Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   probably because

   

   Anonymous Coward, Mar 9th, 2007 @ 5:13pm

   
   

   The court probably made that decision because there are no laws preventing videotaping in the state house.
   
   My guess is that there will be laws like that pretty soon.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Amerika

   

   SteveO, Mar 10th, 2007 @ 10:43am

   
   

   Typical Republicans. The one thing they learned from Nixon is don't allow anything to be recorded. Fuck them. Point a camera at these pricks every chance you get.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Must be Terrorists

   

   BlueBoy, Mar 11th, 2007 @ 3:43am

   
   

   The law prohibiting videotaping in government building will be billed as an "anti-terrorism" measure.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   SteveO, Nice comment idiot

   

   a, Mar 11th, 2007 @ 5:35pm

   
   

   Ummm, New Jersey is pretty heavily Democrat, so your statement should read "Typical Democrats"
   
   What a fucking idiot.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   In Michigan Too

   

   Doug Dante, Mar 12th, 2007 @ 8:55am

   
   

   Michigan's Open Meetings Act require officials to hold open meetings and to allow any citizen to video or audio tape them. Family Rights Activists have faced difficulties when dealing with Citizen's Advisory Committees in this state, and IIRC, one CAC was actually effectively dismantled rather than allowing its proceedings to be video taped. Also, some boards, most notably the Detroit Public Schools, hold "informal" meetings that may be to some extent "real" business meetings, and members of those boards have been punished for exposing any information from them.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment