I don't agree. It doesn't say carrying a gun, it says specifically licensed to carry a handgun under the authority of .....G.A. Heath wrote:This is in response to Kory Watkins and the OC marches, but it looks like it it aimed more at Watkins and his cop watch/block crowd. The issues I have is that they do not provide an exception for someone being stopped by law enforcement, they specifically add a penalty for possessing a firearm while recording, and no exception for a license holder who gets stopped while recording either.
Search found 2 matches
- Fri Mar 13, 2015 11:44 am
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: House Bill 2918
- Replies: 46
- Views: 8347
Re: House Bill 2918
- Fri Mar 13, 2015 11:38 am
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: House Bill 2918
- Replies: 46
- Views: 8347
Re: House Bill 2918
The sort of subtle implication is that somebody legally carrying a concealed handgun is more of a threat. I'm pretty cynical about such things, and I see this (just as Doctors asking about firearms) as one of those little ways that anti-gun folks implant doubt or kind of allege that only anti-gov wackos carrying guns would be recording Police Officers.
As for the 100ft limit, that's not a problem. Modern camera phones zoom just fine. I'm actually surprised that the restriction (insofar as there is one) is only 25 ft. for the 'normal' people. (again, subtle implication is normal folks can film at 25ft...)
I agree this probably won't go anywhere, but I do think it's possible this proposed change will show up in a news report/article.
As for the 100ft limit, that's not a problem. Modern camera phones zoom just fine. I'm actually surprised that the restriction (insofar as there is one) is only 25 ft. for the 'normal' people. (again, subtle implication is normal folks can film at 25ft...)
I agree this probably won't go anywhere, but I do think it's possible this proposed change will show up in a news report/article.