Talk:France bans filming of violence

Question- If there were an act of violence happening outside of Paris then this law makes it illegal to film it right? Then all evidences with videos of violent crime are illegal, therefore can not be use in a court room, since it is illeagl to tape violence in the first place. So, if there were a rape and the only evidence that link the rapist to the crime is a video tape that the rapist made himself on the rape, that video can not be summited as evidence since it was obtained illegally, right?

Is this "sincere ignorance and [,or] conscientious stupidity"? --Martin Luther King Jr

How could this stop violence? This law just ignores the problem. --Wxyrty 13:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Stupid law
So innocent bystanders aren't allowed to film acts of violence which in turn could prove to be only realiable evidence in court? What a stupid law... --124.181.245.141 05:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

admission of evidence in court
In the USA evidence gained illegally cannot be admitted in court, however this is not necessarily true in other countries. I do not know if this applies to France or not. I understand this law has been created in the USA in order to prevent illegal police activities, however it makes no sense from the point of view of the victim of a crime.

That withstanding, I do think that a ban on filming is dangerous. Instead I believe a judicius use of the material would be a good thing. I don't think that just anything should be allowed to be published arbitrarily (we don't allow obscene material in many countries). Acts of violence may be considered obscene too. The act of filming such material should however not be prohibited. The person filming might however be held responsible for delaying a call to the police.

--212.46.113.88 10:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I think it is backlash to the YouTube effect. -Edbrown05 11:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm remined by this article of a couple of guys who went repeatedly to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) saying that they lost their wallet sized driver liscense ID cards. Each time they returned to the DMV, they drastically altered their facial appearence so they looked like someone other than themselves. In the end, if they REALLY didn't lose their ID cards which probably they didn't, they were issued new ID's with entirely different looking picture identities on them.
 * Why did they do this? Because they could.
 * And they made a video of their escapades available on YouTube. That was news reported in my area that made my wife and me chukcle. But to manufacture news, which is what that amounts too, is a line Wikinews shouldn't step over. -Edbrown05 11:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)