wrong doings) and then was arrested, and she did go to trial.
Furthermore I dont need to see a man go to trial, and get convicted to know that a law violates the U.S Constitution. Does that make any sense?
So once again as you seemingly can't grasp a few things... Cops == not the real problem here. A law that gives more time for recording cops (Who record you all the time btw) than violent crimes, and violates constitutional rights == BAD.
|
Blacksquirrel
|
Posted - 2011.09.03 03:58:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Sader Rykane
Way to blow **** out of proportion.
They key phrase here is
"IF CONVICTED"
No judge will convict him of all counts; if anything he'll get some lesser sentence for like 6 months community service or something.
No the key word here is arrested... You think it's ok that people can get arrested for video taping/recording cops in their own homes? You're ok with the press not being able to video tape cops in public? Being arrested,charged, and awaiting a felony trial isn't a small thing. What if that person can't afford bail? That means they sit in city jail until their court date which is usually a couple of months.
Let's say he does get 6 months of CC. You really think someone taping cops should get that? Has anyone yet been able to explain what public service or public safety this law provides? Or why in some states cops are now required to wear video cameras on their person full time when on duty? Bit of a dichotomy when you have states with exact opposite laws.
Furthermore lets just create a hypothetical situation. (Not really that hypothetical now because we see plenty of bad cops going overboard on video) You take out your phone take a few snap shots at a scene...maybe the cops have acted poorly maybe they haven't. You're fine with getting your phone confiscated or yourself arrested? Not even impeding a police action just standing off to the side? If anything the cops were doing their job your video could prove just that... That they took appropriate actions. Which could avoid some ******ed lawsuit against them or the city etc...Saving money and time.
Someone please enlighten me why this is a good thing or something to be ignored?
|
Blacksquirrel
|
Posted - 2011.09.03 14:16:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Blacksquirrel on 03/09/2011 14:17:51
Originally by: VKhaun Vex
Edited by: VKhaun Vex on 03/09/2011 06:16:32
Originally by: Blacksquirrel
Someone please enlighten me why this is a good thing or something to be ignored?
You're writing in a second half of what everyone says. I don't know what your problem is but it's really annoying that you spin everything like this.
No one said it was a positive thing that it happened, they were arguing against you blowing it out of proportion toward the negative.
Originally by: Blacksquirrel
No the key word here is arrested...
This is called backpedalling. You started a thread with keywords about spending the better part of a cetury in jail, and you knew it was trivial and he wouldn't be. Now you're talking about being convicted and you know that THAT is trivial because he won't be it. Even says in your own ****ing vid they have no case.
You think anyone is fooled by **** like this?
Next you'll be talking about whatever the next step down is like it's the end of all freedom and they are stamping your occupation as a barcode on your ass when you're born. When you run out of things to take into hyperbole the thread will die and you'll calm down until you find another article to start over with again.
It's ridiculous sensationalism.
It's not helping anyone.
There's a real discussion that could be had about what to do with the situation of an officer being wrong when arresting someone and how to balance error rate with abuse, and you are just getting in the way with this bull**** 'enlighten me about how it's a good thing' derail attempt in your own thread!
I can't be upset about the whole thing? I should really just wait for conviction because thats what my original post states?
I've already stated people have been arrested and sent to trial over this. The whole thing is BS. And if i am making "forum drama" I dont care in the least bit. Getting arrested for nonsense is something to be upset over... And this hasnt just happened once or twice.
Furthermore you have no way of knowing if the man will or wont be convicted. I would assume a judge or jury would see such a case and throw it out... But I would also assume that a law such as this wouldnt be made in the first place.
He could be convicted because well he did break the law...(which is video taping or recording police is a felony)
I'm not attempting to derail my own thread it's was a rhetorical statement. Nor would that really be an instance of "detrailment" as it's still a part of the topic on hand.
So you really believe that a person shouldnt be upset over people getting arrested and sent to trial over video taping police? Hell they drop drug cases more than these now in Illinois.
Too reiterate for the third time... The whole thing stinks, and people should not be arrested, await trial, or even go to trial for something like this.
|
Blacksquirrel
|
Posted - 2011.09.04 15:32:00 -
[5]
Originally by: VKhaun Vex
Edited by: VKhaun Vex on 04/09/2011 03:23:52
Originally by: Blacksquirrel
He could be convicted because well he did break the law...(which is video taping or recording police is a felony)
We've articulated our points just fine and I'm not interested in beating a dead horse, but this is a pretty bold snippet.
Are you using the logic, that because he was wrongfully arrested by a cop and charged with eavesdropping in a case they haven't won and aren't likely to win to send him to jail for 75 years... that this makes it 'illegal' in your mind?
Or is there an actual law you can cite that makes it illegal to videotape or record police?
You do realize if it were illegal they would not need to try and charge him with something abstract like eavesdropping, right? They would just charge him with the actual offense of breaking that law... Though of course you might mean it's illegal somewhere else...
I'd love to know where there's a law directly against this and not some other pending court case you're assuming will result in tyranny and the end of all freedom.
You do know the eavesdropping law now includes videotaping/recording police without their consent...right? They haven't thought up some abstract legal plot because they couldn't get him for something else. (He hasnt done anything else.) He was arrested for videotaping police...which is ILLEGAL. It just falls under the "eavesdropping" law which they ratified a few months ago. Like they stated in the video he has 5 counts of illegally recording police without their consent...Which btw was done in a public place.
|
Blacksquirrel
|
Posted - 2011.09.06 01:58:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Blacksquirrel on 06/09/2011 01:59:51
It's still technically illegal because of the audio portion of taping someone. Essentially you and I would argue over legal interpretation of http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/fulltext.asp?Name=094-0183 So I dont see the point of arguing who's technically right in some forum **** wagging contest. You wanna be right... ok you're right...
http://gizmodo.com/5553765/are-cameras-the-new-guns
As of now if they ask you to stop (And you dont) or say you didnt tell them to begin with they can arrest you.
But you can still be arrested and go to trial... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/25/tiawanda-moore-acquitted-_n_936313.html
Yes she was acquitted... but she shouldnt have been arrested or gone to trial.
I dont care if I didnt originally state that in the first post... Oh well you got me for not elaborating... And if I am over reacting then the wise thing to do would have ignored the post in the first place no?
And for the hundredth time... It's BS that people are getting arrested and awaiting trial even if they can get off. People should not be arrested and have to go through months of nonsense for this.
|
|
|
| |
|