Michael Brown Shooting

[Pooneil]

As far as I know, reporters have an absolute right to film in public.

I think it is important to be clear here. Reporters have no more rights to shoot video in public than you or I. That is we each have the same rights to publicly collect information on the activities of the government and that right does not come from the employment as a reporter, an affiliation with a recognized news organization or a predetermined intent to report.

And not is not absolute, for instance the police can set up restricted zones in public for various purposes, such as interviewing witnesses.

 

[NoahFence]

Here's a video of the police tear gassing a clearly identifiable press film crew. After the crew fled, more police arrived to break down the equipment... as they were caught on film by another crew.

http://boingboing.net/2014/08/14/video-of-ferguson-police-gassi.html

ETA: I see Unabogie beat me to it.

Is there a single person responsible for that state of affairs, or have the police just become more and more paranoid as time goes by?

That was about as anti-american as you can get right there.

 

[Upchurch]

I think it is important to be clear here. Reporters have no more rights to shoot video in public than you or I. That is we each have the same rights to publicly collect information on the activities of the government and that right does not come from the employment as a reporter, an affiliation with a recognized news organization or a predetermined intent to report.

And not is not absolute, for instance the police can set up restricted zones in public for various purposes, such as interviewing witnesses.

Restricted zones, maybe, but they cannot prevent them from taking pictures or shoot video.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Just in case there is any confusion about how badly these cops want to censor journalists: http://www.ksdk.com/videos/news/local/2014/08/14/14042891/

Those are Al Jazeera reporters.

 

[Pooneil]

Restricted zones, maybe, but they cannot prevent them from taking pictures or shoot video.

Correct. A restricted zone would be a place where the public is temporarily not allowed. But filming from outside the zone should be fine. However recording conversations within might be problematic as such a zone would be put in place to provide privacy for those being interviewed, for instance. It is a technical and perhaps an uncertain point, but there are special situations restrictions can be in place. This is really an aside to the public filming abuse in Ferguson. No cop should ever tell anyone to stop recording in public.

 

[LTC8K6]

The currently circulating photo of the cop is apparently a hoax. There was never an officer on either force with that name.

The currently circulating post by the Ferguson chief's wife is also apparently a hoax. The name does not match either chief's wife.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Restricted zones, maybe, but they cannot prevent them from taking pictures or shoot video.

They can, and do prevent people from taking pictures and shooting video. They're not supposed to, and it is unlawful for them to do so. But they will continue doing so until there is an enforced punishment sufficient to deter them.

 

[Psi Baba]

It seems to have gotten to the point that it's safer to be a reporter in Gaza, or Syria, or Iraq than in Ferguson. I can only imagine these Al Jazeera reporters are thinking, "Wow, and you think the Middle East is scary?"

 

[Meed]

I'll ask again.

In light of this apparent police jackbootery and tyrannical behavior, where are the gun guys?

Where are the Bundy types? Where are the "we need guns to protect ourselves (and society) from government run amok!"? Where are the Second Amendment defenders of the folks in Ferguson? Why are there no "snipers" on the overpasses n Ferguson?

Yooohooo....Where are you guys?

You aren't making sense. Are you saying you think people should go to Ferguson and shoot cops?

 

[I Am The Scum]

You aren't making sense. Are you saying you think people should go to Ferguson and shoot cops?

Not really. He's pointing out the disparity in response.

Unarmed black teen gets murdered by a cop in the middle of the street? Oh, well.
Old white guy has to pay taxes? Sound the alarm!

 

[Meed]

Not really. He's pointing out the disparity in response.

Unarmed black teen gets murdered by a cop in the middle of the street? Oh, well.
Old white guy has to pay taxes? Sound the alarm!

Huh, don't most old white guys have to pay taxes? You seem to be implying that when an old white guy has to pay taxes it brings about an armed response. So where is it?

 

[Lithrael]

Huh, don't most old white guys have to pay taxes? You seem to be implying that when an old white guy has to pay taxes it brings about an armed response. So where is it?

I think they were specifically referring to the April 12 2014 Cliven Bundy armed fanboy protest thing and then the rest was general venting.

"Feds want to remove old white guy's cattle from federal land? Sound the alarm!"

Better?

 

[Primus]

You aren't making sense. Are you saying you think people should go to Ferguson and shoot cops?

I think you're supposed to form a militia first?

What sort of armed fightback against a tyrannical government wouldn't involve shooting cops and soldiers?

I gather the crux of the second amendment is so gun owners can do this rather than 'you have a right to bear arms cause they're cool and go pew pew pew'

 

[I Am The Scum]

Huh, don't most old white guys have to pay taxes? You seem to be implying that when an old white guy has to pay taxes it brings about an armed response. So where is it?

It might have had something to do with the fact that Bundy had a fondness for cattle and looked like the Marlboro Man (post lung cancer), but the point remains: The militia movement doesn't stand for anything other than entitled self-interest. I don't expect any kind of rational consistency.

 

[dudalb]

QFT.

It's disheartening to see people falling over themselves in their rush to express outrage on this critical thinker's forum.

I think you have to distinguish between the details of the shooting...which are still up in the air..and the actions of the police in the aftermath,which,frankly, people should be outraged about, the arrest of two reporters in particular.

 

[dudalb]

Just watch. They will find a way.

At a local Starbucks this morning I heard two Sacramento City Police officers discussing Ferguson,and the attitude of both toeare the Ferguson plice were "What a bunch of incompetent idiots.".

 

[Kaosium]

Again, sorry if I'm repeating.

The Ferguson police chief has denied that Brown had been in possession of the gun or that he, Brown, ever fired on the officer.

From your link:

The police chief said a St. Louis County coroner's report has not been released due, in part, to concerns that releasing certain details--such as the exact number of gunshot wounds on Brown's body--could taint possible witness testimony.

Hrm. What does that mean? Have they not taken all the witness statements yet?

 

[332nd]

I think you have to distinguish between the details of the shooting...which are still up in the air..and the actions of the police in the aftermath,which,frankly, people should be outraged about, the arrest of two reporters in particular.

Well, that & tear gassing/firing rubber bullets at a news crew that was clearly a news crew & identified themselves as such.

 

[Upchurch]

Hrm. What does that mean? Have they not taken all the witness statements yet?

Anecdotally, I've heard they have not. At least a day or two after the incident, the friend that was with Brown at the time was saying he had not been interviewed. I'll see if I can find something that backs that up.

 

[dudalb]

Well, that & tear gassing/firing rubber bullets at a news crew that was clearly a news crew & identified themselves as such.

100% agreed.

I know one thing.The legal department forwhichever police force made the arrest is not getting much sleep ,thinking about the legal Dream Team which the WAPO will no doubt put together to go after them in an unlawful arrest lawsuit.