No because then courts would litigate what “newsworthy” means leaving your 1st amendment rights in the hands of random judges. I can imagine filming ICE doing routine operations being seen as “not newsworthy” by a conservative court.
Who defines newsworthy? How does one know if it will be newsworthy or not before something happens? Can a citizen be arrested or fined for recording police when they record just in case?
Are people using video chat apps going to be fined? How do you know if that is being recorded or not?
I could go on with many examples
You're doing a lot of handwaving, there are many reasons recording in public is legal
It wouldn't be impossible to enforce, but like all laws it is impossible to enforce 100%, while they have an effect and provide at least government and ethical support and remedy for those affected.
Also it would allow people to sue YouTube creators who do so, whereas currently there is no recourse because YouTube can just ignore complaints.
No because then courts would litigate what “newsworthy” means leaving your 1st amendment rights in the hands of random judges. I can imagine filming ICE doing routine operations being seen as “not newsworthy” by a conservative court.
https://allaboutberlin.com/guides/photography-laws-germany
It's already illegal in Germany and I love it.
What about when ICE murders people in the street like Alex and Renee?
Are you glad we have video evidence from ordinary citizens?
See 'newsworthy exception'
Who defines newsworthy? How does one know if it will be newsworthy or not before something happens? Can a citizen be arrested or fined for recording police when they record just in case?
Are people using video chat apps going to be fined? How do you know if that is being recorded or not?
I could go on with many examples
You're doing a lot of handwaving, there are many reasons recording in public is legal
No
It would be impossible to enforce, and create an inevitable purity spiral when security cameras and the like get involved.
So I'd put myself down for a no, but I'd support a ban on government-owned dragnet cameras a-la Flock.
It wouldn't be impossible to enforce, but like all laws it is impossible to enforce 100%, while they have an effect and provide at least government and ethical support and remedy for those affected.
Also it would allow people to sue YouTube creators who do so, whereas currently there is no recourse because YouTube can just ignore complaints.
Leaving this stuff at the discretion of courts will mean a lot of routine filming of police will just get thrown out by right leaning courts.
Yes I would. Furthermore, I'd support banning all cameras of all types (excluding cctv security cameras) anywhere in public.
But that would include dashcams too, and those are a must if you're operating any sort of vehicle.
Is the dashcam footage local to the dashcam or the users private data storage, and is gone when the user deletes it?
Or is the dashcam managed by a company that collects and stores the data up uploaded to a cloud of an insecure company?
Do insurance companies even watch dash cams ? From what ive heard they just pay out and dont care.
Really? They are intent on looking for reasons to not pay, from what I know.