Well, somehow we went from a discussion of the public filming a LEO to a discussion on LEO body cameras. But I always have an issue with this wording "obey lawful orders". What is a "lawful" order? Do I need a lawyer next to me to tell if an order is or isn't "lawful". Our laws are encyclopedic. I'm all for giving the LEOs room to work. But I've seen video of LEOs threatening to arrest people who are standing in their own front yard and WELL out of the way as far as creating interference. Is an "order" to leave your own yard and go inside your home "lawful"? When you're filming 20 - 25 feet away?ELB wrote:
ETA: I took a quick peek at HB1035 -- it basically says it is a defense to prosecution for Interference with Public Duties if recording/photographing/documenting/observing was what you were doing (as long as you obey lawful orders to change position or proximity).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not "anti cop". But nowadays there is a concerted effort by the media to highlight EVERY case of bad police work. Resistance to being recorded will be used to reinforce the narrative that every cop is evil and they just want to use minorities for target practice. I know that's not true, but it's the narrative being pushed by today's yellow journalism. And resistance to being recorded gives the APPEARANCE there is something to hide. Is it right? No. But that's the narrative being pushed. In the long run it will be shown to be the twisting of the truth that it is. But that will take some time. It will continue until the media finds another bad guy they want to demonize.