Citizen Assaulted for Filming Governor John Kitzhaber Event (Oregon)

Breitbart TV ^ | September 23, 2010 | James O'Keefe

[penelopesire]

Approximately 10 minutes into the speech the moderator informs the public not to film. The citizen continues to film, stating it is his First Amendment Right. The camera is smashed into his face. This is clearly seen on the video.

[wolfcreek]

Win you soul or knock the Hell out of you, I guess.

[Gondring]

And yet, if this had been a conservative speaker with liberals recording the faces of those who attend, for example, I bet most FReepers would object.

Note, sometimes conservatives can object to filming even in public (at an event that the organizer had requested to remain apolitical).

What a mess!

[PapaBear3625]

I hope the camera guy puts all those thugs in jail for assault and sues the church for failing to control it (Hey, I thought it was the democrats who wanted churches to lose their non-profit status for mouthing political opinions??).

The people who assaulted him were clearly operating as agents for the Church leadership, enforcing the order that no recording was allowed. If this can be demonstrated, then he has a good case for suing everybody involved for the tort of assault and battery.

[Gondring]

What public official was invited? The only person I’ve heard about is John Kitzhaber.

[mmanager]

Sorry for the grammer. Not Who’s Dat but Who.

[penelopesire]

I have only one observation so far....That was an assault and should be prosecuted as such. The thug had no right to hit the camera dude in the face. He should have called the cops to remove the dude.

[mo]

“And that Democrat Etheridge that STRONG ARMED the young kid that was asking him a question and put in a CHOKE HOLD is LEADING in the polls...”

who’s his opponent? Has he a copy of that film?

[Drango]

I fully support the use of physical force to eject unwelcome behavior on private property.

Agreed. Where we differ perhaps is the amount of force. You may use reasonable force to insure your property rights. You may not assault someone.

What I saw was an assault and an unreasonable use of force. I believe a jury would find the same.

[livius]

People might object, but I doubt that anybody would attack the photographer.

And as for a conservative event with liberals photographing the faces, that happens all the time. I am sure that I appear on videos all over the leftist US.

At the most recent Tea Party event, they were out in droves, obviously trying to intimidate us. But we just let them film. After all, why not?

[penelopesire]

It was much better that the camera dude didn’t get involved in a fight imho. It is clear who is the aggressor. I hope he sues the hell out of them.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Can’t imagine why a politician would have a problem with his meet-and-greet being filmed, isn’t publicity what they want?

[Ann Archy]

I don’t know who the Republican is, but if that creep Etheridge wins, then that part of the country is LOST.

[Gondring]

THIS one had this as an open meeting to the public....

Yes...they let him in, didn't they?

But that doesn't mean he has the right to violate event rules. If he'd gotten up and started doing that awful Islamic wailing, would we all have to say, "Well, it's his First Amendment right!"

Bottom line, KOIN News 6 got the filming rights and agreed to stream the event. I really hope you're not asking the government to reach into private property and determine what do or do not allow.

[P-Marlowe]

It was on private property. I guess we've lost the right to decide what we allow on our own property?

If a private facility asks the governor of the state to give a speech on their property that is open to the public at large and the governor is speaking in his official capacity as the governor, then the facility for all intents and purposes is public property and people on the property enjoy the same rights and privileges they would otherwise enjoy if the event were to have occurred on public property.

In this case, because of the public and political nature of the event, the private property became quasi public property and the church ushers who assaulted the cameraman were acting as quasi officials of the state.

If this were a private political event, then what the heck is it doing in a church?

[Gondring]

Can’t imagine why a politician would have a problem with his meet-and-greet being filmed, isn’t publicity what they want?

It was being filmed...and streamed live.

[Gondring]

Having watched this, I have two observations. 1.) The person operating the camera knows how to say “It’s my First Amendment right” over and over again but has apparently never actually read the amendment in question. 2.) I fully support the use of physical force to eject unwelcome behavior on private property.

It's good to see another conservative here. :-)

[Gondring]

Governor Kitzhaber does not have any “official capacity as governor” since he left office.

[mockingbyrd]

KOIN 6 has said that they didn’t have an exclusivity agreement with the Church and want an apology from the church for trying to blame the violence on them.

[Gondring]

I don’t think that candidates are “public officials” until elected. Since Governor Kitzhaber is no longer in office, I would also say that he wouldn’t be considered a “public official” either.