Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It’s ridiculous when he puts a camera in all of the employees faces and says that if they don’t want to be videotaped, they shouldn’t hold a public job. I’m sure no one signed up to be videotaped just for doing their job. He looks for trouble. He points out that security cameras are everywhere taping employees, so why does it matter if he records them. How about the fact that the security camera are not posting the videos to a YouTube channel with thousands of viewers
They should change the law that while you may videotape in public buildings, posting those videos for monetary gain should be illegal and he needs to forfeit any monies he made fas a result of YT revenue. And I was getting into being a cameraman in the early 90s and I was not allowed into any event without press credentials. He keeps saying he is a meme er of the press but has no credentials. He is just a guy with an iPhone. Nothing more.
Of all the causes to fight. How about election fraud, illegal migrants pouring in? His biggest problem is videotaping people doing their jobs? Technically, I can sit outside his house all day and record him all day as he comes and goes. Maybe he should get a taste of his own medicine. Just because something is legal doesn’t mean you shouldn’t consider others. Sure I can boast loud music all day until 11 pm but would all of my neighbors like it? To his credit, he usually is pretty respectful but can be a wise ass at times. After watching the video, I think the police over reacted and that was a bit much. He just needs to be warned not to continue to harass people who do not wish to be recorded . I understand his mission but he shouldn’t bother people just going about their business and make them uncomfortable.
Yep well said! 1st amendment gives you the right to freedom of the press, to write and report on what you please without government censorship. It does NOT give the press or public freedom of access and never has.
I didnt realize trying to enter a govt building and recording in public was antogizning.
I don’t recall saying that. Did you know for example that in many states a zoom can’t be recorded unless you have expressed permission from everyone in the room? Same thing applies here, people have to consent to being filmed and shown, otherwise why do so many tabloids, tv shows, news programs etc require a release to use the footage?
I will say there is a line between fighting for rights and just being a nudge looking for his 5 minutes of fame.
Yep well said! 1st amendment gives you the right to freedom of the press, to write and report on what you please without government censorship. It does NOT give the press or public freedom of access and never has.
Except that a public building is a public forum and no expectation of privacy. Its a govt building as long as you are in an open area, prohibiting a person being there and filming as a journalist is a violation of the 1st amendment
I don’t recall saying that. Did you know for example that in many states a zoom can’t be recorded unless you have expressed permission from everyone in the room? Same thing applies here, people have to consent to being filmed and shown, otherwise why do so many tabloids, tv shows, news programs etc require a release to use the footage?
I will say there is a line between fighting for rights and just being a nudge looking for his 5 minutes of fame.
Except NY is a 1 party approval to record state.
There is no expectation of privacy in a public area or in a public government building. Therefore consent or not consent to be filmed, watched is irrelevant.
Regardless of whether you think LIA is a legit auditor or a piece of garbage, the point of my post was how the hell can a police chief in one of the largest counties in the country literally waste tax paying resources (cops) on such nonsense.
Just another example how our "leaders" waste our hard earned money!
Regardless of whether you think LIA is a legit auditor or a piece of garbage, the point of my post was how the hell can a police chief in one of the largest counties in the country literally waste tax paying resources (cops) on such nonsense.
Just another example how our "leaders" waste our hard earned money!
it is a waste of money... there are much more important things to be using police time for
The Police Chief is definitely an @ss for flexing his muscles at this guy. On the other hand, I've seen several of the videos and this guy is annoying. Doesn't justify the police actions, but it's still annoying.
In public, or a public building, there is no expectation of privacy. However, people still retain the right to usage of their "likeness." If I am on a public street and you are standing in your front yard, I have every right to film you. Where the line gets drawn is that, with some exceptions, I cannot use that image for most purposes without your permission. That's why movies and commercials have model releases.
I know of many "street photographers" that love to die on the hill of "no expectation of privacy." It's still extrememly rude to photograph/video someone who specifically asks you to not take their picture. Even worse when you use that photo/video for the purpose of making that person look bad.
Are these videos valid "news?" Or are they a commercial enterprise? Is this guy providing a legitimate public service, or is he harassing public servants for money/notoriety via YouTube views? Is he guilty of lying to police when he claims he is "gathering information for a news story?" Since a judge issued the arrest warrant, I'd think the answers aren't clear cut.
By pushing the envelope, it is also possible what he does could backfire. It only takes a court decision or two to set a precedent that would accomplish the opposite of what this guy purports to do.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. IMO, both parties need to be taught a lesson.
The Police Chief is definitely an @ss for flexing his muscles at this guy. On the other hand, I've seen several of the videos and this guy is annoying. Doesn't justify the police actions, but it's still annoying.
In public, or a public building, there is no expectation of privacy. However, people still retain the right to usage of their "likeness." If I am on a public street and you are standing in your front yard, I have every right to film you. Where the line gets drawn is that, with some exceptions, I cannot use that image for most purposes without your permission. That's why movies and commercials have model releases.
I know of many "street photographers" that love to die on the hill of "no expectation of privacy." It's still extrememly rude to photograph/video someone who specifically asks you to not take their picture. Even worse when you use that photo/video for the purpose of making that person look bad.
Are these videos valid "news?" Or are they a commercial enterprise? Is this guy providing a legitimate public service, or is he harassing public servants for money/notoriety via YouTube views? Is he guilty of lying to police when he claims he is "gathering information for a news story?" Since a judge issued the arrest warrant, I'd think the answers aren't clear cut.
By pushing the envelope, it is also possible what he does could backfire. It only takes a court decision or two to set a precedent that would accomplish the opposite of what this guy purports to do.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. IMO, both parties need to be taught a lesson.
The Police Chief is definitely an @ss for flexing his muscles at this guy. On the other hand, I've seen several of the videos and this guy is annoying. Doesn't justify the police actions, but it's still annoying.
In public, or a public building, there is no expectation of privacy. However, people still retain the right to usage of their "likeness." If I am on a public street and you are standing in your front yard, I have every right to film you. Where the line gets drawn is that, with some exceptions, I cannot use that image for most purposes without your permission. That's why movies and commercials have model releases.
I know of many "street photographers" that love to die on the hill of "no expectation of privacy." It's still extrememly rude to photograph/video someone who specifically asks you to not take their picture. Even worse when you use that photo/video for the purpose of making that person look bad.
Are these videos valid "news?" Or are they a commercial enterprise? Is this guy providing a legitimate public service, or is he harassing public servants for money/notoriety via YouTube views? Is he guilty of lying to police when he claims he is "gathering information for a news story?" Since a judge issued the arrest warrant, I'd think the answers aren't clear cut.
By pushing the envelope, it is also possible what he does could backfire. It only takes a court decision or two to set a precedent that would accomplish the opposite of what this guy purports to do.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. IMO, both parties need to be taught a lesson.
There are many areas of public buildings that are private and recording is not allowed. Frauditors do not get unlimited access to every room in a government building.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
