Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Citizens Spy On Big Brother 719

An anonymous reader writes "Citizens of the world are striking back at 24/7 state surveillance by pulling out their cameraphones and filming inept officials, deadly healthcare lapses and thuggish cops. So-called Sous-veillance is seeing more and more people posting damning footage of official misdemenours to sites such as YouTube to shame them into action." I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Citizens Spy On Big Brother

Comments Filter:
  • You wonder? (Score:5, Informative)

    by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:30AM (#24417503) Homepage Journal
    "I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over."

    Oh..that's mysteriously gets dropped and smashed on the ground (probably while you are being slammed against the car), and you get charged first with obstructing justice...with more charges to follow later as they have time to think them up.

    • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:33AM (#24417601)

      Yeah, like the guy who refused to give the cops the video footage of them coming to his door when he informed them that he had a camera and a tape and they arrested him and beat him? I mean, theres not much left to wonder about, welcome to Amerika.

      Posted anonymous for obvious reasons.

      • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Duncan Blackthorne ( 1095849 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:42AM (#24417793)
        I see no reason why this person, AC or not, was modded down to -1 for his statements. It would have been nice if he'd've posted links citing actual examples, but he's not off-topic or off-base either.
        • by spun ( 1352 ) <loverevolutionar ... m ['oo.' in gap]> on Thursday July 31, 2008 @01:34PM (#24419975) Journal

          There are a lot of authoritarian fuckwits who can't stand it when people stand up to authority. They are small minded bullies who worship power, think humans are basically evil, and must be beaten into civility. The idea of these 'evil' humans refusing to take their beatings frightens them, because a human who hasn't been beaten into submission is a free and therefore dangerous human.

          I'm being a little harsh here, as authoritarianism is actually a mental virus. If you've ever mentally beaten yourself up for a perceived failure instead of simply noting it and refocusing on how you want to be, you are very likely infected with it yourself. People infected with the virus do not need to coordinate their actions consciously, yet work together to spread the virus through abuse and fear mongering.

          Always try to be impeccable with your words and thoughts and do not use them to harm yourself or others. Use reward, not punishment, to motivate yourself and others to behave in positive ways. Punishment will never create new and positive behaviors.

          • by rpbird ( 304450 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @02:29PM (#24420979) Homepage Journal

            You see this in online gaming. Playing ctf in Star Wars Republic Commando, or coop in Synergy, I can't count how many times I've seen guys bellowing complaints on voice or on the chat line. "I've got a terrible team!" Oh, they're really gonna get better now. A few of my friends and I don't do that. When a person on our team gets the flag or clears the opfor off the flag carrier's tail, or scores, it's "GJ!" "Way to go!" Everyone enjoys the game a little more when ppl behave that way. Plus, we win more games. Guys even switch teams. Things are a little simpler in Synergy. We votekick the complainers off the server.

          • by smellsofbikes ( 890263 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @03:03PM (#24421533) Journal

            Authoritarianism is just what happens when some people think that they know what's best for everyone. Censorship and spying are parts of this.

            But for many people, it's less about the authority than about the 'standing up' part. People who lack self-confidence aren't going to stand up to a pushy government, or anyone, because they're scared. As a result, when someone *does* stand up, it shames those who didn't, and they resent that person. This has been called crab mentality []: the idea that a crab trying to escape from a bucket is pulled back by its fellow crabs.

            At its base, authoritarianism is strongly related to insecurity. My point is just that many people encourage this (actively or passively) through fear and cognitive dissonance, not malice.

      • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Informative)

        by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:51AM (#24417979) Homepage Journal
        "Yeah, like the guy who refused to give the cops the video footage of them coming to his door when he informed them that he had a camera and a tape and they arrested him and beat him?"

        Yeah, I'm not sure why this was modded troll either...I mean, this story was published on Slashdot awhile back. Actually, there are two of them on that subject here at a home [] and here filming a car pullover [].

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Phanatic1a ( 413374 )

          I don't know what happened to the guy in the first story, but the charges in that Carlisle case were dropped []:

          'When police are audio- and video-recording traffic stops with notice to the subjects, similar actions by citizens, even if done in secret, will not result in criminal charges,' Freed said yesterday. 'The law itself might need to be revised.'"

      • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Firehed ( 942385 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:28PM (#24418709) Homepage

        If you feel the need to post anonymously, our terrorist government has already won.

    • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Phiros ( 991892 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:34AM (#24417619)
      That's why you use two cameras. One to point out that you are recording, and a hidden one to record the ensuing hijinks.
      • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by noidentity ( 188756 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:08PM (#24418303)

        That's why you use two cameras. One to point out that you are recording, and a hidden one to record the ensuing hijinks.

        Unfortunately, you have only one body, and insurance won't help you if you're dead.

        • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Informative)

          by xappax ( 876447 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @02:14PM (#24420707)
          Video recording cops isn't that dangerous. Me and people I know have done it as a policy, in a fairly confrontational way for years now.

          Sure, the cops get pissed off, sure they threaten to arrest you, but if you stand your ground, don't interfere with their "crime scene", and make it clear you know your rights, they don't do anything serious.

          You can learn about smart/effective ways to record the police here: []

          There's a lot of advice, but the main thing is to make sure you have someone else with you, preferably with another camera, to hang back and record any interaction the cops have with you, the copwatcher.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by linzeal ( 197905 )
        Thats why you send a live feed from your car, person or the like to a secure Internet backup and use that in court. Those of you with children already know that you are growing your home video collection by massive amounts each vacation, birthday or random filming of you and your partner skinny dipping in the neighbors pool getting backed up for posterity. My best friend in the world just had kids and he is taking about 100 gig a month or so in HDTV. He is at 40 terrabytes video storage for his ripped DV
      • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Phat_Tony ( 661117 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @01:11PM (#24419587)
        You certainly need a hidden camera. If you inform them of your camera (or it's obvious), then as others have stated, it'll probably get smashed and any recordings destroyed. And if they were already doing something wrong, if they destroy your camera, then they're probably about to do something a lot more wrong to you.

        On my street (not a particularly good part of town; old, blue-collar, and multi-ethnic, though not particularly run-down or dangerous) the cops came to arrest someone, and when they got him out of his house, he was making some noises about resisting arrest and being somewhat disorderly. If I were a cop, I'd certainly have been prepared for trouble, the way he was acting. But one of the cops came over and told everyone who had gathered on the opposing sidewalk, about 30 feet away, that we had to disperse and couldn't watch. My landlord argued with him, asking why he couldn't stand on a public sidewalk near his house, well away from what was going on, and watch what happened in his neighborhood. The cop told him that if he didn't walk out of viewing distance, they'd arrest him. The cop said it was for the privacy of the person being arrested. Yea, right. The cops didn't want any witnesses around before they went to town on this guy. First person experience.

        Even when the cops have been required by law to keep everything on camera and keep the footage, they'll still go turn the camera off illegally and beat the #*$ out of someone []. Who's going to arrest them, they're a cop? More info on that one here [] At least the cop was fired, eventually, but not prosecuted or anything. He's appealing the decision.

        Although sometimes, they don't destroy the evidence. [] And other times, people do [] get away with videos of cops being idiots [] unmolested.

        And this guy [] has a whole series of videos he posts online catching cops doing illegal things. I wonder how long until he get his camera confiscated and nasty things happen to him off film? Also, see this. []
    • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Profane MuthaFucka ( 574406 ) <> on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:36AM (#24417679) Homepage Journal

      ... and the still intact memory chip has a nice recording of the officer's boot, which turns out to be very helpful in securing a conviction for assault and his dismissal from the department, and from the society that he was supposed to protect.

    • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Informative)

      by betterunixthanunix ( 980855 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:37AM (#24417683)
      Pretty much. Cops have a lot of leeway when it comes to knocking over your camera in the course of an arrest or ticket, especially at an event where there is already some misbehavior from the police. Try filming a protest where the cops start throwing tear gas; unless you have your camera affixed to a telescope and you're on a hill far away, chances are that a cop is gonna "firmly grasp" the arm holding the camera, and the camera will end up on the ground waiting to be destroyed. We had a protest a few months ago at my university that ended up like that; only one fragmented video escaped.
      • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:49AM (#24417929) Journal

        chances are that a cop is gonna "firmly grasp" the arm holding the camera, and the camera will end up on the ground waiting to be destroyed. We had a protest a few months ago at my university that ended up like that; only one fragmented video escaped.

        If it's a normal digital camera, try using a Micro-SD card in an adapter.
        The chances are higher that the card will survive even if the camera is destroyed.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:40AM (#24417753)
      Please half of you guys never get out of the house let alone get pulled over!
    • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by raj2112 ( 219727 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:41AM (#24417777)

      You get arrested under shiny new terrorism laws, eg: []

    • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Informative)

      by mi ( 197448 ) <> on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:56AM (#24418067) Homepage Journal

      Oh..that's mysteriously gets dropped and smashed on the ground

      No. What's more likely is that the officer starts acting with utmost professionalism, smiles, and fines you for various things, with which he would not have bothered otherwise. He is also going to take his sweet time issuing the ticket(s) — especially if you commit another folly by indicating, that you are in a hurry. (12 years ago I did that, and the pig took 40 minutes to issue the citation.)

      If it is illegal in your locale to record people without warning, put a notice about recording on your window — he is not going to notice it, but you'll be covered — do not bring it to his attention. In general, do not argue with the policemen. All arguments should happen in court.

    • Re:You wonder? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:00PM (#24418161)

      Dallas SWAT has been raiding poker games. Drew Carey covered this at [].

      When one of the defendants subpoenaed copies of the video tapes made
      of the raid -- the reality show "Dallas SWAT" had filmed it -- he was
      told that no copies of the tapes existed. See []

      In Oceania, members of the Inner Party were allowed to turn off their

    • Re:You wonder? (Score:4, Informative)

      by WillAdams ( 45638 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:02PM (#24418201) Homepage

      In a local case, the person who made the tape was accused of illegal wiretapping. Previous discussion of it here: []

      Charges were eventually dropped though.


    • You don't. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by an.echte.trilingue ( 1063180 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:47PM (#24419075) Homepage
      You don't tell the police that they are being filmed. You just quietly film them, and when they do something inappropriate you give the tape to the local TV station and sue the department into the ground. This strategy has three advantages. First, it will be a hell of a lot harder for the DA to charge you with wiretapping when you are a local celebrity. Second, you might get something for your trouble.

      Finally, and most importantly, it will force the police to behave as if they were being filmed all of the time because they just won't know who that one tinfoil hat dude is until they are being fired for beating him.
  • Good! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by truthsearch ( 249536 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:30AM (#24417515) Homepage Journal

    This is great. I just hope people don't stop once it all is made illegal.

  • Good Luck (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:30AM (#24417523)

    You might be considered a terrorist if you record the police. Wouldn't be the first time.

  • Nothing. (Score:3, Funny)

    by a whoabot ( 706122 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:30AM (#24417527)

    Oh, I'm sure they won't care, when they searched for expectation of privacy on Google, they found out there was none [].

  • by KlaymenDK ( 713149 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:31AM (#24417549) Journal

    I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over.
    I don't know where you're at, but over here it's illegal to use your (camera)phone while driving. If you're fiddling with your phone when the man steps up to your window, I'm sure he'll give you a bonus for it.

    • by postbigbang ( 761081 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:51AM (#24417985)

      Not in my jurisdiction. Too bad about yours.

      We barely have seatbelt laws here. Phone? Fine. Camera? Fine. Shotgun rack? Fine. Bought the shotgun at a gunshow with no ID? Fine.

      Do a video at your own risk. However, only very rarely does a police officer respond negatively to an individual that is polite when pulled over, is sober, and doesn't provoke the officer. It's a self-fulfilling action to believe that police officers will react negatively; they're human and IMHO aren't going to react negatively without provocation. Then tell it to the judge. Or suffer the consequences of provocation.

      When I was young I called cops pigs. Then I came to understand what cops have to put up with. Some are still way too brutal. But most are just trying to keep the peace. Traffic cops I have problems with, but I keep quiet and polite during a trafffic stop, then beat my tickets anyway and don't drive like a raving Type-A idiot. Others have different results.

      • by QuantumRiff ( 120817 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:07PM (#24418291)

        My uncle was a sheriff for many years, (just retired) and I asked him what is was like dealing every day with people giving you shit, hating you, spitting at you, calling you names, etc..

        He told me it didn't bother him much, it was just a part of the job, and that assholes will always be assholes. The part of his job he hated was the psuedo "victims". IE, you're called to a house for the 3rd time that month for domestic violence, and the woman wants YOU to stop the man from beating her, cause she's a victim. Of course, she would always go back to the same guy, and a few weeks later, the whole cycle would repeat. He really hated those situations, or any domestic violence, because you have so much emotional crap you have to deal with as a cop on the call.

  • by ChrisCampbell47 ( 181542 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:31AM (#24417553)

    "The courts might not work anymore, but as long as everyone is videotaping everyone else, justice will be served."

    Marge Simpson

  • by SatanicPuppy ( 611928 ) * <> on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:32AM (#24417567) Journal

    Who watches the watchers? The point becomes moot when everyone is a watcher.

  • Take care to (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FeatureBug ( 158235 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:32AM (#24417571)
    Use a hidden camera - a really small "bullet" camera. If nobody can see the camera, nobody can talk about it, nobody can demand you stop using it, nobody can demand destruction of the footage. Or, use a wireless bullet camera to broadcast the footage to a separate location where the recorder is based. Then, if the camera is found, the recording may not be.
  • Depends on the cop (Score:5, Informative)

    by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:33AM (#24417585) Journal

    I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over.

    Almost all of them will ask you to stop recording.
    Some will physically block the camera.
    Very few will try to take your camera from you.

    Police (and security guards) will do this with varying levels of anger and threats.

    The only two things that matter are:
    1. You are on public property
    2. You are not filming/photographing something you legally cannot (like a port or inside a mall)

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by beezhive ( 827703 )
      I'm fairly sure that you're legally allowed to photograph/film inside a mall, but the mall owners/security are legally allowed to make you stop/kick you out for doing so.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Or you're stopped by police in Pennsylvania, where it is illegal to record them. Although as I recall, this law was enforced in a traffic stop in Mechanicsburg, PA and it was being appealed to test the law. Not sure if the state dropped the recording charge to avoid the appeal. Which is a brilliant strategy; they get you to stop the recording at a legal stop because the law says so, when you try to get rid of that law, the drop the charges, you lose standing, and the law remains. I'm sure some lawyer ca

    • by Tim C ( 15259 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:46AM (#24417867)

      Exactly. Here in the UK there are a couple of reality TV shows that follow a team of police around, filming them as they go about their duties.

      From time to time someone they're dealing with will demand that the cameraman stop filming, and the response is always along the following lines:

      "He can film what he likes, we're in public"

      Well, then that surely applies both ways, no?

    • by Speare ( 84249 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:49AM (#24417923) Homepage Journal

      2. You are not filming/photographing something you legally cannot (like a port or inside a mall)

      In the USA at least, there's no legal framework that bans filming inside shopping malls. There is simply a legal framework that allows the private owners of the mall to make rules dictating whatever behavior they like or not, and if as a guest you do not comply with these rules, you must leave. If you do not leave when requested by any private owner, whether following their rules or not, you can be reported and arrested/ticketed by police for trespassing. In any case, the private owners cannot (1) take your equipment, (2) delete your pictures, (3) force you to do anything but leave the premises.

      Personally, I think that since most shopping malls get huge tax incentives and other public funding, they should be held to certain accessibility and public use laws. However, that's rarely the case, and the private owners can enjoy this micro-fief in which to control their "guests" at their whim. If you don't like it, shop elsewhere.

      And lastly, if a police officer ever asks you to delete a photograph, follow the ACLU bust guidelines. "Am I under arrest, or am I free to go?" Since a photograph is copyright-protected simply through the act of creation, destruction of a photograph is (1) destruction of your personal property, and (2) destruction of legal evidence. The cop needs to be reminded as gently as possible that there are two options and that you know this: they arrest you (securing all evidence safely) or wave goodbye.

    • by Angst Badger ( 8636 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:58AM (#24418103)

      "Depends on the cop" is right. Considering the disparity in power, you should think very carefully about the stakes before you make a cop aware that you are recording his or her actions. At the very least, it will piss them off, and pissed off cops are nothing you want to deal with. If you're just being pulled over for speeding (and you're white and sober), just being pleasant and respectful (read: kissing a little ass) will go a long way.

      Mind you, I think it's a good thing for citizens to videotape police actions. But cops are dangerous and angry cops are even more dangerous, and you shouldn't play with that kind of danger. Bear in mind the number of occasions that cops have been videotaped beating the holy living hell out of somebody and then gotten off scot-free. If you're going to take on the system, don't do it casually. By all means, if you see injustice, take it on -- but do so with forethought and a careful consideration of the risks you expose yourself to. It's not a game, and the consequences can be pretty serious. Choose your battles wisely.

      The short version: If your main motivation is to be an annoying wiseass, start a blog instead.

    • by LWATCDR ( 28044 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:00PM (#24418159) Homepage Journal

      It will also depend on the state. In some states recording video is totally legal but audio requires permission.
      I have a brother in law that is a police officer and a good friend that is one also.
      The amount of crap they have to take is amazing.
      My brother in law as called out on a call because of "Pinching". I don't mean some stealing but two women at a Christmas sale started to pinch one another!
      He also had to deal with a man that was trying to commit suicide by cop. He tired to kill himself and my brother in law stopped him. The guy then sued the police because he suffered emotional trauma when my BIL tackled him and took away the gun.
      Sorry folks but the vast majority of the police offers I have had dealing with have been just normal people doing a crappy job the best that they can.
      My brother in law is in trouble with the town officials because he refused to discipline an officer under him.
      What did the cop do? Well during an armed robbery being committed by a minor the cop told the kid with the gun too "Drop the f'ing gun".
      The officer was going to be suspended for using foul language in front of a minor. A minor with a gun holding up a store mind you but still a minor.

  • by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:33AM (#24417605)

    Everyone the authorities swore did something wrong.

    And it gets worse- humans actively remap their memories to make them feel better. 10 years after these incidents, the police probably really DO believe their initial lies.

    I've seen it in others and I've seen it in myself and I'm more careful of it than most (or at least I remember that I am! ;) )

    Police should be required to video tape everything they do and lack of video evidence should be a strong case against them.

    People (not just police) have been shown to lie a lot more than we used to think. We need to change our systems of justice to fit reality.

  • by jgaynor ( 205453 ) <> on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:34AM (#24417617) Homepage

    "I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over."

    Beats me, but apparently it's more fun (and career-lethal) to film him without notification [].

  • by sckeener ( 137243 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:37AM (#24417695)

    In some states it is illegal to film a government official.

    Not that it will help them once it gets on youtube, but first you have to get it on youtube and not confiscated by the police.

    What would you do if you filmed a cop beating someone and they asked for the video camera? If you answered anything but give the camera over, expect to be in pain and most likely jail.

  • Shooting back (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Eunuchswear ( 210685 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:38AM (#24417725) Journal

    Wonder why they didn't mention Shooting Back []?

  • Don't wonder (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MikeRT ( 947531 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:43AM (#24417817)
    Just look it up...

    I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over.

    Chances are it ends up like one of dozens upon dozens of cases out there, well publicized in the media, of cops abusing the hell out of people who record their actions. Doubly likely now since you're their target (unlike in most cases with camera-related incidents), and are acting in a f#$% you way toward them.

    I've thought about buying one of these AIPTek camcorders []. The things aren't half bad and would be ridiculously easy to carry around in public in case you ever had a good video opportunity.

  • by gotw ( 239699 ) <> on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:46AM (#24417863) Homepage

    I was catching a bus from Walthamstow Bus Station, part of a busy transport interchange in East London. On my way I saw the police kicking the living crap out of someone. I went up to start filming, and was told by a "Community Support" [] officer not to take pictures. I asked what law I was violating, and was met with the witty answer of "the law that says you can't film that over there". Right then. Seeing no point in continuing this conversation while the man continued to be smashed around by the Metropolitan Police, I went to the other side of a toughened glass barrier, stood on some chairs and started filming from there. It was at this point that I was grabbed by two officers and stopped and searched under the terrorism act, 2004. Unfortunately, as I shut the shutter on my K800i, all footage was lost :(

    They're actually allowed to arbitrarily search anyone in London under this law, arbitrarily, as it's designated a zone of terrorist threat or somesuch. The mistake the officer searching me (whos full details I do have) claimed that I had been filming covertly. Standing on a chair holding a camera above my head, I'd not felt this to be covert, so I submitted the "stop and account" slip to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, who handed the investigation back to the local force, who stalled the investigation for long enough that the CCTV had been erased!

    The rest is history, I'm afraid. There are wranglings going on with my MP regarding this, but should I be in such a position again I'll be damn sure to make certain that the footage is saved.

  • citizens with cameras is an idea that destroys the outdated orwellian dystopian fantasy so many posit as their philosophical starting point when evaluating trends in the modern world

    "big brother" as a viable concept is dead. "1984" is pure fiction. it will never come to pass. the citizens merely use the government's own tactics and technology against them

    long live "little brother" []

  • by thomas.galvin ( 551471 ) <slashdot AT thomas-galvin DOT com> on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:55AM (#24418057) Homepage

    The smaller cameras get, the more common this is going to become.

    Security guards and such get all bent out of shape if you try to take a picture inside of a mall. Cops get all bent out of shape when you record them being cops. But when the camera is so small that it can't be easily spotted...

  • by Kamineko ( 851857 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @11:59AM (#24418123)

    Forget Sousveillance, you want Seussveillance. You have to wear a big long stripey jumper and speak in rhymes.

    'Excuse me officer, would you mind,
    would I be fined, maligned or confined,
    if I were to tape your daily grind?

    Sir, I'd like to believe,
    that you and me we've
    both come to perceive
    That your job affords you - the responsibility to be true!

    (I couldn't conceive of a way you'd
    deceive me my friend, aggreive or bereave!)

    A hasty repreive!; My hypothetical weave
    does you an injustice. (And speaking of justice)

    Enough of confession: let's return to my question.
    I got impression of obsession with oppression.
    Is this a true fact, or idle digression?
    Would recording your good self be found a transgression?

    Am I a free man?

    or need I grab my tape, my cape and escape?'

  • Recording others (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Iphtashu Fitz ( 263795 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:22PM (#24418575)

    I've often wondered about this... Whenever I call my credit card company, utility companies, etc. the first thing you hear on the call is "this call may be recorded...." Does that give me implicit permission to record the call without notifying whoever I end up talking to? It doesn't say "this call may be recorded by Acme corporation for training purposes but you do not have permission to record this call".

    I wonder if such an assumption can be made when it comes to getting pulled over by the police, etc. It seems to be common knowledge that a lot of police cars are now equipped with cameras, so is there any reason I, as a private citizen, couldn't hook up a similar video camera to my dashboard that records video & sound just like a cop car, and not even bother to tell an officer who happens to pull me over.

  • Traffic Stops (Score:3, Informative)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:24PM (#24418627) Homepage Journal

    This is why they have cameras in most cars now, in a sealed box that the patrol officer cant get into.

    Hard to fake the evidence when you get get to it. It serves to watch *both* parities for when they end up in court.

  • by nexuspal ( 720736 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:37PM (#24418883)
    I heard something going on behind my apartment complex. I looked out the window, and a cop was beating a guy in the face with a collapsable baton. He continued doing this for a couple minutes, then walked the guy back to the car, face bloody and crying, and drove off like it was nothing. Even at that time I was thinking to grab our family video camera but didn't do it. Knowing what I know now, face strikes are never to be used as they can most often be fatal, he didn't call for any backup, so the man wasn't resisting... Just messed up all around, even if the guy "had it coming". Other than that, I've never had any problems with police and they have been angels (rolls eyes).
  • by jmoo ( 67040 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:37PM (#24418893)

    This is beginning to remind me of the story "The Light of Other Days". In it the technology is discovered to allow anyone to view someone else, no mater where they are (Wormhole CAM). The concept of privacy is completely destroyed.


  • by astro ( 20275 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:42PM (#24418977) Homepage

    ...the cops take an extreme dislike to perfectly legal citizens who employ any sort of cop-watch, especially so with cameras. The link below is a video beginning with a citizen filming the abject harassment of two citizens on the street in an upscale part of downtown, ending with the cops confiscating his camera.

  • by not_hylas( ) ( 703994 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @12:51PM (#24419137) Homepage Journal

    Q. I wonder what happens if you inform a cop that you are recording him when he pulls you over.

    A. The case of Brett Darrow, Missouri: [] [] []

    Any other questions?, I got a whole folder dedicated to "official" ABUSE.

    Related: []

  • by scorp1us ( 235526 ) on Thursday July 31, 2008 @01:03PM (#24419405) Journal

    The Eye-Fi products [] will help anyone in a situation where pictures are attempted to be deleted from a camera. By buffering images then transmitting pictures to the internet via WiFi, you can effectively remove the ability for people to confiscate film or memory cards.

    All you need is a near-by wifi station... Which isn't too hard, but it would be awesome if WiFi devices (phones) had client that could receive as well. You and your friend could embed in a crowd and if the photographer is discovered, your friend's cell phone could be the backup. With the iphone, and other phones you could then automatically email images to others in near-real time...

    The eyefi also somewhat supports GPS tagging too, which may help with authenticity.

    (I am not affiliated with Eye-fi in anyway, other than having one on my wish-list)

"The number of Unix installations has grown to 10, with more expected." -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June, 1972