Theres a little bit of a difference between doing away with the first amendment right to public photography and people using a massive corporation’s own take-down process for removing a publicly hosted images of their house 😅
The constitution people always love talking about the amendments like they’re gospel. But like, if the constitution was so great, why do you care about the changes to it? If we make a new amendment does it instantly become as sacred emotionally to them?
Yes and some people would do away with the 1st amendment right to public photography entirely. That doesn’t make it right…
Not everyone’s in the US…
Theres a little bit of a difference between doing away with the first amendment right to public photography and people using a massive corporation’s own take-down process for removing a publicly hosted images of their house 😅
I’m not from the US so care little for the constitution. What is in the constitution and what is right are two different things.
Okay this one has always cracked me up.
The constitution people always love talking about the amendments like they’re gospel. But like, if the constitution was so great, why do you care about the changes to it? If we make a new amendment does it instantly become as sacred emotionally to them?
Oh shit! I never knew we had access to the first amendment in Europe. (I also have no fucking idea what the first amendment is).
The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution is a part of the US Constitution that prohibits laws violating certain specific rights, two of them being the freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Many other countries have some equivalent to this too.
The relevance here is that taking photos of public spaces is part of freedom of speech and of the press.
The US Constitution is fucking stupid.