Distributed Surveillance

|

The NYT reports that the cases against some 400 persons arrested during the GOP convention last summer have unraveled. "A sprawling body of visual evidence," writes reporter Jim Dwyer, "made possible by inexpensive, lightweight cameras in the hands of private citizens, volunteer observers and the police themselves, has shifted the debate over precisely what happened on the streets during the week of the convention."

NEXT: Small-Screen Terrorism

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Sorry, for actual acts of criminal violence, you’d have to be shooting inside the Republican convention. But then, the cops didn’t seem too concerned about that.

  2. Well knock me over with a feather. I’m shocked, shocked to find that the police might be bringing unsubstantiated charges in the expectation that, in the absence of impartial video evidence, a jury would believe the cops rather than a defendant. It really undermines my faith in our government.

  3. I’m with the cops here – somebody had to end to stop those stupid people from walking around with their giants puppets. Giant puppets must be stopped.

  4. Coming in 2008: no cameras allowed…

  5. “Coming in 2008: no cameras allowed…”

    Coming in 2008: No protesting allowed. It’s a national security issue, see. And it’s for your own safety….

  6. No, wsdave, It’s for the children.

  7. No, you guys, it’s for the troops.

  8. If these protesters love free speech so much, how come they weren’t in the Free Speech Zone?

    Answer me that, Mr. Smartypants.

  9. There’s going to be conventions in 2008? How about a presidential election? We gonna have one of them too?

  10. I’ve been to more energetic star trek conventions here in NYC than the protests were last summer.

    The bike group and the protest panties were the only two that got anyuone’s blood going.

  11. The Police would lie to convict the innocent? Maybe they need some “fake but accurate” evidence instead?

  12. “No, wsdave, It’s for the children.”
    “No, you guys, it’s for the troops.”

    My god, that’s it! The ultimate sympathy demographic — child troops! Imagine, you bring a couple of child troops onto the stage at a political rally and tearfully explain how it’s all for them. Instant victory.

  13. “It’s for the security of the children of our troops!”

    Combines all three.

    BTW, why haven’t the overreaching, hubris-infested Republicans started a movement to repeal the 22nd Amendment yet? Doesn’t Our Glorious Leader deserve a turd — uh, I mean, third — term?

  14. Stevo, I remember reading about that children’s crusade a long time ago, it always depressed me that the kids were allegedly sold into slavery, I think because it reminded me of the pied piper, another tale that always depressed me.

  15. “It’s for the security of the children of our troops!”

    …born or unborn.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.