Very good news for photographers

[PierreVandevenne]

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/dc-police-chief-announces-shockingly-reasonable-cell-camera-policy/

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Hallelujah!

[louoates]

I hope this filters down to other cities' police forces and to the legions of poorly trained security folks who view themselves as omnipotent.

[Justan]

Thanks for posting the article!

While a good sounding announcement, this is only a very belated acknowledgement by 1 local LEO. It amounts to ass covering, seemingly as a result of multiple law suites which the dept. (probably many of them) lost.

It does not represent new law or a change of any statute.

As stated in the article:

“The First Amendment protects the right to record the activities of police officers, not only in public places such as parks and sidewalks, but also in "an individual’s home or business, common areas of public and private facilities and buildings, and any other public or private facility at which the individual has a legal right to be present."

If police have ever interfered with recording something done at least per at least the conditions stated in the article, the camera holder has ample recourse for law suit. And the camera holder will most likely win the suit.  Those details have not changed.

Heck around here the LEOs have on occasion done horrid things to people, including murder, and then the department has refused to show the event, as recorded by the LEO’s own videos until forced to do so.

Power corrupts.

But it’s a nice reminder to citizens that we still have some rights…..at least sometimes…..if and when it’s convenient to overreaching LEOs………………..

[Rob C]

Yip, and when your home gets trashed, your car stolen, who ya gonna call?

Rob C

[colinb]

Yip, and when your home gets trashed, your car stolen, who ya gonna call?

Rob C

emm. The police. Who I expect will do their job in a polite, courteous and professional way. I expected that before everyone's phone could record video, and I still expect it. I don't understand how that has anything to do with the topic though.

c

[wolfnowl]

It is a basic right, and as it says in the article, even the president's office has acknowledged that abuse of that is a violation.  Still, it takes a lot of chutzpah to make such a statement AND stand behind it.  It was the law before, too, just blatantly ignored.  It sets precedent for other jurisdictions to make the same stance.  Good news to me.

Mike.

[Rob C]

emm. The police. Who I expect will do their job in a polite, courteous and professional way. I expected that before everyone's phone could record video, and I still expect it. I don't understand how that has anything to do with the topic though.

c

What it has to do with the topic, Colin, is that here on LuLa, we've ad nauseam, raked over the interface between those trying to keep things 'safe' for us and those who insist that 'their' actions are always legal and that despite the very real possibility of criminal intent from others claiming the same 'rights', nobody should try to stop anything that a photographer chooses to do. You now, divine rights and all that. It's a topic that's raged from Heathrow to some Godforsaken U.S. railway stations (not that other countries' railway stations can't be Godforsaken too, I hasten to add in the interests of impartiality). It will never go away, and every voice raised to support the boys in blue is seen as quasi-nazi. In fact, the only applauded attitude or reaction is the one where a face-off is created; that gets almost universal, schoolboy approval.

The best thing is to ignore it - which I should have even on this occassion.

Rob C

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Sorry to disappoint you, Rob, but seems like DC police chief sided with us, not you

EDIT: On second thought, I think DC chief did get one thing wrong: there is one category of photographers that deserve special treatment, i.e., increased scrutiny by police: Nikon D800 owners! The unbelievable structural detail the camera provides beats any publicly-available blueprint.

[Justan]

It is a basic right, and as it says in the article, even the president's office has acknowledged that abuse of that is a violation.  Still, it takes a lot of chutzpah to make such a statement AND stand behind it.  It was the law before, too, just blatantly ignored.  It sets precedent for other jurisdictions to make the same stance.  Good news to me.

Mike.

I doubt that chutzpah is part of the calculus for this admission. More likely losing law suits and perhaps also criminal prosecution or threats thereof for those who perpetrated these violations of our basic rights.

Time and the opportunity to seize incriminating evidence will tell if LEO's will stand behind it.

[canon3]

it is indeed a very good news for photographer.....well congratulation for every photographer