7 ms·

Good. Barring any attempts to hinder a police investigation or crime scene, the right to record law passed in NY should be absolute. I see no reason why it's

Good. Barring any attempts to hinder a police investigation or crime scene, the right to record law passed in NY should be absolute. I see no reason why it's a bad thing to keep law enforcement honest and make sure their actions are legal and above board....because otherwise, their mistakes and ignorance of the law can cost the public money. It also allows the good folks within police departments to have a straightforward way to root out the bad folks and the corruption that a police union might traditionally try to cover up. If I were a cop and I knew one of my coworkers was a bad apple, and might screw things up for me, knowing that they are getting recorded on the job would give me peace of mind.

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
The only reason I see is if it captured citizens that don't want the fact that they were in a NYPD Precinct livestreamed.
- stronglikedan 3y ago
  It's a public place. If a separate law gave them a right to privacy then the police have to make accommodations to bring them into the station privately, like through a back door.
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    My position is that it is good that everyone going into the precinct should be publicly noticed. Nobody goes in through "a back door". Nobody goes into police custody without the public knowing. Yes, this gets embarrassing. But it keeps people from silently "disappearing". If they're in police custody, everybody knows (or can find out).
    - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
      Which is fine if you're being arrested, not great if you're trying to report domestic violence. I get it, it's better like this, but it could have secondary side effects for some people.
      - KennyBlanken 3y ago
        Trying to report any crime where the victim fears repercussions. Organized crime, crime by an employer, etc.
      - Kye 3y ago
        Every law is a balance with some compromises toward or against personal and public good. Some of that balance should include alternate channels for reporting things with hazards like this.
    - AniseAbyss 3y ago
      [dead]
  - fishtacos 3y ago
    To echo the previous reply, it's a ridiculous stance to defend absolving of documentation of their presence when all these situations involved taxpayer money. Whether it's an officer, a congressman,Trump under subpoena, or a random drunk ... if they are being charged with something, they are in the public record. That public record includes public documentation of where they were taken, why, and sufficient documentation to allow both the public to be informed and for intervention in case of abuse of power. Otherwise, we don't live in a functional democracy. This is a good decision. It's sad the PD is appealing it, but not unexpected.
    - tzs 3y ago
      People often go to police stations for reasons other than being charged with something.
    - koolba 3y ago
      > That public record includes public documentation of where they were taken, why, and sufficient documentation to allow both the public to be informed and for intervention in case of abuse of power. The problem for the specific case of being charged with something, or even a step before when someone is brought in for questioning, is enough to tarnish the person's reputation for life. If someone is brought in for questioning on suspicion of spousal battery, rape, or kiddie porn, that stink is not going to subside even if the officers or prosecutors later admit to being completely wrong.
      - fishtacos 3y ago
        That's a socio-cultural issue, not something related to what the law requires because it's the just thing to do. Otherwise, we'd have no knowledge of anything. We fought so hard (US-specific) for the FOIA and that barely even works. Crawling backwards into a decades of state and police corruption isn't the answer. I get what you're saying. There is an imbalance of power between the common citizen and state. Wanting transparency instead of the alternative because of abuse of power is precisely why this should be the norm.
    - barbazoo 3y ago
  - barrkel 3y ago
    What if a private organization set up cameras observing everyone walking every street and avenue, and stored facial eigenvectors of all the people walking there. It could then set up shop as a service, and given a picture of someone's face, tell you when and where they went anywhere on foot in NYC. It's all public, right?
    - wongarsu 3y ago
      That's what companies do with license plate scanners. I don't think faces would be substantially different in the eyes of the law. I agree that it's an issue. In Europe there is some expectation of privacy even in public and what you describe would be illegal.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
        > In Europe there is some expectation of privacy even in public which is reason #1367 why the UK had to leave the EU. Thanks, I'll be here all week, until I die.
        jakupovic 3y ago
        [flagged]
    - DoesntMatter22 3y ago
      In thr US that is probably legal currently
    - roywiggins 3y ago
      It's being done for police, but I don't think there's any legal bar to selling this data to the public instead. https://www.404media.co/fusus-ai-cameras-took-over-town-america/ https://www.404media.co/fusus-ai-cameras-took-over-town-amer...
    - usea 3y ago
      The scenario you're describing is already the status quo.
  - omginternets 3y ago
    I think there's room for protecting people's public image so long as they have not been convicted.
    - heliodor 3y ago
      Are you saying that every crime punishment should automatically include loss of privacy? Cause that's what your statement sounds like.
      - omginternets 3y ago
        That's a very bizarre reading of this thread of conversation.
        heliodor 3y ago
        I didn't read it well, I guess. "Protecting people's public image" sounds much broader than whether an arrest or conviction is public record.
      - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
        Every crime conviction is a public record, so that ship has sailed.
      - themaninthedark 3y ago
        I would say that we want to know what crimes our government is convicting people of. Otherwise, you can have the government arrest and convict some one of "secret" charges, perhaps in "secret" courts with "secret" evidence. The convicted just disappeared. I think we had something like that happen before, it caused a bit of upset.
      - AniseAbyss 3y ago
        [dead]
      - tick_tock_tick 3y ago
        I mean pretty much that's a cornerstone of our legal system. There's a strong bias against hidden courts where someone may be convicted in secret and punished in secret.
  - oneplane 3y ago
    The public place doctrine is uniquely weird (and American) in that regard. Being seen or heard by others in a public place should not mean that you, as a private person, also gets recorded.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      I agree. I think that US law is actively harmful in this regard. It should be possible to be in public spaces without having to worry about being recorded, either by authorities or other people.
      - ultrarunner 3y ago
        This reverses the subject, though: even if we grant that private civilians should have a (possibly limited) expectation of privacy in public, civilians acting in a public capacity, like the police, should not. Given the enormous power they have to act outside the law with impunity, removing the only check on that power— transparency into their conduct— would be a mistake. One only need to consider any of the many times police have been caught outright lying by video surfacing afterward to understand why.
        JohnFen 3y ago
        I agree entirely. We give police extraordinary power over us, and it seems completely reasonable that they have little expectation of privacy when using those powers.
  - qwertox 3y ago
    What a simplistic view of the world. "It's a public place.". Do I want to be there? No. Do I have to be there? Yes. Oh, the back door, right. And don't forget to make the appointment. Fact is, if I'm being there as a private citizen dealing with private matters, I don't want some person hanging around there filming me. And at least in Europe I have the right to expect this.
- JackFr 3y ago
  What about crime victims?
- themaninthedark 3y ago
  What if the mob is paying people to film inside the Precinct?
JohnFen 3y ago
I get the argument. This is a tough problem, though, because someone recording in a police building can easily prevent citizens from conducting their business in there. I know that if I saw some random person recording in the building (or in other sensitive places), I wouldn't set foot in there. I doubt I'm the only one. Particularly if someone is going in there to deal with an issue where they don't want others to know they're going to the police.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- MrDrMcCoy 3y ago
  I'm still in favor of absolute recording rights despite all that. You're quite right to point out chilling effects of active recording, but you have to also consider that bad police behavior is chilling in and of itself. People don't want to make reports when the police might make things worse or neglect things they're supposed to help with. Recording can help with that and will become less common as bad police are held to better account. Another thing that can balance that would be for police stations to have a reception desk with a transparent, soundproof box for citizens to make reports with some privacy and safety regardless of recording.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > Another thing that can balance that would be for police stations to have a reception desk with a transparent, soundproof box for citizens to make reports That doesn't really address the issue, though. The issue is that people can be shown to have been at the police station at all.
    - chrsig 3y ago
      Surely if it's that big of an issue they could call the police station and arrange a more discrete venue? Maybe in the best of times this would seem a bigger concern, but in the present day it definitely seems like there needs to be more pressure on police to meet minimum standards.
JackFr 3y ago
Should other people in a police station have any expectation of privacy? Victims of crimes? People who've been arrested?
- Kab1r 3y ago
  People who have been arrested don't usually just hang out in the lobby. There is no expectation of privacy in any public space
  - kube-system 3y ago
    That is not universally true, there are some expectations of privacy in some public places. For example, public restrooms, phone booths, dressing rooms, people's person, car, belongings, etc.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > There is no expectation of privacy in any public space But there should be protection against being recorded against your will.
    - drdaeman 3y ago
      In a public place? Why? If you’ve been somewhere others saw you, and it was a place where privacy is not expected (i.e. not someone peeking into your backyard or a bathroom stall), why should others be prevented from recording and retelling this, if they want to?

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago

The only reason I see is if it captured citizens that don't want the fact that they were in a NYPD Precinct livestreamed.

stronglikedan 3y ago
It's a public place. If a separate law gave them a right to privacy then the police have to make accommodations to bring them into the station privately, like through a back door.
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  My position is that it is good that everyone going into the precinct should be publicly noticed. Nobody goes in through "a back door". Nobody goes into police custody without the public knowing. Yes, this gets embarrassing. But it keeps people from silently "disappearing". If they're in police custody, everybody knows (or can find out).
  - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
    Which is fine if you're being arrested, not great if you're trying to report domestic violence. I get it, it's better like this, but it could have secondary side effects for some people.
    - KennyBlanken 3y ago
      Trying to report any crime where the victim fears repercussions. Organized crime, crime by an employer, etc.
    - Kye 3y ago
      Every law is a balance with some compromises toward or against personal and public good. Some of that balance should include alternate channels for reporting things with hazards like this.
  - AniseAbyss 3y ago
    [dead]
- fishtacos 3y ago
  To echo the previous reply, it's a ridiculous stance to defend absolving of documentation of their presence when all these situations involved taxpayer money. Whether it's an officer, a congressman,Trump under subpoena, or a random drunk ... if they are being charged with something, they are in the public record. That public record includes public documentation of where they were taken, why, and sufficient documentation to allow both the public to be informed and for intervention in case of abuse of power. Otherwise, we don't live in a functional democracy. This is a good decision. It's sad the PD is appealing it, but not unexpected.
  - tzs 3y ago
    People often go to police stations for reasons other than being charged with something.
  - koolba 3y ago
    > That public record includes public documentation of where they were taken, why, and sufficient documentation to allow both the public to be informed and for intervention in case of abuse of power. The problem for the specific case of being charged with something, or even a step before when someone is brought in for questioning, is enough to tarnish the person's reputation for life. If someone is brought in for questioning on suspicion of spousal battery, rape, or kiddie porn, that stink is not going to subside even if the officers or prosecutors later admit to being completely wrong.
    - fishtacos 3y ago
      That's a socio-cultural issue, not something related to what the law requires because it's the just thing to do. Otherwise, we'd have no knowledge of anything. We fought so hard (US-specific) for the FOIA and that barely even works. Crawling backwards into a decades of state and police corruption isn't the answer. I get what you're saying. There is an imbalance of power between the common citizen and state. Wanting transparency instead of the alternative because of abuse of power is precisely why this should be the norm.
  - barbazoo 3y ago
- barrkel 3y ago
  What if a private organization set up cameras observing everyone walking every street and avenue, and stored facial eigenvectors of all the people walking there. It could then set up shop as a service, and given a picture of someone's face, tell you when and where they went anywhere on foot in NYC. It's all public, right?
  - wongarsu 3y ago
    That's what companies do with license plate scanners. I don't think faces would be substantially different in the eyes of the law. I agree that it's an issue. In Europe there is some expectation of privacy even in public and what you describe would be illegal.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
      > In Europe there is some expectation of privacy even in public which is reason #1367 why the UK had to leave the EU. Thanks, I'll be here all week, until I die.
      - jakupovic 3y ago
        [flagged]
  - DoesntMatter22 3y ago
    In thr US that is probably legal currently
  - roywiggins 3y ago
    It's being done for police, but I don't think there's any legal bar to selling this data to the public instead. https://www.404media.co/fusus-ai-cameras-took-over-town-america/ https://www.404media.co/fusus-ai-cameras-took-over-town-amer...
  - usea 3y ago
    The scenario you're describing is already the status quo.
- omginternets 3y ago
  I think there's room for protecting people's public image so long as they have not been convicted.
  - heliodor 3y ago
    Are you saying that every crime punishment should automatically include loss of privacy? Cause that's what your statement sounds like.
    - omginternets 3y ago
      That's a very bizarre reading of this thread of conversation.
      - heliodor 3y ago
        I didn't read it well, I guess. "Protecting people's public image" sounds much broader than whether an arrest or conviction is public record.
    - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
      Every crime conviction is a public record, so that ship has sailed.
    - themaninthedark 3y ago
      I would say that we want to know what crimes our government is convicting people of. Otherwise, you can have the government arrest and convict some one of "secret" charges, perhaps in "secret" courts with "secret" evidence. The convicted just disappeared. I think we had something like that happen before, it caused a bit of upset.
    - AniseAbyss 3y ago
      [dead]
    - tick_tock_tick 3y ago
      I mean pretty much that's a cornerstone of our legal system. There's a strong bias against hidden courts where someone may be convicted in secret and punished in secret.
- oneplane 3y ago
  The public place doctrine is uniquely weird (and American) in that regard. Being seen or heard by others in a public place should not mean that you, as a private person, also gets recorded.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    I agree. I think that US law is actively harmful in this regard. It should be possible to be in public spaces without having to worry about being recorded, either by authorities or other people.
    - ultrarunner 3y ago
      This reverses the subject, though: even if we grant that private civilians should have a (possibly limited) expectation of privacy in public, civilians acting in a public capacity, like the police, should not. Given the enormous power they have to act outside the law with impunity, removing the only check on that power— transparency into their conduct— would be a mistake. One only need to consider any of the many times police have been caught outright lying by video surfacing afterward to understand why.
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        I agree entirely. We give police extraordinary power over us, and it seems completely reasonable that they have little expectation of privacy when using those powers.
- qwertox 3y ago
  What a simplistic view of the world. "It's a public place.". Do I want to be there? No. Do I have to be there? Yes. Oh, the back door, right. And don't forget to make the appointment. Fact is, if I'm being there as a private citizen dealing with private matters, I don't want some person hanging around there filming me. And at least in Europe I have the right to expect this.
JackFr 3y ago
What about crime victims?
themaninthedark 3y ago
What if the mob is paying people to film inside the Precinct?

JohnFen 3y ago

I get the argument. This is a tough problem, though, because someone recording in a police building can easily prevent citizens from conducting their business in there. I know that if I saw some random person recording in the building (or in other sensitive places), I wouldn't set foot in there. I doubt I'm the only one. Particularly if someone is going in there to deal with an issue where they don't want others to know they're going to the police.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
MrDrMcCoy 3y ago
I'm still in favor of absolute recording rights despite all that. You're quite right to point out chilling effects of active recording, but you have to also consider that bad police behavior is chilling in and of itself. People don't want to make reports when the police might make things worse or neglect things they're supposed to help with. Recording can help with that and will become less common as bad police are held to better account. Another thing that can balance that would be for police stations to have a reception desk with a transparent, soundproof box for citizens to make reports with some privacy and safety regardless of recording.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Another thing that can balance that would be for police stations to have a reception desk with a transparent, soundproof box for citizens to make reports That doesn't really address the issue, though. The issue is that people can be shown to have been at the police station at all.
  - chrsig 3y ago
    Surely if it's that big of an issue they could call the police station and arrange a more discrete venue? Maybe in the best of times this would seem a bigger concern, but in the present day it definitely seems like there needs to be more pressure on police to meet minimum standards.

JackFr 3y ago

Should other people in a police station have any expectation of privacy? Victims of crimes? People who've been arrested?

Kab1r 3y ago
People who have been arrested don't usually just hang out in the lobby. There is no expectation of privacy in any public space
- kube-system 3y ago
  That is not universally true, there are some expectations of privacy in some public places. For example, public restrooms, phone booths, dressing rooms, people's person, car, belongings, etc.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > There is no expectation of privacy in any public space But there should be protection against being recorded against your will.
  - drdaeman 3y ago
    In a public place? Why? If you’ve been somewhere others saw you, and it was a place where privacy is not expected (i.e. not someone peeking into your backyard or a bathroom stall), why should others be prevented from recording and retelling this, if they want to?