Police Chief in DC: "Stop hassling photogs"

[mto'brien]

The Top Cop in DC tells her underlings to knock it off by setting a sane public photography policy:

http://fstoppers.com/dc-camera-recording-policy-finally

Sure, it is only one city, but it is a good start in returning to a respect for our rights as citizens, don't you think?

 

[Paul Luscher]

Well, I'm glad some sanity is finally settling in. Ever since 9/11, too often the police have become overbearing, believing that "National Security" gives them the right to act like the Soviet MVD and step all over our constitutional rights. I'm for one tired of police acting less like public servants and more like our jailers (speaking from personal experience).

 

[jsrockit]

Now, will these underlings actually read this directive and understand it or will it just be another e-mail in their box that they ignore?

 

[mto'brien]

Now, will these underlings actually read this directive and understand it or will it just be another e-mail in their box that they ignore?

Well, she made it public, so they can't deny it as a set policy at least. I suppose printing >this document< and putting it in your pocket while in DC wouldn't be a bad idea, though.

 

[mto'brien]

"I know, and support the right to take photos of me in public, and applaud this police chief's action, but up close, I do not like it. Go figure."

The policy is for photographing / filming cops. You're not a cop are you?

 

[Paul Luscher]

"I know, and support the right to take photos of me in public, but up close, I do not like it. Go figure."


Well, let 'em believe what they like. It's still LEGAL and Constitutional.

Besides, do you really believe that's so in a country where people are snapping away continuously (and at each other)with their camera phones? A country where people want to share every (excruciating) detail of their lives on Facebook, et al? A country where we simply must know EVERY intimate detail of the lives of the celebs-of-the-moment?

 

[mto'brien]

"Of course they can, even to extent of beating a "disagreeable" photographer to within an inch of their life. Which is not to say the officer will not be arrested, or kicked off the force, but they certainly can ignore anything they want while holding a gun on you in the field.

Put a gun in someone's hand they many feel excessively empowered."

Yes, some cops have disregarded laws/rights in just about every imaginable circumstance. Some will continue to do so, no matter what. I get that. That is not the point. The point is that the chief of police in DC has gone on record stating that citizens have a constitutional right to photograph police while they are in public places.

This is now less likely to happen as a result: http://boingboing.net/2011/08/31/man-faces-75-years-for-recording-police.html

 

[furcafe]

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/ne...ce-policy-cameras-should-earn-no-praise/2729/

 

[Ranchu]

There are no consequences for them, if there were/are they just lie. It's meaningless PR, ask a cop.

EDIT: Oh, hah. From furcafes link,

"In reality, as Ars writer Tim Lee later noted in an update to his original story, the MPD was actually forced to issue this order thanks to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. Jerome Vorus sued the city last June, claiming he had been harassed by four MPD officers after taking pictures of a traffic stop in Georgetown. As part of conditions related to a settlement in that case, Lanier agreed to issue the order."

 

[jsrockit]

Oh, hah. From furcafes link,

"In reality, as Ars writer Tim Lee later noted in an update to his original story, the MPD was actually forced to issue this order thanks to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. Jerome Vorus sued the city last June, claiming he had been harassed by four MPD officers after taking pictures of a traffic stop in Georgetown. As part of conditions related to a settlement in that case, Lanier agreed to issue the order."

Figures.... 😡