Video or photos in public?

[Hoss]

Hoss,

And then I would submit if it is related to national security, it shouldn't be out in public in the first place.


What America needs is more free speech!!
  - By someone, but can't remember who.

But then what do you do if it's a facility within photo-shot that has to do with national security and you're photographing it outside of a known military border fence.  Say something like Groom Lake (aka Area 51)?  And what if you have a $15,000 zoom lens that can determine the gender of a gnat from 2500 meters (for those not metric savvy, that's about a mile and a half)?

[heironymouspasparagus]

I have worked with some people associated with places like Groom lake.  Trust me, you won't get close enough to get a decent picture, even WITH that camera.  In fact, the guys there have actually extended their reach beyond the borders of the military zone into public land.  Camo-dudes is their nickname.

Here is an interesting place if one is into that conspiracy stuff.  Of particular note, is some of the equipment this guy talks about that is made here locally in little ol' Tulsey-town!  How about that?
(I will leave that as an exercise to the observer to discover which equipment that may be, but will/may confirm or deny if presented comments about it.)

http://www.dreamlandresort.com/

[Ed W]

I'd love to have a helmet camera in one of those rare moments when I've been stopped by the police.  If the LEO complained, I could say, "If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about!"

[heironymouspasparagus]

The Maryland case guy had a helmet cam, the stop was uneventful, and it wasn't until he posted the movie on YouTube that the state had a complaint - however illegitimate.

Hopefully, the ACLU can help him with this travesty.

[patric]

The Maryland case guy had a helmet cam, the stop was uneventful, and it wasn't until he posted the movie on YouTube that the state had a complaint - however illegitimate.
Hopefully, the ACLU can help him with this travesty.

They raided his home and took his computers as well?

"A motorcyclist was showboating and recording himself doing it using a helmet cam. While stopped at a stop light, an off duty police officer stepped out of his unmarked car with his gun drawn. The rider received a citation and posted the whole episode on YouTube. 4 days later MD state police seized his computers and helmet cam and threatened to arrest him because it is illegal to record someone without their consent."

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNcDGqzAB30[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHjjF55M8JQ[/youtube]

Personally, I think that motorcyclist would piss me off in traffic, and justice was served by stopping him and giving him a hefty ticket.

Where that fell apart was how the traffic stop was made, which was indistinguishable from a carjacking.

This is not a case of state security but rather one of the highway patrol's bruised ego.  The guy that deserved the ticket incidentally documented an improper stop, and rather than acknowledge that, the highway patrol brass had a child's tantrum and dug the trooper's hole big enough to fit the whole department.

[patric]

If you can walk up to someone wearing this on their head
and claim you didnt know you might be photographed...

[custosnox]

If you can walk up to someone wearing this on their head
and claim you didnt know you might be photographed...

Apparantly the law has to do with audio recordings.  Wonder how they manage to wire informants in that state.

[nathanm]

Yeah, that guy completely deserved a reckless driving ticket. It still doesn't excuse the behavior of the officer who decided he needed to pull out his gun for a freaking daytime traffic stop. (and hide it from the officer that shortly pulled up behind the two of them)

[custosnox]

Yeah, that guy completely deserved a reckless driving ticket. It still doesn't excuse the behavior of the officer who decided he needed to pull out his gun for a freaking daytime traffic stop. (and hide it from the officer that shortly pulled up behind the two of them)

hell, the guy even admitted he deserved the ticket.  Personally I'm not sure how I would react to some guy cutting me off in a car and jumping out with a gun telling me to get off the bike, given the fact he didn't even announce who he was until after he was up beside the guy, and never showed any kind of identification.  I think I might have pulled some avoidence menuvuers and when the marked car pulled me over say "thank god your here, that guy back there jumped out of his car and pulled a gun on me".

[heironymouspasparagus]

I have watched the video several times and the traffic stop was very professionally done with restraint.  This idiot was doing 135mph!!
Even to the point of the cop getting out and drawing the gun for the few seconds it took to see there was no threat.  No problem with the stop at all.


What I have a big problem with is the MSP response AFTER the posting.  They had nothing to apologize for.  Nothing to be ashamed of (unlike so many of these cop videos!) and yet, they reacted like this?? 

I realize we are in a headlong rush to a police state (can you spell "Patriot Act"??) but we aren't there yet!  Or maybe we are....

[nathanm]

I have watched the video several times and the traffic stop was very professionally done with restraint.

Drawing a weapon during a daytime traffic stop when the driver/rider's hands are clearly visible is not an example of "restraint," unless you're comparing it to actually shooting the rider.

[custosnox]

Drawing a weapon during a daytime traffic stop when the driver/rider's hands are clearly visible is not an example of "restraint," unless you're comparing it to actually shooting the rider.

not to mention the faliure to identify who he was.

[Hoss]

not to mention the faliure to identify who he was.

Now, can you imagine what would have happened if the motorcycle driver had drawn his own and shot the officer, before he identified himself?  The motorcycle driver would have been well within his rights under self-defense.

That's why the officers actions were wrong.  Identify yourself first ALWAYS.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I kinda think that since the rider KNEW he was being followed by cops - he looked around to see them behind him once in the video - and the cop in front yelled out that he was a cop, and the black and white behind him was rolling up with lights and sirens at the same time - there was pretty solid evidence to this clown that he was being stopped by cops.  I believe it would stand up to more than a reasonable doubt argument that he did know they were cops.

At least if he didn't, and pulled a gun thinking these guys were hijackers and they blew him away, it would pretty much be a clear case of evolution in action.  He is already a walking organ donor driving the way he does - no brain up there - just warm body parts awaiting a transplant - so I guess I wouldn't be very sympathetic.  One can only hope he doesn't kill someone else with him when he goes out.

[Hoss]

I kinda think that since the rider KNEW he was being followed by cops - he looked around to see them behind him once in the video - and the cop in front yelled out that he was a cop, and the black and white behind him was rolling up with lights and sirens at the same time - there was pretty solid evidence to this clown that he was being stopped by cops.  I believe it would stand up to more than a reasonable doubt argument that he did know they were cops.

At least if he didn't, and pulled a gun thinking these guys were hijackers and they blew him away, it would pretty much be a clear case of evolution in action.  He is already a walking organ donor driving the way he does - no brain up there - just warm body parts awaiting a transplant - so I guess I wouldn't be very sympathetic.  One can only hope he doesn't kill someone else with him when he goes out.

But my point is it was on tape having the officer NOT identifying himself first after getting out of an unmarked vehicle.  If you're getting out of a black/white in full uniform, that's a given.