I must respectfully disagree. Consider a spam phone caller. He might justify his calls by saying he’s offering a service, one that the called person can decline. But deep down he knows the truth. He his simply harassing people for his own benefit.
The same goes with the 1A auditors who harass civilians. Those auditors are not standing in from of private property to protect the Constitution. Deep down, no one can believe that. Instead those auditors are looking for an adverse reaction. They want an adverse reaction.
Controversy sells. It’s no different than some guy who uses the n-word in front of a black person, then claims he’s just testing his right to free speech.
With really bothers me is that the garbage “1A auditors” give a bad name to the true 1A auditors. The true auditors record the police. They watch the police. As I noted earlier, the police need watching.
The true auditors record the police.
As I told you before the first amendment doens’t just cover the police. You are allowed to film anything you can see in public. More people need to understand this and stop being paranoid. If you have something you want to keep private keep it at home.
Filming in public isn’t harrassing. That is what you don’t get.
The spam caller example you gave would be different because you are engaging someone by calling them up on the phone. AP doesn’t engage. But if they want to engage him in a conversation or whatever, he will engage or might not.