PCWorld Forums: Shooting Cellphone Video Is Not A Felony (in Illinois) - PCWorld Forums

Post your comments for Shooting Cellphone Video is Not a Felony (in Illinois) here

I think you made a mistake in saying "for the minority of control-freak cops", should have read "the majority of control-freak cops".
Most all (The Majority) cops have a "Type A" control-freak personality. The U.S. has become a police state in every sense and is like living under the Gestapo.
It goes to reason, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I have seen more than my share of law enforcement stepping out of bounds, but their word is obviously better than yours in a court of law, no matter what the circumstances.

Tinman1957, on 03 March 2012 - 05:08 PM, said:

Well said Tinman.
It's the old line about what's good for the goose and we have been "goosed" enough by cops that are on a "power trip".
What surprised me most about this story was that the judge is from CHICAGO, one of the most reprehensible Democrat strongholds in the country. It makes me wonder if the "Chicago Machine" is now planning the judge's downfall.

I've never really understood certain aspects of societal complacency. Supposedly we live in a self-governing society. In such a society when oppressive laws are created, why is it such a foreign concept that the law makers who created those laws are allowed to stay in office? When it is on a national level, it can be argued that the process of replacing representatives from all the states needed to overturn bad law can be daunting. However on the State and local level, it's a much simpler process.

It serves a dual purpose. First, it removes from office, unthinking people who would trample on the rights of the people they are supposed to serve. Second, it sends a message that the voting public is in fact, responsible for their own government. If a congress (whether upper or lower house) passes unconstitutional laws, it's up to the people who ultimately control the congress to correct the problem.

Is it a simple task? No. Can it be done? Without a doubt.

Why should the policy be protected on the surveillance issue while others are not? This should go both directions; the policy should notify you when they are video taping you. Many policy cars have videos as can be seen on some TV shows.

Let us talk about retailers with their surveillance camera all around their stores; inside and outside. I don’t see notification that your picture is being taken only the camera. Come on we are being watched doing our jobs.

Policy’s job in the public eye and if they are doing their job correctly they should be welcoming this evidence. The question here is how they can obtain that evidence legally and not by force.