Re: "Bills address police body cams, records" (TNT, 2-3).
In reading through this article, matters of implementation, financing, privacy, records retention and so forth are the focus. This information is clear, enabling the reader to understand the ramifications of the legislation under consideration.
And then, this non sequitur appears: State Rep. Drew Hanson is quoted as saying, "Each community gets to decide for themselves," presumably from the wide array of options under consideration for implementation.
The obvious question is: Why enact any statewide legislation?
Are we to assume that a citizen or police officer of one jurisdiction is protected as to privacy, record retention, etc., while a citizen or police officer in another remains unprotected in one or some of these situations?
Under any given state law, is it not reasonable to assume that all law pertains to all citizens?