Found this interesting video Via Uncle
I must agree, much like the ubiquitous dashboard cameras on police cars, police should be required to record their actions on public time. Not only will this keep things honest, but it will always protect the good guy. The video gives examples of both instances where video helped innocent people being preyed upon by overstepping police, but also instances where partial videos and biased eyewitnesses made police doing a good job look like they were violating the law. Also they failed to mention this famous case where most sources point that if the video had been complete the event would not have blown-up the way it did.
All of these interactions should be recorded by police, as well as any innocent bystanders, and the unedited tapes in public possession should be subject to Freedom of Information queries.
The whole perversion of the wire-tap laws is very obviously an abuse. If it were true that ANYBODY recording audio required the express permission of all persons present, Video and Audio recorders would simply be illegal. Example:
Here’s a video shot by Jay of Zeeke42 shooting the famous Snubbie from Hell .357. You can see yours trully wander into frame. I don’t think I was aware I’m being filmed, and I belive that’s my voice heard when I’m out-of-frame, also I clearly hear Mopar and somebody else talking. I doubt they know they are being recorded.
Now this is an active firing line where ear protection is required! Its not like this is a place where people chatting. Look at any Man-on-the-street news cast, or search for home videos on Youtube from any public event, or crowded location (like say Disney World”) and you’ll find dozens if not HUNDREDS of people being recorded without expressed permission.
Has there ever been a public address of this wide-spread and serious crime? Have there been arrests made for violations? No! This ONLY comes up with police and government officials, or prosecutors fishing for charges to file (I’ve read a few cases of people mounting hidden cameras in private areas to capture nude images where the wire-tapping charges were filed).
In a world where audio and video equipment is so small, and broadband internet nearly everywhere, these abused laws need to be reviewed!
Yes cops should have to wear cameras. They’re cheap and the technology exists. There really isn’t a downside.
My one big problem with unlimited public recording of cops is recording things like security checkpoints or fixed security procedures. This should not be easy to do and should be somehow protected. The first thing someone does when planning an attack or a bankjob is to case the place. Security and anti-terrorist training specifically teaches to look for it. I’m a civilian who works on an Army base and reporting this when we see it is a big part of our responsibilities.
You have a VERY valid point, but is there some common ground to be had? I mean I assume the procedures being video taped are visable from public, unrestricted land. If people can’t video tape, they can simply watch and take notes. And certainly people should be aware of who’s video taping what, where, and why.
There was a video on efukt.com of a man video taping a young woman performing gymnastics in a street performance. People took note of the perv nature of this guy and asked him to leave, and obstructed his view…but obviously he kept the tape and uploaded it.
I’m sure with private property rights things can be concealed from the general public….
Define unrestricted public land. You can’t get on an Army base without at least producing ID. Often you’ll be required to sign in and acquire a visitors pass. You can’t get through airport security without ID either and you really can’t wander about on the flight line. I wager that if the TSA catches you recording their checkpoint, they may have the right to detain you and take your video. So they’re public land, but we’ve already given the government the right to restrict access and use.
I would think most of those sorts of places would have their own video surveillance. I would suggest that in lieu of allowing video surveillance by the public, the public could be given implicit access to the feeds for court cases with the stipulation that it not be distributed publicly. These feeds need to be made as tamper resistant as possible technologically. There should also be strict penalties for mishandling this evidence. Cops misplacing 90 seconds should at least be fired for mishandling evidence. Defendants and their lawyers posting to youtube should be able to be prosecuted.
I think we can agree on that. Army Bases, and Airport secure areas might possibly be allowed to restrict activities that they can reasonably deem “unsafe”. Sorta like the proverbial “Saying Bomb” in a boarding line. Its free speech to talk about explosives, but in the context of secure areas that could be deemed a threat. Same would go for video taping screenings. All that granted if more secure surveillance feeds are available for subpoena.
I would say any area that doesn’t have public domain surveillance should not be allowed, as we need protection that the Army MP, or TSA goon won’t abuse their power, and leave the resulting court case with nothing but a “his word vs. mine” scenario.
Agreed and frankly any area that really is crucial to security ought to have surveillance anyway. In this day and age why wouldn’t you have security cameras?
I’m sorry, I can’t watch that video without chuckling…
“That’s INSANE!”
Heh.
The last time I shot it I got 4 shots off before my last handload bullet jumped the crimp and stopped the cylinder. She has some bark!
Yeah Jeff, I keep thinking about pricing out a setup for my front porch. Really should talk to an expert rather than a DIY so I can get the best bang for my buck.
A cop who doesn’t want you to record undercover operations is not necessarily corrupt.
A cop who doesn’t want you to tape ordinary uniformed operations is corrupt.
You cannot stop terrorists from filming–you can only stop them from filming openly. If there is an exception for ‘sensitive security areas’, it needs to be narrowly defined, enforced, and with significant penalties for a government agent who claims security to stop someone from filming.
Well undercover work is an odd duck, and a gray area. If you KNOW they’re a cop, well then they aren’t very undercover….if you don’t know they’re a cop, you’re just taping another citizen.
must agree, much like the ubiquitous dashboard cameras on police cars, police should be required to record their actions on public time. Not only will this keep things honest, but it will always protect the good guy.
What if I don’t want the cop recording what I have to say to them?
I could be reporting a tip on my neighbors who have large vans unloading mysterious boxes every night.
Or I could be talking about the kid hotrodding through my neighborhood every night, nearly running over kids or me as I walk the dog.
If every second of every interaction is recorded, how much would be public record, eh?
How many snitches would be willing to talk to cops about the crimes in the area if they knew every word would be recorded and accessible.
And there is no hack proof storage either. So one way or another some recording would get out.
Also think about how many people would subpeona the recordings to show favoritism.
“Well, on the 12th, 15th, 19th, 23rd and 29th, you let people who were speeding and running red lights go, but on the 30th you didn’t let my client go. Why Officer Do-Right?”
Sorry but I’m not a fan of recording every moment.
Here is my last point — if we require cops to wear cameras — what is to stop the antis from pushing that everyone with a Concealed Handgun License has to wear a camera to make sure don’t break the law?