A year ago in Aurora, Colorado, a 37-year-old black man named Rajon Belt-Stubblefield was driving drunk in his Jeep, with a blood-alcohol-content more than three times the legal limit. When an officer attempted to pull him over, Stubblefield drove away at a high rate of speed and eventually rear-ended a car, before flying over the median into oncoming traffic and hitting another car. At that point, Stubblefield exited his jeep with a handgun, which he immediately threw towards the grass nearby. Then, as the officer attempted to arrest Stubblefield, he fell to the pavement.
After regaining his balance, the officer drew his weapon and ordered Stubblefield to the ground. Instead of complying, Stubblefield squared up to fight. Stubblefield also walked towards the officer in a threatening manner, backing him up into traffic. While doing so, Stubblefield told his son (who was nearby) to retrieve the firearm from the grass. He also repeatedly taunted the officer, saying “You ready for this?” — another pretty unmistakable signal that he was about to attack. Finally, as Stubblefield rushed to close the distance with the officer, the officer responded by shooting him. Stubblefield was hit three times and died immediately.
There is no dispute about any of these facts. The entire incident was captured on the officer’s bodycam, as well as other nearby cameras.
*Viewer discretion is advised*
There’s no way to spin it any other way. This was a fully justified shooting. Stubblefield clearly posed an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death to the officer. He received multiple warnings and lawful commands. He ignored every single one of them. Instead, he charged towards a police officer he had already thrown to the ground — after already endangering the public by colliding into multiple vehicles while driving drunk. This is yet another example, out of countless others, of a suspect — very often a black male — who did literally every single thing in his power, every step of the way, to escalate an interaction with a police officer into a deadly confrontation. This was someone absolutely determined to turn what could have been a comparatively minor DUI charge into a life-or-death struggle. And the thing about a life-or-death struggle with police is that you will always lose — 100% of the time. One way or another, you lose.
The fact that the cop was armed, while Stubblefield was unarmed at this particular moment, does not change the fact that Stubblefield posed an imminent threat to the officer’s life. A gun isn’t useful anymore if someone jumps on you, beats you, and takes it. And very clearly, that’s what Stubblefield was trying to do to this officer. All of his actions pointed in that direction. There’s a reason he told his kid to grab his gun. There’s a reason he told the officer to get “ready” for a beatdown. It’s the same reason he drove drunk and crashed into multiple vehicles: he was drunk out of his mind, and had no regard for his life, or the life of anyone else. In this scenario, when the guy lunges towards you — even though he knows you have a gun — you have to assume that he’s going to try to kill you. And you have every right to respond accordingly, police officer or not.
You also have to wonder how Stubblefield must act toward other people in his life if this is how he acts towards an armed police officer pointing a gun at his chest. This is very clearly a volatile, unhinged human being. We see this kind of thing so often that we become inevitably desensitized to it. But it’s worth pausing to reflect on this fact. Stubblefield was charging towards an armed police officer with a gun pointed at him. The level of suicidal rage and aggression and violence necessary to do something like that — to completely override what should be your base level self-preservation instinct — is hard to comprehend. Again, just imagine how this man must behave towards people who are weaker than him, and defenseless. This was a dangerous man. And now he’s dead, and that’s entirely his fault.
But in Aurora, Colorado — a city that’s allowed entire apartment buildings to be taken over by Venezuelan terrorist organizations — the right of self-defense is no longer afforded to police officers, or to white people in general. Therefore, as incredible as it may be, the police officer involved in this shooting — Matthew Neely — has just been indicted by a grand jury on charges of second-degree murder and reckless manslaughter. Yes, for shooting a violent drunk criminal who was charging towards him and threatening to beat him, Officer Matthew Neely is now facing the prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison.
This is a case that should be national news. If we had worthwhile media outlets in this country, every single one of them would be leading with this story. But as it stands, from what I can tell, only local news stations are covering the indictment. And predictably, they’re not covering the absurdity of charging a police officer with murder for defending himself. Instead, they’re running puff pieces where they speak to Stubblefield’s family about what a great father he supposedly was. Because nothing says “great father” like driving drunk, armed, with blood alcohol three times the legal limit, and then trying to fight the cops. Truly, this was a model citizen.
This clip is from 9News, which is based in Denver. It’s one of the most nauseating segments you’ll ever see. Watch:
Just utter shamelessness, all the way down. Notice how, when the woman is describing what Stubblefield was doing before he got “the death penalty,” she trails off at the end. It’s pretty conspicuous. She says “He’s driving drunk” and “didn’t pull over right away,” and then she kind of rolls her eyes and moves on. Well, what else did he do right after that? After he fled from the officer and hit two people with his car, what happened next? He didn’t happen to charge towards the officer, backing him up into traffic while threatening to beat him, did he? He wasn’t telling his son to retrieve his firearm, was he? He didn’t refuse to obey multiple desperate commands from a police officer who was very clearly trying to do everything in his power to not shoot Stubblefield, until he was left with no other choice, did he?
The purpose of this news segment, very transparently, is to foment a race riot in an election year. There is no reason to run a puff piece on this guy, in which they minimize the fact that he was obviously a violent, dangerous degenerate. And there’s certainly no reason to talk to his wife or whatever. The family is going to sue the city because they want a payout. Their testimony is not credible. More to the point, their life story is completely irrelevant to what happened. If we’re going to interview these people and talk about how the dad liked to play board games or whatever — at least, when he wasn’t drunk out of his mind and crashing into innocent families on the road — then where’s the interview with the cop’s family? Why don’t we get his side of the story? Why don’t we hear about the cop’s favorite color, and all the parks he likes to visit in his spare time?
Instead, shockingly enough, we learn that Stubblefield’s son was ignored when he pleaded with the cop to “chill.” His wife really can’t comprehend that one. Why on earth would the cop not listen to her son, and allow this violent thug to beat him in the street? It’s a real mystery. After all, on their first day at the academy, every cop is taught that when a random bystander tells you to “chill,” then you need to lay down your weapon and take whatever beating is coming. That’s textbook police procedure.
Try to comprehend the gall that these people have, in order to run this playbook *when the shooting is on video.* The family, the media, all of them. It’s almost unbelievable. And we can’t forget the new DA, Amy Padden, who brought this case before the grand jury.
Amy Padden, of course, is a leftist white woman with the important-lady glasses who believes in “racial equity” and “social justice.” She’s endorsed by communists, including Bernie Sanders, for obvious reasons. Amy Padden’s objective is anarcho-tyranny, where she lets black criminals out of prison and spends most of her time prosecuting police officers (and other white people) who attempt to maintain law and order.
Just to make sure I wasn’t missing anything, I pulled up the grand jury indictment in this case. This is the document the prosecutors drafted, and the grand jury signed off on. I wanted to see if there was some actual evidence that this police officer had committed murder. But there’s nothing there. The officer told investigators that he thought Stubblefield was going to assault him and take his firearm, which was obviously a reasonable assumption from the footage.
He stated he didn’t have a taser at the time, and didn’t believe his pepper spray would be effective because it would incapacitate both of them. Then there’s this part from the indictment: “At one point, [the officer] attempted to holster his pistol so that he could transition to his retractable baton less-lethal device, but he was unable to get the pistol into his holster. … Defendant spent approximately 7 seconds trying to holster his weapon but was not successful in doing so. … Stubblefield never verbally threatened to harm Defendant, nor made any overt acts to disarm the officer or to re-arm himself.”
That last part is a flat-out lie. If you square up in a boxer’s stance, and say “You ready for this?” over and over again, then you’re absolutely making a verbal threat to harm someone. What do you think “are you ready for this” refers to? What was Stubblefield going to do — perform a magic trick, breakdance, maybe show off the Christopher Walken impression he’s been workshopping? This is a farce. Everyone who sees that video knows exactly what Stubblefield was doing. No rational human being with eyes and a brain could possibly be confused about what Stubblefield’s intentions were. And yet, based on this indictment, Amy Padden went to a grand jury and stated that the officer was never threatened. She lied to the grand jury, in other words. And remember, in a grand jury proceeding, the defense doesn’t get the opportunity to say anything. They’re not invited. So the prosecutor is free to lie about whatever she wants. And in this case, that’s exactly what happened. Padden’s gambit is to say whatever she needs to say to get this white male police officer in front of a Colorado jury. She knows at that point, all bets are off. Even if she has no case — and she doesn’t — she could very well still send this innocent man to prison for life. And that’s what she intends to do. And may well succeed in doing. It’s evil beyond comprehension.
And by the way, the fact that he wasn’t able to holster his pistol and draw his baton isn’t relevant to the question of whether he had a right to shoot. Police are not obligated to try out their less-lethal weapons before using their handguns. It’s a moment-by-moment determination. In this case, the officer obviously wanted to try using the baton at one point during this encounter. But the thing is, as long as the officer’s handgun wasn’t holstered (for whatever reason), there’s a very real threat that this guy could take the handgun if he closed the distance. That’s the whole point. The officer’s inability to holster his firearm under the stress of the situation does *not* give a criminal license to charge towards him and potentially take his firearm.
And somehow, that’s only the beginning. The more you read this indictment, the worse it gets.
The indictment tries to make the argument that Officer Neely wasn’t justified in using deadly force because “at no time did the officer tell Stubblefield that he was under arrest. … The officer did not radio the police dispatcher that Stubblefield was not complying with his commands or that he had and threw a gun into the grass when he got out of the Jeep, or that he believed Zion Murphy [the kid] and at least one other unrelated man at the scene to be an associate of Stubblefield. … Instead of continuing backwards on the sidewalk, the officer stepped into the west-bound lanes of 6th avenue with his pistol in his right hand. … The officer did not tell Stubblefield that he was under arrest. The officer did not tell Stubblefield that he would shoot him immediately prior to firing.”
So in other words, with the benefit of hindsight, the officer’s radio calls could’ve been better. Oh, and he could’ve given a few more warnings about shooting Stubblefield, in addition to the warnings he already gave. And what’s worse, he didn’t inform Stubblefield that he was under arrest. Can you imagine? Without being told he was under arrest, how was this guy supposed to know he was in trouble? All he was doing was committing multiple felonies and nearly killing everyone on the road before charging at a police officer. Surely, if he had been told he was under arrest, everything would’ve been different. He would’ve surrendered right away. Yes, the only reason Stubblefield reacted the way he did was that he was confused about what the officer wanted him to do. Sure, the officer did say multiple times, “Stop,” “Get on the ground,” “Get your hands up,” etc. But still Stubblefield was perplexed. The officer needed to be clearer. And because the officer wasn’t clearer, Stubblefield did the only reasonable thing with the limited information available to him — he tried to beat the officer to a pulp and steal his gun. I mean, what else was he supposed to do? He was confused.
This is a case for the Department of Justice to look into immediately. It is one of the most egregious cases of misconduct by a prosecutor that we’ve ever seen. And that is really saying something. This DA needs to be removed from office in handcuffs. There is no universe in which this indictment should stand. We have basic human rights in this country. Or at least we should. We cannot stand by and just allow a psychotic, evil DA to railroad an innocent man and ruin his life. His human rights are being violated. And at the most fundamental level. The fact that Leftists are even trying to push this case is genuinely astonishing, even by their standards. It’s a sign of a new strategy in their war on bodycams, which have caused so many problems for their ideology over the last decade. The new strategy is to simply ignore the footage entirely. Pretend it doesn’t exist, on the theory that a Left-wing jury will convict the police anyway. And that strategy, if we’re being honest, has a very real chance of success.
Recently we talked about how Leftists in Madison, Wisconsin have done a rather comical 180 on the use of police bodycams. First, BLM activists in Madison said bodycams were racist because they might “disproportionately affect minority communities,” meaning they’d record black people committing crimes. So they banned bodycams completely. But now, those same BLM activists are furious because there’s no bodycam footage of a recent police shooting involving a degenerate lifelong black felon named Corey Ruiz. Leftists were convinced that the footage would show some kind of police misconduct, which would allow them to instigate a new wave of all-important riots in an election year. Alas, no cameras means no footage, so now they’re demanding bodycams. They want more surveillance, solely because they believe it will benefit their ideology at this particular moment. But at the same time, they want “restrictions” on the new bodycams, so that the footage can’t be used to prosecute certain crimes (like illegal immigration). Naturally, they’re trying to figure out a way to prevent too many Democrat voters from going to prison. Give them another few years, and presumably, they’ll give up and try to ban bodycams again.
The flip-flop in Madison, as we discussed, was yet another indication that bodycams have been a disaster for the Left. It highlights, once again, that they don’t care about the truth, or principles of any kind. Their entire ideology depends on distorting reality to fit narratives that are clearly fake. Bodycams stand in their way, 99.9% of the time.
Remember DeShawn Leeth?
They told us he was a “force in his community,” a real family man and community leader. The sheriff’s office even made him a “community engagement officer,” despite his multiple felony convictions (including for home invasion). And then the bodycam footage came out. Watch:
NEW: A trooper in Ohio fatally sh0t Deshawn Leeth, a local figure in Michigan, after Leeth launched an aggressive attack on the officer.
The incident began when Leeth crashed a stolen police cruiser, near the PA state line.
Video footage captures the moment the Ohio trooper… pic.twitter.com/bWDSVLuo0K
— 🇺🇸 Larry 🇺🇸 (@LarryJones) April 16, 2025
There’s Exhibit A for why tasers don’t work. After being tased, he goes on to beat the officer and steal his police car, which he took out for a joyride on the Ohio Turnpike (nearly killing multiple people). This is why, when a deranged thug is charging towards you, you have every right to shoot them. It doesn’t matter if they’re unarmed. They’re a lethal threat to you and everyone around you, and they need to be put down. They have no right to charge at you, assault you, or threaten you. You are under no obligation to value their life above your own. You are under no obligation to put your own life at risk for the sake of preserving the life of a violent degenerate thug who wants to do you harm. This same logic obviously applies to police officers.
And overwhelmingly, bodycams show that police officers have to deal with barbaric criminals like this every day, and they exercise remarkable restraint in doing so. Officer Neely exercised incredible restraint in Aurora. He pleads with Stubblefield to get on the ground. He pushes him back multiple times. He would have been perfectly justified in shooting Stubblefield dead the first time he charged. That would have been a totally fine response. But Neely goes out of his way — above and beyond — to avoid doing what he eventually has no choice but to do.
But when I talked about the situation in Madison a few days ago, I realize now that I may have been a little too optimistic about bodycam footage, and how it can be used to suppress fake leftist narratives before they get off the ground. You see, I assumed that when there’s clear bodycam footage showing that a police officer acted lawfully to defend himself from a violent threat and the bodycam footage is released right away, BLM activists would give up and move on to the next fake outrage. Not because they’re honest people, or because they have morals, or a soul — none of that applies to BLM activists, obviously — but because they would simply have no choice. The truth would be plain as day for everyone to see. And that’s been true in general, whenever there’s a BLM hoax — whether it’s George Floyd, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, or anyone else. The narrative has always depended on the fact that bodycam footage isn’t released to the public (at least, not immediately). When there’s bodycam footage that immediately kills the BLM narrative before it can propagate, then generally speaking, the narrative dies.
But with the Stubblefield case, it’s not true anymore. BLM activists have decided that they’re going to simply ignore footage that contradicts their race propaganda. And it’s happening all over the country. Maybe you’ve heard of the case of 14-year-old Rashawn Knight in Jacksonville, Florida. According to Left-wing activists, in July, Rashawn was out for a walk with a 15-year-old friend at 2:45 a.m. — a perfectly normal time to go for a walk; obviously the kids weren’t up to anything illegal — when the police, out of nowhere, attacked them. The police supposedly used racial slurs and beat the children, all because they suspected that the boys had been jaywalking. Watch:
Rashawn Knight was beaten by white cops, and dogs were sicced on him just for walking down the street pic.twitter.com/a56huDKVcb
— kevin blue (@kevinblue345) July 30, 2026
Notice how she includes a random jab at the surveillance state at the end of the video, in an attempt to get some public support on her side. She knows people online hate drones and surveillance, so she’s somehow trying to make this case about that. It’s all very calculated. And she goes on to say that the officers should be indicted and their lives should be ruined, and of course, the kid’s family deserves a massive payout from the city because he’s just so traumatized and so on.
The problem is, every aspect of this story is false. First of all, Rashawn Knight and his friend were not jaywalking, nor did the police suspect jaywalking. They were actually suspected of breaking into cars, and residents called 911. Because when a couple of black teenagers are out wandering the streets at 3:00 in the morning, they are pretty much always going to be committing crimes. We all know that. But we’re supposed to pretend we don’t, lest we be called racist.
When the police arrived on the scene, officers caught the teens in the act of breaking into a vehicle. The car alarm went off right in front of them, and then the teens ran away. The officers recovered a window-breaker from one of the teens, as well as a stolen handgun. At no point did officers use any racial slurs or excessive force. They didn’t beat anyone or stomp on anyone’s ribs. The police acknowledge that they struck one of the teens when he was reaching for his waistband, and the officers deployed a dog who bit one of the teens as he fled. And it worked — he stopped running and dropped the stolen gun he was carrying. Officers rendered aid as soon as they could, and it was obviously a minor injury.
Again, there’s no doubt about any of this. It’s all on tape. And by the way, when you’re watching this footage, note that this “14-year-old” is not some little kid. We’re talking about obese thugs here. Watch:
We’re releasing body-worn camera video from the arrest of 14-year-old Rashawn Knight to counter misinformation the case has generated.
Around 2:45 a.m. on July 20, District 3 Patrol officers and our K9 Unit responded after reports armed individuals were burglarizing cars.
When… pic.twitter.com/jrvV21NZk2
— Jax Sheriff’s Office (@JSOPIO) August 3, 2026
This should be the end of this whole narrative. This was yet another attempt by leftists and black activists to lie, in a desperate attempt to start race riots. And it’s been exposed, unambiguously.
But once again, activists are simply ignoring the evidence. They certainly aren’t acknowledging that they were wildly wrong about the facts of this case. Instead, a BLM-style black activist group called the “Jacksonville Community Action Committee” just released a statement claiming the video is deceptively edited. And they’re doubling down on their narrative, even though the video is obviously devastating for them.
Jacksonville Community Action Committee said it “condemns the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office’s latest attempt to retroactively justify the brutalization of 14-year-old RaShawn Knight. … This is a deliberate attempt to shift public focus away from the brutality of the incident to a misleading portrayal of Knight as a threat. … The facts remain: RaShawn Knight is a child, and he was subjected to K-9 bites and strikes. The community demands the full, unedited body cam footage and audio, not just the clips JSO chooses to release. We demand all trumped-up charges be dropped and continue to demand that Rashawn be released to his mother immediately. We demand the officers involved in this brutal arrest be held accountable. End JSO excessive force now!”
Yeah, the teens weren’t a threat. They were just caught on-camera at 3:00 a.m. breaking into cars while carrying a stolen handgun and a window-breaker. What’s the big deal? Arrest the officers! Release Rashawn back to his mother immediately! This poor boy just wants to go on peaceful nature walks with his friends in the middle of the night while holding stolen handguns. He’s a nature enthusiast, that’s all!
Actually, here’s a better idea. Throw the mother in prison with him. And assuming you can find him — which is admittedly very unlikely — round up the father too. Isn’t that what we’re doing now? Didn’t a white father just get sentenced to 15 years in prison because his son shot up a school? If white parents are liable for the crimes of their children, then black parents are liable as well. Of course, that’ll mean arresting an awful lot of black parents, but then again, our Constitution has an Equal Protection Clause for a reason. Laws must be applied equally. So let’s start with the parents of Rashawn Knight.
The only part of their statement that’s reasonable is that, yes, to the extent that the sheriff’s office has more footage, it should release it (assuming they haven’t already). Every news outlet in Jacksonville is going to get the footage eventually. The more transparency, the better. But obviously, these people clearly don’t care about the evidence anyway, so really, there’s no point. No matter what happens, they’ll say the police officers should be fired, and the city should pay out a multi-million-dollar settlement. They’ll never admit they were lying. They’ll never have a single moment of self-reflection. They’ll just continue inventing fraudulent narratives until one of them sticks.
The reason they’re so confident in their strategy is that, piece by piece, these activists are taking over the government at the local level. As we discussed, in Aurora, they have a communist DA who’s willing to prosecute police officers for no reason. Meanwhile in New York, there’s a DEI deputy police commissioner who was just arrested for acting as a getaway driver in an attempted gang hit, which was carried out by her son.
Yes, a deputy police commissioner in New York allegedly participated in a gang hit, along with her husband and her son. So it was a real classic family outing, the kind we’ve all had at one point or another. You watch a movie, get some ice cream, and then try to assassinate some members of a rival crew — there’s nothing more American than that.
With respect to bodycams, these imbeciles have now committed themselves to ignoring the footage entirely. They’ve also been doing their best to make the footage harder to obtain. This is another story that’s not getting much coverage. Right now on YouTube, as you’ve probably noticed, one of the most popular genres is police bodycam footage. Popular channels include Police Activity, Midwest Safety, CodeBlueCam, and so on. They’ve gone mainstream, to the point that podcasters and comedians are talking about some of these channels — which were basically unheard of, just a few months ago. Watch:
One of the main reasons these videos are so popular is that, unlike “COPS,” they’re not sanitized in service of a communist agenda. There’s an interview with the co-creator of “COPS,” John Langley, where he admits that he goes out of his way to include more white suspects, even though black people are committing most of the crime.
“Here’s the reality of crime, in the street crime, approximately 60-70% is perpetrated by people of color, people of color, right? Maybe 30-35% of the suspects are white people,” Langley said. “In prisons, the percentages are pretty much the same: maybe 30-35% of the people in prison are white and the rest are people of color, meaning black, Hispanic, whatever. Now on ‘COPS,’ we reversed that. We showed 60-70% white suspects and 30-35%, or maybe as high occasionally as 40%, of people of color. Now why do I do that? Because I don’t wanna contribute to negative stereotyping. Everybody knows that crime takes place in ghettos. We all know that, or should know that; the majority of street crime. All of the white criminals are at Enron and places like that and that’s just because they’re not disenfranchised and they do different kinds of crime.”
There you have it. White people are committing all kinds of crime, all the time. You just can’t see it. It’s invisible crime. White people are constantly conducting Enron-level accounting frauds, every day, at the same frequency that blacks and Hispanics are committing street crimes. John Langley is sure of it. Just trust him. In fact, he’s so sure of it that he’s willing to put racial propaganda on the air for decades — all to counteract this grave injustice that he’s made up in his own head.
It’s an incredible quote, and it sums up Leftism pretty well. They think they’re justified when they lie to you, in support of a fake narrative they’ve invented that suits their ideology. But “COPS” is full of many other deceptions too. For example, they rarely show serious, violent crimes. They mostly film meth addicts in parking lots — the whiter the better. But if a black guy shoots and kills a police officer, they won’t air that. If a Hispanic gangbanger executes an innocent person, that’s too graphic for “COPS.” They’d rather show you a white guy who’s getting high in his own backyard, so you can point and laugh at him.
This is why YouTube channels like Midwest Safety and Police Activity are so popular. They don’t have any obvious political agenda. They show you what happened, mostly unfiltered. They show the reality of living in major American cities. As a result, all over the country, there are efforts to shut these channels down.
Despite how it may look, these channels put in a lot of work to get that footage. They’re submitting thousands of records requests to local police departments and sifting through all of it. And then they’re editing it and (in some cases) narrating it. In response, many local jurisdictions are now charging these channels per request. And the charges aren’t small. To give just one example, this is from the Yellow Springs News in Ohio:
“Village Council authorizes charging some for police video records requests. … At the most recent Village Council meeting, Monday, April 21, the group approved a resolution that allows the Village to charge for public records requests of video footage from the Yellow Springs Police Department’s body-worn camera and police cruiser dash cameras. According to the resolution, the Village will charge $75 per hour of video produced, not exceeding a total of $750 for each recorded video.”
So if there’s an incident in Yellow Springs, and a YouTube channel wants to collect the body-camera footage from multiple officers, they might end up paying thousands of dollars — all without knowing if the footage is actually newsworthy. For example, if a channel requests all of the bodycam footage from 3 officers on the scene, the police department could produce the officers’ bodycams from the entire shift, and demand more than $2,000.
It’s obviously an effort to prevent the public from accessing information they’re entitled to. And there are many, many similar bills that have been enacted throughout the country. In some cases, local jurisdictions are simply refusing to turn over footage entirely, unless the person requesting the footage falls into some narrow exceptions (like a school, or a credentialed news outlet).
This is from a group called The Better Government Association. Keep in mind as you read this — they’re focusing solely on Illinois with this analysis: “Several legislative efforts in 2025 tried to limit access to body cam footage, according to an analysis by BGA Policy. BGA Policy found six bills that would have limited access to body cam footage. … HB 1583 and HB 3524 would have limited access by changing which officers require body cams or changing requirements to have body cams turned on while on duty. The other bills, HB 3515, HB 3380 and SB 1796 under Senate Amendment 1, were broader. They would have targeted the requester and the requesting process, limiting either the circumstances for accessing body cam footage, who can access it or both.”
Again, this is just one state. The same thing is probably happening where you live. Politicians are going out of their way to suppress access to bodycam footage, precisely because they understand that it’s devastating for the fake narratives they want to push. And that’s not even getting into YouTube’s various efforts to de-monetize bodycam footage. These activists are so desperate, as we discussed, that in some cases they’re simply ignoring the body cam footage and proceeding with their narratives anyway. Imagine what would happen if they successfully eliminated these cameras entirely (or suppressed access to the footage).
No matter what your position is on “mass surveillance” in general, these body cams are clearly in the public interest. We should be able to surveil what police officers are doing — and what criminals are doing. You should be very suspicious of anyone who says otherwise. Especially as we’re coming up on the midterms, you can expect a new, intense effort to fabricate many more narratives in the next few weeks. They’ll try to manufacture a new fake narrative every day until they get what they want, which is racial violence. Bodycams stand in their way.
Bodycams prevent them from convincing anyone that their foot soldiers were just out for a jog at 3 a.m., when they were really terrorizing an entire neighborhood. Bodycams prevent them from pretending that whites commit as much crime as blacks and Hispanics. Bodycams are fatal to every single one of their narratives. And for that reason — because the truth is their mortal enemy — they want to get rid of them. They want to charge YouTube channels thousands of dollars for simply looking at the footage. It’s a very calculated and deliberate effort that almost no one is talking about. It’s a threat to a wealth of information about something the Left desperately wants to keep hidden, which is the reality of living in the United States all these decades after the “Civil Rights Movement” and mass migration. They’ve made life hell for millions of Americans. And no matter what they tell you about the “surveillance state” or “racial profiling” or whatever other excuse they use, Americans have a right to see what these people have done to their country.
.png)
.png)
