New York State May Make It A Felony To “Annoy” A Police Officer

annoy a police officerPhysical contact with intent to annoy a cop would be a serious felony – get ready for the law that could be used against countless protesters. Via the Huffington Post:

The New York State Senate passed a bill Wednesday that would make it a felony to annoy a police officer. The bill would make aggravated harassment of a police officer a crime punishable by up to four years in prison, and so far, the effort has won praise from law enforcement officials.

“Professionally, I am grateful to see this bill pass through the Senate,” Utica Police Department Chief Mark Williams said in a statement. “Our police officers have a very dangerous job and need the support of our government leaders to help make them safe.”

However, the proposed law isn’t as bad as it sounds: Its language specifies that a person has to make “physical contact” with an officer in order for the action to be a crime.

30 Comments on "New York State May Make It A Felony To “Annoy” A Police Officer"

  1. Ted Heistman | Jun 8, 2013 at 4:49 pm |

    This doesn’t seem all that Orwellian to me.I mean if I grab a cop in order to harass or annoy him/her I wouldn’t expect anything positive to happen. As far as filming them though, I think that should remain legal.

    • We may want to have constant video feeds for proof of our innocence if this becomes the norm.

      • chinagreenelvis | Jun 9, 2013 at 2:05 am |

        Constitutionally, I see that as being allowed. Eventually, Google Glasses and/or augmented reality will allow for equal surveillance and a more peaceful state of existence between citizens and authority.

        Rather than first-person experiences being stored on a personal hard drive, they will have to be instantly uploaded to a server and propagated in a way that ensures deletion of one copy cannot destroy the information.

    • hmmm…the potential of abusing this law is far to great. not really a surprise…I would hope. Just a way to legitimize the increasing police power. For instance, you mentioned ‘harass or annoy’.
      who the bullocks decides what qualifies as harass or annoy…maybe videoing is a form or harassment? A stare? Picking my nose? I donno, and you?

  2. Washichu Rehab | Jun 8, 2013 at 5:00 pm |

    It’s all fair if the law is passed that prevents cops from annoying YOU.

  3. Seems ambiguous, and prone to abuse.

    • chinagreenelvis | Jun 9, 2013 at 2:05 am |

      Did you read the actual law? The only thing that’s ambiguous here is the headline.

      • If I don’t know, I sometimes try to keep from sounding like I do. I have found that this can be an challenging approach, for me at least. I am a work in progress. No, I didn’t read the law.

  4. Calypso_1 | Jun 8, 2013 at 5:23 pm |

    What if i make contact with my psycho dehumanizing eyebeams?

    • Like cyclops from X-men?

      • Calypso_1 | Jun 8, 2013 at 6:23 pm |

        More like Burnt Norton:
        Disconsolate chimera
        The end precedes the beginning
        Words after speech, desiccation of the world of sense.
        Internal darkness, deprivation
        The torpid Driven emptying the sensual lucid stillness which flesh cannot endure.
        Trilling wire in the blood clot the axle tree.
        Humankind cannot bear very much reality. Into our first world,
        shall we follow the deception towards the door we never opened?

  5. BuzzCoastin | Jun 8, 2013 at 7:05 pm |

    too bad the law isn’t reversed
    making it a felony for a pig to assault a protestor
    which BTW
    would be more inline with the fake US Constitution

    • chinagreenelvis | Jun 9, 2013 at 2:02 am |

      It is against the law for a police officer to assault a citizen. The problem is that in court, it comes down to the officer’s word against the citizen’s, sans any evidence for either party. One reason loose cops don’t like being recorded.

      • BuzzCoastin | Jun 9, 2013 at 2:16 am |

        yeah, it is kinda silly to talk about legal & illegal
        when it’s pretty clear that laws are meant for
        wee the free sheeple

        but those who rule
        rule without the constrain of law
        which they can violate with impunity
        and sometimes get a Nobel Prize for too

  6. Ittabena | Jun 8, 2013 at 8:34 pm |

    Ok, I must finally admit that Luke R and We Are Change have finally caused some change.

  7. DrDavidKelly | Jun 8, 2013 at 9:16 pm |

    You can see what’s going to happen can’t you? Cops are going to arrest you and when you ask them what for they will cite this new law. You will say you didn’t touch them, they will say you did and they may ultimately lose in court but by then they’ve been able to punch you a few times and throw you in a cell for 24hrs. You deserve it to you bloody hippies.

    • InfvoCuernos | Jun 8, 2013 at 11:29 pm |

      Don’t forget the cavity search, they’ll get to jam a hand or two up your ass if they lock you up.

  8. It’s bull, and someone needs to tell Chief Williams that “We The People” ARE the government leaders, and that police work wouldn’t be so dangerous if they remember who they work for.

    • chinagreenelvis | Jun 9, 2013 at 2:06 am |

      You probably shouldn’t comment before reading the actual text of the law.

      • phasegen | Jun 9, 2013 at 1:14 pm |

        I did read it, ( and the wording (especially the word “intent”, though “comply” is pretty freaking ominous too) is too ambiguous. The police and prosecutors have a history of using that to our disadvantage. When they make it a felony for them to come into physical contact with us, they’ll be moving in the right direction. People are assaulted by the police far more often than they are by us. They video us as evidence, and try to confiscate our property for doing the same to them. If you try to stop them from illegally taking your property, you are arrested and charged with “Resisting Arrest”, “Harassing A Public Official”, and “Obstructing Justice”. If you are lucky enough to fight them in court and prove they took your property illegally, is the officer charged with felony theft, assault, and armed robbery? No. The fact is that the police have gradually been setting themselves up as an enemy of the “common” people.

  9. chinagreenelvis | Jun 9, 2013 at 2:01 am |

    Thanks for the misleading headline.

  10. I disagree with the quoted HuffPo article’s note that the law’s “language specifies that a person has to make ‘physical contact’.” Having read the actual text of the law, it is unclear whether or not the “annoyance” has to lead to some kind of physical harm. Regardless of what happens in court, it’s certainly ambiguous enough that the NYPD will make their own interpretation (as I’ve personally seen them do with bike laws and subway search procedures) and use it to haul people in for no good reason. I see a few commenters stating that the text of the law is less scary than the headline. I’d encourage them to read it again.

  11. i’m just fukking shocked, it’s not like cops don’t make up bullshit charges enough as it is, now they have the power to do anything. this is truly a policed state, what a cop says goes, if you disagree with them you better pray they don’t put your ass in prison… VIVA LA REVOLUTION.

  12. Yeah, well, it’s going to be your word against theirs as to whether you “touched” them or not! I don’t understand why police officers don’t get-it that they’re in the same boat as “we the people.” Yes, they are just regular people, being paid crap for risking their lives. Yet many seem to act like the big-wigs they protect actually care about them! What a joke. Police officers: the people who attend the G20, G8, the Bilderberg meetings, etc., wouldn’t urinate on you if you were on fire! They are using you to make sure we the people can’t execute our constitutional rights! And why is corporatism so dangerous? Corporatism is the merger of corporate & gov’t power. The gov’t can be sued for infringing upon your constitutional rights–but not a corporation. And now corporations not only have all the special protections of a corporation (as something other than a regular business or person), they now also have all the rights of a U.S. citizen, given to them by the Supreme Court in the “Citizens United” ruling. How does one even define a corporation, then?? This is the most dangerous thing that has happened, and it’s destroying what is left of our democratic republic.
    “Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism, for it represents the merger of corporate & state power.”–Benito Mussolini, Hitler’s WW2 Ally.

Comments are closed.