|'); } // End -->|
In Reply to: Joe's Record Paradise in Rockville, MD posted by MarkEL on November 12, 2004 at 09:55:10:
Did you read the article? Six cops in riot gear to raid a small independent record store? Does that seem like a productive use of law enforcement resources to you?
It's weird. The Tara Labs raid, now this. Someone with power and clout---the RIAA, the major record store chains, the major audio component manufacturers---must be putting pressure on law enforcement agencies about this stuff. Otherwise, the raids wouldn't be happening. In the grand scheme of things, these raids are tiny, tiny potatoes.
Well, I must admit I didn't read the article and riot gear does seem a little over the top if that's what happened(still haven't read it :-). However it is a crime and your placing blame on the cops as opposed to the owner of the store. If the store goes out of business then it's the owners fault for doing things illegal. Not the cops fault for enforcing the law.
It isn't the cops fault. They're just doing their job. Someone is pulling their boss's strings.
The article doesn't say "riot gear". It says helmets and bullet proof vests. This maybe required gear for enforcing a warrant. Also the police in my area have to act on a complaint. They don't have a choice. A complaint was made and they did their job. So I don't think any strings had to be pulled. Lastly don't believe everything you read on the internet. What was reported in the story and what really happened may be different.
Yes, "riot gear" may have been an overstatement, but not by much.
Do you honestly think that someone called 911, said "This guy is selling bootleg records?" and the cops ran over with their guns drawn? Sorry, but raids like these are organized at the station with the cops' supervisors involved. And in situations like these, the supervisors usually get their instructions from the mayor's office or the feds. If you don't believe me, ask the next cop you see.
Um, Washington's "City Paper" is a respected weekly and part of a national chain. It is published on real paper, not just on the Internet. Following your logic, all newspaper stories are suspect and not to be trusted.
As usual, you seem to care less about facts than promoting your ideology. Whatever.
...is the paper that broke the New York Times plagerism story. It has excellent investigative reporting.
The story said that the "complaint" was filed in Baltimore. Presumably such a complaint would had to have come from someone in the RIAA or similiar as the two raids in two different counties would probably have to be approved by the District Atorney in Baltimore (I doubt a local cop and judge would have come up with warants for two stores in two different counties and be given the resources to carry out cocomitant raids). Perhaps the DA launched his/her own campaign (ala NYC), but I do not know.
No, not someone called 911. The article says recording industry representatives called the cops after they purchased bootleg CD's at the store. Then the cops purchased bootleg CD's at the store and used them to obtain a warrant. And yes all newspaper stories are suspect and not to be trusted. Just look at the latest Dan Rather story. Papers and TV. Sensationalize stories to obtain readers. So yes they are all suspect.
"The article doesn't say "riot gear". It says helmets and bullet proof vests."
Yes, I have. Helmets and riot helmets may be different in that the riot helmets have face guards on them. Also riot gear usually consists of a big plastic shield that is held in front of the officer to protect the upper body. Bullet proof vests maybe be standard gear.
As in how long to the copyrights last. According to the article these were bootlegs from 30-40 years ago.
As for cops in the nation's capitol, well, occasionally they are better than the terrorists. And I can guarantee you they would be sitting in their armoured vehicle if a real crime were taking place.
I think the records do violate the law. But whether or not police resources should be dedicated to enforcing this law rather than some other law is a matter of opinion. Personally, I'd rather see police patrolling the streets and protecting people rather than confiscating live Jimi Hendrix (for example) recordings from which Hendrix's estate and the RIAA don't get a cut.
Erm, here in San Francisco, the only thing the cops MUST do is prioritize complaints, and that's because there aren't enough cops to go around.
My noise complaints, for example, go to the bottom of the list, and nine times out of ten, the police don't show up.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: