• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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

What state is this **** in anyways?
 
It's not illegal. The police have no right to privacy ... as onme Masachusetts lawyer pointed out:

Massachusetts attorney June Jensen represented Simon Glik who was arrested for such a recording. She explained, "[T]he statute has been misconstrued by Boston police. You could go to the Boston Common and snap pictures and record if you want." Legal scholar and professor Jonathan Turley agrees, "The police are basing this claim on a ridiculous reading of the two-party consent surveillance law - requiring all parties to consent to being taped. I have written in the area of surveillance law and can say that this is utter nonsense."

It is nonsense which will evetually lead to legal action against the police. I would bet the girl in questi is about to sue to the police false arrest and unlawful imprisonment. This offense, if proven, will end some police careers and some police administrators WILL look like the brainless assholes they quite obviously are.
 
Last edited:
The Giant Noodle said:
What a bunch of ****. This just isnt America anymore. :x:badpc:

Are Cameras the New Guns?
Click to expand...

Without reading and article I see partial-reason in it.

When that 7 year old girl was killed in a police-shootout/drug raid in her home a lot of people felt that the cops were only "over-acting" because they were being filmed for a TV show. A lot of people are outraged, still, and feel that she would be alive if the policement didn't feel the need to really go overboard for TV audiences.
 
ptif219 said:
Who writes the ticket and takes you to court?
Click to expand...

Yeah. What She said...A Computer.

Its an automated system that runs your registration and imposes a civil fine on the registered owner of the vehicle.
Even if 23 year old Joe is still driving mommy and daddys car. Mommy and Daddy are fined.
 
It's all government, what's the difference?
 
The police issue the ticket and go to court your spin is funny at best
 
It is not. A parking ticket is not a moving violation that screw your points and insurance. I am a truck drive those cameras can ruin my life. They have lessened the time of yellow lights to entrap you with cameras
 
ptif219 said:
It is not. A parking ticket is not a moving violation that screw your points and insurance. I am a truck drive those cameras can ruin my life. They have lessened the time of yellow lights to entrap you with cameras
Click to expand...

Red light cameras do not give you points either, they are a CIVIL fine.
And they are not issued by a police officer.
 
from the article....

A recent arrest in Maryland is both typical and disturbing.

On March 5, 24-year-old Anthony John Graber III's motorcycle was pulled over for speeding. He is currently facing criminal charges for a video he recorded on his helmet-mounted camera during the traffic stop.

The case is disturbing because:

1) Graber was not arrested immediately. Ten days after the encounter, he posted some of he material to YouTube, and it embarrassed Trooper J. D. Uhler. The trooper, who was in plainclothes and an unmarked car, jumped out waving a gun and screaming. Only later did Uhler identify himself as a police officer. When the YouTube video was discovered the police got a warrant against Graber, searched his parents' house (where he presumably lives), seized equipment, and charged him with a violation of wiretapping law.

2) Baltimore criminal defense attorney Steven D. Silverman said he had never heard of the Maryland wiretap law being used in this manner. In other words, Maryland has joined the expanding trend of criminalizing the act of recording police abuse. Silverman surmises, "It's more [about] ‘contempt of cop' than the violation of the wiretapping law."

3) Police spokesman Gregory M. Shipley is defending the pursuit of charges against Graber, denying that it is "some capricious retribution" and citing as justification the particularly egregious nature of Graber's traffic offenses. Oddly, however, the offenses were not so egregious as to cause his arrest before the video appeared.

Almost without exception, police officials have staunchly supported the arresting officers. This argues strongly against the idea that some rogue officers are overreacting or that a few cops have something to hide. "Arrest those who record the police" appears to be official policy, and it's backed by the courts.
 
What department issues the Ticket? Running a stop sign has point penalties and is a moving violation.
 
Caine said:
It is not a criminal charge, it is a civil fine, like a parking ticket.
Click to expand...

Yes, but they must somehow be authorized by the government to do it. I can't sit outide with a radar gun giving tickets to people who are speading. I don't have that power. In order for the company to have the power to do so; they must be authorized by the government to do so.

Also, I really hate those camera thingies. We gave authority to the police to enforce laws, that's who has it and not some company with cameras. If the government wants to give me a speeding ticket, well then a cop can just come and chase me down and give it to me. But it brings the point that I think these cameras are there only for revenue generation. They can't give points, all they can do is send a bill. There's no real "enforcement" or
 
More protections for police. More rights to the authorities and less rights to the citizens, for 'your safety'. I don't really see what's in place to stop this. I mean yeah, it can go to the supreme court and the usual legal circus, but how long are the courts going to do what is right? They already falter some of the time. If the citizenry is apathetic then there is no way that the decline of rights can ultimately be stopped.

The government expands and gains power because people stop caring. I mean, when you come to DP you'd swear that there are so many people out there who are relatively politically conscious, but we are a minority to be sure. I think most people just don't care. They vote and then turn off their brains, and many don't even vote.
 
ptif219 said:
What department issues the Ticket? Running a stop sign has point penalties and is a moving violation.
Click to expand...

Yout not understanding. Under a Stop Light Camera system, it is NOT the same as being charged by an Officer. It is a civil penalty, like a parking ticket. It does NOT put points on your license.
 
Ikari said:
Yes, but they must somehow be authorized by the government to do it. I can't sit outide with a radar gun giving tickets to people who are speading. I don't have that power. In order for the company to have the power to do so; they must be authorized by the government to do so.

Also, I really hate those camera thingies. We gave authority to the police to enforce laws, that's who has it and not some company with cameras. If the government wants to give me a speeding ticket, well then a cop can just come and chase me down and give it to me. But it brings the point that I think these cameras are there only for revenue generation. They can't give points, all they can do is send a bill. There's no real "enforcement" or
Click to expand...

The point is to discourage people from running red lights during times where enforcement action is difficult due to traffic congestion.
Many times officers can't enforce violations they observed in high traffic situations because their response in order to catch the violator would be very likely to cause an even greater traffic hazard.

Your focused too much on the idea of revenue generation, and not even thinking about it in terms of trying to curb violating traffic law while doing it in a safety conscious manner.


Which is no surprise to me.
 
Orion said:
More protections for police. More rights to the authorities and less rights to the citizens, for 'your safety'.
Click to expand...
There is no "safety" issue with this ridiculous abuse of citizens rights. This will simply get beat down by the courts at some point along the way.

As for the rest of your post, it is a long winded rant.
 
Orion said:
I don't really see what's in place to stop this. I mean yeah, it can go to the supreme court and the usual legal circus, but how long are the courts going to do what is right? They already falter some of the time. If the citizenry is apathetic then there is no way that the decline of rights can ultimately be stopped.
Click to expand...

You don't fight apathy with MORE apathy though, thatys for sure. Do your part, inform those you know, who hopefully if persuaded enough will inform others, and so on and so forth, it has to start somewhere.
 
Caine said:
The point is to discourage people from running red lights during times where enforcement action is difficult due to traffic congestion.
Many times officers can't enforce violations they observed in high traffic situations because their response in order to catch the violator would be very likely to cause an even greater traffic hazard.

Your focused too much on the idea of revenue generation, and not even thinking about it in terms of trying to curb violating traffic law while doing it in a safety conscious manner.

Which is no surprise to me.
Click to expand...

There are some intersections where the cameras are marked. And yes, I think for those intersections it's probably an attempt to limit accidents. But there are many more which are unmarked, and those are clearly for revenue generation only.

YOu focused too much on the idea of the government being nice and helpful and wanting to be all chummy chummy, and not even thinking about it in terms of government trying to milk more money out of people by surprising them with cameras, setting up institutions which can fine people which were never given authority by the People to do so.

Which is no surprise to me. Statists are all the same.
 
Ikari said:
There are some intersections where the cameras are marked. And yes, I think for those intersections it's probably an attempt to limit accidents. But there are many more which are unmarked, and those are clearly for revenue generation only.

YOu focused too much on the idea of the government being nice and helpful and wanting to be all chummy chummy, and not even thinking about it in terms of government trying to milk more money out of people by surprising them with cameras, setting up institutions which can fine people which were never given authority by the People to do so.

Which is no surprise to me. Statists are all the same.
Click to expand...

The intersections are required by law to have a sign posted. Same thing for the speed monitored by cameras programs.
 
Caine said:
The intersections are required by law to have a sign posted. Same thing for the speed monitored by cameras programs.
Click to expand...

Where? Because in Ft. Collins you can have them, but it's not regulated how big, where, and how visible. So we have several that are small signs hidden behind a poll. And I don't believe that requiring a warning is a federal law; I believe it's up to the local governments to choose. More whitewashing I suppose. Anything to excuse the state. And what about those vans they put on roads? Do you have to post that they're there? Not here. What about cameras on the interstate? Is it required everywhere that they post warnings? Hmmm. It seems that you are very very willing to look over details on anything which may cast negative light on the government or hold police officers accountable. Statists....bah, no reasoning with them.
 
Travelsonic said:
You don't fight apathy with MORE apathy though, thatys for sure. Do your part, inform those you know, who hopefully if persuaded enough will inform others, and so on and so forth, it has to start somewhere.
Click to expand...

How did you draw the conclusion that I'm apathetic? I'm here, aren't I?

I do contact my MP or MPP whenever something is going down in the legislature I disagree with. I attend protests for causes I am strongly in favor of. I either sign petitions or I MAKE them for distribution with community organizations.

These days I don't have time to be as active, but I still have a relationship with my MP and MPP whenever **** goes down that I disagree with. It seems like a lot of people in the free world aren't exercising their right to tell their government what they want them to do. I have lived off and on in China, and let me tell you, when you live in a true police state, you begin to value the freedoms you have back home. People here don't understand what they've got. They're just pissing it away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom