Videotaping Police Should Never Be a Crime

Well I would say that at the moment in time when the officer makes contact with me that it has now become of intrest to me what gets archived for purposes of protecting MY rights. I believe that all MY encounters with a officer should be either video taped or at the least a audio recording of the encounter made and preserved. The encounter involes the Officer(s) and I, therefore I choose to retain a record of this encounter for protection of MY rights. The officer is serving in a Civil Servant capacity and therefore in a PUBLIC capacity, unlike a Dr, Mechanic or private sector field. Except for active investigations and minor children cases Everything can be FOI (FREEDOM OF INFORMATION) from a public service.(Police Department) Expectation of privacy for the Officer is NON Existant. Unlike said Private Sector Professions.

exactly right, remember - authority exists when one person is subservient to another, freedom exist only when people stop obeying other people

You are video taped all the time. Look at the crossbars of redlights as you drive, Police cameras. Check the bus/train/airport, Police cameras. Check the dashes of cop cars and building corners on city streets, the police video you any time they want for their purposes and it is perfectly legal. Also if your Dr. lawyer etc. does not want you to video they can refuse to offer you service but it is NOT a violation of their rights to video them if they do perform the service. Police should be videoed they MUST be held to a higher standard or the system breaks down. We are not lightyears from Iraq only steps away. Do not believe that we are that far from anarchy. The police are the basis of a legal society but police abuse will rapidly destroy faith in any system.

you are a loser

I hope so...

Because the police DO follow you around with cameras all day. More so in Britain and in Ireland.
More and more of these go up everyday. America is now adopting Britain's idea of fixing microphones and speakers to these cameras so they may yell demands at you.

Taking into account that growing number of incidents being reported the world over - and every encounter I've had with authorities always being negative since they're of such retched spirit - I'd suggest documenting their every deed. They're paranoied enough to do it to us!

And, also, the fact that those lunatics coming back from Iraq are now training for the police force. Imagine one of them getting a flash-back to Iraq when they're working on a stop-and-search roadblock in the homeland, eh?

Your point is.... moot

hey man i can see your idea but please take back what you said about soldiers coming back from Iraq being lunatics. thats very hurtful and ungracious, my two cousins are in the Marines, stationed in Iraq, and they are definitely not lunatics, so i hope you reconsider what you said.

I have this funny feeling that you have never visited a VA in your life. Well i have, mostly being forced to because my mother works there, and those who come out of wars always tend to be odd by our perspective. So yes you can call a large portion of those who come out of Iraq as lunatics, because most tend to turn out that way.

A lot may have went in as normal people but by the time they come back their bodies have been snatched.

Your cousins are going from a place where they are ordered to kill people without moral qualification, to a civilized society where murder is against the law. How exactly do you expect them to come back completely fine? They may very well be lunatics, unable to square their primal urge to kill, that has been stoked and honed, with a society that outlaws violence against others. While it's true that in times of war, most soldiers don't even shoot at the enemy, some really relish the act of killing a person. I think the question of "are they lunatics" goes to what side of that particular fence they fall on.

just got a question ..um can a police just toss you on the ground becouse you refused to stop working out when he told you too and your not in anykind of probation and and did not do anything wrong just sapousely the person in charge called the cops on you saying that your drunk and after just leaves you at the police station and you got to take the bus back ..can you file a sue for that them wasting your time and the police handcuffing you..or who can i sue if anybody

As it stands, I have no clue what you are talking about, but will assume it is as follows, based on what you posted:

You were working out, while not on probation, and some owner of something, the guy in charge of something, said you were drunk. So, the police take you to the station where they may, or may not have arrested you, may or may not have charged you with a crime, and may or may not have detained you. I'm assuming because of the handcuffs, you were detained.

You may be able to sue your high school. I don't think they did their job with you.

You're attempting to point out the hypocrisy of defending citizens' privacy while advocating the taping of police. I'd argue that police have zero expectation of privacy when on duty. Here's why:

1. They wear uniforms designed to make them noticeable.
2. They have badge numbers designed to make them identifiable.
3. They work with shows like COPS which publicize their activities.
4. They report arrests to the media, describing specific details.
5. Trials themselves are a matter of public record, with all details becoming publicly available, including all the officer's actions.

There simply is nothing private about police actions during a citizen encounter. And police, unlike other professionals you've named, literally have the authority to kill people. Society cannot afford to allow anyone to exercise that level of authority over others in private.

There have been so many cases in which gross police misconduct was revealed only through surreptitious taping of officers. In the absence of other effective accountability measures, the need for video is obvious and amply demonstrated.

You have a valid argument as well. However, where do lines get drawn? Where, when, and whom can we trust? Must everything be recorded for protection? We don't live in a free society nor a free world. It is an illusion.

"What if the cops followed you around (in public) and filmed you? You would go nuts!"

you don't even know WTF you're talking about do you? In my city (where there are a lot of hispanics), the police already DO carry around handycams and film groups of people in public (and at the local high school) for god-knows-what reason. (I can only imagine it's for "identifying" gang members or whatever)

"Keep the video cameras out of the cops faces and report any abuses or rights violations through the proper channels."

The problem with that is that no one will usually do anything about it unless VIDEO EVIDENCE exists. I've been illegally searched and detained when I lived in my old town but it was of no use to "report violations through the proper channels" because they wouldn't do anything about it. On the other hand, had I videotaped them doing it, I might have had a case.

To all the people out there who are thinking about videotaping the police, don't let ignorant fools like the OP scare you or guilt-trip you into not doing it; Police officers have a sort of "brotherhood" and like to cover-up for each other's crimes, unlike in other industries, so your likening of teachers, etc. to police officers fails.

What happens in public.... is public... your grandmas heart surgeon, and you kids teachers, are not in public.

If they go to PUBLIC school it is.

Only cops are delegated by the rest of us to, when necessary, use violence on our behalf. Mechanics, surgeons, teachers, lawyers - we give none of these the power to lawfully hurt, kill or incarcerate others. So cops are unique, and require unique methods of control. Most jurisdictions exert inadequate control, because it's difficult to ride herd on civil servants who are selected precisely for their strength and hardness. But control we must; when cops are on the job they are not private citizens (and thus free from videotaping) but the sharp point of society. We must require maximum scrutiny to maintain their punctiliousness. It's just part of the (difficult) job.

You make a logical argument. Therefore, I would have to agree that trust should be had and things dealt with in a basic form. Taping everything would violate our right to privacy.

the police all have dashboard mounted cameras. THEY DO follow me around in public videotaping me. ass.

You tell us of your plan to videotape everyone. However, your sarcasm falls short since it's a great idea to videotape your surgeon or your car mechanic. The problem with one's legal rights is that one has to have evidence to prove one's point in court. Unless you walk around with a video camera or have others videotape the event in question by accident, usually we have a hard time coming up with evidence in court, esp. against the word of a cop or 2. Therefore it must be made standard acceptable even welcomed practice of video logging any important encounter that could need acceptable evidence for the court room in case of need later. Unfortunately it is not the teacher or the hairdresser that will (usually) require taping, instead it is the surgeon, car salesman, and police. Anyone in a public space gets video taped anyway, and one's privacy does not extend to being shielded from photos and video once you leave the privacy of your own home. Police cars now routinely have cameras mounted on their dashboard to document police interference already. If you are an honest cop you shouldn't have a problem with being video taped anway. Proud perhaps, but not nervous.

The difference is a matter of citizens' rights being more important than the rights of the government. Police officers are representatives of the government and as such the people must be allowed to protect themselves in any way possible. If people are not allowed to protect themselves from their government the government can and in most cases will start to abuse its power. America is no exception; in fact it has already begun to happen here because people are either to ignorant of their rights, or to afraid to exercise them. That's not the country I want to live in.

"The difference is a matter of citizens' rights being more important than the rights of the government."

Wanna clear up an important error in that statement that indicates a very widespread misunderstanding about rights. In fact, the government has no rights (inalienable), as legally described. It has powers (revocable by those who gave the power to begin with), given to it by the people. Only people have rights in this country. Furthermore: since these powers are given by the people, then the government CAN NOT do anything that the citizen has no right to do, according to the Constitution. Remember that thing? Very important to note here that citizens' rights are limitless, provided that the exercise of them does not encroach upon the rights of another citizen. The Bill of Rights is by no means exhaustive, hence Article IX. Governmental powers, on the other hand, are expressly limited by what the People of the United States of America allow them to do. Only what is written- nothing more. Please read the Constitution! Thoroughly!

Let's take this country back. Vote for Ron Paul in 2008.

You make some good points. Except for the fact that your mechanic can't deprive you of your freedom. There is no condition where your doctor can get away with beating you in the face with a stick. Your lawyer can't spray you with mace and have no consequences visited upon him. Every single person in the world that is given any amount of responsibility has the power to abuse it. If you think your mechanic is ripping you off, you can go to a different mechanic. What are you going to do when you are getting clubbed on the side of the road at 2am, ask for a different arresting officer? If you want to make comparisons, try working them out first to make sure there is a little consistency to them.

As far as cops videotaping you in public, where have you been? Look up on street lights, building corners, and any other structure outside of po-dunk Alabama and you will see video cameras. Security personnel, police officers, and building owners ARE taping everyone in public. Only an authority loving boot licker would want that ability to be exclusively in the hands of people with power, taking the right away from the average citizen.

The simple difference between all of the people you list vs. police: The police are agents of the state, specifically of the executive branch of our government. As that is the case, and as this country is SUPPOSED to have a government controlled by the populace (not the other way around) we, as citizens, have every right to demand that the police are doing their job properly, considering that they are indirectly controlled by US the people.

The other people you listed may have restrictions and regulations set upon them by the government (again, by US, the people...supposedly), but they are not AGENTS of the government. They are private citizens doing a private job (except maybe teachers....gray area there).

Frankly, absolutely transparent government, including the executive branch, is the only way to ensure that our government is being run the way that we want it to be run. Remember that freedom's cost is constant vigilance, and as soon as we stop watching what our government is doing (including the enforcement portion of the government...again the executive) then we the people lose control and are easily lead into a totalitarian and controlling regime. Some would argue that we are already there.

You're missing one fundamental point here. Aside from the teacher, all of the other people you mentioned ARE NOT public servants. If I vidoetape my lawyer or mechanic, I am on his private property. He has the right to say that I cannot videotape on his property. Police officers, however, work on public property with a public duty. It is my constitutional right to videotape that officer while he is in the commision of his public duty. If he does not want to have a publicly funded job in which he is accountable to the public (who pays him), he should have taken up private law practice or mechanics, not police work

"I'm just saying that if some guy whipped out a video camera at your job....."

If your job is on public property then you should expect and accept that you will be videotaped, just as everyone else on public property is.

"Most police are honest and trying to serve."

Good, then they should have absolutely nothing to hide; they would have nothing to lose and everything to gain by being videotaped. Only somebody with something to hide would not want to be documented, otherwise the video evidence would only support that they have done nothing wrong.

The fact of the matter is that the average patrol officer is an underpaid loser with no sex life and that gnawing little feeling that no one wants to get close to them because of their work. They like to "peacock" and try to assert their dominance over other males to stroke their egos and compensate for their lack of a good feeling about themselves; mainly using their job as a pedestal to try and justify their significance to society. Many, many of them have chemical dependence issues (mainly alcohol and prescription drugs) which further add to the destabilization of their psyche from living a life of hypocrisy.

I have videotaped so many cops in my town it is beyond funny. They used to arrest me and claim i was obstructing justice because i would shout out to people that they had pulled over that they had 5th amendment protections and absolutely do not have to answer any questions being asked. I got a lawyer and started to file harassment and civil right violation complaints and cases against the officers and viola! They stopped messing with me real quick. My advice is find the best lawyer you can and get him to agree to represent you and write official complaint letters for you for half price if you can guarantee a steady supply of work for him. This may get a little expensive but it works BIG TIME. Take my advice and videotape and consciously protest ALL police activity that occurs on public property, it is the only way to keep the heat on these assholes and make them realize that the watchers ARE being watched !

"Most police are honest and trying to serve."

Most police are just trying to fill up their quota of arrests. If they have nothing to hide, they shouldnt worry about being videotaped. What if I refuse consent to search and a cop searches anyway? What if he lies in court and says that I consented? Police are public servants, nothing more. If we can be checked up on by the police, I see no reason why the police cant be checked up on by us. Fair is Fair.

Did you read your own post?

How can you say:
"If they have nothing to hide, they shouldnt (sic) worry about being videotaped."

Only to have it immediately followed by:
"What if I refuse consent to search and a cop searches anyway?"

Do you see how the logic of those two thoughts are kind of at odds with each other?

As far as police being "public servants, nothing more.", I strongly disagree. When was the last time your mailman had the ability to detain you for questioning? Ever been beaten by a road crew while they were on the clock? Ever been shot by a fire fighter?

With their ability to detain, injure, and kill people, I think they should be given more oversight. Everything a police officer does on the clock should available for public scrutiny. Everything you do on the clock is subject to the scrutiny of your employer, the major difference being, if you kill someone on company time, you usually don't get a paid vacation.

I cannot find statrment if first admendment that allows a ciizen to
video tape police in norh carolina. can anyone help

I'm not sure of other states, but in San Francisco, anyone is ALOUD to video tape a cop. There is a little law on the books called..."the law of observation"

LeRn 2 SpeL.

obay.

I really hope you are not a police officer if you don't even know how to spell obey.

Lets say you have educated yourself on this website.
Lets say you happen to be hauling 50 pounds of cocaine inside the bumpers of your car from Miami up to Charlotte. Lets say the cops stop you for a busted headlight.
Lets say you:
1) remain silent when questioned
2) refuse consent to search
3) drive away when told you are free to do so

Congratulations, you just avoided arrest.
IS THIS WHAT WE WANT IN AMERICA? DO WE WANT POWERLESS POLICE?
I'm sure that is exactly what some people would like to happen, but as an enitre society, is that what we WANT?
Lets say it was your mother's dead body in the trunk instead of drugs... Lets say it was 10 AK-47 Assault rifles for an Al-Queda cell, lets say it was a biological or chemical agent...
Do we WANT the police to just let them drive away?
Will you still be saying the same thing when 1/2 of New York City is dead? Or will you be wailing about how woefully inadequate police protection is when you are the one who fought so hard to clip thier wings?
What do you WANT?

It sounds to me like you want the police to be able to pull over anyone they want, search the car thoroughly (cavity check, free of charge), to make sure no one's hauling around my mother's dead body and 10 AK-47's. I don't know, but if I had to choose between being attacked by terrorists or being cavity searched every time I stepped out of my house, I'd have a hard time choosing.

I like how you claim that knowing our rights will kill 1/2 of New York City. Good logic, there, Anonymous.

Let's say you are driving from Miami to Charlotte and have a trunk full of dirty underwear, socks and dirty levi's and a sack full of your favorite sex toys. Do you consent to a search and let some greasy cop finger up your wife's coleection of vibrators? America is going to hell in a hand basket. Our individual rights are being eroded away little by little. The founding father's of this country were escaping tyranny and opression, they knew all about being screwed over by their government. While we have some more modern conviences than we did 200 years ago, nothing has changed. We just want to be free to pursue our own happiness. I don't advocate breaking any laws. I'M all for our laws, most importantly OUR CONSTITION. If a cop wanted to search me or my home or car just because he thought he might find something I would say NO. I would ask him if he believed in the law? and of course he would say "yes." Well sir, it's THE LAW that I have a reasonable right to privacy. Otherwise let's just go door to door and search everyones home. Stop every car and search everyone. Then we wouldn't be citizens of a free country we would be subjects of a government. What would make us any different from China or The Soviet Union? Support and defend all your rights. If not maybe someday you might not have the right to practice your own religion. Being a Catholic or a Jew would be illegal. Having sex in any manner other than in the missionary postion between married couples for the sole purpose of pro creation could become illegal. " Uh sir we have a report here that you and your partner engaged in oral sex and then ingaged in contact other than the missionary postion, you are going to have to come with us." " You must answer all of our questions because you don't have the right to remain silent." " You don't have any right to privacy, that went out in 2009, we're here to protect you." George Orwell wrote of such a society in his novel "1984." And it will all start when idiots bow down and assume the postion out of fear and ignorance. LIVE FREE OR DIE!

Especially considering that in this country we are innocent until proven guilty.

Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Thomas Jefferson said, "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

"What do you WANT?"

We WANT you to tackle serious crime, and stop throwing people in jail for lifestyle offenses, simply because they are soft targets. If you did that, you might find that you suddenly got a lot more public respect and cooperation.

These websites wouldnt exist if you werent running up your quota by acting like a jerk.

But of course youre impotent to change the law, and its easier to nail a few students on a drug bust, so you take the easy option, so a new generation learns to view you as scum.

Is that what YOU want?

"Lets say it was your mother's dead body in the trunk instead of drugs... Lets say it was 10 AK-47 Assault rifles for an Al-Queda cell, lets say it was a biological or chemical agent..."

If you let students off with a half ounce of weed that you find, or amybe an open can of beer, instead of destroying their lives and careers, then we would be happy to let you search what you like, when you like.

But its not the AK-47's youre after, is it? Thats just a handy lie. Because if it were, you'd let off the kids, and you dont.

So you made a choice. Now everyone hates you; and the Ak-47's get through. And all because you got an orgasm throwing a kid into jail for a joint.

With power, comes responsibility. Because you misuse the power, pulling over 20% of all license holders per year; INSTEAD of going after Al-Quaeda (thanks for allowing 9-11 to happen btw while you were busting potheads); we dont LIKE you anymore. Let alone respect you.

So take your ak-47 and shove it; if you want our cooperation, you have to earn our respect. And destroying a kids life for your quota doesnt crack it with me.

It doesn't matter what we WANT, it's what we're entitled to under the 4th Amendment....read it some time.

fuck u

You are NOT the law, and you are NOT above the law. You ENFORCE the law, and should be held at the same standard as a regular citizen when you break the law.

"I dont care about you video taping us. We will still prosecute and send you potheads to jail. We're the law not you losers. So stop thinking of ways to evade the law and start thinking of ways to obay the law."

You are not the law. You are the servants of the law. We pay you wages so you protect and SERVE. We elect the people who MAKE the law.

By the sounds of it, youre a sad little f who never got any respect, so he joined the force so he could get back at the cool kids who rejected him. Thats a sad excuse for a human being. I'm ashamed to think that you actually represent a meaningful fraction of the police force.

Your job, is not to run down and incarcerate "potheads"; it is to stop drive-by shootings, investigate robberies, and root out corruption. Attacking "potheads" is simply your way of filling up your mealticket in the way which minimizes the danger to you, and messes up other peoples lives to the max.

o-b-e-y, for god's sake!!!!!!!!!!!!!