Comments on: Police continue to use wiretapping laws to crack down on people recording them

By: Truongson Huynh

Truongson Huynh — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 00:49:18 +0000

The current MD Attorney General believes that the police officer in the case of Anthony Gaber had no reasonable expectation of privacy:

http://www.oag.state.md.us/Topics/WIRETAP_ACT_ROSENBERG.pdf

By: Joe Piervincenti

Joe Piervincenti — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 21:46:21 +0000

If you go to You Tube for the video re: the woman on the floor restrained, a witness ten feet from the incident reported that the female struck a guy in the head at a counter and then when two policewomen approached her she struck one of the policewomen.

Ummm, what are we discussing here? Now, with this video and the Seattle cop and two females getting physical, we are discussing individual rights to videotape but not the violations the females perpetrated in both instances? Can we take those infractions and turn this into a plea for the abridgement of individual rights?

I know, I know, some will say thats not the issue. Filming rights are the issue. Well, they are ONE issue, the crimes are THE issue though. We need some cooler minds with a tad more reason to sort this out. We also need to rein in citizens that think because of their personal characteristics that they are immune from codes of conduct and the law.

By: Joe Piervincenti

Joe Piervincenti — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:52:16 +0000

I have always said “We The People” when there are complaints about the government pushing the limits against the people. I have reminded officials in government in a number of areas in the country where I was currently living that it’s the taxpayers and “We The People” that form this land and that elected officials and employees of government work for the taxpayers. The People “hire” them and the People can “fire” them.

However, the taxpayers never take a stand for their rights and so we see developments such as the video and situation above. It’s become a adversarial situation of we against them and until the people take this stand, impeach those errant officials, stand up to big government, and take appropriate and legal action, we will be victimized by what is obviously a “police state.”

Although I may have played devil’s advocate in a number of these discussions I have no less regard for individual and civil rights than anyone else, possibly more as I have placed my name on the bottom line in more than a few instances, even in the face of fierce opposition and retaliation.

I have also indicated to be aware and be wary of retaliation by authorities for this conflict is far from over and a contest will surely ensue for there are those that will not relent until every individual right and freedom is capped or eliminated from our society. Perhaps this is the long sought for catalyst that will decide the future for America.

By: Hank

Hank — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:59:12 +0000

I do not see how it could possibly be better put

By: Chris Flowers

Chris Flowers — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 03:51:33 +0000

The police think that public space belongs to THEM. It belongs to US, the PUBLIC. Our states are not POLICE STATES, they belong to us. We must be allowed to video tape them. When the police are not held accountable for anything they do, and we cannot record evidence against them, then we have no freedom to a fair trial.

By: Hank

Hank — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:49:24 +0000

and one thing further:
if it Is illegal to film without 2-party consent – when are all the street surveillance cameras coming down ?

By: Hank

Hank — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:23:52 +0000

2 things to remember:
1). these laws cover AUDIO only, which is why cops can still use a dashboard cam with no audio
so
if you see police corruption, capture it with a still (non-video) camera, that way there is no possible violation – until the cops assault you and break your camera, so be sure there is someone else nearby shooting the same thing, and it`s result, from a hidden place nearby if possible
2). doesn`t this make it illegal for news cameramen to video tape cops also ?
think of all the times they shoot outside a court and capture all the cops standing there, as well as some things they are saying

Question: if you inform the cop you are filming, can you then continue to film and take audio legally ?

this needs a brave soul to take their case to the Supreme Court as only Then can there be a legal remedy for all
I hope it`s me !

By: Kathy

Kathy — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 19:47:00 +0000

Wow! I had no idea that one could be arrested for recording a police officer after announcing that such recording was being made!!! So, will I be arrested now?
Kathy´s last blog ..Cambridge Police and General Manager of the Tavern in the Sq

By: Cool

Cool — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 11:02:16 +0000

Oh, I agree… I didn’t mean to imply you needed consent in public, sorry if I wasn’t more elaborate. I think it’s ridiculous and these are just more examples of LEO’s using and bending the laws to their own interpretation and or purpose. They know and use the law, arrest’s and legal process to discourage acts and actions, knowing full well that charges won’t stick, cases will get dismissed… all as a form of intimidation, harassment and discouragement towards those seeking to exercise their rights.

One of the only things I can think of that will begin to cull this behavior would be for LEO’s to lose their shielding and protections provided by law while on duty regarding legal liability. Maybe if they came under the SAME more stringent burden of requirements in effecting an arrest that CITIZENS do, well then, maybe you’d see some change. Try making a citizen’s arrest in the manner they have shown in some of these examples and see what the courts will do to you.
It’s problematic when two sets of rules exist!