How long until jaywalking is a felony?
This is a discussion on Illinois New Eavesdropping Law Is A Terrible Idea (a law to get around a law) within the Off Topic Discussion forums, part of the Off Topic category; In the wake of the deaths of Eric Garner, Mike Brown, Tamir Rice and others, many questions have been raised about police shootings, tactics and ...
so basically it's an "arrest you" law until the courts make a decision.In the wake of the deaths of Eric Garner, Mike Brown, Tamir Rice and others, many questions have been raised about police shootings, tactics and the militarization of local police departments. A major contributing factor to this new era of transparency has been a citizen's right to film the police, upheld by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2012.
The Illinois Legislature wants to change that.
Even though the Illinois Supreme Court struck down the state's overbroad eavesdropping law, which had led to multiple citizens being arrested and charged with felonies for filming police officers without their consent, earlier this year, on Dec. 4 the Illinois Legislature introduced a new bill that would have nearly the same effect.
Senate Bill 1342 would criminalize any "oral communication between 2 or more persons" that was surreptitiously recorded where one party, including police, had a "reasonable expectation of privacy." The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that police in performance of their duties in "public," do not have an expectation of privacy, but did not define "public."
Illinois New Eavesdropping Law Is A Terrible Idea*|*Dan Johnson
the difference between wisdom and intellect, wisdom foresees the dangers in life, and intellect studies the aftermath
I don't understand we can't film them but they want my tax dollars to put video cameras on them that they can conveniently turn in and off.
On a serious note police are people working or not my rights clearly dictate I can record in a public place without violation.
Last edited by Nanashi; 12-12-2014 at 07:18 PM.
You have a few good points when it comes to privacy and interfering. You should not interfere with an officer, in public you dont really have a right to a full level of privacy.
Maybe if a video can be proven to have been used in a distracting or embarrassing manor the recorder can face consequences. However, that kind of muddies the water and is probably going to make things even more complicated.
Most recent EX was a teacher in high school. She wasn't allowed to have a camera in the classroom to document the little bastards that misbehaved. It violated their privacy rights. What privacy? They had them in the hallways. They could take the videos and slap the denying POS lazy blame everything on everyone except for my kid parents in the face.
For $45 she could have put a cell phone jammer in the room, it would have probably wiped out every cell communication in the school. That would have hindered emergency communications. It would have messed up the teachers who texted in class too!
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to talk out your ass and remove all doubt." A. Lincoln (sort of.)
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"It seems to me a certainty that the fatalistic teachings of Mohammed and the utter degradation of the Arab women are the outstanding causes for the arrested development of the Arab. He is exactly as he was around the year 700, while we have been developing." George S. Patton
President/executive director of the NQNP STFU awards foundation.