Larry Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Link Not much info in this article. In fact, the entire text is: A congressman from Ohio had cops grab the cameras of constituents during a town hall meeting. Steve Chabot, a Republican, had cell phones and cameras confiscated in order to “prevent an embarrassing Youtube video from making the rounds,” according to Carlos Miller, who runs a blog documenting efforts by the state to stifle the First Amendment rights of photographers.Police said the cameras were taken “to protect the constituents.” A local television station, however, was allowed to videotape the meeting and the brazen move by Chabot and the cops There's two videos, but frankly, they don't show much except a guy in a uniform (cop/security, I can't tell) confiscating cell phones. (While two TV stations ignore the congressman and record the confiscation.) However, the lack of information doesn't stop me from springing into melodramatic overreaction. 1) I have to confess that when I watch this, the scenario I imagine is for some citizen to pull a gun, and inform the officer that he's under arrest for armed robbery, and to slowly remove his weapons. 2) I don't really see any linkage between the Congressman and the officer's actions. I see things like this, I read about things that seem similar at events W attended, I assume[/u] (but haven't read about them) that similar things happen at Obama events. I don't think this is a Congressman Chabbot issue. (The article says that the Congressman ordered the policy, but I don't see any support for that claim.) I don't think it's a Republican issue. (The only times I read about these kinds of things, it's been Republicans. But I really don't think it's a Party issue.) I think this is a "too many people think they have too much authority" issue. This is a "people are grossly, criminally, IMO treasonously, abusing their authority, and they aren't being punished for it" issue. Damn things like this make me wish I had the guts to do what I suspect our FFs would have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Seems to me "to prevent an embarrassing YouTube video" is precisely why we have freedom of speech and freedom of the press in the first place. If the guy doesn't want to be embarrassed in front of cameras, maybe he should try not to embarrass himself. Slowly but surely... ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 1) I have to confess that when I watch this, the scenario I imagine is for some citizen to pull a gun, and inform the officer that he's under arrest for armed robbery, and to slowly remove his weapons.Win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 25, 2011 Author Share Posted August 25, 2011 Seems to me "to prevent an embarrassing YouTube video" is precisely why we have freedom of speech and freedom of the press in the first place. If the guy doesn't want to be embarrassed in front of cameras, maybe he should try not to embarrass himself.Slowly but surely... ~Bang The article links to a somewhat longer article (with a lot more conspiracy theory, but without any more substance) from Prison Planet. And one of the points they make in that article is that apparently the Congressman trusts the corporate media not to embarrass him. It's just the citizens he doesn't trust. (It also points out that the Congressman, I assume to avoid embarrassing himself, insisted that all questions be written down and handed to his staff, so that they could pick which questions got asked.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Makes no sense to allow a film crew and confiscate cameras I would have no problem with not allowing both a possible point could be to reduce staged protests/disturbances maybe...but eh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin'Em84 Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 The one thing that has me bugged over the situation, is the fact that the cops either A) broke the law in applying this mandate, or followed the law which allows only press members to document speeches. The latter would worry me more, if a congressman suddenly had control display of his speeches; this isn't court. 'An embarrasing video on youtube' is not an excuse to confiscate someone's camera; that's an excuse to not say anything that would be embarrassing on youtube. Maybe this guy should write his speeches better or just man up and face the consequences of what he is saying/doing. If anything is a violation of 1st amendment rights, this would be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 Seems to me "to prevent an embarrassing YouTube video" is precisely why we have freedom of speech and freedom of the press in the first place. yeah but you aren't an expert so you couldn't possibly understand this and no one should listen to you. that's how the game is played today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin'Em84 Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 yeah but you aren't an expert so you couldn't possibly understand this and no one should listen to you. that's how the game is played today. Because that's how everyone does it and that's how it should be are not the same thing. If he doesn't want to be embarrassed by something he says/does, he shouldn't say/do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 Seems to me "to prevent an embarrassing YouTube video" is precisely why we have freedom of speech and freedom of the press in the first place. If the guy doesn't want to be embarrassed in front of cameras, maybe he should try not to embarrass himself.Slowly but surely... ~Bang Agreed 100% They didn't have any problem with all the embarrassing videos from Democratic town halls making the rounds. Seriously this is the kind of stuff that dictators do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 If the esteemed congressman doesn't want embarrassing youtube videos to come out then he should avoid publicly embarrassing himself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 If the esteemed congressman doesn't want embarrassing youtube videos to come out then he should avoid publicly embarrassing himself Sometimes the esteemed congressmen and women allow their constituents to do that for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 yeah but you aren't an expert so you couldn't possibly understand this and no one should listen to you. that's how the game is played today. Ah don' need no fancy pants Harvard Elitist tellin' me what fer! ~Dang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 Those "liberty" and "freedom" loving Republicans! All across the country, other members of the GOP are either blocking town halls, refusing to hold them, or trying to charge money for attendees. So much for their populism, eh? As an example, here is that "libertarian" Paul Ryan making he doesn't have to speak with his constituents: "Police Block Entrance To Paul Ryan Office, Deny Constituents Access To Request A Meeting." http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/24/303546/paul-ryan-office-constituents/ ThinkProgress has dozens of articles on this subject, as a note: http://thinkprogress.org/?s=town+hall&x=0&y=0 ---------- Post added August-26th-2011 at 02:39 PM ---------- Makes no sense to allow a film crew and confiscate camerasI would have no problem with not allowing both a possible point could be to reduce staged protests/disturbances maybe...but eh The Republicans didn't seem to mind when it came to Tea Partiers screaming about health care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 http://www.infowars.com/cops-confiscate-cameras-at-ohio-congressmans-town-hall/ A congressman from Ohio had cops grab the cameras of constituents during a town hall meeting. Steve Chabot, a Republican, had cell phones and cameras confiscated in order to “prevent an embarrassing Youtube video from making the rounds,” according to Carlos Miller, who runs a blog documenting efforts by the state to stifle the First Amendment rights of photographers. See video of the incident below. Police said the cameras were taken “to protect the constituents.” A local television station, however, was allowed to videotape the meeting and the brazen move by Chabot and the cops. more at link The cops should be put on administrative leave: They are not the ARM of the gov't, they are there to protect and serve and enforce actual laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted April 29, 2012 Author Share Posted April 29, 2012 I think this is an old story. At least it's a story that I saw, years ago. Been discussed in Tailgate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?352334-FoxNation-Cops-Confiscate-Cameras-at-Ohio-Congressman%92s-Town-Hall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.