PDA

View Full Version : Videoing encounters with law enforcement.



Irishquad
22nd September 2013, 01:02
I would like to comment on the recent phenomenon of people beginning to film police officers during traffic stops and other personal encounters. I think this is important, because even though most of these encounters are recorded on the dash cams in police cars, citizens filming these encounters add a level of accountability to ensure that Law Enforcement are acting lawfully and not violating our Constitutional rights.

Where I take issue, is when I see situations like the one that happened in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH2-uZAimH8

In the video, it appears to me (and I admit my perception could be wrong) as if this guy was standing outside of a Sheriff's Department, with a camera, looking to provoke an incident. He wasn't just going about his business innocently and then randomly & unjustly questioned and subsequently detained by the Sheriffs. He provoked an incident.

But one could say, "it's not illegal to stand in a public place with a camera so the Sheriff Deputy had no probable cause to question him about his activities or his identification." I agree that in most cases, a citizen has the right to live without the government reaching into our private lives, including keeping our IDs private even when asked for it by police (except when driving). I admit I could be wrong but, it appeared to me that this guy crossed the line by setting up this situation for the purpose of making his video. He wasn't just standing outside "somewhere," he was standing outside of a Sheriff's Department with his camera, for all appearances like he was filming. The Sheriff had a perfectly reasonable cause for suspicion. He could have been recording shift change habits or something which could have jeopardized security. In particular situations, police officers have a responsibility to investigate suspicious behavior, and a reasonable expectation for citizens to comply with requests for identification. If, of instance, some guy had been standing outside an elementary school with a camera and a child was later abducted, the public would be justifiably outraged to find the police had questioned him but couldn't say who he was, because the guy claimed he didn't have to show ID to the police. I believe that society grants Police/Sheriff departments with a recognizable authority to both defend the innocent and investigate criminal activity, including evaluating suspicious behavior, which they apparently felt this guy was exhibiting.

Some have said to me, "The problem is that every time we make exceptions, that violate our constitutional right to privacy, those exceptions become the norm which then comes to be the expected response. So it becomes necessary to "flex our rights" in order to reassert them, "use em' or lose em'." Nothing wrong with respecting authority when that authority understands that it is by CONSENT that authority is granted. We are Free individuals and have rights to live our lives without fear/threat of force, so long as we do not violate the rights of others."

I agree with everything which was said there, except that I believe HOW we assert our rights will make all the difference. I think we will be much more effective by asserting our Constitutional rights in a respectful way. The way that we build and reinforce a civil society, is first and foremost by acting civilly. One of the ways that I think the guy in the video was absolutely wrong in his approach, was that he immediately began acting like a jerk. If we want law enforcement to begin respecting us, and respecting our rights, we need to respect them by treating them with equal dignity. If we act like jerks to the police, we shouldn't be surprised if some of them lose patience and begin treating us like jerks.

In the U.S. we have a big enough problem with law enforcement becoming militarized and viewing citizens as insurgents, we don't need people encouraging guys like the one in the video to post up outside Police/Sheriff's stations acting suspiciously to provoke cops for YouTube drama junkies. We need real efforts to educate the police to honor the Constitution, not this kind of crap.. As proof that law enforcement can be won over, we only have to look at the rapid growth of organizations like the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. They are growing very fast because more and more law enforcement officers are becoming educated and taking a stand against the corrupt and communist infected government, promising to uphold/defend the Constitution and protect the constitutional rights of citizens.

As a side note, one of the ways by which we will unify the country against the Communist influenced enemy working to demolish our Constitutional Republic will be by engaging in rational, civil dialogue, winning hearts and minds one person at a time. Unfortunately, especially on YouTube, most people who honestly want to defend the Constitution inadvertently adopt Saul Alinsky style tactics to insult, belittle and marginalize a perceived opponent in order to assert a particular point of view, which shuts down all rational discussion and impedes real progress. We have to abandon all communist influenced tactics and get back to civil rational dialogue like the form our Founding Fathers utilized. The United States, consists of many people with differing opinions on a wide range of subjects concerning how the country should run to best meet the needs of the citizens. Until we find a way to respect each other, especially when we don't agree, we will never be able to truly understand those different views or why/how those different views could be viewed as correct, precisely so that our different views can be honestly way weighed and debated in order find the best path forward for this country. Long live the Republic!

What do you think?

RunningDeer
22nd September 2013, 01:29
Power Hungry Cops VS. Guy That Knows His Rights
zH2-uZAimH8


"The problem is that every time we make exceptions, that violate our constitutional right to privacy, those exceptions become the norm which then comes to be the expected response. So it becomes necessary to "flex our rights" in order to reassert them, "use em' or lose em'." Nothing wrong with respecting authority when that authority understands that it is by CONSENT that authority is granted. We are Free individuals and have rights to live our lives without fear/threat of force, so long as we do not violate the rights of others."

Hi Irishquad,

I agree with the above statement and appreciate it when people test the limits. But for me, I’ll choose my battles. I do not have enough skill to take on the law enforcement. There are too many ever changing variables.

Chris folded when he gave permission to search his personhood. He gave his name near the end, so in effect, the video it's a mixed message for me. Also, permission to search opened a door for law enforcement. [just a guess]

Peace,
Paula

Irishquad
22nd September 2013, 02:34
Thank you Paula, I absolutely agree with you and I've seen a number of great videos where people go out specifically to test the limits by publicly open carrying their firearm, expecting the police to stop them and ask them for identification. In those instances, the gentlemen were respectful, but definitely intelligently asserted the reality that unless they were suspected of committing a crime, (which open carrying a firearm is not) then the police had no reason to ask them for identification, and in every instance they were able to walk away without showing identification. And this is at the core of the point I was trying to make, it's HOW we assert our rights that will make the most difference in protecting our rights.

Nice job catching the inconsistency of the message in this video. He absolutely blew it by consenting to being searched. In every possible way, Chris failed in his attempt to use an encounter with law enforcement as a teaching moment. He arrogantly tried to set up a situation to draw the the Sheriff's Department into an incident where he could assert his rights, but it's not a complete failure because this video now is a perfect example of how NOT to test the limits.

Again, thank you very much for your comment.
Peace,
Christopher

GCS1103
22nd September 2013, 02:49
I believe that we need to assert our constitutional rights and I'm all for standing up to police bullying, but I don't think this is the way to go about it. When I watch this video, I see a guy antagonizing the police and looking to provoke a confrontation. We need to be more careful in picking our battles.

Nanoo Nanoo
22nd September 2013, 02:56
i thibnk in the end when he is being agressively hounded by 3 officers it gets hard to stand your ground. They are revving them selves up for the favorite part of their job which is taking controll of people physically.

if it were me id simply ask if i was under arrest and if he said no id just walk off and of he tried to grab me id defend my self before the cavalry arrived.

however i do get the feeling he was trying to provoke a reaction.. and he got his wish.

N

RunningDeer
22nd September 2013, 03:18
Deleted post. Sorry if it appeared go off topic.

Irishquad
22nd September 2013, 03:46
i thibnk in the end when he is being agressively hounded by 3 officers it gets hard to stand your ground. They are revving them selves up for the favorite part of their job which is taking controll of people physically.
N

Thanks Nanoo,

I think the only reason he was being aggressively hounded by three officers is precisely because of the way he went about executing his plan to assert his rights. If we act respectfully toward law enforcement, especially in these instances when we are adamantly asserting our constitutional right to privacy, we will in turn receive much more respect from them and can use the encounter as a way to encourage law enforcement to honor the constitutional rights of citizens.

Regarding what you say is their favorite part of the job, I think it's unfair to make a blanket statement like this. I think it's important to recognize that the large majority of people who become police officers are doing it for honorable reasons. It's only the minority, in my opinion, who abuse their position in order to be thugs. If we can educate the majority in the importance of championing the Constitution, the thugs will either fall in line or be pushed out of the force.

Christopher

turiya
22nd September 2013, 05:30
Know Your Rights: What To Do If You're Stopped By Police, Immigration Agents or the FBI (https://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform-immigrants-rights-racial-justice/know-your-rights-what-do-if-you)

IF YOU ARE STOPPED FOR QUESTIONING
Stay calm. Don't run. Don't argue, resist or obstruct the police, even if you are innocent or police are violating your rights. Keep your hands where police can see them.

Ask if you are free to go. If the officer says yes, calmly and silently walk away. If you are under arrest, you have a right to know why.

You have the right to remain silent and cannot be punished for refusing to answer questions. If you wish to remain silent, tell the officer out loud. In some states, you must give your name if asked to identify yourself.

You do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your belongings, but police may "pat down" your clothing if they suspect a weapon. You should not physically resist, but you have the right to refuse consent for any further search. If you do consent, it can affect you later in court.
There is an art to asking questions... questions, when asked, will assert your rights in a way that will give pause to the officer or agent, as to whether they (the officers of the law) really know what they are doing... whether they really know the law, and/or whether they know their own respective responsibilities to the law.

The man in the OP video (above), obviously was lacking this art - not very competent. Instead came off as looking for a conflict. Instead, exercise being competent & those less competent are more than likely to back away & back off.

Here is an example of a Ron Paul supporter that understands his rights & how to assert those rights in a manner to cause the TSA agents to hesitate relative to their understanding of the limits of their own authority by asking the right questions & staying on point.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiKPseXiVXg

The same holds true to standing in front of a judge... asking the right questions will give pause to what are the limits of the judge's own authority - and when its in court, it goes on record (providing the court reporter is doing their job)... or better to say, make sure it goes on the record by making eye contact with the court reporter and saying "and for the record, the judge's response is..." such & such.

From another thread (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?63555-Looks-like-Common-Law-is-punching-the-corrupt-legal-system-in-the-eyes-), here's a Private Attorney General Anthony Williams showing competency in Common Law in front of a judge...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crLhwROPnPo

turiya :cool:

LahTera
22nd September 2013, 22:25
Laws are BS these days. They pick and choose which ones to enforce and how to enforce them. The system is so overwhelmed, that you'd be lucky to have an attorney stand up for your rights unless your case was so publicized, it was a perfect opportunity for them. Even defense lawyers have to play a game to save what defendants they have on their client list, and they know they can't save them all.