Is it legal to capture video and audio of on-duty law enforcement in public?

7/31/2012 5:30:06 PM

should be.

but I'm not a lawyer.

7/31/2012 5:32:23 PM

Read the fucking constitution.

7/31/2012 5:35:01 PM

Quote :

"Filming police officers in North Carolina could be illegal Wilmington, NC - WILMINGTON, NC (WECT) - Could filming police officers on the job in a public place be illegal in the state? Attorney General Roy Cooper is staying quiet on the subject, while New Hanover County's Sheriff says citizen journalism is important. A report in the Carolina Journal states that while it's legal to record, as long as one person in the conversation knows, it is illegal to eavesdrop. There are twelve states in which all parties must consent before a conversation can be recorded. New Hanover County Sheriff Ed McMahon believes members of the public have every right to film. "I don't know why we would want a law that would be violating our constitutional rights," the Sheriff said. "It's our job to protect and serve the citizens, so we should not be afraid of that [filming]. We should welcome that." McMahon spoke on this topic earlier this summer when a man filmed with his cell phone the tazing of a college student by a deputy on Wrightsville Beach. Even then, McMahon said he was happy someone caught it on video. The tazing video would not be deemed illegal since deputies knew the man was filming it."

http://www.wmbfnews.com/Global/story.asp?S=13054806

7/31/2012 5:35:02 PM

this article has been interesting
it doesn't seem like the issue is fully settled


"Watching, and Recording, the Police"
September 22nd, 2010 - Jeff Welty
http://nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu/?p=1615

7/31/2012 5:37:11 PM

"In America you don't film the police, the police film you..."



[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 5:39 PM. Reason : http://i.imgur.com/mwAqs.jpg]

7/31/2012 5:38:21 PM

that is apparently the law in Illinois and Taxachussetts

7/31/2012 5:39:26 PM

Quote :

"I don't know why we would want a law that would be violating our constitutional rights," the Sheriff said. "It's our job to protect and serve the citizens, so we should not be afraid of that [filming]. We should welcome that.""

surprising, but very refreshing stance by a sheriff.

7/31/2012 5:39:34 PM

isn't he the same sheriff that clears the streets of the bar districts with tear gas?

7/31/2012 5:42:53 PM

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/07/03/2425557/recording-police-can-create-clashes.html

7/31/2012 5:44:28 PM

you should film him doing that

7/31/2012 5:44:50 PM

Quote :

"that is apparently the law in Illinois and Taxachussetts "

Because ignoramuses like you allow them to make such laws by staying ignorant of the Constitution. READ AND KNOW YOUR CONSTITUTION. You have no idea how much you've pissed me off with this thread. It's fucking outrageous that you've lived so many years of your life and are this uneducated about your rights.

7/31/2012 5:46:20 PM

yes you caught me
I've been part of this conspiracy all along

the ignoramus thing is actually your only error
in reality I'm the evil genius behind the erosion of your rights

guess I'll go check myself into freedom jail now

7/31/2012 5:48:30 PM

Your comebacks are pitiful because all I can see is dumbass tattooed on your lips.

7/31/2012 5:49:41 PM

Quote :

"READ AND KNOW YOUR CONSTITUTION. You have no idea how much you've pissed me off with this thread. It's fucking outrageous that you've lived so many years of your life and are this uneducated about your rights."

lmao

7/31/2012 5:53:13 PM

I didn't realize that the Constitution was the only aspect of the legal code that I needed to be concerned with

please school me, Dr. GeniusxBoy

7/31/2012 5:55:01 PM

Why should I school you? You didn't pay attention your whole life. I doubt you could afford to pay attention for longer than the length of a JaZon post.

7/31/2012 5:57:38 PM

Just ignore GeniuSxBoY...

The bottom line is that currently in NC, yes, you are allowed to film the police. We are a "one party" state, meaning that only one person (you) needs to consent to the conversation being recorded. Record away!

If they ask with some sense of hostility why you are recording them, just say for the same reason they are recording you via dashcam - for your protection.

7/31/2012 5:57:54 PM

leave geniusboy alone, he's got to read 600 page bills in a day since 0% of the Senate does

7/31/2012 6:08:37 PM

Also, dickbag (GeniuSxBoY), whether or not it is legal to record the police while they are on duty wouldn't be in the fucking constitution. Perhaps you should A) read the constitution (if you had, you would know it isn't in there) and B) know the difference between a state's Constitution and a state's General Statutes. One is the rules by which a state will be governed, the other is a set of rules for the people in the state to follow.

7/31/2012 6:09:33 PM

Our country can run itself on no education.

7/31/2012 6:09:46 PM

^^^^ However, if you're recording someone else's dealings with the police, would it still be legal? You, are not a part of the conversation, just like wire tapping. If you're not a part of the conversation, then what rights do you have to tape/record another people's conversation/dealings?

^^^^^ What part of the Constitution specifically allows you to record anyone, anytime, anywhere?

Personally, I feel that each state needs to pass a law explicitly allowing video taping of the police by anyone.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:10 PM. Reason : .]

7/31/2012 6:10:28 PM

Quote :

"Personally, I feel that each state needs to pass a law explicitly allowing video taping of the police by anyone."

They have one. It's called the FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATE'S CONSTITUTION.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:12 PM. Reason : .]

7/31/2012 6:12:07 PM

You idiots, constitutional law was covered on the first day of how to put french fries on shitty pizza class

7/31/2012 6:12:33 PM

You should try one of my pizzas but I don't have a lay-a-way plan for your sorry ass.

7/31/2012 6:14:21 PM

nevermind, i'm posting in a troll thread.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:18 PM. Reason : well it is now, anyway]

7/31/2012 6:16:02 PM

^^ can you deliver it on that sweet 15 year old civic?

7/31/2012 6:16:59 PM

I would but you have to hit the minimum amount for delivery to qualify. Please call back when you have a real job.

7/31/2012 6:19:53 PM

I do have a real job

making, more than likely, substantially more than you do

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:20 PM. Reason : ]

7/31/2012 6:20:32 PM

mawle, post the first amendment here if you can locate it on the internet. I know it's difficult, but I think you can handle it.

7/31/2012 6:20:48 PM

Quote :

"You should try one of my pizzas but I don't have a lay-a-way plan for your sorry ass."

hha that was good

7/31/2012 6:21:19 PM

Recording is not illegal. Where I work, we have been advised on more than one occasion to leave people alone with it. Now you can be arrested for resist, delay, obstruct under extreme circumstances (for example, you are struggling with someone and they are sticking a cell phone camera in your eyes or getting in between you and the suspect you are struggling with).

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:34 PM. Reason : ...]

7/31/2012 6:33:11 PM

^^^ Why not just quote the part that allows it?

7/31/2012 6:38:21 PM

Quote :

"^^^^ However, if you're recording someone else's dealings with the police, would it still be legal? You, are not a part of the conversation, just like wire tapping. If you're not a part of the conversation, then what rights do you have to tape/record another people's conversation/dealings?"

Generally speaking, yes. You are free to record and photograph anything in plain sight in a public area due to the lack of expectation of privacy in these areas. Of course, you can't break other laws, like interfering with an investigation (although that's really tough unless you're being a major asshole) while filming/photographing, though.

And despite all of this, it doesn't mean that cops won't still hassle you about it.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:42 PM. Reason : I stop paying attention to the thread for 15 minutes, and apparently Restricted answered. Oh well.]

7/31/2012 6:41:10 PM

Trust me, it's in there. Plain as day. Part of being responsible is taking the initiative to learn on your own.


If you can't take my word for it, then take the sheriff's.
"I don't know why we would want a law that would be violating our constitutional rights," the Sheriff said."



[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:45 PM. Reason : .]

7/31/2012 6:41:53 PM

yeah, y'all can rag on Geniusboy all you want, but it is absolutely unconsititutional (not to mention just plain wrong) to forbid filming the police. why are people ok with these kinds of laws?

7/31/2012 6:49:10 PM

^^ Where is it plain as day:

Quote :

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

And a sheriff isn't a constitution expert.

^^^ Photography, I agree with. However, that video generally has an audio component that can come under scrutiny from wiretapping laws:

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/know-your-rights-photographers

Quote :

"In situations where you are an observer but not a part of the conversation, or in states where all parties to a conversation must consent to taping, the legality of taping will depend on whether the state's prohibition on taping applies only when there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. But that is the case in nearly all states, and no state court has held that police officers performing their job in public have a reasonable expectation. The state of Illinois makes the recording illegal regardless of whether there is an expectation of privacy."

^ Nobody said anything about being ok about anything. Please find where someone said that they are. We are discussing the current legality of doing something.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:55 PM. Reason : .]

7/31/2012 6:54:54 PM

I'd prefer you only rag on me when I'm wrong It would make more sense.


^merbig, sorry, man, but you have to have some sort of intelligence to understand simple concepts outlined for even a first grader to read and understand.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 6:56 PM. Reason : .]

7/31/2012 6:55:38 PM

Again. All I'm asking you is to bold and describe where it allows someone to make an audio/visual recording of anyone, anywhere anytime?

7/31/2012 6:58:00 PM

Quote :

"I feel that each state needs to pass a law explicitly allowing video taping of the police by anyone."

Well, I feel that passing a law that explicitly allows ANYTHING is a very bad idea

laws are in place to make things illegal, not to make them legal

7/31/2012 6:58:43 PM

^^You are one dumb motherfucker. i was speaking in regards to the general populous, not this thread. there are proposals in some states to make filming the police illegal.

7/31/2012 7:00:05 PM

^^^That is completely false. The First Amendment to the US Constitution is a law that explicitly allows freedom of speech. Is that a bad idea?

^^ When you use words like "y'all" and specifically referencing people making comments towards a participant in this thread, you are not just talking about about a general populous, but also to people in this thread... You're the one who is a dumb motherfucker, but I don't really mean you, I mean a general populous.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 7:04 PM. Reason : .]

7/31/2012 7:00:50 PM

since we're nitpicking, what it actually does is make it illegal for congress to create laws that prohibit people from utilizing their freedom of speech, and so on:

Quote :

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

7/31/2012 7:03:01 PM

this can go on all day

7/31/2012 7:04:05 PM

Which it's all semantics. By forbidding laws that infringe upon speech, it in effect legalizes free speech...

You can word a law that makes it illegal for the government to make a law forbidding the taping of police, which is the same as making a law that makes it legal to tape the police...

7/31/2012 7:07:39 PM

ask gosabres about filming the police (at Bada)

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 7:08 PM. Reason : ]

7/31/2012 7:08:22 PM

merbig:

in reply to my post, you said:

Quote :

"Nobody said anything about being ok about anything. Please find where someone said that they are. We are discussing the current legality of doing something."

then i said:

Quote :

"^^You are one dumb motherfucker. i was speaking in regards to the general populous, not this thread. there are proposals in some states to make filming the police illegal."

then YOU say,

Quote :

"^^ When you use words like "y'all" and specifically referencing people making comments towards a participant in this thread, you are not just talking about about a general populous, but also to people in this thread... You're the one who is a dumb motherfucker, but I don't really mean you, I mean a general populous. "

as usual, you fail completely. fucked up carats, putting words in people's mouth, and wrong about the argument to begin with. let me reiterate: YOU are a dumbmotherfucker, and i cordially invite you to drink bleach.

7/31/2012 7:20:16 PM

Lets try this again:

Quote :

"yeah, y'all can rag on Geniusboy all you want, but it is absolutely unconsititutional (not to mention just plain wrong) to forbid filming the police. why are people ok with these kinds of laws?"

I say:

Quote :

"Nobody said anything about being ok about anything. Please find where someone said that they are. We are discussing the current legality of doing something."

You say:

Quote :

"You are one dumb motherfucker. i was speaking in regards to the general populous, not this thread. there are proposals in some states to make filming the police illegal."

I say:

Quote :

"When you use words like "y'all" and specifically referencing people making comments towards a participant in this thread, you are not just talking about about a general populous, but also to people in this thread... You're the one who is a dumb motherfucker, but I don't really mean you, I mean a general populous."

So again. How the fuck can you say you weren't talking about anyone in this thread, when you criticize those who are "ragging" on GeniuSxBoY? Is the general populous ragging on him or something? Then you go onto ask a rhetorical question, which was preceded by a sentence specifically targeting some people in this thread, which after being called out on it, you have some unrealistic expectation for us to read your fucking mind and somehow know that you're no longer talking about those who were ragging on GeniuSxBoY but are now talking about the "general population."

If you don't like getting called out for making stupid implications in regards to what other people have said in a thread, then I suggest that you stop making stupid implications. I can't believe you graduated from the same school as me. I just hope nobody ever finds out that we went to the same school, as I don't want my degree devalued to below that of community college status in bumfuck, NC.

7/31/2012 7:31:07 PM

Quote :

"Lets try this again"

let's work on our contractions. I don't want you tarnishing my NCSU degree with your elementary grammar mistakes.

and i'm sorry if you're too busy huffing sterno to really think about what people (yes, people in general) are trying to say in their posts. I said "y'all" in reference to people posting in this thread, and "people" in reference to the collective. i don't think it's that tough to figure out.

oh, and by the way:

Quote :

""Nobody said anything about being ok about anything. Please find where someone said that they are. We are discussing the current legality of doing something.""

Quote :

"Personally, I feel that each state needs to pass a law explicitly allowing video taping of the police by anyone."

you yourself said you were okay with it, so you're wrong either way.

[Edited on July 31, 2012 at 8:31 PM. Reason : don't bother trying to contradict merbig...he'll do it himself]

7/31/2012 8:23:41 PM

you guys ruined my thread

fuck you

8/1/2012 2:42:15 PM