Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are Cameras the New Guns?
Gizmodo.com ^ | 6/2/2010 | Wendy McElroy

Posted on 06/03/2010 6:59:40 AM PDT by RoseyT

In response to a flood of Facebook and YouTube videos that depict police abuse, a new trend in law enforcement is gaining popularity. In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer. Even if the encounter involves you and may be necessary to your defense, and even if the recording is on a public street where no expectation of privacy exists.

The legal justification for arresting the "shooter" rests on existing wiretapping or eavesdropping laws, with statutes against obstructing law enforcement sometimes cited. Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland are among the 12 states in which all parties must consent for a recording to be legal unless, as with TV news crews, it is obvious to all that recording is underway. Since the police do not consent, the camera-wielder can be arrested. Most all-party-consent states also include an exception for recording in public places where "no expectation of privacy exists" (Illinois does not) but in practice this exception is not being recognized.

(Story continued...)

(Excerpt) Read more at gizmodo.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: abuseofpower; allanimalsareequal; animalfarm; barney; barneyfife; bigbrother; biggestgangintown; cameras; constitution; cultureofcorruption; donutwatch; firstamendment; freespeech; gort; jackboots; lping; moreequalthanothers; nifongism; nwo; orwelliannightmare; police; policestate; surveillance; thugwithabadge; uniongoons; video
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 next last
To: RoseyT

As I’ve always said, the police aren’t citizens since they aren’t subject to our nation’s laws.

Pathetic.


21 posted on 06/03/2010 7:26:00 AM PDT by Filo (Darwin was right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT
"The legal justification for arresting the "shooter" rests on existing wiretapping or eavesdropping laws, with statutes against obstructing law enforcement sometimes cited."

Absurd. Illogical. Typical Statist protections (liberal / progressive control).

The NEA protects bad teachers through tenure and other means. Incompetent, redundant, or unethical government workers are next to impossible to fire. The UAW protects the lowest quality workers in their ranks versus enforcing a standard of excellence.

Protect your kingdom.

22 posted on 06/03/2010 7:26:39 AM PDT by uncommonsense (Conservatives believe what they see; Liberals see what they believe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT
In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer.

Completely unconstitutional.

23 posted on 06/03/2010 7:42:11 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Throw the bums out in 2010.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT
Most all-party-consent states also include an exception for recording in public places where "no expectation of privacy exists" (Illinois does not) but in practice this exception is not being recognized.

So the public has "surrendered" their right to not be recorded but the police don't. No wonder they don't want cameras in the jails to catch them beating up those arrested.

It's good to be the king.

24 posted on 06/03/2010 7:44:31 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Throw the bums out in 2010.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

Those cameras are “not working” or the tapes are “lost” sometimes when the tapes don’t back up the officers’ stories.


25 posted on 06/03/2010 7:45:28 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Throw the bums out in 2010.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT

“In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer”

That’s a pretty stupid law. Nice way to alienate your constituents. It’s like passing a law that says you can’t give city councilmen funny looks. Except in that case, the law would encourage less beatings with heavy objects.


26 posted on 06/03/2010 7:54:18 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT
I just bought a few of these key fob recorders off of ebay. Nine bucks. And that includes shipping.


27 posted on 06/03/2010 8:11:56 AM PDT by VeniVidiVici (What's black and white and red all over? - OBAMA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT

this law violates the exculpatory evidence rule and it flies in the face of laws which ALLOW police to record you if they arrest you how are holding you in custody, or just doing a simple terry stop.


28 posted on 06/03/2010 8:19:33 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT
*Sh!its a Brick* - It looks like I prophesied this line of reasoning here:
The fools think that this actually entitles them to some sort of defense when it’s obvious that Our mere accusation is proof enough of guilt for punishments; just look at our highly-successful legal team at the IRS.
29 posted on 06/03/2010 8:38:06 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Sure looks that way. I enjoyed your “Supreme Law” post. Very Screwtapish!


30 posted on 06/03/2010 9:12:03 AM PDT by RoseyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT

Thank you much.


31 posted on 06/03/2010 9:28:30 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I couldn’t agree more. What part of “Public Servant” do they not understand?


32 posted on 06/03/2010 4:12:39 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I think the age of citizen journalist is upon us ... Video is the new media and the tape will always tell the tale, unless it’s photo shopped.

Heck even our lame stream media could have found the tapes of the flotilla raid, if they had wanted to tell the truth.

I agree mostly with the author, the camera can be as powerful as the gun, just like the pen before it.


33 posted on 06/03/2010 4:14:22 PM PDT by Tarpon (Obama-Speak ... the fusion of sophistry and Newspeak. It's not a gift, it's just lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GraceG
What’s next, will the congress critters make investigating congress illegal?

No need, they alone investigate themselves.

34 posted on 06/03/2010 4:17:17 PM PDT by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Alexander Rubin; Allerious; ...



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
View past Libertarian pings here
35 posted on 06/03/2010 4:17:40 PM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT

If two party consent is required, wouldn’t that prevent police dash cams from recording until the police officer got consent from the citizen being recorded?


36 posted on 06/03/2010 4:20:04 PM PDT by magellan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bike800; GraceG; dznutz

bike800, As GraceG said, (and I wholeheartedly agree) this is just an initial step in protecting the brownshirt police state to come.

I don’t think of the problem being as much what we now call “police” as the problem, so much as will inevitably be the brownshirts to come. I respect the good law enforcement officers, but I increasingly see the deck being stacked, so to speak.

Dznutz, I pinged you because I thought it’s important to bring in all perspectives, if you care to add. I appreciate anything you can add, but know you may be busy. This is only relevant to 3 states for now, but may increasingly involve us all.


37 posted on 06/03/2010 4:20:12 PM PDT by JDW11235 (I think I got it now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GraceG
I would say that the information our own eyes capture is our own inherent right

It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the law, guilty or not.

38 posted on 06/03/2010 4:22:43 PM PDT by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
Completely unconstitutional.

Not until the Court says it is, probably not in our lifetime either.

39 posted on 06/03/2010 4:24:23 PM PDT by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RoseyT
Of course, if someone hoodlum attacked some innocent person, the police would hope somebody filmed the hoodlum without the hoodlum's consent.
40 posted on 06/03/2010 4:24:37 PM PDT by magellan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson