2nd cameras
the second amendment says we have the right to bear arms. it also says in the same sentence a well regulated militia is necessary to have a free state. some folks argue that means i'm allowed to mount a loaded fully automatic minigun on my truck. which, while undoubtedly kick ass cool, really isn't. at the other extreme, some folks argue that in order to be a gun owner you must be part of a well regulated militia. which is an idea that, while arguably technically correct, goes precisely nowhere. heh. imagine the blank stares of the yahoos at starbucks when you ask, what well regulated militia are you in? anywho, arms are to ensure our free state. from hostile outside states. and even from our own. arguably, it's the armedness of our populace that has kept our government from taking the route of oppression. which is a good thing. a very good thing. on this front my "arm" of choice is a camera. it's non-lethal. and extremely accurate. seems perfect for the protesting pacifist. so of course it's illegal to record on video the actions of police officers. fooey. truly i can't be the first person to suggest treating cameras as arms protected by the constitution. can i?