I'm not a civil rights activist nor am I a First Amendment auditor, but I am deeply concerned for our civil liberties, constitutional rights and human rights.
I used to watch a lot of these auditors on YouTube, but now I only follow one. I find many of them annoying and childish, but Jeff Gray from Florida is a Jedi Master. He's one of the oldest and best auditors out there - if not THE best.
Are any of you an auditor or experienced seeing one?
No. However, I understand asking such a question on GSC is inherently political, making this thread political.
The news story to which you linked is from June 2018.
I am aware that Arizona's legislature passed a bill last month that outlaws filming police from any closer than 8 feet. The governor signed the legislation and it goes into effect in September.
My guess is that other states likely have enacted similar legislation. It will probably be litigated.
Through FB videos I have been watching men and women film from public sidewalks and public buildings. The laws allows anyone to film whatever they can see in the public. However, people are concerned if they are filmed by a person with a camera, even though there are thousands of camera’s recording, which are setup by the government and private business. Many people will protest even though filming is completely legal. Even the police, who should know the law, often arrest them.
Here is an example of an “Audit”.
Are any of you an auditor or experienced seeing one?
Yes-- I've done a few videos where the authorities have wanted me to stop. In one video that made the local and state news, I went to a state senator's public open forum where she demanded I stop filming. I didn't, so she called the sheriff on me. The sheriff told me that I was at the brink of getting arrested so I turned off the video. Ironically, that video made the news and it looked bad for the senator, but had she simply let me peacefully film her forum it would have been no big deal. But I really like Amagansett Press, am subscribed on YouTube and he does a very good job of exercising his rights. As he always says "rights are like muscles; if you don't exercise them, they tend to go away."
Yes-- I've done a few videos where the authorities have wanted me to stop. In one video that made the local and state news, I went to a state senator's public open forum where she demanded I stop filming. I didn't, so she called the sheriff on me. The sheriff told me that I was at the brink of getting arrested so I turned off the video. Ironically, that video made the news and it looked bad for the senator, but had she simply let me peacefully film her forum it would have been no big deal. But I really like Amagansett Press, am subscribed on YouTube and he does a very good job of exercising his rights. As he always says "rights are like muscles; if you don't exercise them, they tend to go away."
I wonder what the senator was hiding? What/where was the senator's public open forum? Were there signs in view expressly prohibiting cameras?
I know Amagansett Press. Though, he is good at what his does, and I agree with his warning about exercising rights, I find him a little too abrasive for my taste these days.
No. However, I understand asking such a question on GSC is inherently political, making this thread political.
The news story to which you linked is from June 2018.
I am aware that Arizona's legislature passed a bill last month that outlaws filming police from any closer than 8 feet. The governor signed the legislation and it goes into effect in September.
My guess is that other states likely have enacted similar legislation. It will probably be litigated.
Is it a legal or a political issue? I suppose this line can get blurry.
The Arizona governor's new law will likely be contested by news media groups on 9th Circuit precedent and Constitutional grounds - Freedom of the Press.
I don't think other states have enacted similar legislation that hasn't already been overturned by an appellate court. Most circuits have established case law protecting the filming of public officials and police operating in their public capacity - a right safeguarded by the First Amendment. The case for the Fifth Circuit where I live is Turner v. Driver.
I wonder what the senator was hiding? What/where was the senator's public open forum? Were there signs in view expressly prohibiting cameras?
I know Amagansett Press. Though, he is good at what his does, and I agree with his warning about exercising rights, I find him a little too abrasive for my taste these days.
No signs prohibiting cameras, and they couldn't do that legally because it was a public forum. I believe she didn't want her answers to tough questions up on the internet for all to see. There were friends who encouraged me to sue, but at that time in my life (December 2015) I wanted to stay out of the news if possible. This whole incident was very interesting to me! Oh and, my "video name" is Mert Melfa. You guys know my real name!
No signs prohibiting cameras, and they couldn't do that legally because it was a public forum. I believe she didn't want her answers to tough questions up on the internet for all to see. There were friends who encouraged me to sue, but at that time in my life (December 2015) I wanted to stay out of the news if possible. This whole incident was very interesting to me! Oh and, my "video name" is Mert Melfa. You guys know my real name!
Great job, Oldies! So interesting and funny. That Senator was shady, and you were well within your rights.
I found what I think was a related story in the Poughkeepsie Journal and took note of what the senator said - “She said in the statement that she strongly believes “in a government that is open and transparent. However, confronted with the scenario we faced last evening, I did not want to put my constituents in the position to be bullied or intimidated.”
I’m of the opinion this first amendment auditor thing is a great idea for leveling the playing field. I reinterpret the senator’s wish to eliminate bullying and intimidation of constituents as actually tipping her hand - as if to say “as your leaders we really prefer to keep our advantage…no bullying and intimidation going on here. There’s nothing to see…the shows over folks.”
Ultimately, in virtually all cases, a resolution involves an offended party phoning 911. Thus, it is the understanding of the first amendment by the responding officers that determine the outcome. If the police recognize that photographing in public is lawful, everyone goes on their seperate ways. If the police believe otherwise, there are many different outcomes.
Ultimately, it is the courts who settle disputes when the police believe the auditor is breaking the law.
Some years ago, Skyrider wrote something like: To find out who controls you, look to those whom you can’t criticize.
Someone else may have said it originally…. Thomas Paine, Bertrand Russell, Alduous Huxley, George Orwell… But it was a brilliant observation by Sky relating it to the wicked cult of VPW.
Public officials from the local police to the president of the U.S. are not above the law and are accountable. The First Amendment protects those seeking to criticize them and hold them accountable.
Public officials from the local police to the president of the U.S. are not above the law and are accountable. The First Amendment protects those seeking to criticize them and hold them accountable.
In theory, definitely yes. In practice, not always and practically never without massive (including use of police power of government) resistance. This ALSO applies to corporate exercise (often illegal) of power.
In theory, definitely yes. In practice, not always and practically never without massive (including use of police power of government) resistance. This ALSO applies to corporate exercise (often illegal) of power.
Let them resist. Massively. They are free to resist as we are free to criticize. But I get it it’s not easy.
In Russia, China, North Korea and TWI, the powers and principalities do not resist criticism, they swiftly dispatch the criticizer to prison or exile or death.
Recommended Posts
Nathan_Jr
I'm not a civil rights activist nor am I a First Amendment auditor, but I am deeply concerned for our civil liberties, constitutional rights and human rights.
I used to watch a lot of these auditors on YouTube, but now I only follow one. I find many of them annoying and childish, but Jeff Gray from Florida is a Jedi Master. He's one of the oldest and best auditors out there - if not THE best.
His channel is Honor Your Oath Civil Rights Investigations https://youtube.com/user/HONORYOUROATH
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
No. However, I understand asking such a question on GSC is inherently political, making this thread political.
The news story to which you linked is from June 2018.
I am aware that Arizona's legislature passed a bill last month that outlaws filming police from any closer than 8 feet. The governor signed the legislation and it goes into effect in September.
My guess is that other states likely have enacted similar legislation. It will probably be litigated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Yes-- I've done a few videos where the authorities have wanted me to stop. In one video that made the local and state news, I went to a state senator's public open forum where she demanded I stop filming. I didn't, so she called the sheriff on me. The sheriff told me that I was at the brink of getting arrested so I turned off the video. Ironically, that video made the news and it looked bad for the senator, but had she simply let me peacefully film her forum it would have been no big deal. But I really like Amagansett Press, am subscribed on YouTube and he does a very good job of exercising his rights. As he always says "rights are like muscles; if you don't exercise them, they tend to go away."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
I wonder what the senator was hiding? What/where was the senator's public open forum? Were there signs in view expressly prohibiting cameras?
I know Amagansett Press. Though, he is good at what his does, and I agree with his warning about exercising rights, I find him a little too abrasive for my taste these days.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Is it a legal or a political issue? I suppose this line can get blurry.
The Arizona governor's new law will likely be contested by news media groups on 9th Circuit precedent and Constitutional grounds - Freedom of the Press.
I don't think other states have enacted similar legislation that hasn't already been overturned by an appellate court. Most circuits have established case law protecting the filming of public officials and police operating in their public capacity - a right safeguarded by the First Amendment. The case for the Fifth Circuit where I live is Turner v. Driver.
Edited by Nathan_JrLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
No signs prohibiting cameras, and they couldn't do that legally because it was a public forum. I believe she didn't want her answers to tough questions up on the internet for all to see. There were friends who encouraged me to sue, but at that time in my life (December 2015) I wanted to stay out of the news if possible. This whole incident was very interesting to me! Oh and, my "video name" is Mert Melfa. You guys know my real name!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Great job, Oldies! So interesting and funny. That Senator was shady, and you were well within your rights.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Kudos to you Oldiesman!
I found what I think was a related story in the Poughkeepsie Journal and took note of what the senator said - “She said in the statement that she strongly believes “in a government that is open and transparent. However, confronted with the scenario we faced last evening, I did not want to put my constituents in the position to be bullied or intimidated.”
I’m of the opinion this first amendment auditor thing is a great idea for leveling the playing field. I reinterpret the senator’s wish to eliminate bullying and intimidation of constituents as actually tipping her hand - as if to say “as your leaders we really prefer to keep our advantage…no bullying and intimidation going on here. There’s nothing to see…the shows over folks.”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
Ultimately, in virtually all cases, a resolution involves an offended party phoning 911. Thus, it is the understanding of the first amendment by the responding officers that determine the outcome. If the police recognize that photographing in public is lawful, everyone goes on their seperate ways. If the police believe otherwise, there are many different outcomes.
Ultimately, it is the courts who settle disputes when the police believe the auditor is breaking the law.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
1A questions can be of legal matters, but the question as posed is not a legal question.
This question, however, is exclusively a political question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Some years ago, Skyrider wrote something like: To find out who controls you, look to those whom you can’t criticize.
Someone else may have said it originally…. Thomas Paine, Bertrand Russell, Alduous Huxley, George Orwell… But it was a brilliant observation by Sky relating it to the wicked cult of VPW.
Public officials from the local police to the president of the U.S. are not above the law and are accountable. The First Amendment protects those seeking to criticize them and hold them accountable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
In theory, definitely yes. In practice, not always and practically never without massive (including use of police power of government) resistance. This ALSO applies to corporate exercise (often illegal) of power.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Let them resist. Massively. They are free to resist as we are free to criticize. But I get it it’s not easy.
In Russia, China, North Korea and TWI, the powers and principalities do not resist criticism, they swiftly dispatch the criticizer to prison or exile or death.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.