The only reason why red-light cameras exist is so the cops have more time to spend at coffee and donut shops not to mention spending more time with their girlfriends, boyfriends, wives and husbands.
I agree with the LAPD officer but not for the same reasons he states. It's true that there are a lot of people who don't listen to officers but that the number of people who don't listen aren't in the majority, they are in the minority.
The problem is that there are too many cases where morons feel they have an entitlement to ignore what the officer is telling them and the majority of those who are sticking their noses up in the air to the cops are those looking to deliberately provoke the cops into doing something they can catch on video.
Just a look at the majority of videos posted on youtube and you can see how these morons with their cameras deliberately go out of their way to make a spectacle out of themselves in order to create the next viral video and ti's simply gotten out of control. Here in Michigan, I have never had a problem with filming a police officer and I surely don't mouth off to the officer or act rude to them.
Don't know about you guys, but a cop is a person just like any of us. You treat them with disrespect and, guess what? You're going to get disrespected right back.
So, Harris got a no-bid contract by using the products of its competitor? That's like Best Buy selling Circuit City branded merchandise, or Walmart selling Target-branded merchandise. LOLS
Where exactly in that letter did it say that they were denying the request? I saw no such thing other than "it may be necessary to release this document under request". How does that state that the FOIA request was denied?
These officers were very cordial to these drone enthusiasts but I watched that video about two weeks ago and these idiots were just trying to provoke a response with the police. Secondly, your right to record ends at the gate or the door. Just as you have an expectation of privacy in your home, these officers have an expectation of privacy at their own police station. Your right to record officers in public is legal; your right to record them in their own police station is not.
The LAPD is quite correct. Filming police in public is one thing but when you cross over onto public property, you are violating the law. It's why you can't fly a drone over the White House or why you can't fly a drone over an airport. Flying a drone over police department property and capturing license plate numbers, the payout of the police cruisers is a violation of the privacy and security of law enforcement.
This article completely misses the point and tries to make the excuse that police property is the public. The officers are correct because how would you like it if I decided to fly a drone close to your bedroom window and started recording you?
The prolem, and I read the writeup on Huffington Post days ago, is that there is a minimum of $5,000 compensation that athletes can be paid, which expect the NCAA to only pay athletes $5,000. Not only that, but the NCAA and the colleges they play for can both appeal the decision.
The morons with the videocameras and cellphone cameras are exactly what I'm talking about. I can't tell you how many times I've watched videos where idiots just deliberately stop to film police officers in order to provoke a confrontation. I just watched one video, a few days ago, where these idiots were flying drones over a private area of a police station in California and they proceeded to argue with the cops over it. It was obvious they were provoking a confrontation.
I never said we didn't live in a police state. But, then again, I don't go out actively trolling cops with a loud mouth and a videocamera or a camera/cellphone. While it technically isn't illegal, when you actively provoke a bear, expect to get chased down and attacked. How many of you deliberately provoke a hive of angry bees? Remember, never wake the sleeping dragon, because you're bound to get bit.
I find it hilarious that the above article leaves out too much. First, if the person you're walking with is under suspicion of a crime, the police don't know if you're also involved. They have every right to detain you until they can confirm your identity and involvement with that person you're walking with.
While the ruling is too broad, it's more designed to prevent morons from stopping and distracting police officers who are not just investigating someone they suspect but also because they don't know who you are.
Don't always assume that decisions like this are 100% wrong. There are legitimate concerns for officers to be concerned with their own safety.
I have to side with the victim's family members because autopsy photos, even if they are considered to be in the public domain, doesn't give anyone else the right to profit off those photos. While there may be exceptions, such as journalism and the news media; when other entities, such as movie and television studios, seek to profit off those photos, it just creates one massive screw-up, and also creates liability for anyone involved in the production of that movie or television series.
First of all, the county of Los Angeles should have exercised more restraint and they should not have released those autopsy photos and I seriously doubt that the law was designed to allow the entertainment industry to profit from those autopsy photos.
Second, Warner Brothers Television, producer John Wells, NBC, Turner Network Television, the city of Los Angeles, the County of Los Angeles and Warner Home Video have all set themselves up for liability because not withstanding that the scene appears on a large number of episodes in the series, but also the rebroadcast of those episodes, the DVD releases, digital downloads, torrent downloads, Blu-ray releases and releases to other regions and other countries, the aforementioned people and entities may be in a lot of trouble for using those photos without permission from the family.
I also expect that the aftermath of this lawsuit could force municipalities, cities, states and even congress itself, to pass a law making it a crime to use sensitive photos such as autopsies in any commercial venue.
Fact of the matter is, Warner Brothers and everyone involved, have commercially profited off those autopsy photos in such a way as to invade the privacy of Andy Nelson Abarca's family.
Such autopsy photos, even if they are considered to be in the public domain, are not without limit. I think some overzealous crew member on Southland discovered the photos and decided to suggest them to the producers to add to the montage, not realizing what kind of impact it would have on the family.
Imagine that a member of your family was brutally murdered and the country medical examiner took photos and then Paramount, Universal or Warner Brothers decided to include those photos in every episode of one of their TV shows. There you are, sitting at home, interested in watching this TV series and you're confronted with the autopsy photos of your slain family member. Nobody can imagine what kind of psychological effect that could have on a family member and it was callous of Warner Brothers and everyone mentioned above to even use those photos in the production of their TV series.
These studios have special effects departments, they could have easily created fake autopsy photos, but they decided to use real-life autopsy photos? This isn't like the TV series COPS or World's Dangerous Police Chases. Everyone involved in this TV series should be sued because they intruded into the private lives of this mourning family.
I just don't see these students prevailing because campus administration and campus safety had an absolute right to search those student's dorm room and they had no expectation of privacy since they were in violation of campus policies and they were violating the law.
I missed the point on that issue but the fact is, you cannot file a lawsuit publicly shaming an institution and then hide behind anonymity. These frat boy morons should be ashamed of themselves.
They filed their lawsuit alleging the violation of their constitutional rights, except that their rights weren't violated. What Mike Masnick left out of his article above was that a faculty member found a cell phone in her classroom with numerous texts suggesting drug activity, a court document states, from a court complaint back in February where Bucknell attempted to dismiss the lawsuit in a complaint filed earlier this year.
From what I found out about searches of campus dorms: "with limited exception, courts support the rights of college and university officials to enter and search rooms in order to serve institutional purposes, which include protecting the health and safety of students and enforcing college rules and regulations."
In effect, once the campus discovered that some of its students were engaging in the business of illegal drugs on its campus, it had the right to search the student's dorm in relation to this illegal activity.
Additionally, what Mike's article also neglected to mention was that campus authorities discovered LSD tablets, marijuana, synthetic marijuana, 5.5-inch hunting knife, slingshot, pellet gun designed to look like an automatic pistol, 11-inch bong, 16-inch bong, nine pipes, digital scale, seven grinders and a lock-picking set.
I don't see these students on the winning side of this court battle.
I have to admit that this is an interesting argument. But, unfortunately, there is no constitutional right to keeping your name out of a legitimate court trial when you are accused of a crime. These students were busted for possessing illegal drugs and they got caught. Arguing that revealing their names is a constitutional violation is such a wrong reading of the law that you have to scratch your heads wondering how any competent attorney came up with this argument.
Sure, anyone accused of a crime is going to be embarrassed, but arguing that they have a constitutional right to keep their names out of it violates the very visit of open court proceedings.
If these students didn't want their names revealed, then here's a suggestion, DON'T VIOLATE THE LAW.
That's not solely due to Sony. I remember once I had paid my domain name renewal to my webhost and they neglected to renew my domain name, so I was screwed for three days because of the oversight.
I actually believe the stupid morons in this country for all of these crap laws that put the NSA, FBI, DOJ and the TSA in power. That's right, I called everyone a moron.
Why?
Because it's those morons who agreed with congress to pass the Patriot Act and every other law that congress passed to give our government unprecedented power. By the way, what happens when you give government too much power? They are unwilling to relinquish control of that power.
On the post: Shocking: Red Light Camera Company CEO And Chicago City Official Indicted On Corruption Charges
On the post: LAPD Officer Says Tragedies Could Be Prevented If Citizens Would Just Shut Up And Do What Cops Tell Them To
The problem is that there are too many cases where morons feel they have an entitlement to ignore what the officer is telling them and the majority of those who are sticking their noses up in the air to the cops are those looking to deliberately provoke the cops into doing something they can catch on video.
Just a look at the majority of videos posted on youtube and you can see how these morons with their cameras deliberately go out of their way to make a spectacle out of themselves in order to create the next viral video and ti's simply gotten out of control. Here in Michigan, I have never had a problem with filming a police officer and I surely don't mouth off to the officer or act rude to them.
Don't know about you guys, but a cop is a person just like any of us. You treat them with disrespect and, guess what? You're going to get disrespected right back.
On the post: Unsealed Motions Shows How Team Prenda Sought To Hide Money
On the post: FAA Grounds Attempts At Ride Sharing For Amateur Pilots
On the post: Hypocrisy In Action: Stingray Maker, Who Relies On Secret No Bid Contracts, Whines About Motorola Getting A No Bid Contract
On the post: Specially-Designated 'FOIA Denial Officers' Are Handling The Dept. Of Education's Rejected Requests
On the post: Los Angeles Police Develop Sudden Privacy Concerns When Someone Flies A Drone Over Their Parking Lot
On the post: Los Angeles Police Develop Sudden Privacy Concerns When Someone Flies A Drone Over Their Parking Lot
This article completely misses the point and tries to make the excuse that police property is the public. The officers are correct because how would you like it if I decided to fly a drone close to your bedroom window and started recording you?
On the post: Many Pulitzer Prize Winners Demand DOJ Stop Threatening Reporter James Risen With Jail If He Protects His Sources
On the post: NCAA Found To Violate Antitrust Laws In Preventing Schools From Sharing Licensing Revenue With Student Athletes
On the post: NCAA Found To Violate Antitrust Laws In Preventing Schools From Sharing Licensing Revenue With Student Athletes
On the post: Connecticut Supreme Court Says State Cops Can Detain You Simply For Being In The Vicinity Of Someone They're Arresting
On the post: Connecticut Supreme Court Says State Cops Can Detain You Simply For Being In The Vicinity Of Someone They're Arresting
On the post: Connecticut Supreme Court Says State Cops Can Detain You Simply For Being In The Vicinity Of Someone They're Arresting
While the ruling is too broad, it's more designed to prevent morons from stopping and distracting police officers who are not just investigating someone they suspect but also because they don't know who you are.
Don't always assume that decisions like this are 100% wrong. There are legitimate concerns for officers to be concerned with their own safety.
On the post: Family Sues Over Autopsy Images Appearing In Southland Opening Montage
First of all, the county of Los Angeles should have exercised more restraint and they should not have released those autopsy photos and I seriously doubt that the law was designed to allow the entertainment industry to profit from those autopsy photos.
Second, Warner Brothers Television, producer John Wells, NBC, Turner Network Television, the city of Los Angeles, the County of Los Angeles and Warner Home Video have all set themselves up for liability because not withstanding that the scene appears on a large number of episodes in the series, but also the rebroadcast of those episodes, the DVD releases, digital downloads, torrent downloads, Blu-ray releases and releases to other regions and other countries, the aforementioned people and entities may be in a lot of trouble for using those photos without permission from the family.
I also expect that the aftermath of this lawsuit could force municipalities, cities, states and even congress itself, to pass a law making it a crime to use sensitive photos such as autopsies in any commercial venue.
Fact of the matter is, Warner Brothers and everyone involved, have commercially profited off those autopsy photos in such a way as to invade the privacy of Andy Nelson Abarca's family.
Such autopsy photos, even if they are considered to be in the public domain, are not without limit. I think some overzealous crew member on Southland discovered the photos and decided to suggest them to the producers to add to the montage, not realizing what kind of impact it would have on the family.
Imagine that a member of your family was brutally murdered and the country medical examiner took photos and then Paramount, Universal or Warner Brothers decided to include those photos in every episode of one of their TV shows. There you are, sitting at home, interested in watching this TV series and you're confronted with the autopsy photos of your slain family member. Nobody can imagine what kind of psychological effect that could have on a family member and it was callous of Warner Brothers and everyone mentioned above to even use those photos in the production of their TV series.
These studios have special effects departments, they could have easily created fake autopsy photos, but they decided to use real-life autopsy photos? This isn't like the TV series COPS or World's Dangerous Police Chases. Everyone involved in this TV series should be sued because they intruded into the private lives of this mourning family.
On the post: Court To Frat Boys: Openness Of Courts More Compelling Than Your Potential Embarrassment
On the post: Court To Frat Boys: Openness Of Courts More Compelling Than Your Potential Embarrassment
They filed their lawsuit alleging the violation of their constitutional rights, except that their rights weren't violated. What Mike Masnick left out of his article above was that a faculty member found a cell phone in her classroom with numerous texts suggesting drug activity, a court document states, from a court complaint back in February where Bucknell attempted to dismiss the lawsuit in a complaint filed earlier this year.
From what I found out about searches of campus dorms: "with limited exception, courts support the rights of college and university officials to enter and search rooms in order to serve institutional purposes, which include protecting the health and safety of students and enforcing college rules and regulations."
In effect, once the campus discovered that some of its students were engaging in the business of illegal drugs on its campus, it had the right to search the student's dorm in relation to this illegal activity.
Additionally, what Mike's article also neglected to mention was that campus authorities discovered LSD tablets, marijuana, synthetic marijuana, 5.5-inch hunting knife, slingshot, pellet gun designed to look like an automatic pistol, 11-inch bong, 16-inch bong, nine pipes, digital scale, seven grinders and a lock-picking set.
I don't see these students on the winning side of this court battle.
On the post: Court To Frat Boys: Openness Of Courts More Compelling Than Your Potential Embarrassment
Sure, anyone accused of a crime is going to be embarrassed, but arguing that they have a constitutional right to keep their names out of it violates the very visit of open court proceedings.
If these students didn't want their names revealed, then here's a suggestion, DON'T VIOLATE THE LAW.
On the post: Key Sony Gaming Websites Go Down Because They Let Their Domains Expire
On the post: The Inevitable: Drunk Man Arrested For Impersonating Groping TSA Agent At Airport
Why?
Because it's those morons who agreed with congress to pass the Patriot Act and every other law that congress passed to give our government unprecedented power. By the way, what happens when you give government too much power? They are unwilling to relinquish control of that power.
Like I said, MORONS.
Next >>