I find this very interesting, on several levels.
Here are the Armed Attorney’s with a video on, well, videos.
I find this very interesting, on several levels.

| thexrayboy on Repost: Truth about shoot… | |
| thexrayboy on Repost: Truth about shoot… | |
| Susan Harms on Repost: Truth about shoot… | |
| Matthew W on Repost: Truth about shoot… | |
| On the North River on Repost: Truth about shoot… | |
| Matthew W on Repost: Truth about shoot… | |
| On the North River on Scott Adams (June 8, 1957 – Ja… | |
| thexrayboy on Scott Adams (June 8, 1957 – Ja… | |
| On the North River on Pearl Harbor Day (from 20… | |
| Heather on Pearl Harbor Day (from 20… |





This site contains images and some content obtained from the internet. If you are the owner of an image or content seen here and object to its use on this site, please contact me at johnonthenorthriver@gmail.com for immediate removal.
Nothing wrong with cameras…as long as YOU own them and YOU control if and when the cops see the video. Cameras from Ring and other internet based companies OWN any video the camera sees. You can’t control what happens to that video. But if you buy and set up cameras and don’t allow them access to the internet but simply record what they see you can decide if you want that video released to the courts. If you don’t you erase it BEFORE you receive a subpoena for it. Then simply tell the court you erased it..before they asked for it. No crime doing that. But yes…if a DA can use YOUR video to imprison you they WILL do so. Prosecutors are NOT interested in justice. All they care about is their conviction rate. If an innocent person is convicted of something…oh well. Tough.
LikeLike
All true. The problem is finding a camera that isn’t made to connect to the internet. Or an App for the camera that isn’t written in China and that App will demand complete access and rights before it will operate at all.
So for me, for now. No cameras.
LikeLike