skinnay 0 #1 November 24, 2011 God bless america! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80DbxSZ_FB8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,064 #2 November 24, 2011 Hi skinnay, I live in Oregon & it only takes the consent of one of the parties to legally make an audio recording. However, there are many statutes that make it illegal to audio record any law enforcement officer. The local newspaper had an article on this subject a few weeks ago and it does seem as though this state will soon make it legal to audio & video tape any law enforcement officer at any time. The article said that it may happen by legislation or by court ruling. My preference is that it be by court ruling. I am thinking that this guy in IL will win when & if it gets to court; no matter how loud the police holler & scream about it. And this is why I donate to the ACLU every year. JerryBaumchen PS) And since this is SC; I feel that we have reached a point in this country where the police have become a 'us against them' mentality. And I add, not all of them thankfully. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #3 November 24, 2011 Quote there are many statutes that make it illegal to audio record any law enforcement officer. IMO, they're all unconstitutional. QuoteAnd this is why I donate to the ACLU every year. Ding! The ACLU - it's not just for pinkos! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 140 #4 November 24, 2011 just one small step towards the police state and away from the free state. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #5 November 24, 2011 Quote I am thinking that this guy in IL will win when & if it gets to court; no matter how loud the police holler & scream about it. And, if it happens that way, I'd love to see the screamers pay ALL his expenses. Sucks that it comes down to money. Quote PS) And since this is SC; I feel that we have reached a point in this country where the police have become a 'us against them' mentality. And I add, not all of them thankfully. I guess I'm more of a cynic than you are. I've believed that for years and years. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #6 November 24, 2011 This is why DA's are at the top of my legal shit list. Cops can't charge him or try him. That's the DA's job. It's a DA asking for the sentence. In my opinion, this is a sign that our freedoms ARE under assault. I hope that the courts do not have to fix this but that the legilsatures fix it first. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #7 November 24, 2011 Quote Quote I am thinking that this guy in IL will win when & if it gets to court; no matter how loud the police holler & scream about it. And, if it happens that way, I'd love to see the screamers pay ALL his expenses. Sucks that it comes down to money. Quote PS) And since this is SC; I feel that we have reached a point in this country where the police have become a 'us against them' mentality. And I add, not all of them thankfully. I guess I'm more of a cynic than you are. I've believed that for years and years. Some people do seem to have blinders and are unwilling to see what i going on around them. They think that police harrassment of those "who do not matter" is just fine. The worm turns though when they... thinking that THEY are "people who matter" run into one of the sadists in blue and get to see where the country has been going for quite a while now. Not all of the police have reached that mentality.. but they do seem to protect them with the US vs. THEM mentality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #8 November 25, 2011 Those laws are ridiculous. They're wrong because (A) they prevent third patries from recording events in public (B) they create inequity by allowing one party to record and not the other (C) they make it illegal for a person to record his own actions. They are particularly despicable because they can be twisted to mean anything. Of course that wouldn't matter if people elected representatives to correct the law or DAs that wouldn't indict or try this type of case, but that's expecting far too much.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverborg 0 #9 November 25, 2011 Holy Crap!! This is the most disturbing post I've seen on spearkers corner in a long time. Hard to believe something like this could happen in this country. I can't believe the country isn't screaming over this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #10 November 25, 2011 QuoteGod bless america! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80DbxSZ_FB8 Top comment on the page was an update that the charges got dropped, Judge ruled them as Unconstitutional, and I think rightly so. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #11 November 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteGod bless america! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80DbxSZ_FB8 Top comment on the page was an update that the charges got dropped, Judge ruled them as Unconstitutional, and I think rightly so. Matt Glad to hear that the charges were dropped. However, that the law is still on the books is a problem. If you don't understand that the reason the bill introduced by (R) Rep. Chapin Rose was shot down in comity was because the highly democratic Illinois legislature was bought off by the Police Unions, then you are fooling your self. I've will keep harping at the evils of a unionized police force until someone finally gets it. And as long as you keep voting for public sector unions, understand that you will never fix the police force. That lump they just gave you? You asked for it."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,064 #12 November 26, 2011 Hi goose, QuoteAnd as long as you keep voting for public sector unions, understand that you will never fix the police force. IMO to get control of any police dep't. you have to de-certify their union. I spent 30 yrs with the federal gov't. and they do not recognize any union ( that I know of ). Anyone remember what happened to the air traffic controllers when the union told them to go on strike? One of the few good things that I think Reagan did. Just my thoughts . . . JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,064 #13 November 26, 2011 Hi Kennedy, Quote(B) they create inequity by allowing one party to record and not the other This was the very basis for the argument in the article; only one party could legally tape/record and that makes it unfair. JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #14 November 26, 2011 QuoteHi Kennedy, Quote(B) they create inequity by allowing one party to record and not the other This was the very basis for the argument in the article; only one party could legally tape/record and that makes it unfair. JerryBaumchen I asked a few retired PD Friends about the law and its variants. Most "think" it is to protect the Officers from current or future undercover work and from reprisals by organized crime types. A few even think that it would have protected the Officers from harassement activities like "DOX" that OWS and "Anonymous" employ. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #15 November 26, 2011 QuoteQuoteHi Kennedy, Quote(B) they create inequity by allowing one party to record and not the other This was the very basis for the argument in the article; only one party could legally tape/record and that makes it unfair. JerryBaumchen I asked a few retired PD Friends about the law and its variants. Most "think" it is to protect the Officers from current or future undercover work and from reprisals by organized crime types. A few even think that it would have protected the Officers from harassement activities like "DOX" that OWS and "Anonymous" employ. Matt Yeah, that's become the standard talking point. It's bullshit, of course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #16 November 26, 2011 It may have had validity back when some of the laws got passed, not so much now. The actions of Anonymous and OWS's DOX team, I would think is harassment tough. Posting the UC Police Officers credit info, home address, all phone numbers, e-mails etc etc. Didn't some kid just go to jail over hacking and posting e-mails recently? MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sacex250 0 #17 November 26, 2011 Another famous caseIt's all been said before, no sense repeating it here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
