4 ms·

Deniability. i.e. the sheriff can say the permit wasn’t issued because its at their discretion, not because someone didn’t pay a bribe. That said, even with a

Deniability. i.e. the sheriff can say the permit wasn’t issued because its at their discretion, not because someone didn’t pay a bribe. That said, even with a "shall" situation there are hoops to jump thru that can be used to set this same kinda situation up.

anigbrowl 6y ago
You just get a recording of them soliciting the bribe. Not so hard.
- zepto 6y ago
  Private parties recording conversations without consent is illegal in California.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    I've seen a few people on here state this. I really wish people knew their rights better. Federal judges have consistently ruled that recording public officials in the performance of their duties is a right under the first amendment. As a member of the public, you can record your interactions with police without their consent.
    - zepto 6y ago
      It’s clear that this applies to uniformed cops performing duties in public places. It is much less clear that it applies to a private conversation with a senior officer in a police station.
      - Reelin 6y ago
        > > public officials in the performance of their duties > conversation with a senior officer in a police station Are you seriously suggesting that conversing with a public official at their place of work about official business doesn't qualify as part of their official duties? (Aside, two party consent is a genuinely broken system for a wide variety of reasons. I consider violating it to be a laudable act of civil disobedience.)
        zepto 6y ago
        I’m suggesting that an attorney could definitely argue that a particular conversation was not part of a persons official duties, depending on the content. Attorneys argue things like this all the time. And Judges rule on their arguments. What I’m asking about is whether any existing ruling makes this point clear.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Some states have exceptions to the 2 party rule in general, such as if you think a crime may be committed, or a crime from a specific list. This can apply to everyone, not just police. I think it would be hard to argue that a conversation with a CCW applicant in which you ask for stuff in exchange for issung a CCW isn't acting in an official capacity. The only person who can issue it is the person holding that office. Not to mention, the calendar/schedule/sign-in book should have a memo a out the purpose of the visit (the pretext he was called down to the station).
        zepto 6y ago
        The department / police union could argue that if it’s not sanctioned behavior it is not part of the officers duties.
        anigbrowl 6y ago
        No they couldn't. That would be equivalent to saying committing a crime creates a right to privacy that didn't exist previously. And if it wasn't part of their official duties, why would the department/police union be defending the officer? You do sometimes see cases where a police union defends an officer accused of some crime, but that's usually because they're putting up some BS story about how they actually were doing their duty, eg an officer busted in possession of drugs who tries to argue it was actually an undercover investigation of the drug scene.
        giantg2 6y ago
    - gwd 6y ago
      > As a member of the public, you can record your interactions with police without their consent. You can do it without their consent, but can you do it without their knowledge?
      - mensetmanusman 6y ago
        Apple should just add it to the EULA of the iPhone :)
      - giantg2 6y ago
        Yes, you can record them secretly. That's according to the federal courts that hold that it is your first amendment right. Don't be surprised if they try ro charge you under the state's laws. You would then have to file a federal lawsuit claiming your rights are being violates. It all depends on exactly how stupid or corrupt the specific officer is.
anfilt 6y ago
however the official in a shall issue state is then lying on documents, by jumping through hoops to deny applications if they are not paying the bribe.
- giantg2 6y ago
  And thus leaves a paper trail that you can use for a civil rights violation complaint to the FBI or at least internal affairs.

anigbrowl 6y ago

You just get a recording of them soliciting the bribe. Not so hard.

zepto 6y ago
Private parties recording conversations without consent is illegal in California.
- giantg2 6y ago
  I've seen a few people on here state this. I really wish people knew their rights better. Federal judges have consistently ruled that recording public officials in the performance of their duties is a right under the first amendment. As a member of the public, you can record your interactions with police without their consent.
  - zepto 6y ago
    It’s clear that this applies to uniformed cops performing duties in public places. It is much less clear that it applies to a private conversation with a senior officer in a police station.
    - Reelin 6y ago
      > > public officials in the performance of their duties > conversation with a senior officer in a police station Are you seriously suggesting that conversing with a public official at their place of work about official business doesn't qualify as part of their official duties? (Aside, two party consent is a genuinely broken system for a wide variety of reasons. I consider violating it to be a laudable act of civil disobedience.)
      - zepto 6y ago
        I’m suggesting that an attorney could definitely argue that a particular conversation was not part of a persons official duties, depending on the content. Attorneys argue things like this all the time. And Judges rule on their arguments. What I’m asking about is whether any existing ruling makes this point clear.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Some states have exceptions to the 2 party rule in general, such as if you think a crime may be committed, or a crime from a specific list. This can apply to everyone, not just police. I think it would be hard to argue that a conversation with a CCW applicant in which you ask for stuff in exchange for issung a CCW isn't acting in an official capacity. The only person who can issue it is the person holding that office. Not to mention, the calendar/schedule/sign-in book should have a memo a out the purpose of the visit (the pretext he was called down to the station).
        zepto 6y ago
        The department / police union could argue that if it’s not sanctioned behavior it is not part of the officers duties.
        anigbrowl 6y ago
        No they couldn't. That would be equivalent to saying committing a crime creates a right to privacy that didn't exist previously. And if it wasn't part of their official duties, why would the department/police union be defending the officer? You do sometimes see cases where a police union defends an officer accused of some crime, but that's usually because they're putting up some BS story about how they actually were doing their duty, eg an officer busted in possession of drugs who tries to argue it was actually an undercover investigation of the drug scene.
        giantg2 6y ago
  - gwd 6y ago
    > As a member of the public, you can record your interactions with police without their consent. You can do it without their consent, but can you do it without their knowledge?
    - mensetmanusman 6y ago
      Apple should just add it to the EULA of the iPhone :)
    - giantg2 6y ago
      Yes, you can record them secretly. That's according to the federal courts that hold that it is your first amendment right. Don't be surprised if they try ro charge you under the state's laws. You would then have to file a federal lawsuit claiming your rights are being violates. It all depends on exactly how stupid or corrupt the specific officer is.

anfilt 6y ago

however the official in a shall issue state is then lying on documents, by jumping through hoops to deny applications if they are not paying the bribe.

giantg2 6y ago
And thus leaves a paper trail that you can use for a civil rights violation complaint to the FBI or at least internal affairs.