Tell me what you think of this

[resident_evil]

I agree. But when they do cross the line, it sure does let them know you're unhappy when you and 500 well-armed friends and acquaintances show up on their doorstep to discuss their behavior.

And I'd be there too. :0)

 

[resident_evil]

Some of them are just ass holes. Some of them are looking for a payday.
And some of them are true believers.

At about 9:00 a guy without a hat walks out..... watch his behavior.
That's what should happen when these guys show up, IMO

(BTW, a woman I know worked in that office, and ID'ed all of these troopers when I showed her this video. The hatless guy is considered a major ass hole by almost everyone in that building and he had to retire finally because nobody wanted to work with him. What does it say about an organization when the one guy who acts right is despised by everyone else? What does that say about the organizational culture?)

Well, let me help those State Police out.

"Sir, I need to see ID because I have reason to believe you may be surveilling personnel and premises on behalf of gangs in order to gather information for future unlawful acts to be perpetrated against law enforcement. This surveilling tactic has been used in the past both in Mexico and the U.S. You're free to continue surveilling but you will offer ID on my reasonable and articulatable explanation."

That's just off the cuff.

 

[freyasman]

Well, let me help those State Police out.

"Sir, I need to see ID because I have reason to believe you may be surveilling personnel and premises on behalf of gangs in order to gather information for future unlawful acts to be perpetrated against law enforcement. This surveilling tactic has been used in the past both in Mexico and the U.S. You're free to continue surveilling but you will offer ID on my reasonable and articulatable explanation."

That's just off the cuff.

Trouble is, Texas state law doesn't compel anyone to ID themselves to LE until they are lawfully arrested. 38.02

 

[freyasman]

And I'd be there too. :0)

That's what we did to Olmos Park PD.

 

[resident_evil]

Trouble is, Texas state law doesn't compel anyone to ID themselves to LE until they are lawfully arrested. 38.02

Exactly, and when you don't produce ID (or absent ID, identify yourself) after the articulated reason offered then you are under arrest. Lying is not a good idea. I'm against laws that charge lying to LE as a crime but the law is there.

 

[freyasman]

Exactly, and when you don't produce ID (or absent ID, identify yourself) after the articulated reason offered then you are under arrest. Lying is not a good idea. I'm against laws that charge lying to LE as a crime but the law is there.

They have done that..... and they have gotten their asses kicked in court for it repeatedly. That Lieutenant knew that, and did all he could legally and then had everyone go back to work.
https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/turner-v-driver/

 

[resident_evil]

They have done that..... and they have gotten their asses kicked in court for it repeatedly. That Lieutenant knew that, and did all he could legally and then had everyone go back to work.
https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/turner-v-driver/

If I was that State Patrol officer I would have said to the subjects to continue videoing the premises and the personnel and that was their right to do so.

Further, I would say that I though believe you could be surveiling for gangs or terrorists for some future attack on the premises or personnel (even at their homes). I want to see your ID or your name and DOB. No? Fine you're under arrest.

I'd go to court and tell the judge my reasoning. Given my intent I'd likely win.

 

[freyasman]

If I was that State Patrol officer I would have said to the subjects to continue videoing the premises and the personnel and that was their right to do so.

Further, I would say that I though believe you could be surveiling for gangs or terrorists for some future attack on the premises or personnel (even at their homes). I want to see your ID or your name and DOB. No? Fine you're under arrest.

I'd go to court and tell the judge my reasoning. Given my intent I'd likely win.

Sorry, no. You'd lose, your agency would get a lawsuit, and since this is settled law and certified LEOs in the state have received training on it (mostly as a result of these activists), you have a good chance of losing your qualified immunity and getting a lawsuit against you personally, that you have to pay for, your own defense lawyer and pay your own damages.

And that ain't just Texas, DHS put out a memo in 2010, and then again in 2018, stating that filming from a public place is legal, and that it does not constitute a legit reason to detain or arrest someone. You can walk over and ask someone "What's up?", but if they tell you to fvck off, then you need to fvck off.

 

[resident_evil]

Sorry, no. You'd lose, your agency would get a lawsuit, and since this is settled law and certified LEOs in the state have received training on it (mostly as a result of these activists), you have a good chance of losing your qualified immunity and getting a lawsuit against you personally, that you have to pay for, your own defense lawyer and pay your own damages.

You need to pay attention. You can surveil but you can be questioned and identified over it.

And that ain't just Texas, DHS put out a memo in 2010, and then again in 2018, stating that filming from a public place is legal, and that it does not constitute a legit reason to detain or arrest someone. You can walk over and ask someone "What's up?", but if they tell you to fvck off, then you need to fvck off.

You can surveil. Nobody stopping you. But your surveiling behavior can be questioned and your ID taken for a valid reason. Think about it.

 

[freyasman]

You need to pay attention. You can surveil but you can be questioned and identified over it.


You can surveil. Nobody stopping you. But your surveiling behavior can be questioned and your ID taken for a valid reason. Think about it.

No. Anyone can walk up to anyone and ask them anything, including to see their ID, but in the absence of any evidence that criminal activity is afoot, that person does not have to ID themselves, nor do they have to answer any questions.

 

[resident_evil]

No. Anyone can walk up to anyone and ask them anything, including to see their ID, but in the absence of any evidence that criminal activity is afoot, that person does not have to ID themselves, nor do they have to answer any questions.

articuable - check
possible crime - check
allow continued surveillance - check
legality - check

 

[freyasman]

articuable - check
possible crime - check
allow continued surveillance - check
legality - check

What crime? Standing in a public space and filming? I don't think so..... and neither do the courts.

 

[freyasman]

articuable - check
possible crime - check
allow continued surveillance - check
legality - check

It is not legal to demand their ID for this; they can ask, but the person does not have to provide it.
Numerous departments have lost multiple court cases over this.

 

[resident_evil]

It is not legal to demand their ID for this; they can ask, but the person does not have to provide it.
Numerous departments have lost multiple court cases over this.

Just try to listen for a second. When you act in a manner consistent with surveillance taking you give law enforcement a legal excuse to investigate you and ask for your ID. They can't stop you from surveilling but they can legally ask you for ID when they state that your behavior resembles surveillance operation and may be a precursor to a crime. Again, nobody is stopping you from video taping a public place they are lawfully asking for your ID.

It will be tested some day in court I'm sure and you most likely will lose.

 

[resident_evil]

It is not legal to demand their ID for this; they can ask, but the person does not have to provide it.
Numerous departments have lost multiple court cases over this.

Surveillance can be a precursor to a crime which legally allows to ask for your ID. Nobody is stopping you from recording in a public place.

"I'm not here to stop you from your surveillance behavior of law enforcement personnel and their facility but because surveillance can be a precursor to a crime I'm lawfully asking for you to ID to investigate that possibility." This scenario fulfills the letter of the law. Check the elements.

Providing ID with expressed valid concern, especially when personnel or facilities have had credible threats asserted in the past, is not considered by most judges to be a hardship on a subject being asked to identify.

If you're just walking down the road and I don't like your red shoes I can't jump out and ask for your ID. That is what is unlawful. If you're walking down the street with an assault style rifle and nobody else is doing so on that day or the 100, 200, 300 days prior to that date there is lawful reason stop and question you and ask for ID while allowing for continued expression of open carry rights. On the other hand if many people open carries every day of the year then that question for ID can't legally be asked.

IT is ALL a matter of training to express the valid concern at hand.

 

[resident_evil]

@freyasman

Do you know that verbally abusing a law enforcement is a first amendment right but it in certain circumstance allows them to warn you on continued trespassing until a next business day.

Go out on the street and tell an officer to go [Unwelcome language removed] himself and you do so free and clear. Do it at a government facility or a school or other location similar in function and they can lawfully ask you to leave. They just have to couch it according to training.

 

[freyasman]

Just try to listen for a second. When you act in a manner consistent with surveillance taking you give law enforcement a legal excuse to investigate you and ask for your ID. They can't stop you from surveilling but they can legally ask you for ID when they state that your behavior resembles surveillance operation and may be a precursor to a crime. Again, nobody is stopping you from video taping a public place they are lawfully asking for your ID.

It will be tested some day in court I'm sure and you most likely will lose.

It has been tested, more than once. The cops lost, over and over again.

 

[freyasman]

Another example here;

 

[resident_evil]

It has been tested, more than once. The cops lost, over and over again.

Wrong, you see they never articulate their concern and they try to stop the surveillance. THAT has been tested. What WILL be tested is the articulation of a valid concern and no attempts to stop the lawful recording of personnel or facilities in order to collect ID. Given those elements the court will not see hardship in subjects being required to provide ID.

 

[freyasman]

Wrong, you see they never articulate their concern and they try to stop the surveillance. THAT has been tested. What WILL be tested is the articulation of a valid concern and no attempts to stop the lawful recording of personnel or facilities in order to collect ID. Given those elements the court will not see hardship in subjects being required to provide ID.

Sorry but you're wrong.