As stories have surfaced detailing arrests based solely on the recording of law enforcement, there has been some concern over whether or not it is legal to videotape police.
Though a number of states (FL, IL, MA, MD, NH) have used wiretapping and eavesdropping statutes to answer this question in the negative, last week's decision by the First Circuit in Glik v. Cunniffe came to a different conclusion.
Honing in on a group of cases throughout the varying circuits, the court found that there is a "constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public."
SS109 wrote: Bravo! While I usually support law enforcement, I think everybody usually acts better knowing they are watched.
I also support the police, I just do not support a police state. The idea that the police have a right to privacy in the performance of their duties is anathema to a free society.
"All over America, police have been arresting people for taking video or making sound recordings of them, even though such arrests are pretty clearly illegal. Usually, the charges are dropped once the case becomes public, and usually that’s the end of it.
But sometimes things go farther, and in two recent cases, they’ve gone far enough to bite back at the police and prosecutors involved. We need more such biting."
I also support the hard and risky work police officers do. However, I can't think of any other occupation that gives a single individual so much absolute power over another person. There are bad people in every profession, including law enforcement. This is a good ruling.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
