|
|
|
|
|||||||
| General Discussion (Everything Else) Discuss anything that doesn't belong in any other forums here. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
03-13-2015, 11:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Texas Bill Would Make Recording Police Illegal
A bill introduced to the Texas House of Representatives would make it illegal for private citizens to record police within 25 feet. House Bill 2918, introduced by Texas Rep. Jason Villalba (R-Dallas) on Tuesday, would make the offense a misdemeanor. Citizens who are armed would not be permitted to record police activity within 100 feet of an officer, according to the Houston Chronicle. Only representatives of radio or TV organizations that hold an FCC license, newspapers and magazines would have the right to record police. I use a dash cam and carry, soooo if I get pulled over I gotta turn off my camera? I don't think so, that part of why I have one. 
|
|
#3
03-13-2015, 12:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
correct....If you have nothing to hide and doing your job right...why worry about what or who is recording you.... Have the Police and our Government forgot they work for the People, like everyone else should be accountable for this action.....If my Boss decided he wants to record my activity at work, which they do...he has every right to do it, he signs my check..... Another Politician being paid off..... 
|
|
#4
03-13-2015, 01:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm a cop and wear a camera as well as have dash camera, if it makes you feel better I think this is nuts and will be shot down in a hurry. I see where people get in our way trying to record with their cell phones, or give us another body to deal with, but this will never fly!
|
|
#6
03-13-2015, 01:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Certainly at an active scene, failing to comply with law enforcement directives to back up and give officers room to do their job should continue to have criminal consequences. But requiring FCC licenses to record audio or video is a clear fist amendment intrusion.
Honest citizens (including public servants) should have no problem with their public activities being recorded for more full review according to established Constitutional and republican processes. If it is reasonable for citizens to be subject to surveillance and security cameras any time we are in public (and it is), then it is reasonable for public servants to also be subject to the same any time they are in public.
|
|
#7
03-13-2015, 01:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Yes it would definitely make Me feel better if I could control my own camera....as some how they can get mysteriously "turned Off".... http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...rest/23540945/ http://jonathanturley.org/2014/08/19...t-in-forehead/ http://jonathanturley.org/2012/01/17...ten-reprimand/ I have deep respect for the Police/law enforcement...I truly understand this is a hard and dangerous job. However, the facts of life there are some "Bad" cops that put on the uniform and do unjust service...
|
|
#8
03-13-2015, 01:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Will never survive legal challenges. All respect to our LEOs, they have a tough job,but this is the world we live in and there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in public. But I will say that the idiots that try to get in the middle of things and don't follow lawful orders deserve to catch a charge.
|
|
#9
03-13-2015, 02:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
An FCC license or not having a camera (or CHL) should not give someone the right to get closer than someone using a cell phone to record the event.
All parties should immediately comply with a law enforcement officer asking for more room to do his job. https://www.aclu.org/free-speech/app...deotape-police
|
|
#10
03-13-2015, 02:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I agree all parties should comply with a LEO asking for room to do his or her job.....However I do not agree with an Officer request or demand you turn off your recording device...and then threaten you with arrest cause you do not comply to turn off the camera, while standing across the street........I am done cause I am starting to have flash back and will have nightmares tonight.......
|
|
#11
03-13-2015, 02:27 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
SCOTUS already shot down something similar in a case in Illinois. It is a direct violation on the first amendment to outlaw the recording of police officers.
I think it is bogus to put a minimum distance required to film. Too many times police officials have internally investigated themselves and found nothing wrong, or some how "lose" dash cam footage. This is a tool us common folk can use to keep others, especially police, accountable. How many people have been punished for their actions once video surfaced of them committing a crime?
|
|
#12
03-13-2015, 02:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
 as the CHiP lays the smack down LEEME put my heater away...................................... so I can video this Last edited by marty f; 03-13-2015 at 02:41 PM.
|
|
#13
03-13-2015, 02:55 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
To me Nothing justify a beating this lady received when the camera was turned OFF.....
Officer did not recieve any reprimand due to "Technicality" Really!!!!!http://jonathanturley.org/2009/08/14...ing-videotape/
|
|
#14
03-13-2015, 03:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Who said 100 ft away.... not me.... I simply said that it seems to be saying they dont want you in the way while dealing with a problem. 25 feet is close enough to spit on someone so why would you need to be that close to a officer doing his job?? You may become a problem for the officer if your that close. Hell you might even become a victim yourself if your that close.
What pisses me off is the fact that police officers are all grouped together as bad guys by the general public. I dont even know why any of them want to serve in this day and age. Anyways I am not trying to argue or push a point I am just saying what I take from it.
|
|
#15
03-13-2015, 03:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Wanting to retain the right to video public servants is not portraying them as bad guys.
All public servants need accountability, and the right to video them is simply maintaining that accountability.
|
|
#16
03-13-2015, 03:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
NO NO you didn't, but THE BILL PROPOSED says that "Citizens who are armed would not be permitted to record police activity within 100 feet of an officer" I carry (legally) my gun everywhere I go, thus Im an armed citizen, so I have to stay 100 ft away.
|
|
#17
03-13-2015, 04:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I understand the idea that when the camera is turned on or off can completely change the context of what you see in the recording, such as the perps fighting the cops then the camera is turned on only at the point he gets the physical takedown he initiated and instigated but I see no way this is a reasonable logical request or how it can be deemed constitutional.
the camera is no more then just a digital eye witness that isn't prejudiced by emotion or opinion even though what it captures can be manipulated to "some" extent as expressed above, by not showing the full event from beginning to end.
|
|
#18
03-13-2015, 04:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That's why you see so many pant draggers running from the police, they are simply trying to maintain that 100 feet distance to remain legal.......NOT!
|
|
#19
03-13-2015, 08:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I see it good and bad, when people or on the scene of a deadly wrea or dubble murder, it's nice to inform the family before they see it on Facebook or the news!!! I am not sure but that's the way I read that....
|
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
