Arrested for Videotaping

[DolfanBob]

I missed this John Stossel special.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8dflSXvQME

http://www.copblock.org/

[patric]

An interesting twist...

This TV photojournalist is suing police for unlawfully detaining him when he photographed a police scene from a remote-controlled helicopter:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/207750257/Pedro-Rivera-s-lawsuit-against-Hartford-Conn-Police

Apparently, they went over the top by threatening his station, as well.

[Hoss]

An interesting twist...

This TV photojournalist is suing police for unlawfully detaining him when he photographed a police scene from a remote-controlled helicopter:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/207750257/Pedro-Rivera-s-lawsuit-against-Hartford-Conn-Police

Apparently, they went over the top by threatening his station, as well.

I'm looking at buying one of these; I was a huge RC airplane guy at one time when my dad wasn't so ill.  http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-2-vision-plus

There are many regulations regarding these, but not completed as the technology is moving pretty quick with thse.  The FAA pretty much caps you at 400 feet AGL.  You also cannot use them to film for commercial purposes unless you have a license and obviously are not supposed to use them to invade people's privacy.

Not sure if the police had recourse to do this though.

[patric]

Not sure if the police had recourse to do this though.

The first thing police asked was "Are you media?" which seems odd.  Did they think they were acting on behalf of the FAA?
Probably not.

[Conan71]

I'm looking at buying one of these; I was a huge RC airplane guy at one time when my dad wasn't so ill.  http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-2-vision-plus

There are many regulations regarding these, but not completed as the technology is moving pretty quick with thse.  The FAA pretty much caps you at 400 feet AGL.  You also cannot use them to film for commercial purposes unless you have a license and obviously are not supposed to use them to invade people's privacy.

Not sure if the police had recourse to do this though.

It just dawned on me, I should get a remote control black helicopter to mess with the crazy neighbor next door.

[nathanm]

It just dawned on me, I should get a remote control black helicopter to mess with the crazy neighbor next door.

I'll let you know when I finally get that octocopter. 

[Ed W]

It just dawned on me, I should get a remote control black helicopter to mess with the crazy neighbor next door.

While you're at it, make some fake Yagi antennas out of wood dowels, paint them black, and point them at his house.

[patric]

The FAA pretty much caps you at 400 feet AGL. Not sure if the police had recourse to do this though.

The NTSB called the FAA on the carpet recently for overstepping their authority, but since the FAA is appealing, the decision is stayed.
They are citing a March incident in Florida where a US Airways had a near miss, but you have to drill down to the fine print to see it involved a fixed wing piston engine drone at 2,300 feet (think Homeland Security loaner) and not a hobbyists styrofoam quad copter at 200 feet.

[patric]

The National Press Photographers Association filed an Amicus Brief today in a federal civil rights lawsuit involving an Austin, Texas man, who says that police violated his constitutional right to photograph and/or film police in a public setting.
Police moved to dismiss the suit, claiming "qualified immunity," which protects government officials from being the subjects of lawsuits unless they have violated a clearly established constitutional right.

The constitutional right to film police officers while on duty has been well established for decades through numerous constitutional decisions that protect the "coextensive" rights of journalists and members of the public to gather information and to hold government officials accountable for their actions, as the First Circuit Court of Appeals held in the 2011 case of Glik v. Cunniffe.  In Glik, a citizen was arrested after using his cell phone to photograph Boston police officers he believed were using excessive force in effectuating an arrest. After his charges were dismissed, Glik filed a civil action against the Boston Police Department and won because the First Circuit observed that a citizen's right to film police officers on duty is a "basic, vital, and well-established liberty protected by the First Amendment."

The United States Department of Justice has also affirmed this right in  multiple Statements of Interest, explaining that over eighty years of precedent, going back to the 1931 case of Near v. Minnesota, stand for the proposition that "government action intended to prevent the dissemination of information critical of government officials, including police officers, constitutes an invalid prior restraint on the exercise of First Amendment rights."

http://blogs.nppa.org/advocacy/2014/06/02/nppa-files-amicus-brief-supporting-right-to-photograph-and-record-police-in-public/

[Vashta Nerada]

I think that it is all about questioning the Officers decision and manner in which he is enforcing the law as he sees fit. Most Officers have thick enough skin and know how to handle the situation of this type of public scrutiny.

Having said that. There are going to be the ones who got into law enforcement purely for the bully factor. And when their job skill comes into question. They will react as if you knocked off that chip on their shoulder or crossed the unknown line drawn in the sand. To me those type individuals are a danger to the public at large by being armed and protected by a favorable law.

This Tulsa Police Sergeant admits he isnt sure about the law he is enforcing, yet insists he doesn't need to be told the law.
....like how he complains about being photographed, saying the people he is confronting are confrontational.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvDx9V2VqPQ

[Hoss]

It just dawned on me, I should get a remote control black helicopter to mess with the crazy neighbor next door.

I have the 'drone' now...

[Conan71]

I have the 'drone' now...

I could have used it this morning.  She was having quite a talk with God in her back yard at 7am whilst swilling Bud Light.

[Hoss]

I could have used it this morning.  She was having quite a talk with God in her back yard at 7am whilst swilling Bud Light.

She might have though it was Ezekiel's Wheel for all I know...  

I have had people come up and say it looks like a UFO.  I tend to try not to fly it around the neighborhood.  If people saw the quality of camera these things had, they wouldn't be so afraid of the consumer version of them, because a) they're not exactly stealthy with as loud and lit as they are and b) there is no zoom on the camera.  To spy on people you'd essentially have to be peering in their window with the device.  Not really very secretive.

[Conan71]

She might have though it was Ezekiel's Wheel for all I know...  

I have had people come up and say it looks like a UFO.  I tend to try not to fly it around the neighborhood.  If people saw the quality of camera these things had, they wouldn't be so afraid of the consumer version of them, because a) they're not exactly stealthy with as loud and lit as they are and b) there is no zoom on the camera.  To spy on people you'd essentially have to be peering in their window with the device.  Not really very secretive.

If you Google edited video from Tulsa Tough this year, there are some aerials shot from a drone.  The operator set up next to us on the lawn of Channel 6 studios on Saturday evening, really impressive equipment.

[Hoss]

If you Google edited video from Tulsa Tough this year, there are some aerials shot from a drone.  The operator set up next to us on the lawn of Channel 6 studios on Saturday evening, really impressive equipment.

Yeah, I saw that.  Mine is cheap compared to some of those rigs.  They were likely hexacopters or even octocopters (6 or 8 rotors).  Mine with battery, barely weighs 2 pounds.  I'd be curious to know about how wide one was.  Mine is only about 16 inches diagonal from rotor to rotor.