• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

It is now illegal to film Police Officers while on duty

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
74,486
Reaction score
42,572
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Where is this? Something like this can't last long. I like how some folk defend police brutality and abuse. Even going so far as to call police assault essentially a crime of passion (in the heat of the moment) which should come to no punishment. They claim things like all the police beatings we see are overblown events by the media and that it doesn't really happen. Some folk here. And then we see this. Well if all this is true, why can't we film cops in public doing their jobs? I mean, how many times am I caught on camera? They can videotape me going through intersections and doing whatever I may be doing in my business time; but the door doesn't swing both ways? If there are a group of people to watch all the time, it's government officials. The private individuals shouldn't have to endure this draconian treatment. Yet that's what happens. Everything to protect the authority. They don't want to be videotaped...why? Perchance it's not because those beatings we see are overblown instances of inflated reporting by the press; but rather the tip of the iceberg. Maybe the truth is that all the incidents of inappropriate conduct and abuse of power we've been seeing with cops is starting to be reported correctly. And now that it's being reported correctly, the cops and government want to fight back to remove the reporting. So that we don't catch on to the horrible abuse of power which most likely goes on in most every department.

Regardless, if the paparazzi are allowed to operate against individuals in the manner they do, I do not see how it could be legal in the least to ban the video taping of cops while they are doing their job. If anything, people should ALWAYS video tape cops in the process of them doing their job.
 

ptif219

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
When a police state is created as we see happening in the US over the last 10 years this is expected. They do not want it made public how the rights and freedoms of the citizens are being taken away
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
When a police state is created as we see happening in the US over the last 10 years this is expected. They do not want it made public how the rights and freedoms of the citizens are being taken away
Yeah, **** those damned politicians making stupid ass laws.
 

rivrrat

Goddess of Bacon
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,988
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Charlottesville, VA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What the ****? How can any ****ing judge anywhere in this country uphold such laws?
 

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,224
Reaction score
14,222
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This law is completely crap. It needs to be repealed. Seriously, if someone video tapes police brutality they can't use it as evidence in court because making the tape itself is illegal. This is a cop out law to allow police free reign to do what they want. Is there any good argument behind keeping this law in place? I thought it was stupid when I went to Haiti and the law was that you can't take pictures of videotape any UN vehicles or UN peace keeping soldiers (that stood around and literally did absolutely nothing).
 

ptif219

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
13,156
Reaction score
1,038
Location
melbourne florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
They have something to hide when they stop their own practice. If we can't film take down the stop light cameras
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
They have something to hide when they stop their own practice. If we can't film take down the stop light cameras
The police do not run the stop light camera program, its a seperate entity within city government.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
74,486
Reaction score
42,572
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The police do not run the stop light camera program, its a seperate entity within city government.
City authorizes it, so it does count. The city essentially says it can spy on us, have cameras up on us, and bill us if we break one of their rules. But we can't film them, we can't spy on them, and we can't demand accountability and responsibility in the actions and duties of the City's police.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Waht about dashboard cams in squad cars? Would laws like this affect those?
I guess not? I dunno.

Its a ****ing retarded law, made by...... LEGISLATORS unlike what some folks in this thread seem to be focused on, as if cops makes the laws.

Where did the motivation for this retarded law come from? Probably from ignorant ass "Police Unions" which I also could give two ****s about.

Where do their concerns come from? Probably a number of various topics, many of which haven't been bothered to be mentioned in this thread, safety for the officer and his family as people post videos of officers doing their job to Facebook and now everyone knows this guy is an officer so they can blast his ass when he is in public off duty with his family, not to mention officers who wish to work in undercover positions some day and now every two bit thug wanna be knows what they look like, etc.

But of course, any time the police are mentioned, first thing to come to peoples minds aren't that that police are members of the public just like everyone else, its "EVIL ABUSIVE RIGHTS VIOLATING BASTARDS!" when this situation occurs very infrequently.

Thanks Mainstream Media!
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
City authorizes it, so it does count. The city essentially says it can spy on us, have cameras up on us, and bill us if we break one of their rules. But we can't film them, we can't spy on them, and we can't demand accountability and responsibility in the actions and duties of the City's police.
So this legislation covers your city councilmen, and city trash collectors too?
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
74,486
Reaction score
42,572
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
So this legislation covers your city councilmen, and city trash collectors too?
The specific legislation was to isolate the police from being caught doing things they shouldn't be. The law did not cover others, so I assume it's still ok to video tape the garbage man if you want. Councilmen, depending on where you're at probably have a system of laws and lawyers in place to prevent their indiscretions from being found out.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,603
Reaction score
22,539
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I guess not? I dunno.

Its a ****ing retarded law, made by...... LEGISLATORS unlike what some folks in this thread seem to be focused on, as if cops makes the laws.

Where did the motivation for this retarded law come from? Probably from ignorant ass "Police Unions" which I also could give two ****s about.

Where do their concerns come from? Probably a number of various topics, many of which haven't been bothered to be mentioned in this thread, safety for the officer and his family as people post videos of officers doing their job to Facebook and now everyone knows this guy is an officer so they can blast his ass when he is in public off duty with his family, not to mention officers who wish to work in undercover positions some day and now every two bit thug wanna be knows what they look like, etc.

But of course, any time the police are mentioned, first thing to come to peoples minds aren't that that police are members of the public just like everyone else, its "EVIL ABUSIVE RIGHTS VIOLATING BASTARDS!" when this situation occurs very infrequently.

Thanks Mainstream Media!
I was thinking that one unintended consequence of the law could be that dashboard cams become illegal since they film cops who are on-duty or because they don't have that all-party consent thing being used to pass these laws.

If that occured, I gotta admit, I'd laugh.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The specific legislation was to isolate the police from being caught doing things they shouldn't be. The law did not cover others, so I assume it's still ok to video tape the garbage man if you want. Councilmen, depending on where you're at probably have a system of laws and lawyers in place to prevent their indiscretions from being found out.
So thats what the legislation says? To keep the police from being caught doing things they shouldn't be?

I know you have an axe to grind with authority, but come on, a little intellectual honesty is appretiated.
 

Your Star

Rage More!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
27,246
Reaction score
19,928
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
This is so much bull****! Seriously how did this law get passed?
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
74,486
Reaction score
42,572
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
So thats what the legislation says? To keep the police from being caught doing things they shouldn't be?

I know you have an axe to grind with authority, but come on, a little intellectual honesty is appretiated.
There's very little reason beyond trying to stifle the influx of videos taken by average citizens which show acts of police misconduct. Otherwise, what's the point? There has not be an increase in civilian casualty due to video taping cops. There's no real "public safety" concerns associated with it. Thus the simplest of answers is that this is done in order to prevent people from video taping cops such that one can then subsequently prevent any video taken which may have depicted misconduct from being put on the internet or otherwise brought to the attention of the People.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There's very little reason beyond trying to stifle the influx of videos taken by average citizens which show acts of police misconduct. Otherwise, what's the point? There has not be an increase in civilian casualty due to video taping cops. There's no real "public safety" concerns associated with it. Thus the simplest of answers is that this is done in order to prevent people from video taping cops such that one can then subsequently prevent any video taken which may have depicted misconduct from being put on the internet or otherwise brought to the attention of the People.
So, basically, you make up what you think (or want to think) is the reason for the legislation and then present it as fact.
Gotcha.
Thats what we call intellectual honesty these days?
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
74,486
Reaction score
42,572
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
So, basically, you make up what you think (or want to think) is the reason for the legislation and then present it as fact.
Gotcha.
Thats what we call intellectual honesty these days?
It was a formally submitted argument. You can counter argue if you like, instead of dredging through all this deflect rhetoric.

With no public safety factor being of consequence from this legislation, one must ask why it was submitted and passed. Lawsuit and controversy cost a city a lot of money. If you want to cut down on that you can either crack down on the behavior which causes that or attempt to cover up the behavior which causes that. In this case, the former would be much more expensive than the latter if the latter is done in such a way as to prevent the information gathering in the first place. Which is exactly what the law does.

One has to ask, why cops? Why not the individual? We certainly are allowed to be video taped in public. The government loves it. When you consider the whole of the system the answer seems glaringly clear. By preventing people from video taping cops, you prevent them from obtaining and recording data which can show improper use of police force. Thus the problem is never allowed to surface, and the government does not have to deal with it or spend money on it.

You, of course, are free to counter-argue the point.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You, of course, are free to counter-argue the point.
All I can say to this, is that it is your opinion that this is the reason for the legislation.

I don't know what the reason why they made the law is.

I just know its a stupid ****ing law, and Im not in the mood to play devil's advocate and defend it.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
74,486
Reaction score
42,572
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
All I can say to this, is that it is your opinion that this is the reason for the legislation.

I don't know what the reason why they made the law is.

I just know its a stupid ****ing law, and Im not in the mood to play devil's advocate and defend it.
That's fine. I'm not requiring you to defend it. I'm saying that there was nothing illogical or dishonest about the argument I put forth. I think that I performed a sufficient job at outlining my line of thought and I don't think it's immediately invalid or dishonest.
 

Caine

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
23,344
Reaction score
7,210
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That's fine. I'm not requiring you to defend it. I'm saying that there was nothing illogical or dishonest about the argument I put forth. I think that I performed a sufficient job at outlining my line of thought and I don't think it's immediately invalid or dishonest.
You represented it as THE reason, not as your opinion.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
74,486
Reaction score
42,572
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
You represented it as THE reason, not as your opinion.
I represented it as the reason I think is most probable.
 

Vader

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,064
Location
Whitewater, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
This will be an issue that will be shot down by the SCOTUS. This is covered under the 1st Amendment. These idiots DO NOT have the authority to pass a law that bars a right granted by the 1st Amendment. Look for this to be tossed out and the idiots who did it to made a mocker of.
 

DrunkenAsparagus

Devourer of Poor Children
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
4,496
Reaction score
1,878
Location
DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So government is allowed to watch us, but we can't do the same to them? Hypocrisy at its finest.
 
Top Bottom