Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 272 posts

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#141

Post by idiotsecant »

moretrashplz wrote: post #89
nathan_compton wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean for one thing there aren't any laws anywhere protecting anyone else from micro-aggression. I work in a context where this stuff is taken very seriously and I've never seen anyone lose a job over it. I've never been asked to attest to something at all, to say nothing of some mandatory idea. Look, what you reactionaries call "woke" and are so afraid of is the mere pointing out of structural racist shit. There is…

"Governments everywhere are more conservative than ever" - do you have any sources / citations to back this up? "There is literally no legal force behind any woke policies" - Politicians in Michigan have been attempting to pass a law to make harassing someone by misgendering them a felony. There are plenty of laws and policies protecting groups of people that have nothing to do with "structural racist shit". If you'r…

Your only example is a law that is not currently a law? People propose crazy laws all the time. They get used by politicians to get attention and by media outlets to drive clicks from their outrage pornography addicted audience. In both cases it's all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#142

Post by yamazakiwi »

zdragnar wrote: post #28
matthewdgreen wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks to your comment I read through to the original article and it’s even more despicable than I’d thought from the description. She’s being accused of a “hate crime” for “intimidating the police” based on defacing a sign. It’s the most disgusting thing I’ve ever heard of, and I have no idea why any rational human being would defend it.

Several people have been charged with hate crimes for spinning their car tires over rainbow painted sidewalks, even though nobody else was present. Hate crime is a fucking stupid term; a crime is a crime is a crime. That said, if targeting one group deserves special treatment, then targeting any group should get the same. Equal application of the law, y'know?

What sidewalks are you talking about... That is just one instance of misguided outrage to drive your confirmation bias. No one has context for your sensationalized news story.

If people started attacking other people for being Gluten-free, and the government saw that there was a large amount of cases, they would create regulations trying to curtail the amount of crime targeting those people. They are creating regulation with the intention of lowering crime targeting a small group because it is atypical.

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#143

Post by amanaplanacanal »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #90
manuelabeledo wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So much so that Hate Crimes and Safe Spaces are now a thing. People have lost jobs due to Cancel Culture fueled hate-mobs. It is not "cancel culture", just good old fashioned "consequences".

When you lose your job simply for disagreeing with the mob it is indeed "cancel culture" not "consequences".

If you lose your job for disagreeing with the mob, all that means is that your boss is weak. That’s not the culture, that’s your employer.

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#144

Post by leereeves »

zer8k wrote: post #113
zapataband1 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are statistically more likely to die on the job as a delivery driver than a cop.

Another fun fact is when controlling for race and gender you are still more likely to be killed by a cop than almost anything else.

This is so far from true it's absurd.

Roughly 100k Americans per year die from drug overdoses, 30k from car accidents, while only 1k are killed by police.

And while everyone knows cancer and heart disease are the leading causes of death, few people realize they kill significant numbers of young Americans, more than 10k per year.

Even if you limit the discussion to violent crime, you're far more likely to be killed by someone you know than by an officer.

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#145

Post by giraffe_lady »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #46
AlexandrB wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many service workers interacting with the public it's already a reality that they get filmed and posted on TikTok/Instagram - especially if an interaction goes wrong.

True. But if you ask them about being filmed, I doubt they love it. Just saying we can’t conclude malfeasance from cops desiring secrecy.

No for the police you should assume malfeasance by default and craft law & policy around that. They have demonstrated over and over that they consider discretionary violence their core role and oversight of it to be interference.

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#146

Post by otikik »

zdragnar wrote: post #28
matthewdgreen wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks to your comment I read through to the original article and it’s even more despicable than I’d thought from the description. She’s being accused of a “hate crime” for “intimidating the police” based on defacing a sign. It’s the most disgusting thing I’ve ever heard of, and I have no idea why any rational human being would defend it.

Several people have been charged with hate crimes for spinning their car tires over rainbow painted sidewalks, even though nobody else was present. Hate crime is a fucking stupid term; a crime is a crime is a crime. That said, if targeting one group deserves special treatment, then targeting any group should get the same. Equal application of the law, y'know?

> crime is a crime is a crime

Fortunately lawyers can not win trials with that argument in particular.

> Equal application of the law, y'know?

The context here is that we have a group (the Police) already enjoys special privileges (like monopoly on the use of force legally) and want to expand those privileges even further. I don't think your argument works the way you seem to think it works.

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#147

Post by mcdonje »

mrangle wrote: post #104
mcdonje wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Remember that this is the age wherein people are getting arrested for destroying LGBT, BLM, etc signs and art. To think that police won't get away with using a standard that approaches that isn't realistic. Black people and LGBT people are protected classes. Law enforcement is a job. People are getting arrested for hate crimes, the definition of which is a crime motivated by desire to cause harm to a protected class…

There aren't protected class allowances for assault. This thread, more than others on HN, fatally suffers from abuse of jargon. Your last two sentences are word salad. Between the double negative and hyperbole I have zero idea what you are trying to say.

Flippant response. I didn't abuse jargon and there is no word salad. My comment is clear.

You're describing hate crimes and saying police are trying to treat actions against them the same way they treat hate crimes. It's not hyperbole to say that amounts to them making up laws.

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#149

Post by jgwil2 »

mrangle wrote: post #91
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if someone has a right not to be harassed, when doing their job in an office, why doesn't a cop, when doing their job on the street Please show precedent for anyone being prosecuted for rendering an “intimidating smirk” in any other context. Or filming someone working in public.

They're being prosecuted for smirking at cops while destroying pro-cop signage, which can be read as assault. Ask yourself whether in today's age someone could get away with destroying an LGBT sign amidst a pro-LGBT protest, while staring down LGBT people, and get away with it. I don't agree with where the standards are, but most people would observe that this is the standard. Whatever anyone's personal rationalizati…

If she tore it up and threw the pieces in their face then maybe it could be construed as assault. If she was tearing it up and smirking without physically threatening the cops then how could it possibly constitute assault?

Re: New laws trying to criminalize filming cops

#150

Post by kodah »

mitt_romney_12 wrote: post #79
kodah wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10-25 feet seems reasonable with 25 being the upper bound of reasonability. The average person can move 9-12ft/s in a single direction; starting speed would be slower so generous is 5-6ft/s. 2 seconds worth of distance sounds reasonable to keep everyone safe. As others have pointed out the issue likely isn't the distance. It's that police can enforce their own measures here without accountability.

The issue is also the distance, because it makes it harder to get accurate footage of what's going on

How do you account for the safety and liability of near proximity parties?
Post reply on HN