Declining attitude to law and order

Status
Not open for further replies.
deuse said:
"The female adult, who was later identified as a member of the press, did not identify herself as press and later admitted she did not have proper press credentials on her person. Both individuals have been arrested for 148 P.C."


Now you lazy liberals can rest easy.
But next time do your home work...Or you will need a bid,,,because IT WILL get messy :)
Click to expand...

LOL that's your evidence? Wow.

The evidence of the lie is right there. " The female adult, who was later identified as a member of the press, did not identify herself as press..." but she did identify as press, you can hear her screaming it on the floor. The way they word it is like at the station she suddenly announces she's is press. "at which time a female adult ran towards the deputies, ignored repeated commands to stay back" except she didn't did she. She walked up to where they were arresting someone to film it. They told her to stay back at which point the video ends. The next video is someone else filming her being arrested and screaming she's with KPCC. There is no law against filming anything. In fact the first amendment specifically protects her right to film that. If this was Alex Jones and he was arrested in a democratic city you lot would be screaming from the rafters about the right being silenced :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Colonel_Klinck said:
LOL that's your evidence? Wow.

The evidence of the lie is right there. " The female adult, who was later identified as a member of the press, did not identify herself as press..." but she did identify as press, you can hear her screaming it on the floor. The way they word it is like at the station she suddenly announces she's is press. "at which time a female adult ran towards the deputies, ignored repeated commands to stay back" except she didn't did she. She walked up to where they were arresting someone to film it. They told her to stay back at which point the video ends. The next video is someone else filming her being arrested and screaming she's with KPCC. There is no law against filming anything. In fact the first amendment specifically protects her right to film that. If this was Alex Jones and he was arrested in a democratic city you lot would be screaming from the rafters about the right being silenced :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


From the police chief.
So you're saying is, what the Police Chief said was a lie?

She was screaming AFTER THE FACT.....get things in order.
She broke the law and is going to court....lets see what a judge says :)
 
deuse said:
From the police chief.
So you're saying is, what the Police Chief said was a lie?

She was screaming AFTER THE FACT.....get things in order.
She broke the law and is going to court....lets see what a judge says :)
Click to expand...

Are you saying the police never lie? After all the lies they've recently been caught in? As for breaking the law, which law? Filming an arrest isn't illegal, in fact its a constitutionally protected right. Also everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Whats the betting the charges are dropped?
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
Are you saying the police never lie? After all the lies they've recently been caught in? As for breaking the law, which law? Filming an arrest isn't illegal, in fact its a constitutionally protected right. Also everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Whats the betting the charges are dropped?
Click to expand...

Could you quote where the constitution, that was written 250 years ago, mentions filming arrests?
 
Dis86 said:
Could you quote where the constitution, that was written 250 years ago, mentions filming arrests?
Click to expand...

The first amendment covers freedom of the press and she is press and filming is a form of reporting. It doesn''t need to mention every form of reporting which would be ridiculous. If you think filming news isn't covered by freedom of the press then we have very different ideas of what freedom of the press means.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
The first amendment covers freedom of the press and she is press and filming is a form of reporting. It doesn''t need to mention every form of reporting which would be ridiculous. If you think filming news isn't covered by freedom of the press then we have very different ideas of what freedom of the press means.
Click to expand...

So you can't...Because it doesn't state it. Filming isn't reporting at all. Dissemination of a video would be. What it doesn't give you the right to do is film everywhere and at any time. There are still restrictions on the activity of the press and the right of others in certain situations can trump them.
 
Dis86 said:
Could you quote where the constitution, that was written 250 years ago, mentions filming arrests?
Click to expand...

Sounds like a very outdated document that isn't fit for purpose in modern society, OP. Begs the question of its relevance, when you think about it. Would be rather silly to slavishly prostrate oneself at the altar of a document written by a bunch of guys who literally owned people, wouldn't it? :)
 
Dis86 said:
So you can't...Because it doesn't state it. Filming isn't reporting at all. Dissemination of a video would be. What it doesn't give you the right to do is film everywhere and at any time. There are still restrictions on the activity of the press and the right of others in certain situations can trump them.
Click to expand...

Of course it doesn't state it, its hundreds of years old, that doesn't mean it doesn't protect it though. Filming, photographing, commentating, or just observing in a public space is going to be covered by freedom of the press when its a member of the press. As soon as the police start arresting the press for doing their job in a public space you are entering very dangerous territory. My guess is any charges will be dropped.

https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2020/heading-back-to-ferguson-know-your-rights/
 
Theophany said:
Sounds like a very outdated document that isn't fit for purpose in modern society, OP. Begs the question of its relevance, when you think about it. Would be rather silly to slavishly prostrate oneself at the altar of a document written by a bunch of guys who literally owned people, wouldn't it? :)
Click to expand...

It would be. Almost like the right to bear arms is crazy in a modern society.
 
Dis86 said:
It would be. Almost like the right to bear arms is crazy in a modern society.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. It boggles the mind that the US is still so absurdly beholden to their national gun fetish.

That being said, I do sympathise with Tony Martin. But there was so much wrong in that case that it would be impossible to single him out.

Kind of makes you wonder why there is a diminished level of respect for plod.
 
Theophany said:
Absolutely. It boggles the mind that the US is still so absurdly beholden to their national gun fetish.

That being said, I do sympathise with Tony Martin. But there was so much wrong in that case that it would be impossible to single him out.

Kind of makes you wonder why there is a diminished level of respect for plod.
Click to expand...

The lack of respect I have is for our shambles of a judicial system. Soft. Self serving. Corrupt.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
Are you saying the police never lie? After all the lies they've recently been caught in? As for breaking the law, which law? Filming an arrest isn't illegal, in fact its a constitutionally protected right. Also everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Whats the betting the charges are dropped?
Click to expand...


I'm saying your talking out your butt as normal...

Go and look at what she has been charged with. Then look at that law in that state to see what it means.
But you should have done that in the first place...
 
deuse said:
I'm saying your talking out your butt as normal...

Go and look at what she has been charged with. Then look at that law in that state to see what it means.
But you should have done that in the first place...
Click to expand...

Oh should I :rolleyes: I really haven't missed you in SC. And state laws can't override the first amendment so there is that.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
Oh should I :rolleyes: I really haven't missed you in SC. And state laws can't override the first amendment so there is that.
Click to expand...


Wrong again..

But once once again...
She shouted she was press AFTER THE FACT. She broke the law
She resisted arrest. She broke the law again.
She was asked to back up. She refused. She broke another law
Even in her video she was asked to backup. She did not.

When someone is detained or arrested. You should say nothing and do what you are asked by the police.
You can ask the police why. But he\she does not have to tell you till they want to.

If you don't like the law that the police have a hard job to inforce.
Don't go there...simples.
 
deuse said:
Wrong again..

But once once again...
She shouted she was press AFTER THE FACT. She broke the law
She resisted arrest. She broke the law again.
She was asked to back up. She refused. She broke another law
Even in her video she was asked to backup. She did not.

When someone is detained or arrested. You should say nothing and do what you are asked by the police.
You can ask the police why. But he\she does not have to tell you till they want to.

If you don't like the law that the police have a hard job to inforce.
Don't go there...simples.
Click to expand...

No its not wrong again because the states can't override the 1st ammendment. Show me in law where they can if you think I'm wrong.

Wow so you believe in the absolute power of the State. Do as we say or else. Yeah you fit in with an authoritarian regime, of course until they come for you and yours and then you'll cry in the corner.

Let's see what happens if/when this gets to court.
 
It is quite remarkable the preoccupation that some people here have with the US Legal system and adherence to it (or lack thereof).

Thank heavens we live in such a law-abiding country where our Government and its ministers and SPADs would not dream of breaking the law ;)
 
Are you peaceably assembling if you're stood in the way of emergency services? I'd say no, so no, the first amendment rights aren't the unrestricted right to protest where ever you want at any time. I clearly can't declare I'm protesting and walk onto a military base or claim I'm a member of the press. That's so stupid.
 
https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/news/birmingham-stabbings-update-chief-constable

People have questioned why we did not give a description or CCTV image of the attacker sooner.

Decisions on releasing images and descriptions are made by investigating officers. A very experienced senior investigator officer was appointed, supported by a very experienced strategic investigator, a role used in complex cases. They reported to the Assistant Chief Constable for crime who was the strategic commander.

An extensive CCTV trawl was carried out to secure images of the suspect on public and private CCTV by investigators. An appeal was launched using the UK police major incident public reporting site to quickly secure mobile phone images. I would like to thank people for all the help they gave us on this.

In deciding whether to release details of the suspect, senior officers balanced the risk to the public, the vague nature of the description and the risk of well-intended but inaccurate reports of sightings alongside already active lines of enquiry. This was influenced by the absence of a good quality CCTV image that would assist identification.

We shared images of the suspect at 7pm on the 6 September. These were the best images secured during the investigation throughout that day. They were downloaded from the private CCTV cameras at 5:30pm – just 20 minutes after we discovered them - once a member of staff for the company was able to get access via a password.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom