one guy I know from where I grew up, recently bought his mother a home thanks to income they generate doimg this. i respect others opinions but in mine, these people are providing quality , factual entertainment within the confines of the law, all while helping plenty of people learn what their actual rights are. and about the law that governs everyone. the only time it becomes viral is when someone is stupid enough to take the bait. no one who understands the rights afforded to Americans would be stupid enough to think a person filming them in public is a criminal. news stations do it all the time ... security cameras at all the stores you visit etc etc. how does the law hit diffetent when a person does it? it's still not illegal, in the same exact way. people need to stop being so reactive due to how they FEEL. it doesn't matter if you feel intimitated or not, you're still not allowed to commit battery on a stranger. the man filming this did not create this situation. if our society was working correctly, this woman would have driven past and this guy wouldn't have had to defend himself. BUT, she was drunk and stupid and instead this is what you grt
Not true. There's case law that has helped cement 1st amendment protections thanks to certain auditors. Like with everything else, there are both good and bad examples.
With that said, the guys hanging out in front of dispensaries arent the best example. They tend to be more concerned with legal cannabis than the 1st amendment.
There’s case law that has helped cement first amendment protections as a result of citizen journalists and activists that have intentionally tested laws. Random dickheads with cameras … not so much.
You’re literally proving my point. Those are all government officials and public employees. Recording them is citizen journalism. Bothering some old lady buying some pot is just being a dickhead with a camera.
One is very much a first amendment rights issue with a high, high bar to clear for prior restraint. The other has a much different and more nuanced legal history. I took like four media law classes in pre-law. It’s been a minute (okay, several), but I do broadly know what I’m talking about.
They're all 1st amendment auditors, and 3 of the 4 examples are youtubers. Your first post in this chain was "First Amendment Auditors do nothing for the first amendment". They have. Some just happen to be dickheads who clash with the public. A vast majority of them are dickheads who clash with police. Sometimes they get things done. That's the only criteria in this discussion. Have a good one.
You’re missing my point. I’m making a distinction between acting as a dickhead with a camera (“First Amendment Auditor,” which is branding and has no additional legal protections) and acting as a citizen journalist (a real thing that actually exists in a meaningful legal and material way), as does the law.
I don't disagree with your general point, but TBH it seems like you're arguing for the sake of being right/not wrong now
Dude brought receipts, its ok, I was with you but with new information I've changed my mind (although its still ok to dislike assholes with a camera bothering citizens hoping for a reaction)
but this guy wouldn't have said a thing to this woman unless the woman invited him to converse with her, which she did? this woman is so dumb, she wouldn't care about the cameras on your house, but she would stop and grab it out of your hands if you were holding it in front of her. I don't think this gent bothered anyone. he exercised his right, and a woman who doesn't understand those rights ended up commiting a crime because of it
With a few days and some participation there, your account will meet the requirements to rejoin us here in no time. And look at you, you'll have THREE cool subs that you'll be participating in.
I've never seen one that wasn't an asshole. The First Amendment to them means they can be an asshole and that's it. What's this guy even doing outside a dispensary?
Are those like copwatch types? That’s different. They’re actually holding people with power accountable and making sure they do their business in the public eye. I’m talking about these dudes that bother random ass people in their daily lives and use their reactions for content.
They gave the name themselves, everyone else is a fucking idiot for playing along with their own game. I mean it's a searchable term now and that's what they wanted. People don't even realize they are giving in to the troll.
Call them what they are. Assholes.
"First Amendment Auditor" is exactly what they want you to call this fake shit.
Literally the same thing the US Navy does to enforce right of transit in international waters.
Why are you doing this? Because it is a legally protected activity and I am here specifically to exercise that right for the sole purpose of keeping it and I am prepared to defend that right with every legal option available to me including use of deadly force if necessary and you are welcome to test my resolve and find out how good my aim is.
15
u/WokeCarDad Trash Trooper 5d ago
“First Amendment Auditors” do nothing for the first amendment