Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 39    Average: 4/5]
52 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 8191
Rating: 4
Category: Misc
Date: 12/04/12 06:42 AM

52 Responses to Cop Protects 1st Amendment

  1. Profile photo of kitteh9lives
    kitteh9lives Female 70 & Over
    8033 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 6:02 am
    Link: Cop Protects 1st Amendment - Deputy Stan Lenic deserves a medal for defending free speech rights against airport officials. Action starts at 1:30
  2. Profile photo of woomanfoo
    woomanfoo Male 18-29
    536 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:10 am
    While the cop was definitely in the right, both parties in the argument seem a bit looney.
  3. Profile photo of dm2754
    dm2754 Male 40-49
    3283 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:10 am
    filming permits are only needed it you are making a movie
  4. Profile photo of KungFuGuy
    KungFuGuy Male 18-29
    182 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:15 am
    I wonder what was on the flyer?
  5. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3348 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:19 am
    Most of what Alex Jones puts out is pure paranoid tinfoil hat crap, but this was actually pretty awesome, and so is that sheriff.
  6. Profile photo of zombunny
    zombunny Female 18-29
    2525 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:24 am
    No one "deserves a medal" for defending free speech. It`s his job. How sad is it that we feel the need to applaud and hand out cookies when a cop actually upholds the constitution like he`s supposed to?
  7. Profile photo of Reebo
    Reebo Male 40-49
    11 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:27 am
    These are the cases where you see how important it is to have informed, professional law enforcement.
  8. Profile photo of woomanfoo
    woomanfoo Male 18-29
    536 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:28 am
    How else are we supposed to change our law enforcement culture, Zombunny? I agree that it is sad, but the popo are typically rewarded with a mandatory paid vacation when they royally muss up.
  9. Profile photo of teamymy
    teamymy Male 30-39
    72 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:28 am
    Good point made, Good for the Deputy. But I would much rather have that time back to maybe go take a shat so I don`t be late for my appointment. Now I gotta go to the bathroom.
  10. Profile photo of Reebo
    Reebo Male 40-49
    11 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:30 am
    Zombunny "No one "deserves a medal" for defending free speech."

    I disagree, everyone deserves a medal for defending freedoms.
  11. Profile photo of TruTenrMan
    TruTenrMan Male 30-39
    2553 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:34 am
    Kudos to the deputy.
  12. Profile photo of zombunny
    zombunny Female 18-29
    2525 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:42 am
    My point is that it shouldn`t be a special occasion. It should happen every time.
  13. Profile photo of RecycleElf
    RecycleElf Male 18-29
    3622 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:47 am
    crazies fighting crazies over crazy things
    all i got to say is that`s cray-cray
  14. Profile photo of Corydoras87
    Corydoras87 Male 18-29
    642 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 7:50 am
    how is that free speech if they are on an airport that is obviously someone`s property. Free speech is only protected in public, not on an airport, not in your office.
  15. Profile photo of Corydoras87
    Corydoras87 Male 18-29
    642 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:00 am
    they are clearly not interested in giving people information.. they are interested in being famous.. see how that woman is flirting with the camera? She just wants to bug people for the sake of bugging people on the off-chance that something happens and they can be in the news..
  16. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:03 am
    After a bit of reading, I found that:
    1) Apparently in the US courts have upheld that if you even place your bags on the x-ray conveyor that you`ve implicitly agreed to be searched and CANNOT revoke consent (unlike Canada).
    2) Airports in the US don`t really go by the same free speech rules as in the rest of the US. As soon as you walk in the terminal your free speech counts for very little.

    So maybe the airport guys were right here, but they are being dicks about it.
  17. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2105 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:08 am
    who owns airports? the public. otherwise,it`s a private airport.
  18. Profile photo of Jimjamjeroo
    Jimjamjeroo Male 18-29
    17 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:23 am
    Cameraman and Flyer girl seem like douchey hippies.
    Airport man sounds like a douche.
    Deputy Stan seems like a stand up guy!
  19. Profile photo of HalfPintRoo
    HalfPintRoo Female 18-29
    2764 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:40 am
    I was flying out while this was happening and I have to tell you, I didn`t want to be filmed, I didn`t want the flyer and I didn`t want to be on the internet.

    I`ve had my fair share of "we are allowed to film in a public place we are doing nothing wrong" and it happens all over NYS. At what point is there a line drawn?

    Ok, so I`m filmed on surveillance cameras, security cameras, etc. They don`t bother me, they don`t end up on the internet.

    Being filmed by douche bags with their agenda that may or may not go viral with my face in it... when is that crossing the line.

    I know I`m going to get major hate from most all of you here and I am all for their rights and what not, but I`m just asking a serious question. When is it crossing the line?????
  20. Profile photo of Mikeoxsbiggg
    Mikeoxsbiggg Male 30-39
    1502 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:42 am
    Watching th old guy be bitter was the best part.
    Kudos to the cop for accually following the law.
  21. Profile photo of HalfPintRoo
    HalfPintRoo Female 18-29
    2764 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:47 am
    by the way, I was NOT in this video, they clearly cut that part out (good on them) and were only showing people who took the flyer.

    But I still want to know why they can film people and put them on the internet without their permission.

    Like people of walmart (is that site still going?)

    It` s not right that those taking the picture of someone to post on the internet just to mock them (bully them) has more rights then the person who is in the picture.
  22. Profile photo of smurfite
    smurfite Male 13-17
    17 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 8:55 am
    HalfPintRoo I`m not entirely sure (as a citizen of the UK) but I`m sure if you were to approach the people filming and ask to not take part in the video or have your face shown they would have blocked it (like the men at 12:32). I`m not sure if this is a law or just general common decency but I have found that if someone ever complains their face can and has always been blurred in everything like this I have seen.
  23. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 9:15 am
    @HalfPintRoo
    In the U.S., it is legal to photograph or videotape anything and anyone on public property. If that bothers you, stay home.
  24. Profile photo of whipplefunk
    whipplefunk Male 30-39
    969 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 9:25 am
    I love how we have great cops in this world that take the time to get it right and WASTE THEIR TIME OVER PETTY SQUABBLES SO SOME GODDAMNED TRUST FUND KIDS CAN HAND OUT A FLYER!!!
  25. Profile photo of Smutleybutt
    Smutleybutt Male 18-29
    1377 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 9:29 am
    HalfPintRoo What if?: Someone DID want to be filmed, DID want the flyer and DID want to be on the internet, but they couldn`t because the people attempting to inform others about this weren`t there because they didn`t want to offend you or your right to privacy.

    Who has more rights? You?? Them??

    If you want privacy stay home. If you are in public anyone can see you and they just might see you in person or on the internet. Remember that next time you go out. Disguise yourself if necessary or become a hermit and recluse.

  26. Profile photo of triki-trakes
    triki-trakes Male 18-29
    83 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 9:38 am
    damn hippies causing trouble and now they got a bunch of jacka sses to follow them on twitter...objective achieved
  27. Profile photo of MrOrange
    MrOrange Male 30-39
    2398 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 9:45 am
    Actualy there is something as portrait right, i don`t know if the states have it and or which states. but it means that even if they film you in a public location you have the right to refuse to be filmed or photographed at which point they no longer can use any footage of you, my photo was taken for a news paper article once, and they had to drop it. (i was just out walkind the dog, they were doing a piece about that park or smth)

    Awsome cop btw.
  28. Profile photo of cheeseb
    cheeseb Male 30-39
    254 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 9:57 am
    Didn`t they say something about an application process? So it`s fine to do this, but it`s just decent to let the airport know that you want to, just like any sensible person would do.
    Like if you just met someone, it would be cool if you invited them over to your house for dinner, but it`s not cool for that someone to just walk in and start eating your food.
  29. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 10:13 am
    @cheeseb
    The application process is to get permission for COMMERCIAL photography, as in filming a movie or documentary, and it requires proof of million dollar liability insurance. It does not apply to personal photography, your analogy is ridiculous.
  30. Profile photo of Reebo
    Reebo Male 40-49
    11 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 10:20 am
    Cheeseb,

    The application process and associated bond fee that the administrator is a rule for filming movies or other commercial ventures. This in no way relates to personal freedoms. The administrator was just hoping to use it as a loop hole to get his way.
  31. Profile photo of dankenstien
    dankenstien Male 30-39
    26 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 10:28 am
    What was the guys name filming? I don`t recall the 1st amendment stating the freedom to be annoying f*cktards.. Who has two thumbs and will never go to whatever his site is and cares less about other peoples opinions? Hopefully everyone
  32. Profile photo of LordJim
    LordJim Male 60-69
    6660 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 11:02 am
    Polite, well-informed, even-handed cop doing his job without fear or favour. Good to see.
  33. Profile photo of CoyoteKing
    CoyoteKing Male 18-29
    2988 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 11:25 am
    officer that knows the laws > flyers and camera people >> airport douche

    i also found it funny that when the airport guy is trying to get the ID from the cameraman and gets turned down, he looks to the cop and says he would like to get it from the cop and winks at him while saying it. cop continues to do his job properly and tells him he cant do that and the look on the airport guy`s face is priceless as if to say "poo i`ve lost this fight and i cant get the cop to play along"
  34. Profile photo of itzazoom
    itzazoom Male 18-29
    182 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 11:35 am
    the camera guy was the most annoying of all, he kept preaching his crap when the the cop already said "i wont stop you, you arent breaking any of my rules"
  35. Profile photo of HalfPintRoo
    HalfPintRoo Female 18-29
    2764 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 11:59 am
    You missed my point.

    I`m asking where the LINE is drawn. I know the law. I know anyone can photograph and videotape anything and anyone they want. I`m saying, why is it then legal to POST those all over the internet with mean, hurtful, hateful comments.

    Not this video- it just made me ask the question- where is the line?

    There is a difference between "Stay home if you don`t want to be photographed" and "Stay home if you don`t want to be bullied and have your life ruined"

    COME ON
  36. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14273 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 12:21 pm
    Anyone think that guy in the thumbnail kinda looks like Hellraiser???



    Well without the pins of course.
  37. Profile photo of cityncolour
    cityncolour Male 30-39
    379 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 12:37 pm
    @HalfPintRoo
    That "where is the line" business works both ways. Where is the line of protection from being bullied and outright oppression of our right to know? The fact is... if you`re on public or federal property, there is no line. and that`s the way it should be.
  38. Profile photo of HalfPintRoo
    HalfPintRoo Female 18-29
    2764 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 1:31 pm
    Difference of interpretation I guess. My opinion is that the legal right after photographing/videotaping people stop at posting them on the internet w/hurtful captions.

    And yes- the cop does look like the hellraiser guy
  39. Profile photo of spbm02
    spbm02 Male 18-29
    30 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 3:49 pm
    The best "action" is at 9:50 where the cop tells the guy who dosent know anything to F off!
  40. Profile photo of Listypoos
    Listypoos Male 40-49
    3069 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 4:44 pm
    "Difference of interpretation I guess. My opinion is that the legal right after photographing/videotaping people stop at posting them on the internet w/hurtful captions. "

    Roo, if the hurtful comments were untrue or exaggerated/just malicious then the laws of defamation may be a way of addressing it in court. If it`s photos of the same person then the harassment laws here would also apply.

  41. Profile photo of Roland
    Roland Male 30-39
    288 posts
    December 4, 2012 at 9:10 pm
    What was this guys so afraid of?
  42. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17515 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 12:18 am
    HalfPintRoo: "Crossing the line" camera wise varies state to state. In some anyone can film, they are called `one-party consent` states. Other states require both (or all) parties to consent to being filmed, they are known as `two-party consent` states. Each state also has their rules on legal age, in terms of filming too.

    Here in Illinois, If a 16 year old boy takes pictures (non-nude) of his 15 year old GF he could be in serious trouble, because she`s not old enough to give consent.
  43. Profile photo of kcpd2050
    kcpd2050 Male 40-49
    330 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 12:31 am
    Good job law enforcement. The old guy was a complete ass. Who gives a crap if they hand out info and film. Whole lot of worry over nothing. The old guy just reinforced the idea of "question everything." The camera man and hot girl where being very polite and professional. Nice work.
  44. Profile photo of BoredFrank
    BoredFrank Male 40-49
    2209 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 5:59 am
    The TSA is composed entirely of clueless shiiteheads who are still butt-hurt they missed being Nazis by 60 years.

    Eff the TSA.
  45. Profile photo of BoredFrank
    BoredFrank Male 40-49
    2209 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 6:03 am
    And yes, Peopleofwalmart is still up and running, because they aren`t doing anything illegal. Expectation of privacy doesn`t apply to elephantine crackers exposing eight yards of ass-crack in public. Mockery may offend some, but it isn`t illegal.
  46. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 6:33 am
    Everyone here is congratulating the police, but I`m pretty sure he was wrong. Your supreme court has upheld that airports are not considered public forums.
  47. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 7:38 am
    Everyone here is congratulating the police, but I`m pretty sure he was wrong. Your supreme court has upheld that airports are not considered public forums.
    Indeed; International Society for Krishna Consciousness v. Lee. Now, whether or not the decision of that case was just is another matter... Either way, the airport is not a public forum currently.
  48. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 8:37 am
    @HA: Exactly my point. Now that case dealt more with money iirc, but it`s still been used to curb free speech in airports. I don`t agree with the ruling, but if that`s the current law then that`s what it is.
  49. Profile photo of HalfPintRoo
    HalfPintRoo Female 18-29
    2764 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 9:24 am
    Listypoos- I was wondering about harassment and/or slander. Something to look into, just out of curiosity.

    CrakrJak- So minors have rights against their picture being taken or posted or both? I figure there are no "internet laws" either. When it comes down to this issue OR starting up laws (aka censorship) on the internet, I would choose to not have the internet censored. Only because I know that once things are governed it will go far beyond reasonable.

    BoredFrank- Your comment made me laugh and I did like the site when it first came out because you always saw just the ass crack. Or you saw just the ill-fitting clothes, etc. But they they started posted shots thought could easily identify the person and to ME that crossed the line.
  50. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 9:29 am
    But they they started posted shots thought could easily identify the person and to ME that crossed the line.
    Sorry but these people know what they look like. If you don`t want to be a potential item of public ridicule, you should present yourself in public better. It may be in bad taste to mock, but it`s not like they pulled one of these people`s ass cheeks out of their jorts or anything.
  51. Profile photo of Denogginizer
    Denogginizer Male 30-39
    821 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 10:10 am
    I hate people like this. Technicly obeying the law, but making a spectacle of themselves, hoping to incite an incident to gain fame. In a just society, the airport offical would have been allowed to dive them from the property with a horse whip.
  52. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    December 5, 2012 at 11:16 am
    Now that case dealt more with money iirc
    Sounds about right... For some reason my brain made a permanent link between "Hindu God Krishna" and "public forum". Probably some trick I used to remember the case name from my time at University.

Leave a Reply