looks like NY wants you to stop recording police misconduct

SmarterthanYou said:
Texas did something similar here a few years ago. you either have to move over a lane or slow down at least to 20 miles an hour for the cops safety. they also tried amending that particular law by adding a death penalty possibility for those that didn't do such things.
Click to expand...

You're really going to need to cite some evidence to support your "death penalty" inclusion. :palm:
 
Socrtease said:
I don't see where it says anything about recording.
Click to expand...

This was what I was about to say. It says physical contact. That says nothing about taking video, which is not a physical contact for those who are going to get all bent about this law.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
AZ passed a similar law.
When possible; we must change lanes and if a lane change isn't feasable, then we are to reduce speed and proceed with caution.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's unreasonable. Truthfully, I think I did it when possible anyway. I think it's more important for big rigs on highways. When they're doing 70+mph, the wind alone can be dangerous to anyone standing on the shoulder of the highway.
 
Darla said:
You can't put anything past these fuckers here. Last year (or maybe two summers ago now), a cop was struck on the side of the LIE and killed. So what did they do? Pass a law that says that anytime a cop is on the side of the road, you have to change lanes. So that there is an empty lane between them and the sidepass. You should see people trying to change lanes when they see a cop pulled over. It puts everyone else's life at risk. But none of our lives have any value when compared to the life of one cop. It's really amazing. I refuse to do it. And have yet to be be pulled over for the infraction.
Click to expand...

Wow, an outlaw. A new surprise every day.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
And this has what to do with what was being discussed, regarding what had proceeded our daily "rant-du-jour"?
Click to expand...
it has to do with the way that cops like to stretch the wordings of the law to their benefit. for this particular law I can see that 'physical contact' is going to be something like a suspect pushing a cops hand away as they tried to seize a cellphone, at least how it will read on the report that is.
 
Time for more people to get Google Glasses. Also, don't hold your phone so it is apparent you are recording. I have recorded at least a half dozen police stops and the cops never knew I was recording.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it has to do with the way that cops like to stretch the wordings of the law to their benefit. for this particular law I can see that 'physical contact' is going to be something like a suspect pushing a cops hand away as they tried to seize a cellphone, at least how it will read on the report that is.
Click to expand...

I don't feel that this law is ambigious, but I totally agree that the "move over' law is. Changing lanes is always a judgement call, and I will abide only my own judgement on that.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I said they tried. It failed. so currently there is no death penalty inclusion for hitting a police officer on the side of the road.
Click to expand...

So they tried to make it a death penalty offense if you accidently killed a police officer by hitting their car on the side of the road. That's outrageous, good thing it didn't pass.
 
In CO we have a "change lanes or slow down" law. They don't want people trying to change lanes dangerously, if you slow down you're okay.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I said they tried. It failed. so currently there is no death penalty inclusion for hitting a police officer on the side of the road.
Click to expand...

But aren't you able to find a news article that addresses the proposal.
Plus you made it appear that the "death penalty" part had to do with not changing lanes.

SmarterthanYou said:
Texas did something similar here a few years ago. you either have to move over a lane or slow down at least to 20 miles an hour for the cops safety. they also tried amending that particular law by adding a death penalty possibility for those that didn't do such things.
Click to expand...
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it has to do with the way that cops like to stretch the wordings of the law to their benefit. for this particular law I can see that 'physical contact' is going to be something like a suspect pushing a cops hand away as they tried to seize a cellphone, at least how it will read on the report that is.
Click to expand...

Of course you will "see" it that way.
I never doubted for a minute that it's what you would see. :palm:
 
Darla said:
So they tried to make it a death penalty offense if you accidently killed a police officer by hitting their car on the side of the road. That's outrageous, good thing it didn't pass.
Click to expand...

no, they tried to make it a death penalty offense if you killed an officer on the side of the road, not just hitting their car. it failed because the wording of the law made it so that there was no accidental incident, any death of a police officer would have been intentional.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
But aren't you able to find a news article that addresses the proposal.
Plus you made it appear that the "death penalty" part had to do with not changing lanes.
Click to expand...
my apologies if you confused the two because of my wording. that was not my intent, as I was addressing a point of darlas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top