re: Border patrol agent pulls gun on Boy Scout

quote:

---

It is NOT illegal to film or record local or federal officers.

---

Pretty sure the Supreme Court has held this recently.

quote:

---

It is NOT illegal to film or record local or federal officers.

---

CptBengal, I'm in agreement with you. But I do want to point something out.

Many years ago, I was taught in media law class that you were free to take photographs of public officials on the job, and you have even more protection if you are in a public space.

However, in recent years, judges across the country have not been backing up this concept, including the 5th circuit, and to me that's troubling.

Their supposition is that a person/photographer must have a message to be communicated and an audience to receive that message. It's been a crap-shoot as to whether they are ruling that a photo or video taken for a person's solitary use is free speech.

Give this article a read. You might find it interesting.

LINK

So according to many of these ruling, journalists and bloggers may have more rights to photograph law enforcement on duty than an individual citizen does.

Personally, I find these rulings troubling, and an erosion of our civil rights as a people.

In my opinion, anything a law enforcement or public official on any level does on the job is subject to scrutiny and review, regardless of how it is recorded, or who does the recording.

Who, what, when, where and how the recording takes place should not matter. What should matter is the behavior and professionalism (or lack of it) of the public servant.


ETA clarification: "must have an audience" doesn't count if you intended to share it with your friends or post to a message board, later. In court, they're expecting you to demonstrate that you are a communicator with an actual audience. This isn't me saying this. Read the article... it's terrible how some of these judges are ruling!