141–150 of 202 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This administration is overstepping legal bound left and right. If they want you in trouble, you'll be in trouble. Appeals to law, even if successful, will take too long.
And inversely, if you break the law, and they 'like' you - then you are freed or never even charged in the first place. Land of the free/saviour of the free world.
IANAL but mens rea is a serious consideration here. A prosecutor would have to prove that you have knowingly and wilfully committed the crime in order to be convicted, so unmarked cars are in practice out of scope. I think the main implication is that you won't be able to use any drone recordings for legal action against ICE unless you can prove that you recorded from further than 3,000 feet (one hell of a camera) or…
No, the point isn't just to stop legal action against ICE, it's also to go after anyone who posts drone footage that goes viral. Party of free speech, btw.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You think they have these things, but they don't. I am theoretically eligible to get 60% of my income for 3 months after losing my job, while I look for my new job. But if I actually try to claim that, they demand so many documents and meetings that it's not actually practical to receive that benefit. The only people who can receive benefits are the people who are experts at navigating the benefit system. For instanc…
That's perfect, actually! We should do that in France, so only people who actually need the money will make the effort. As is, we have some middle class "hippies" finding ways to backpack travel across the world on the taxpayers' dime.
Flying a drone within 1/2 mile of ICE vehicles, which may be unmarked, is illegal? You can be flying a drone and if an unmarked ICE vehicle drives close enough, without warning, you have now broken serious FAA laws? This isn’t the kind of restriction that gets passed when the people making the rules care about being fair or consistent. It’s a power grab.
I hate ICE like the next guy but if the drone followed the wrong car, shouldn't that be illegal?
The inclusion of drones and vehicles doesn't really change that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate ICE like the next guy but if the drone followed the wrong car, shouldn't that be illegal?
The 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th Circuit Courts of Appeals have recognized the First Amendment right to record law enforcement in public. The inclusion of drones and vehicles doesn't really change that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You cannot fly drones over 400ft above the ground (with some very narrow exceptions). So this isn't narrow, it's extremely broad. You can't read such rules in a vacuum without knowing their context.
Ummmm… I fly drones at 8,000ft for arial mountain shots… drones are surprisingly capable given good wind conditions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th Circuit Courts of Appeals have recognized the First Amendment right to record law enforcement in public. The inclusion of drones and vehicles doesn't really change that.
Yes, but what if the drone followed a car they __believe__ is law enforcement (where in reality it is not)?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th Circuit Courts of Appeals have recognized the First Amendment right to record law enforcement in public. The inclusion of drones and vehicles doesn't really change that.
Yes, but what if the drone followed a car they __believe__ is law enforcement (where in reality it is not)?
Court rulings citing the amendments above were made to affirm that law enforcement are not an exception to the general rule that filming is allowed.