11–20 of 95 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article, "addressing perceived threats to the state agricultural industry". In other words, the justification is nothing more than "protecting powerful corporate interests takes precedence over individual rights".
You don't in general have a right to trespass, or break-and-enter, and record what you find.
How is it ever legal to break into a business's property and secretly video the operations? You surely can't sneak into a factory and record their processes to sell to China. Is it only allowed when it's being used for protesting, not for stealing IP? Or only on farms but not in factories? What about trespass law? Non-disclosure agreements for employees? Are those invalid?
Can anyone explain the justification for not recording? I can only see positive things come out of it.
Would you want someone secretly taking video of the most embarrassing, context-free 5 minutes they could find of your job, and invoking a mob to attack you on that basis? These environments, or disrupting their operations because you're trying to get a sweet shot, can be legitimately dangerous. Discouraging people from trespassing in search of publicity could certainly constitute a rational basis for such a law. It's…
The five minutes a day I spend trying to quit vim?
Reporting on legal decisions is garbage when it doesn't even include the name of the case, or better a pointer to the opinion, so I can read the ruling myself. But it seems tenuous to me to claim that the state can criminalize trespassing, but not trespassing for the purposes of X, or conspiring to trespass to commit X, regardless of X.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you want someone secretly taking video of the most embarrassing, context-free 5 minutes they could find of your job, and invoking a mob to attack you on that basis? These environments, or disrupting their operations because you're trying to get a sweet shot, can be legitimately dangerous. Discouraging people from trespassing in search of publicity could certainly constitute a rational basis for such a law. It's…
> the most embarrassing, context-free 5 minutes they could find of your job The five minutes a day I spend trying to quit vim?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article, "addressing perceived threats to the state agricultural industry". In other words, the justification is nothing more than "protecting powerful corporate interests takes precedence over individual rights".
You don't in general have a right to trespass, or break-and-enter, and record what you find.
How is it ever legal to break into a business's property and secretly video the operations? You surely can't sneak into a factory and record their processes to sell to China. Is it only allowed when it's being used for protesting, not for stealing IP? Or only on farms but not in factories? What about trespass law? Non-disclosure agreements for employees? Are those invalid?
>The Utah case, filed by animal-rights groups, was the first lawsuit in the U.S. to challenge one of the ag-gag laws. It came after a woman was charged in 2013 when she filmed a front-end loader dumping a sick cow outside a suburban Salt Lake City slaughterhouse. The case was dismissed because she was standing on a public street when she made the recording.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't in general have a right to trespass, or break-and-enter, and record what you find.
Trespassing and breaking-and-entering were and are still illegal. Ag gag laws went way beyond that; which is why they're unconstitutional.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't in general have a right to trespass, or break-and-enter, and record what you find.
Trespassing is already a crime. It doesn't need to be a double-secret crime just because industrial farmers are afraid of what the trespassers might discover.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trespassing and breaking-and-entering were and are still illegal. Ag gag laws went way beyond that; which is why they're unconstitutional.
That's quite the unsupported claim, which is why I wish I could find the decision. Enhancing penalties in certain situations is incredibly common, even with respect to trespassing - trespassing in certain industrial facilities, or in connection with a conspiracy, or involving breaking and entering, all have increased penalties. I don't really see the rationale for not being able to extra-criminalize trespassing for t…