Yeah - arrested means you're being officially detained into police custody, which didn't happen in this situation. IANAL, but I suspect that generally misdemeanors don't result in arrests.
Whether he was arrested at the scene or not is irrelevant
I'm guessing the guy with the camera would beg to differ had he actually been arrested.
Like most people commenting here, I also strongly disagree with how the police acted here, but getting the facts of the situation wrong is pretty lazy. An actual arrest would've been far worse than what actually occurred.
Henderson went back to the sheriff's office in mid-November to get a copy of the report and try once again to retrieve his camera. Deputy Dan Eggers refused to give him either. He pulled Henderson aside.
"I think that what (the deputies) felt was you were interfering with someone's privacy that was having a medical mental health breakdown," Eggers said, as heard on another recording Henderson made. "They felt like you were being a 'buttinski' by getting that camera in there and partially recording what was going on in a situation that you were not directly involved in."
He suggested that Henderson should "have a little respect" for people's privacy.
Do you know how to read (and understand what you've read)? As DrawgonWriter (and you!) said, the written citation mentions a HIPAA violation, he wasn't charged with a HIPAA violation.
Freedom to do what you want so long as it conforms to exactly what society approves of isn't freedom at all.
The freedom to act doesn't include a freedom from consequences of your actions (as long as those consequences are legal themselves, like the 'popular opinion' and 'peer pressure' that Luckyo mentions).
Based on the rest of this thread, though, I'm not really disagreeing with what you've said. phantomfive's statement "I would really appreciate it if the police stopped people from filming me." is fair, but could've been done in a better/legal way, by shielding the person being arrested, or by simply asking the person to stop filming (understanding that question may be answered negatively).
I was using "legally disorderly" to describe being disorderly in a fashion that is legally defined, and would fall under the 'disorderly conduct' charge that was given to this guy.
IANAL, so I do not know what defines that, nor do I *agree* with the charge. I was just attempting to clarify girlintraining's post (as I understood it) to dcollins
This. A good chunk of the rest of the comments here seemed to have missed this. Also, what's with people mentioning the guy with the camera being arrested?
I'd disagree; I read girlintraining's use of "total douche" to refer to someone being intentionally and legally disorderly. Otherwise the guy would just be partially douchey.
Sounds like you missed the point of girlintraining's post. Cops often have to operate with a "worse case" mentality when confronted with unknown people in fast-moving situations.
You're putting words in Vintermann's mouth. He clearly said he's simply less likely to give McAfee the benefit of the doubt. I think that's a pretty objective statement, given the extreme lack of information available about the situation and the relative paranoia McAfee seems to be exuding.
That said, he was in Belize, not McAfee's native land, so it's also reasonable to assume a heightened level of paranoia or fear.
I suspect because no one wants to spend resources developing that sort of functionality. It is probably also seen as far "safer" and easier for companies to simply ban those offenders, than it would be to track and restrict them.
I suppose offtopic for this specific story, but have you tried SwiftKey on Android? I've definitely found it to be the best keyboard in terms of accuracy, and it seems about as good as the iPhone keyboard (in my limited experience typing on friends' iPhones).
What I want is to avoid paying a fortune in roaming charges when I'm on vacation across Europe.
Not sure what your phone situation is, but I got around swimmingly (mostly northern Europe) on an HTC G2 (quad-band GSM) with a T-Mobile SIM I purchased in Warsaw, like $30 for 2GB of data. GPS + Google Maps was definitely a game-changer for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah - arrested means you're being officially detained into police custody, which didn't happen in this situation. IANAL, but I suspect that generally misdemeanors don't result in arrests.
I'm guessing the guy with the camera would beg to differ had he actually been arrested.
Like most people commenting here, I also strongly disagree with how the police acted here, but getting the facts of the situation wrong is pretty lazy. An actual arrest would've been far worse than what actually occurred.
Do you know how to read (and understand what you've read)? As DrawgonWriter (and you!) said, the written citation mentions a HIPAA violation, he wasn't charged with a HIPAA violation.
The freedom to act doesn't include a freedom from consequences of your actions (as long as those consequences are legal themselves, like the 'popular opinion' and 'peer pressure' that Luckyo mentions).
Based on the rest of this thread, though, I'm not really disagreeing with what you've said. phantomfive's statement "I would really appreciate it if the police stopped people from filming me." is fair, but could've been done in a better/legal way, by shielding the person being arrested, or by simply asking the person to stop filming (understanding that question may be answered negatively).
steelfood is quite the social butterfly, what with knowing every single cop in the world.
I was using "legally disorderly" to describe being disorderly in a fashion that is legally defined, and would fall under the 'disorderly conduct' charge that was given to this guy.
IANAL, so I do not know what defines that, nor do I *agree* with the charge. I was just attempting to clarify girlintraining's post (as I understood it) to dcollins
Agreed.
Why would you be arrested? The guy with the camera in this article wasn't arrested.
This. A good chunk of the rest of the comments here seemed to have missed this. Also, what's with people mentioning the guy with the camera being arrested?
I don't agree with what went down, but he wasn't arrested, nor was he "charged with violating HIPAA".
Who said anything about arrests?
The article says nothing at all about an arrest.
He already did (source: TFA).
Correct, although...
...he wasn't arrested, nor was he charged "on a HIPAA violation". See this comment.
Who was arrested, again?
I'd disagree; I read girlintraining's use of "total douche" to refer to someone being intentionally and legally disorderly. Otherwise the guy would just be partially douchey.
Sounds like you missed the point of girlintraining's post. Cops often have to operate with a "worse case" mentality when confronted with unknown people in fast-moving situations.
You're putting words in Vintermann's mouth. He clearly said he's simply less likely to give McAfee the benefit of the doubt. I think that's a pretty objective statement, given the extreme lack of information available about the situation and the relative paranoia McAfee seems to be exuding.
That said, he was in Belize, not McAfee's native land, so it's also reasonable to assume a heightened level of paranoia or fear.
I suspect because no one wants to spend resources developing that sort of functionality. It is probably also seen as far "safer" and easier for companies to simply ban those offenders, than it would be to track and restrict them.
Source?
I suppose offtopic for this specific story, but have you tried SwiftKey on Android? I've definitely found it to be the best keyboard in terms of accuracy, and it seems about as good as the iPhone keyboard (in my limited experience typing on friends' iPhones).
Not sure what your phone situation is, but I got around swimmingly (mostly northern Europe) on an HTC G2 (quad-band GSM) with a T-Mobile SIM I purchased in Warsaw, like $30 for 2GB of data. GPS + Google Maps was definitely a game-changer for me.
A lot of traditional PC games, sure, but not games designed specifically for the mobile market.
A lot of us grew up on PC game demos.