Morons In CA State Senate Don't Understand The First Amendment
The losers in the California Senate last week approved legislation that would make it a crime to harass or secretly photograph children of police officers, judges, celebrities, and others because of the parents' occupation.
Harassment is already a crime.
Do I think it's utterly rotten that a person would be chased by photographers because, say, mommy's a movie star? Yes.
But the MPAA, below, in the excerpt from the piece by Patrick McGreevy at the LA Times, explains why this legislation should not have been passed. (I'm hoping it will be challenged.)
The measure requires those convicted serve 10 days to one year in jail. State Sen. Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles) introduced the measure in response to a killing spree in February by former Los Angeles police officer Christopher Dorner, whose victims included the adult daughter of a former LAPD captain.De Leon said a manifesto left by Dorner before his suicide named 50 potential targets, including law enforcement officers and their families.
As a result, six foster children of LAPD Captain Phil Tingirides, who served on the board that recommended Dorner's termination from the LAPD, had to be placed under round-the-clock police protection during the manhunt.
SB 606 was supported by the California State Sheriffs' Assn. "Unfortunately, children of law enforcement officers have been targeted for harassment and threats of violence due to the employment of their parents," the group said in a statement.
The measure was opposed by the Motion Picture Assn. of America, which said it conflicts with free speech rights and puts anyone who takes film or photographs of the public in jeopardy of violating the law by photographing children who fall under the protections.
I like "godzilla3's" suggestion in the LAT's comments:
What is really needed is a part-time legislature as it is apparent that having them there full-time results in their trying to find new laws to make up that accomplish nothing. So what is some peace officer's kid going to do, wear a big sign in public that says you can't inadvertently take their picture without violating the law?
I can't know de Leon's actual motivation, of course, but it's my suspicion that the real motivation behind this was getting support the next time he runs from the police union.
I am actually moderately impressed that the MPAA opposes this, given the children-of-celebrities thing. They're usually not so quick to stand up for anyone's rights besides their own.
Couson Dave at May 28, 2013 6:25 AM
I don't see the issue. If there was a loophole in the law making it legal to kill the adult daughters of police captains, then obviously that needs to be addressed.
dee nile at May 28, 2013 6:48 AM
The Issue is some guy will be taking photos of his own familly only to have a cop high on power kneecap him from behind and arrest his cause he caught the cops kid in the background of one of his shots.
Also suppose Demi Moore's daughter gets married, and her husband hires a PI to trail he cause he thinks shes having an affair. What is the age limit on "children" of celebrites?
I mean, I'm almost 34, I'm still my mothers child, ahes almost 55, shes still her mothers child, my grandmother is pushing 80, her mother might be dead but shes still her mothers child
lujlp at May 28, 2013 8:12 AM
That instantly tells me it's a bad law. Dorner was a single individual that was already off the deep end.
This would be like making a Newtown federal law that says you have to have a trigger lock on all firearms and put them in a safe in your house 24/7 unless you're getting them out to concealed carry. Newtown was a one off that we don't know the circumstances of how he got the weapons from his mother.
Dorner was a one off. Did he go by and photograph ahead of time? Maybe. But if he did that is just premeditation. It could have been some asshole that had a good memory for faces and didn't need a camera. What would that have told anybody?
Jim P. at May 28, 2013 8:49 AM
I had to re-read your last line. My initial thought was why would he be running from the police union and why would they be chasing him?
Goo at May 28, 2013 9:43 AM
"As a result, six foster children of LAPD Captain Phil Tingirides, who served on the board that recommended Dorner's termination from the LAPD, had to be placed under round-the-clock police protection during the manhunt."
Only because it's not permitted to defend yourself in CA. Where permitted by authorities, it's suppressed by the "civilized" population.
Radwaste at May 28, 2013 6:04 PM
So glad I bailed from California seven years ago. At least here in Oregon, I can carry my firearm however I please, take pictures of whatever I want and take off my clothes in the airport.
JT at May 28, 2013 10:26 PM
Leave a comment