ACLU Guide For Snapping Pictures In Public

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about snapping pictures in public, especially of police officers while they are eating doughnuts and beating people up....er...working. Police officers will often tell people that it is not lawful to take pictures of police officers when they do their jobs, and will even confiscate cameras of bystanders and arrest journalists and reporters when cameras have clearly caught police officers with their pants down. But the truth is, taking pictures in public is perfectly legal. On private property, one must have permission of the property owner in order to take pictures, but in public, one may snap pictures of anything one can see. Police may not confiscate anyone's camera or SD card without a warrant, and police officers have even been brought up on charges of tampering with evidence for doing just that. The American Civil Liberties Union has published a guide for photographers for reference.

Pictures of police in action, taken by citizens, provide an independent record of the photographed or recorded incident. Such evidence reduces the prevalence of faulty memories and lies, and is important for transparency of those who represent authority. No one should have to worry about police confiscating photographs or cameras, and no police officer should do anything in the line of duty that he or she would not want photographed.

Rest In Peace, Freddie Gray

There is a reason why many police officers do not like to be photographed and recorded while on duty. It has a lot to do with evidence, proof, irrefutable statements to community, and with accountability. Police officers often are not fond of answering to the communities they serve when they abuse others, and in some communities, racism and bigotry replace the law. Freddy Gray's spine was crushed during an arrest in Baltimore, Maryland. He later died, and police in Baltimore have admitted that there wasn't actually a reason to arrest Mr. Gray. There are statements from five of his assailants, but one of them refused to cooperate, citing his fifth amendment rights against self incrimination. Fortunately, one of Mr. Gray's friends turned on his cell phone camera and began filming.

And, for your reading pleasure, here's a list of the names of the officers who were involved in Gray's untimely death. Rest in peace, Freddie Gray.

Police In Motion Pictures

Something law enforcement should remember is that police officers cannot assault and batter anyone they choose without abandon anymore, thanks to the advent of the digital camera and the cell phone. Even if one eyewitness with such a device is pounded to the ground, law enforcement cannot possibly interfere with every filming witness or surveillance camera. Google even snaps random pictures. Finding each and every possible camera isn't even possible, anymore. No matter how loudly police officers threaten those with recording devices, it remains perfectly legal, under the Constitution, to photograph and record them, as long as said police officers are in public. The ACLU has graciously provided us with a guide for gathering such photographic records here. For further enjoyment, there is a picture below of former police officer James Kinsella, at his bond hearing in Omaha, Nebraska, after being charged with felony tampering with evidence because he snatched cameras and SD cards from men who attempted to record evidence of their local police at work. It isn't legal at all for a cop to snatch a cell phone, camera, or an SD card from a citizen.

ACLU Addresses The Rights Of Photography

It's become abundantly clear, lately, that police officers in America do not like added scrutiny provided by amateur and professional photographers and cell phone users. Unfortunately, this finding also coincides with a massive revelation that police officers often think that they are above the law, and can inflict violence whenever their little hearts desire, even to the point of murder. Many of them do not even understand the United States Constitution, much less respect it.

The good news is that those of us who take pictures of police officers and grab cell phone video of our tax dollars being spent are, according to the law, within our constitutional rights. No police officer has a right to shut down a news team or a private citizen taking pictures. The only loophole, in certain states, has to do with wiretapping laws: recorded audio cannot be deliberately captured and shared in all locales. But then, an officer carrying out his duties in public is not a private conversation, so the wiretapping laws do not apply in those instances.

The American Civil Liberties Union has found itself defending cases involving private citizens with cell phone and corporations such as television stations because of this issue with police officers and photography. As recently as the second week of August, police in Ferguson, Missouri did not want their tear gas activities photographed and recorded by journalists, so they handcuffed and arrested a couple from the Huffington Post and the Washington Post. As it happens, the only laws broken were broken by police.

Why is accountability so difficult for law enforcement to accept?

Happy Hate Crimes Holidays

Kristina Vindiola was working as a bell ringer for Salvation Army outside of Walmart in Phoenix, Arizona. Suddenly, a Christian woman stopped beside the kettle. Thinking she was going to donate money, Kristina wished her "Happy Holidays." Instead of donating money, the Christian woman asked her if she believed in God, and informed her that she is supposed to say "Merry Christmas!"  Then, the Christian woman slugged her!

The police were called to the Walmart store, where they took a report on the incident; but not only were they unable to locate the suspect by the time they arrived, they told Kristina that there wasn't enough evidence to charge the Christian woman with a crime!

Ahem! Don't Walmart department stores have surveillance cameras aimed at key areas, inside and outside stores? Don't they use cameras to monitor the perimeters? Aren't doorways, where Salvation Army kettles are stationed during the holiday season, important places for security cameras? After all, if evidence was needed in court to nail a shoplifter, Walmart would just send the security footage to the police. Why shouldn't they do the same when a Christian assaults and batters someone who says "Happy Holidays"? Phoenix law enforcement should have all the evidence they need in order to charge that Christian woman with a hate crime, in addition to assault and battery. It's good to know that some retailers only use their cameras to identify shoplifters and are not interested in the personal safety of those visiting their stores.