Posted on 05/25/2011 8:43:55 PM PDT by The Magical Mischief Tour
In 1991, George Holliday filmed the LAPD’s arrest and beating of Rodney King. The videotape provoked national controversy. If a similar incident happened today, it might provoke something else: the arrest of George Holliday.
Cell phones and cameras with video-recording capability have become ubiquitous. This has led to an increase in the filming of police officers, which has led to a backlash: Cops have begun arresting those who film them, on charges such as interfering with an investigation—even when the filmer is not interfering and the officer is not investigating.
In one now-famous example, motorcyclist Anthony Graber’s helmet cam was rolling when Graber was pulled over last March by a Maryland State Trooper. The Trooper came out of an unmarked car in plain clothes, yelling, with his gun drawn. Graber didn’t like that—and posted the video on YouTube. In short order he was arrested and charged with felony wiretapping. A judge eventually threw the charges out—six months later.
Such incidents have led to a national conversation about the propriety of videotaping cops, even as dashboard cameras have become standard in squad cars. There seems to be some tension in the assumption that, as Graber’s lawyer put it, "the officer has a privacy expectation, but the motorist doesn’t."
That asymmetry has been underscored by recent rulings over global positioning systems. Last year the Virginia Court of Appeals said Fairfax County police did not violate a suspect’s right to privacy when, without a warrant, they surreptitiously put a GPS device on his vehicle to track his movements. Individuals have no expectation of privacy on the public streets, the court ruled—a position also taken by the Ninth Circuit in California.
Yet this past January, Kathy Byron, a member of Virginia’s House of Delegates, introduced legislation that would have forbidden the use of GPS tracking devices for the purpose of following political candidates. People running for public office "are still entitled to some privacy," she argued.
If ordinary citizens have little claim to privacy in public places, then what about their electronic devices? U.S. border-patrol agents often search the phones and computers of American citizens who cross the border—routinely "accessing email accounts, examining photographs and looking through personal calendars," according to The Constitution Project, a watchdog group. "In some cases, electronic devices were confiscated for as long as a year." And in Michigan, the State Police have high-tech forensic devices enabling them to download information from the cell phones of stopped motorists—something they have been doing without a warrant.
In New York, a cell phone alert system will send text messages with a unique ring tone in the event of a terrorist attack or other emergency. By next year the system will go nationwide, and all new cell phones will be required to contain the special chip needed to relay the messages. Orwell comparisons are overdone, but it is hard not to think of 1984: "The voice from the telescreen paused. A trumpet call, clear and beautiful, floated into the stagnant air. The voice continued raspingly: ‘Attention! Your attention, please! A newsflash has this moment arrived from the Malabar front. Our forces in South India have won a glorious victory. . . .’ "
Soon Americans might have no right to expect privacy even in the privacy of their own homes. Earlier this month the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that police officers may force their way into your domicile without your consent, without a warrant, and without what are usually referred to as "exigent circumstances"—e.g., someone inside the home yelling for help. The case, Kentucky v. King, concerned an incident in which police officers chasing a drug suspect ran into an apartment building, smelled marijuana, heard noises they thought might indicate someone was destroying evidence—and broke down the wrong door. This, said the Supremes, was perfectly fine.
Dissenting Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg asked an apposite question: "How ‘secure’ do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and, on hearing sounds indicative of things moving, forcibly enter and search for evidence of unlawful activity?"
The Indiana Supreme Court recently issued two rulings of a similar nature. The first said police officers serving a warrant can enter a home without knocking if officers decide they need to. The second said residents have no right to prevent the unlawful entry of police officers into their homes.
Before long the police might not even need to enter your home to search it. Last year Forbes reported that a company called American Science & Engineering racked up $224 million in sales of ZBVs. Those are Z Backscatter Vans, equipped with x-ray machines that can see through walls and clothing. The magazine says the vans have become "powerful tools for security, law enforcement and border control."
Let’s be clear about one thing: Asymmetry is not the same as injustice. The police can pull you over for speeding, but not vice versa—and that is as it should be. The whole idea of having police departments is to allow only certain authorized individuals -- the ones with badges—to raid homes, arrest suspects, and so on. And many of the developments noted above will help law enforcement catch bad guys, which is a good thing.
But it is not the only thing. It is not even the primary thing. Catching bad guys is an ancillary goal for government, whose first duty is to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens. It’s hard for government to do that while simultaneously chipping away at them.
And if I don't want him looking, it's not that hard to arrange. ;)
Who the hell does the government think invents and builds their spy devices? Hint: Us freedom loving people in fly-over country.
/johnny
Well plz do us a favor and stop building them, please...
Some of whom will gladly put a government contract over the rights of their fellow citizens.
Soon everything will be live feed to remote servers and various home based units that will record every bit in HD and surround sound audio.
He is? He must be bored $#!tless.
I know I am.
Does that mean I can find out where I put my lower dentures almost a month ago? Can you check that feed and tell me what I did with them? Because I could use them. Really.
/johnny
I’m always telling my kids the government is watching us through the Kinect for the X-Box.
“If”
lol!
The desire to believe that such control is possible is simply a desire to believe there is human control mechanism.
We are about 400 million individual contributors, and every last mother loving one of us pretty much does whatever we want whenever we want. Control is granted by the individuals willingness to submit. When laws are unjust, or arbitrarily enforced, the willingness to submit to authority degrades. Peruse some of the posts on this site.
We are blessed by the reality that our population is, for the most part, civil.
When I was a kid watching Romper Room and she said happy birthday Michael on my birthday, I freaked. Took me years before I would walk in front of the television naked.
I don’t know if there have been any federal cases about X-raying cars that managed to bubble up to the USSC; however there was a case at the USSC several years ago that put the nix on using heat scanners on houses to identify energy-hungry indoor marijuana farms sans search warrant.
They actually do.
BTW, I like what you've done to the room:)
If you truly believe what you just wrote, you are not thinking clearly. We are controlled right now. An NBA player cannot be seen to mouth the word faggot. We cannot write or say the -N- word, and if we decide to sell our personal belonging to a neighbor, the govt could tax us on the proceeds, or fine us for not having the proper license. These are just a few of the easily thought of instances of control. How about putting a roof over your deck? Breeding your dog, and having the pups at home? Painting your house if it was built before 1979?
Do neither, you will live longer and happier.
So far, no SWAT team has come to take me out because I refuse to register my dogs.
Funniest thing is watching a fat cop chase my unregistered dog down the street every time they see him out. If they get him, it costs me $80, or they will kill him. He is the fastest little bastard anyone will ever see. They Know him... And he knows them.
I just say... “What dog.. I ain't got no dog..?” when he makes it under the shed ahead of fatboy.
There is one that can get him... They are friends... Another $80..
A week or so back I could not understand why the alarm on my phone did not sound.
I dropped into a glass of water next to the bed.
I freak out when I lose things.
That is the part people need to remember and be wary of.
LOL - I remember that! When she would happen to say my name, I was sure she could see me!
I’m waiting for the day that our own children are programmed to report our most private conversations, actions and thoughts to the “government” by our indoctrination centers (public schools).
Hitler’s youth = Obama’s youth.
Or should that be O’Bama’s youth since he has become an Irishman?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.