Slashdot Mirror
Citizens Spy On Big Brother
An anonymous reader writes "Citizens of the world are striking back at 24/7 state surveillance by pulling out their cameraphones and filming inept officials, deadly healthcare lapses and thuggish cops. So-called Sous-veillance is seeing more and more people posting damning footage of official misdemenours to sites such as YouTube to shame them into action." I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over.
You might be considered a terrorist if you record the police. Wouldn't be the first time.
... and the still intact memory chip has a nice recording of the officer's boot, which turns out to be very helpful in securing a conviction for assault and his dismissal from the department, and from the society that he was supposed to protect.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
Because it hasn't happened to you, it never happens. Thanks for clearing that up.
2. You are not filming/photographing something you legally cannot (like a port or inside a mall)
In the USA at least, there's no legal framework that bans filming inside shopping malls. There is simply a legal framework that allows the private owners of the mall to make rules dictating whatever behavior they like or not, and if as a guest you do not comply with these rules, you must leave. If you do not leave when requested by any private owner, whether following their rules or not, you can be reported and arrested/ticketed by police for trespassing. In any case, the private owners cannot (1) take your equipment, (2) delete your pictures, (3) force you to do anything but leave the premises.
Personally, I think that since most shopping malls get huge tax incentives and other public funding, they should be held to certain accessibility and public use laws. However, that's rarely the case, and the private owners can enjoy this micro-fief in which to control their "guests" at their whim. If you don't like it, shop elsewhere.
And lastly, if a police officer ever asks you to delete a photograph, follow the ACLU bust guidelines. "Am I under arrest, or am I free to go?" Since a photograph is copyright-protected simply through the act of creation, destruction of a photograph is (1) destruction of your personal property, and (2) destruction of legal evidence. The cop needs to be reminded as gently as possible that there are two options and that you know this: they arrest you (securing all evidence safely) or wave goodbye.
[
chances are that a cop is gonna "firmly grasp" the arm holding the camera, and the camera will end up on the ground waiting to be destroyed. We had a protest a few months ago at my university that ended up like that; only one fragmented video escaped.
If it's a normal digital camera, try using a Micro-SD card in an adapter.
The chances are higher that the card will survive even if the camera is destroyed.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Not in my jurisdiction. Too bad about yours.
We barely have seatbelt laws here. Phone? Fine. Camera? Fine. Shotgun rack? Fine. Bought the shotgun at a gunshow with no ID? Fine.
Do a video at your own risk. However, only very rarely does a police officer respond negatively to an individual that is polite when pulled over, is sober, and doesn't provoke the officer. It's a self-fulfilling action to believe that police officers will react negatively; they're human and IMHO aren't going to react negatively without provocation. Then tell it to the judge. Or suffer the consequences of provocation.
When I was young I called cops pigs. Then I came to understand what cops have to put up with. Some are still way too brutal. But most are just trying to keep the peace. Traffic cops I have problems with, but I keep quiet and polite during a trafffic stop, then beat my tickets anyway and don't drive like a raving Type-A idiot. Others have different results.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Except, you know, you can't kill a cop with a camera (unless you bludgeon him over the head with it, but even then).
Plus, the cops should have to act BETTER than most people, because, guess what, they're COPS. If that means they're on camera 24/7, then so be it. They signed up for it.
Why aren't the 'good cops' turning in their corrupt, violent and evil coworkers?
Sorry, until I see more exposure of bad cops from within their departments, I'm lumping the 'good cops' in with the bad cops.
Sympathizers you know? Kinda like how we bomb the houses of people who help Iraqi Insurgents, even if they aren't actually insurgents themselves.
Aiding and abetting the enemy: abuse of authority.
Blar.
Here's what I'm saying: Anyone with the power to ruin your life just by their word against yours should not be trusted.
Doesn't mean they're all bad people, but just like most police approach every traffic stop being aware of the fact someone could be waiting in the driver's seat with intent to harm them, every citizen should approach every encounter with the police knowing there are bad cops out there and they may be at risk.
This won't change until officers start getting prosecuted for swearing false statements, and the "good" ones stop covering for the "bad" ones.
If you've got the time, I highly recommend watching these two videos before you ever consider trusting a police officer:
http://www.hackaday.com/2008/06/16/dont-talk-to-the-police/
Just because it does happen doesn't mean that every cop is a bad officer.
Yes, it pretty much does. If my neighbor were a murdering psychopath, I'd be arrested for knowing about it and not saying anything. Police departments routinely have assholes sign up, simply because they want to be a professional asshole for the rest of their lives. The "good" cops often wind up covering for these pieces of shit and otherwise enabling them, because cops all have a tendency to believe that they are always right and the suspect is always wrong.
Fuck cops. Seriously, you have no fucking idea. It's a two way street you say? Why is it that the police are allowed to film you while you get the shit beat out of you for filming? What purpose does a civilian have for filming the police other than self defense? If the civilian is just trying to protect themselves why are the police so threatened? Is it because a good portion of them are inept, abusive, and generally incompetent? Thinking men know that might does not make right, police officers are *rarely* thinking men.
Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
The idea that it is insulting or implies anything about somebody's behavior when a camera is pointed at someone to record a law enforcement interaction is already a dead issue. Cops record you with their own video, they chemically test the air that emits from your car, and they have the authority to insist on a BAC test to verify that you are sufficiently sober to drive based on a randomly placed static checkpoint. If all that's fair game and no problem, why is a citizen camera anything but a safeguard against the tiny percentage of bad police who should have never been passed by the academy and no reflection on the good cops?
There are a lot of authoritarian fuckwits who can't stand it when people stand up to authority. They are small minded bullies who worship power, think humans are basically evil, and must be beaten into civility. The idea of these 'evil' humans refusing to take their beatings frightens them, because a human who hasn't been beaten into submission is a free and therefore dangerous human.
I'm being a little harsh here, as authoritarianism is actually a mental virus. If you've ever mentally beaten yourself up for a perceived failure instead of simply noting it and refocusing on how you want to be, you are very likely infected with it yourself. People infected with the virus do not need to coordinate their actions consciously, yet work together to spread the virus through abuse and fear mongering.
Always try to be impeccable with your words and thoughts and do not use them to harm yourself or others. Use reward, not punishment, to motivate yourself and others to behave in positive ways. Punishment will never create new and positive behaviors.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
The thing about kids is you can't make it all about them. If they think the only one they're hurting when they misbehave is themselves, they calculate the cost/benefit.
Once a kid is a little older, if you play it so they're not the only one benefiting and losing, they start to realize that other people are depending upon them to do what's right. Kids want more than anything to fit in socially...even if the social group is their parents (especially when young).
The problem is that many parents don't see why they should be inconvenienced by someone else, even if it is their own kid, so they isolate the negative consequences to the child. But that doesn't give the kid a sense of his effect on his local environment...or it mitigates it somewhat, so the kid learns that his negative behavior only affects himself (the same is often true of good behavior—parents naturally want their little angel to get all the credit when they do the right thing, so they try to direct all the benefit that way).
Example: A kid is acting up in a restaurant. Hopefully, the parent did the right thing in getting the child excited about going to the restaurant as a kind of plus, so just being there is a fun experience. The parent should: (1) tell the child once that if they don't settle down, they'll pay the bill and leave immediately, food or no food and then (2) do it. Most parents won't follow through without a big to do, because they themselves want the meal. But this isn't the right answer—the right thing to do is get up and go, and suffer the consequences of your kid's bad behavior with them. Make sure they know your skipped meal is no fun either, but they had the chance to fix it and there's no going back.
If the kid learns early that there are inflexible rules of the universe, and once you run afoul of them the path is determined and quickly followed, they shape up quickly. If parents don't have the will to pursue the behavior they want and not settle for less, however, in the end no one gets what they want.
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.