The Great Police Work Thread

Cotton

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,324
I am not for police having the right to arrest someone for filming something they are doing, just like I'm for all cops having body cameras on them at all times.
 
Clay_Allison

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
BipolarFan said:
BY BILL BRIGGS

A number of recent arrests have highlighted the role citizen smartphones can play in documenting police action, and while courts have sided with camera-wielding observers in the past, civilians who tape police making a bust may still face their own arrest, legal experts and activists say.

Several court rulings have upheld a civilian’s First Amendment rights to videotape cops performing their jobs in public places, legal experts say.

Those same federal courts, however, also found “this federal constitutional right is not absolute, particularly when it comes to filming traffic stops,” said Professor Clay Calvert, director of the Marion B. Brechner First Amendment Project at the University of Florida. “The precise contours of the right have yet to be fully fleshed out.”

One recent arrest video that has invoked public anger is of New York City police officers who, on July 17, appear to have applied a hold to a suspect’s neck in the course of an arrest. The man, 43-year-old Eric Garner, later died. The altercation between Garner and officers on Staten Island occurred after police suspected Garner of selling untaxed cigarettes. On the phone-captured video, Garner, an asthmatic who weighed an estimated 350 to 400 pounds, can be heard telling restraining officers, “I can’t breathe."

On July 1, cellphone footage from a passerby showed a California Highway Patrol officer allegedly holding a 51-year-old woman on the ground near a Santa Monica freeway and repeatedly striking her.

How and when a person takes video of police officers in action may play a role in whether or not the camera-holder could him or herself be arrested.

In May, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit wrote that, “reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right to film may be imposed when the circumstances justify them.” Those factors could include officer and suspect safety, or the ability of law enforcement personnel to control chaos at the scene.

“The weasel word here, of course, is ‘reasonable,’ and courts are likely to give deference to the judgment of law enforcement personnel on that issue,” Calvert said.

For practical purposes, an old real-estate mantra applies here: location, location, location.

“The inherent dangerousness of the situation comes into play,” Calvert said. “That might include how many other people hostile to an officer are nearby and how many suspects the officer is dealing with. The real line here, then, is between filming and interfering.”

This debate is, of course, as old as the Rodney King case –- the 1991 arrest and beating of King by Los Angeles police following a high-speed chase. A balcony-perched witness, George Holliday, videotaped as officers hurled blows against King’s body.

According to CHP, citizens are permitted to film an officer in the course of conducting his or her duties “as long as you are not interfering with the tasks the officer is performing,” said John “Mike” Harris, a CHP spokesman and officer. “You must adhere to the officers' commands if you are ordered to move back to a safe location or outside of the investigative scene.”

New York City police officials did not respond to an email from NBC News asking whether citizens in that jurisdiction are legally allowed to film arrests.

James Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, said through a receptionist that he is “not doing interviews on that” subject.

And at the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), based in Alexandria, Virginia, manager Phil Lynn declined an interview but did email to NBC News a February IACP policy paper titled “Recording Police Activity.”

The document acknowledges that videotaping on-duty police work is “a form of speech” covered by the First Amendment. But the paper lists five examples of police “interference” that individuals “who wish to record police must observe.” Those are:

-Keeping a “reasonable distance” from officers.

-Not “repeatedly engaging officers with questions or distractions that unduly hinder police activities to protect life and safety, or the integrity of a crime scene.”

-Not positioning "themselves in a manner that would either passively or actively hinder, impede” officers, first responders or traffic.

-Not filming “sensitive police operations and tactical situations if they could reasonably jeopardize the safety of officers or third parties,” for example, a police response to a school shooting.

-Not violating “the privacy of victims and witnesses.”

With those rules in place, anyone filming officers -– even in public places –- is at risk for arrest, “rightly or wrongly depending on the facts, on charges ranging from disorderly conduct and obstructing with an arrest to eavesdropping and the failure to obey an order to stop filming,” said Calvert, the First Amendment expert.

“The reason the right to record is so important is the everyday citizens now can play the role of public watchdog on potential government abuses of power,” Calvert said. “Every citizen today with a smartphone now has the power to be his or her own George Holliday.”
_____________________________

Pathetic that there is even a fucking debate about this.
Click to expand...
Did you read the article? It's not much of a debate. You can film as long as you aren't getting in the way. I wouldn't expect courts to rule that you can legally hump the cop's leg while he's busy trying to arrest somebody.
 
NoDak

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,303
I feel like I should apologize to 2233 for bumping this thread again.

 
JBond

JBond

Brand New Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
88
Deuce said:
It's one of those things you're all excited about because of Freedumz and 'Merica! until you try to use it. Once you shoot an officer, lawful or not, the others will dump their clips into you.
Click to expand...
Clips? LOL. Clearly you know nothing about weapons. What freaking gun are cops carrying on a regular basis that requires a clip? This is not 1944. Sigh...
 
JBond

JBond

Brand New Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
88
Troop leader: Customs and Border agent held Boy Scout at gunpoint

A Boy Scout troop from the nation’s heartland is demanding answers and a U.S. senator is expressing outrage after a group of scouts was detained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents, with one child allegedly held at gunpoint.

Jim Fox, the leader of the Mid-Iowa Boy Scout Troop 111, said the incident occurred earlier this month at a checkpoint along the Alaska – Canada border. The scouts and their leaders were on a 21-day trek from Iowa to Alaska – a trip that had been three years in the planning.

As their vans were moving through a checkpoint into the United States, one of the scouts snapped a photograph. Agents stopped the van and ordered all the passengers to get out. They told the underage photographer that he had committed a federal crime. It was unclear which agency with the Department of Homeland Security's CBP agency was involved in the incident.

“The agent immediately confiscated his camera, informed him he would be arrested, fined possibly $10,000 and ten years in prison,” Fox told Des Moines television station KCCI.

During the search, one of the scouts tried to retrieve a bag from the roof carrier. When he turned around, Fox said an agent had a loaded pistol pointed at the child.

“He heard a snap of the holster, turns around, and here’s this agent, both hands on a loaded pistol, pointing at the young man’s head,” Fox told the television station.

The scoutmaster wrote a detailed account of the incident on his Facebook page. He said he tried to watch the agents search the van but was ordered to return to his vehicle. An agent followed him and told the youngsters “that the next one to leave the van would be handcuffed and detained.”

“The agent in charge informed me of the potential charges against (the) scout and informed me it is a violation of federal law for any American to take a picture of a federal agent or any federal building,” Fox wrote.

Fox said he and another member of the troop were interrogated by agents – forced to answer questions about their background.

They also wanted to know why the Boy Scouts were hauling “excessive amounts of lighters, matches and knives,” Fox said. After a lengthy delay, the Scouts were released without any charges being filed.

“The boys were unnecessarily frightened and intimidated,” Fox wrote. “When do we Americans decide enough is enough? The TSA and border guards are a valuable asset to the safety of this country, but to have such Gestapo tactics against a teenage scout is uncalled for.”

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, agrees.

“It’s outrageous that a border patrol agent would point a gun at a boy scout just for taking a picture,” he told the television station. “It just doesn’t make sense.”

The senator’s office said they are looking into the matter.

Robert Hooper, the scout executive for the Mid-Iowa Council of the BSA, told me they, too, are upset and disturbed by the allegations.

“The guys were in scout uniforms,” he said. “I would like to know what caused this to happen. It does sound pretty extreme.”

Indeed, it does. It’s not like they were attempting to cross into the United States illegally.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection said they’ve had a chance to investigate – and they can’t find anything out of the ordinary.

“CBP takes any allegations of wrongdoing very seriously,” read their official statement. “CBP’s review of this group’s inspection, including video footage review indicates that our officer did not un-holster or handle his weapon as stated in the allegation. The review revealed nothing out of the ordinary. We have reached out to the Boy Scout troop for additional information in reference to the allegation. The video footage has been referred to CBP Internal Affairs for further review.”

So, what we have here is an old-fashioned case of he said, he said – or to be more accurate – the Boys Scouts said, the feds said.

In cases like this, the quickest way to determine who is being truthful is to look at the video. So I emailed U.S. Customs and Border Protection and officially requested a copy of the video.

My request was denied.

I also asked for a copy of the statute that criminalizes Photography 101. I’ve yet to receive a reply.

Fox is still fired up over how his scouts were treated – and I can’t say I blame him.

“This was an illegal search and intimidation of Americans returning to their home country,” he said.

So let’s review, good readers.

While hordes of illegal immigrants are stampeding across our southern border unimpeded, federal agents along our northern border detained and harassed a group of law-abiding American Boy Scouts.

I wonder what kind of merit badge they’ll get for that?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/07/24/troop-leader-border-agent-held-boy-scout-at-gunpoint/
 
jeebs

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
U.S. Customs and Border Protection said they’ve had a chance to investigate – and they can’t find anything out of the ordinary.
Click to expand...
This is why I hate police.
 
Cotton

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,324
JBond said:
Clips? LOL. Clearly you know nothing about weapons. What freaking gun are cops carrying on a regular basis that requires a clip? This is not 1944. Sigh...
Click to expand...
He meant magazines.
 
JBond

JBond

Brand New Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
88
jeebs said:
Is clip not an aceptable term for a magazine.
Click to expand...
Not really. It angers me when politicians and do-gooders use terms that they do not understand. I probably came on a little strong. It's been a long day.

 
Cotton

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,324
jsmith6919 said:
I call magazines clips sometimes :unsure
Click to expand...
It's an easy mistake to make. I don't really get hung up on it, but some people have a fit when the two terms are minced.
 
jsmith6919

jsmith6919

Honored Member - RIP
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
28,407
Iamtdg said:
It's an easy mistake to make. I don't really get hung up on it, but some people have a fit when the two terms are minced.
Click to expand...
Guess I've just been around polite gunnuts then since I can't recall anyone getting peeved because i called a magazine a clip, I do have a friend that can't stand when people say PIN number or ATM machine though
 
Cotton

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,324
jsmith6919 said:
Guess I've just been around polite gunnuts then since I can't recall anyone getting peeved because i called a magazine a clip, I do have a friend that can't stand when people say PIN number or ATM machine though
Click to expand...
:lol Why?
 
jsmith6919

jsmith6919

Honored Member - RIP
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
28,407
Iamtdg said:
Ahh... kinda like a NIC card in a computer. Gotcha.
Click to expand...
Yea stuff like that personally doesn't bother me at all, I reserve getting pissed off for things that matter. Like getting cutoff or driving slow in the fast lane
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom