Popehat | Ken | What Law? Just, You Know, THE LAW.Woah there, big fella. What's this "right to control the situation" you're talking about? I don't remember seeing that in the Constitution, or any statutues, or any books of philosophy or law. That sounds an awful lot like a right to tell anyone within ear shot of you to behave however you want.
Law enforcement would have you believe that cameras are dangerous and justify their intervention. Either it’s because a camera could be a high-tech weapon, or because they get folks all het up:
Police officials say officers who seek to stop photography are driven by safety concerns and the fact that the presence of a camera can spike emotions.
"When people see a camera, they get more into it," said Marcello Muzzatti, president of D.C. Lodge No. 1 of the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents 11,000 officers in more than 100 D.C. and federal agencies. "Some people will figure, 'I have a right to take pictures,' and we are not arguing with that. An officer also has a right to his or her safety and to control the situation."
Cops have a right to safety. The very same right that I have and the rest of the humans in the world have. No more, no less. There's no right to "control the situation," because that's nothing but a spiffy way of saying they have a right to unquestioned local authoritarianism.