New Bill In Connecticut Would Make It Illegal For Police To Stop You From Recording Them
from the good-to-see dept
We've seen numerous stories in the last year of police abusing anti-wiretap laws to go after people who record police activities in public. Thankfully, there are some people who realize this is wrong. A Connecticut state senator, Martin Looney, has apparently introduced legislation that not only says that it's the right of citizens to record on-duty police officers, but (more importantly) gives citizens a civil action against police officers if they violate that right. As Radley Balko points out at that link:That second part is important. A right doesn�t mean much if there are no consequences for government officials who ignore it. Witness this case in Florida, where an officer erroneously tries to say federal law prohibits citizen recordings of cops. Even in states where courts have thrown out criminal charges, a cop who doesn�t want to be recorded can still harass, threaten, and even arrest you. You may not be charged. But he won�t be punished, either.It would definitely be nice if a similar rule was taken up at the federal level.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Also, if it is illegal to record a police officer then doesn't that make any news cameraman that records an officer guilty too? Where does it stop?
Kudos to Senator Looney!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
People are people and deviate and develop approaches that are not socially friendly when they are repeatedly not called out on it.
We will end up with smarter, friendlier, more helpful cops as a result of this (though there may be a period of shaking out). And the force will attract more such tolerant people.
I like moves towards government oversight.
And I am sure pvt Manning had something to do with promoting this positive development.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You go too far referencing the jerk pvt Manning. Violating national law and endangering soldiers is way different than video recording your own surrounding while on a motorcycle when a cops stops you.
Keep to the good stuff and not the bad examples.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You can make cops look abusive when in fact they are matching force in order to subdue someone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
exactly y both sides need their right to film in public,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
> finished cloning Hitler and raping all
> the cops' children, the beating shown on
> the tape would still not have been justified
If he'd raped my children the beating would most definitely have been justified. Perhaps not legal, but certainly justified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wholeheartedly second that!
As a citizen, I am told that I cannot expect privacy in a public place. Law enforcement seems to think that are entitled to privacy at all times, even when they are working on the taxpayer's dollar.
This one-way street needs to be rectified quickly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well said. And... "If they aren't doing anything wrong, they should have nothing to hide." - isn't that what they tell us?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Police and Videotaping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Police and Videotaping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Police and Videotaping
At which point, you can feel free to film him. Until then, he has the same privacy rights that you do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Come on, admit it, its a good argument. Even though our response is: tough titties
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I would ask that all write(not email, they'll never read it) and make it known that, although you're not a lobbyist, you matter.
Threadjacking over.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Techdirt stories and discussion motivate me quite frequently to write to my elected officials. Though I can't compete with the lobby industry, I can at least chip away.
*****
SUBJ: Safeguarding our streets
I support a federal bill that explicitly reaffirms the rights of individuals to videotape the public, in particular, to videotape officers of the law.
Connecticut has already taken a leadership role through their state legislature as covered here http://www.theagitator.com/2011/02/24/short-but-sweet/ .
The Connecticut bill specifically allows for civil actions to proceed against those who thwart that public right.
No human is wise enough to have their power go unchecked for very long. And American citizens need to keep a mindful eye on the actions of our public servants, in particular, when we have entrusted them with special privileges that can easily lead to death and injury.
Americans will end up with a more friendly, helpful, clever police force when we reduce the temptation for them to abuse their privilege.
Thank you.
PS: We will also need to improve the lack of civilian Due Process in the actions carried out by our military. As many have shown throughout history, respect and a civilized approach by those in power leads to further respect and a greater amount of peace and security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I modified the letter on the Senator's webform and forgot to save it, but it turns out that looking at the page's source view provided by the browser showed that my letter was on that *Thank you for sharing your thoughts* page hidden from sight (it was in the html but not visible when browsing the page normally).
FWIW, the letter I actually sent included much of the above (modified a little) and
> Valuable video technology offers much hope [for] removing crime from the streets.
> Americans will be much more likely to help law enforcement when respect is reciprocated.
Not sure if this made the letter better or worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actually, the bill calls for civil action. Now if we can criminalize a little kid clicking on a link to see his favorite cartoon, surely we can at least allow for civil action to be brought up against officers manhandling people, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hogwash. And it's quite scary that you think this is true. Cops need the discretion to handle things according to the law, evidence, and due process. Their "gut interpretation" does not belong in public law enforcement. Legislators and judges provide the interpretation of the law. Cops have only the duty to abide by it and enforce it using the proper, legal processes that do not violate human rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem is that a lot of cops don't use discretion and common sense. Look at how many innocent, non-violent people have been tasered simply for not doing what a cop tells them. How many un-armed suspects have been turned into swiss cheese by trigger happy cops? How many people have been beaten simply because they mouthed off to a cop?
When a crime is committed, the first thing the detectives look for is to see if there is any surveillance footage of the incident so that they can use it in court. When a cop abuses their power, the first thing they look for is any surveillance footage of the incident, so that they can cover up the incident.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But could it pass?
It all really boils down to cops wanting to be able to get away with beating the crap out of people when they feel like it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: But could it pass?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Looney
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]