Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Got your pocket Constitution?

If this Ohio policeman is so blasé about confiscating mere video cameras and violating 1st Amendment rights, just imagine how eager he'd be to take away your oh-so-dangerous firearms. For the public good. And, you know, to protect his pension.

Just following orders, ma'am.


Alan said...

Cop: "Are you going to make this hard for me?"


Mike W. said...

Confiscating cameras is no less repugnant than confiscating firearms.

Only a government thug and coward uses brute force to trample rights which would illuminate and call into questions his words, actions and character.

And I'm with Alan. Making the job of the police harder is a feature of the Bill of Rights, not a bug.

An Ordinary American said...

These little pissant cops who work in these little Small Town America Police Departments are going to push the wrong person somewhere down the line and they're going to end up very seriously hurt.

In this instance, I hold the stupid-assed cop every bit as responsible as the stupid-assed congressman.

The PD should know what they can and cannot enforce, and such a goddamn BLATANT violation of the First Amendment IN A PUBLIC FACILITY only proves beyond a doubt the direction that LE management has headed.

They are firmly aligned with the power-brokers and not the people they are paid to serve.


Bryan Caskey said...

So are these "directions" coming from the Congressman? If so, he should be asked why he doesn't want to be filmed.

Who benefits from this? The MSM, keeping a monopoly on the video? The Congressman, who can keep a lid on his video exposure? It sure isn't the citizens...

Anonymous said...

Sent this to Chabot.
Thank you for showing your true colors by making a mockery of the freedoms which are guaranteed by Constitution of the United States of America. You have demeaned the sacrifices made by myself and every other veteran who ever served our nation. We did not offer up our lives so you could spit on and abuse the citizens of this great nation by engaging in a blatant violation of the First Amendment in a public facility by prohibiting them from video recording a public event. I look forward to the day Ohio voters replace you with a representative who values freedom and the citizenry to which it belongs. You sir are slime as is the officer who enforced this crime on your behalf.

irontomflint said...

Great! Now all the Islamic Jihadist bombers know how to get close to their targets! Simply place the bomb in anything that the police will confiscate and then remotely detonate them! If it doesn't get the main target, it will at least take out the police officers!
Jeez Louise! these guys are rummies!

Marty said...

What is with Ohio lately?

Stuart the Viking said...

The real sad thing is that this will probably be the last we hear about this. Those people didn't just have their 1A rights violated, they had their 4A rights violated. Even if they sue, which isn't likely, the officer will just stand behind qualified immunity and get off scot free.

This is what America has come to.


Bubblehead Les. said...

They aren't called Republitards for Nothing. BTW, you remember the Press Conference from a few days ago where the Cleveland Police Chief said it's perfectly okay to video Cops because the STATE LAW says so? Sounds like someone needs to call Columbus and have the BCI start an Investigation.

Boyd K said...

Were the cameras reported as stolen? If it were me, i'd be on the phone (I guess it'd be another phone) to whatever police agency had precendence over locals (In Washington that's the state police) to report the theft. Yes, they'll claim public immunity but it should go in the DA's statistics at the very least.

JohnMXL said...

He's one of the 99% of politicians that give the other 1% a bad reputation.

I hope the voters of Ohio remember this when his name comes up on a ballot in the future.

IMNSHO, all of the good things he may have done for his constituents just got pushed aside by this single act.

Anonymous said...

The officer cannot simply hide behind his badge under "qualified immunity", because he committed "deprivation of rights under the color of law". The FBI is the lead agency for investigating such violations; they have a handy page explaining what they are and how to report them.

Ken said...

Yep. Sounds like a 42 USC 1983.

Chabot is a politician. What do we know about politicians? First, they're adept at buying Peter's vote with Paul's money, and vice versa, simultaneously. Second, they have a taste for minding other people's business. If history teaches us any damned thing at all, it's to be wary of the type.

The difference between Democrats and Republicans is exactly the same as the difference between Tide and Cheer. (Both the latter are sold by P&G.) Who hath ears, let him use a Q-Tip.

Windy Wilson said...

"Just following orders, Ma'am."
Gee, where have we heard that before?