Please don't follow FedEx method

[HarryWarden]

why are you talking about photographs?

We were specifically referring to audio/visual recording. The audio side of which is clearly defined in my state, whereas the video side is a bit more ambiguous.

Do you not know that a video is just multiple photographs in succession? Lmao

Also, it literally says “taking photographs AND VIDEOS”

It’s funny how ignorant people are so bad at reading

 

[PPH_over_9000]

Do you not know that a video is just multiple photographs in succession? Lmao

Also, it literally says “taking photographs AND VIDEOS”

It’s funny how ignorant people are so bad at reading

Harry, you're being an idiot. If there's room for splitting hairs, then hairs will be split in a courtroom. If you think these words can help defend you in a court of law, then you also need to be ready to shut down any other interpretation the opposing party might come up with.

It's honestly clownish of you to think that these rules, these laws, these interpretations.... like, dude, you're straight up a clown if you think they're black and white and not meant to bend before they break.

Also, you're pulling up .org references. Show me a PDF of a statute and i might shut up, but if all you have is some random dude's interpretation of said litigation then you just need to chill because you won't convince me of whatever it is you're trying to.

 

[HarryWarden]

Harry, you're being an idiot. If there's room for splitting hairs, then hairs will be split in a courtroom. If you think these words can help defend you in a court of law, then you also need to be ready to shut down any other interpretation the opposing party might come up with.

It's honestly clownish of you to think that these rules, these laws, these interpretations.... like, dude, you're straight up a clown if you think they're black and white.

Also, you're pulling up .org references. Show me a PDF of a statute and i might shut up, but if all you have is some random dude's interpretation of said litigation then you just need to chill because you won't convince me of whatever it is you're trying to.

I’ve showed you a source from a lawyers office and from the official site of the ACLU

You have shown zero sources. The only source you showed said you can’t film in bathrooms and dressing rooms

There are kids whose entire “career” is filming their entire life in public, they’re called streamers.

There’s YouTube channels where people specifically film people like you, just to prove that they can.

“This means that auditors can legally film their interactions with employees and officials in public spaces without first obtaining their consent. However, this right is not without limitations. Auditors have no right to film in nonpublic spaces ― places where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy and where others would need permission to enter, such as a personal office. But they can record anything they can see from a public space with their naked eye, which may include some parts of nonpublic spaces.

“BUT THEY CAN RECOED ANYTHING THEY CAN SEE FROM A PUBLIC SPACE WITH THEIR NAKED EYE, WHICH MAY INCLUDE SOME PARTS OF NONPUBLIC SPACES”

First Amendment Audits: Definition, Examples and More

You might see First Amendment audits pop up on YouTube and TikTok. But what are they? We answer that, and much more, in this guide.

www.freedomforum.org

It’s okay to admit you were wrong man, it’s not that big of a deal

 

[PPH_over_9000]

I’ve showed you a source from a lawyers office and from the official site of the ACLU

You have shown zero sources. The only source you showed said you can’t film in bathrooms and dressing rooms

There are kids whose entire “career” is filming their entire life in public, they’re called streamers.

There’s YouTube channels where people specifically film people like you, just to prove that they can.

“This means that auditors can legally film their interactions with employees and officials in public spaces without first obtaining their consent. However, this right is not without limitations. Auditors have no right to film in nonpublic spaces ― places where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy and where others would need permission to enter, such as a personal office. But they can record anything they can see from a public space with their naked eye, which may include some parts of nonpublic spaces.

“BUT THEY CAN RECOED ANYTHING THEY CAN SEE FROM A PUBLIC SPACE WITH THEIR NAKED EYE, WHICH MAY INCLUDE SOME PARTS OF NONPUBLIC SPACES”

First Amendment Audits: Definition, Examples and More

You might see First Amendment audits pop up on YouTube and TikTok. But what are they? We answer that, and much more, in this guide.

www.freedomforum.org

It’s okay to admit you were wrong man, it’s not that big of a deal

I'll never admit i was wrong!

I will admit that i don't think I knew what i was jumping into in the first place and just kept digging deeper and deeper.

But you, i wasn't wrong! Almost all of your sources refer to recording of government officals and law enforcement. Not EVERYTHING you've cited, however, but a lot of it.

This is honestly why it's a bit of an issue when local laws vary from one state and jurisdiction to the next. I know for a fact that if i'm recorded without my knowledge and consent in my state, that recording will never be admissible in a court of criminal or civil law unless it's a video documenting a crime taking place. Honestly, THAT's where I'm coming from with this. I'm thinking about things that can be held against you in court, not necessarily the legality of somebody just waving a camera in your face. That might be my fault for getting hung up on that angle.

But other states aren't like that, and that's okay. I realize that rules differ from one state to the other, and that's okay.

But hey, what about those fed ex guys, huh? What buttholes.

 

[HarryWarden]

But you, i wasn't wrong! Almost all of your sources refer to recording of government officals and law enforcement. Not EVERYTHING you've cited, however, but a lot of it.

What fantasy land are you living in where you think government officials have less rights than private citizens?

This is just dumb. RING cameras wouldn’t be a thing if you couldn’t film in public spaces, neither would car dash cams, and thats ignoring all the sources I’ve shown you, including videos of people filming strangers in public

What if I show you a video of someone filming a stranger in public, the stranger calling the police, and the police showing up and telling the stranger that they are allowed to film? Would you then at least be enough of a man to admit you were wrong and shut up?

 

[PPH_over_9000]

What fantasy land are you living in where you think government officials have less rights than private citizens?

This is just dumb. RING cameras wouldn’t be a thing if you couldn’t film in public spaces, neither would car dash cams, and thats ignoring all the sources I’ve shown you, including videos of people filming strangers in public

What if I show you a video of someone filming a stranger in public, the stranger calling the police, and the police showing up and telling the stranger that they are allowed to film? Would you then at least be enough of a man to admit you were wrong and shut up?

Government officials have less of a reasonable expectation of privacy than a citizen.

Are you kidding me? Alright, so we're going with ACLU.org, right? So check this out:

Know Your Rights | Stopped by Police | ACLU

Being stopped by police is a stressful experience that can go bad quickly. Here we describe what the law requires and also offer strategies for handling police encounters. We want to be clear: The burden of de-escalation does not fall on private citizens — it falls on police officers. However...

www.aclu.org

• Do not try to hide the fact that you are recording. Police officers do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when performing their jobs, but the people they are interacting with may have privacy rights that would require you to notify them of the recording. In many states (see here) you must affirmatively make people aware that you are recording them.

LEO and government officials are there to protect, service and enforce the public. They're meant to be in the public's eye and as such, legal precedents have been set that have determined LEO and government officials do NOT have the same expectations of privacy that the average citizen going about their day is entitled to.

If you want court cases, dope. I'll hit you with them tomorrow. It's too late in the night to get caught up in this kind of research.

Oh, and you asked a very specific question at the end of your post. My answer would be no, because a student as well-versed as you should know that you're going to need to show me a Maryland-specific clip before you gain any kind of traction with approach.

 

[HarryWarden]

Government officials have less of a reasonable expectation of privacy than a citizen.

Are you kidding me? Alright, so we're going with ACLU.org, right? So check this out:

Know Your Rights | Stopped by Police | ACLU

Being stopped by police is a stressful experience that can go bad quickly. Here we describe what the law requires and also offer strategies for handling police encounters. We want to be clear: The burden of de-escalation does not fall on private citizens — it falls on police officers. However...

www.aclu.org

LEO and government officials are there to protect, service and enforce the public. They're meant to be in the public's eye and as such, legal precedents have been set that have determined LEO and government officials do NOT have the same expectations of privacy that the average citizen going about their day is entitled to.

If you want court cases, dope. I'll hit you with them tomorrow. It's too late in the night to get caught up in this kind of research.

Oh, and you asked a very specific question at the end of your post. My answer would be no.

Again, you’re not even reading your own sources. Every single one of those is about private spaces where privacy is expected. Not public.

You have ignored every source, and multiple videos showing you are wrong. I’m honestly embarrassed for you at this point

 

[PPH_over_9000]

Again, you’re not even reading your own sources. Every single one of those is about private spaces where privacy is expected. Not public.

You have ignored every source, and multiple videos showing you are wrong. I’m honestly embarrassed for you at this point

So, do you notice the part where i post the source, and then quote a particular section?

Well, the reason i post the source is so you know where the particular section was pulled from. I assumed you understood that, but i guess you didn't, huh? It's not like I'm trying to throw the whole page at you like it's all relevant, because no sir, it just isn't.

I haven't ignored anything relevant to what i'm discussing. I've beelined to the information i know to be true and brought it back for you to view. No more, no less. Feel free to enlighten me further, but keep in mind that i'm not a law enforcement officer or a government official and please try to keep any information you throw at me related to private citizens and private citizens only.

 

[HarryWarden]

So, do you notice the part where i post the source, and then quote a particular section?

Well, the reason i post the source is so you know where the particular section was pulled from. I assumed you understood that, but i guess you didn't, huh?

I haven't ignored anything. I've beelined to the information i know to be true and brought it back for you to view. No more, no less. Feel free to enlighten me further, but keep in mind that i'm not a law enforcement officer or a government official and please try to keep any information you throw at me related to private citizens and private citizens only.

Yeah, and the part that quoted source is referencing is all about private spaces and expectations of privacy. I actually read it, unlike you

You haven’t shown a single source saying filming in public is illegal, while I’ve shown you a video of a stubborn ignorant Karen, like yourself, calling the police, while the police tell her it’s not illegal

You need to get some help man. It’s not healthy to be this insecure. You were wrong. It’s not a big deal. Stop acting like a baby

 

[PPH_over_9000]

Yeah, and the part that quoted source is referencing is all about private spaces and expectations of privacy. I actually read it, unlike you

You haven’t shown a single law saying filming in public is illegal, while I’ve shown you a video of a stubborn ignorant Karen, like yourself, calling the police, while the police tell her it’s not illegal

You need to get some help man. It’s not healthy to be this insecure. You were wrong. It’s not a big deal. Stop acting like a baby

The part i last quoted is actually concerning what to do when you witness acts of police brutality, which typically occur in public.

It's even got a huge title, like several sizes larger than the font and in big, bold letters.

And you're accusing ME of not reading? lmao

I don't think you'd do well in law school, in criminal justice or even a court of law.

I wouldn't either.

But hey, that's why we've got lawyers and just drive trucks. It's good to stay in your lane sometimes.

 

[HarryWarden]

The part i last quoted is actually concerning what to do when you witness acts of police brutality, which typically occur in public.

It's even got a huge title, like several sizes larger than the font and in big, bold letters.

And you're accusing ME of not reading? lmao

I don't think you'd do well in law school, in criminal justice or even a court of law.

I wouldn't either.

But hey, that's why we've got lawyers and just drive trucks. It's good to stay in your lane sometimes.

You know it shows when you edit your posts right?

Regardless, I’ve shown you multiple sources and videos directly contradicting you, and you haven’t shown a single source

I’m done responding to you, it’s all public now, and instead of just admitting you were wrong, you blew it up and everyone will see it and know how ignorant you are. Ironically, the same exact situation which would happen if someone was filming you in public. You’re a Karen

 

[PPH_over_9000]

You know it shows when you edit your posts right?

Regardless, I’ve shown you multiple sources and videos directly contradicting you, and you haven’t shown a single source

I’m done responding to you, it’s all public now, and instead of just admitting you were wrong, you blew it up and everyone will see it and know how ignorant you are. Ironically, the same exact situation which would happen if someone was filming you in public. You’re a Karen

What's your beef with an edit? You don't like it when people fully compose their thoughts?

What, did you think hitting "Post Reply" was a finality? It's almost like you're unaware of the possibility of an edit... but that can't be true because you just mentioned it.

I'm done responding to you too, bro! You can't seem to keep the conversation related to private citizens and really reflect the opinion that every person should be held to the same standard as a public official.

That's okay, though. As soon as you post your last thought, i'll post mine. Until then, mi amigo...

pssssssst..... i edited this one too!

(It's weird though, people have said this before and then strangely tagged me after the fact. Let's see where the dice fall with you.)

 

[Ou812fu]

“

IS IT ILLEGAL TO RECORD SOMEONE WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT WHILE IN PUBLIC?​

The simple answer to this question is: no. When you are in a public setting such as a concert, grocery store, a park, and many others, recordings are permitted. The primary motivator for recording in these types of atmospheres is to ensure safety and enhanced security. Once you leave your private property, you should not be expecting full privacy. Thus, recording in appropriate settings when in public is permitted.”

What to Know Before Recording Someone Without Their Consent

Certain states allow recording someone in public without their consent. Consult a knowledgeable attorney to learn more about the rules.

sparkslawpractice.com

Everything is about safety. Such bs

 

[Ou812fu]

We should all file a class action lawsuit against google earth for filming in public

We should. Because they added a raise feature so that their camera can see over taller fences. You do realize Google is a government run company? Right?

 

[Ou812fu]

If you can’t film in public, how are dash cams legal? How are police body cams legal? How are you able to take pictures in public with people walking behind you?

You’re being ignorant

Again, just because people don't fight it. Doesn't mean that the cameras are legal. If people fought them, and I mean fought them. You'd see most disappear. Just like ring camera that are faces towards another person's house. If the person in the house that the camera faces towards didn't want it facing their house. They first talk with the neighbor and ask that they not record or video any of their property, and if that didn't fix it. You take them to small claims court. The judge will Everytime time tell them to adjust the camera so that the other person's property is not viewable.

 

[Thebrownblob]

Again, just because people don't fight it. Doesn't mean that the cameras are legal. If people fought them, and I mean fought them. You'd see most disappear. Just like ring camera that are faces towards another person's house. If the person in the house that the camera faces towards didn't want it facing their house. They first talk with the neighbor and ask that they not record or video any of their property, and if that didn't fix it. You take them to small claims court. The judge will Everytime time tell them to adjust the camera so that the other person's property is not viewable.

You make some of the dumbest most ignorant claims I’ve ever heard lol there’s nothing illegal about having a camera outside your house. I hope you take someone to trial and lose your ass because the things you post here are the most obnoxious ignorant things I’ve ever heard. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid and wearing your tinfoil hat you deserve to be ignored.

 

[Ou812fu]

You make some of the dumbest most ignorant claims I’ve ever heard lol there’s nothing illegal about having a camera outside your house. I hope you take someone to trial and lose your ass because the things you post here are the most obnoxious ignorant things I’ve ever heard. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid and wearing your tinfoil hat you deserve to be ignored.

Lol. Ignorant.look it up. Better yet ask an attorney if you can legally have your cameras pointed at someone else house that has a problem with it.

 

[Thebrownblob]

Lol. Ignorant.look it up. Better yet ask an attorney if you can legally have your cameras pointed at someone else house that has a problem with it.

Yes, I’m ignorant yet there’s millions of ring and other cameras everywhere pointing at everyone, where is the lawsuits? Stick to secret Society controlling the world it’s your wheelhouse and you should stay there. Why don’t you sue people first? Show us the way because you’re smarter than everyone.

 

[UnionStrong]

Yes, I’m ignorant yet there’s millions of ring and other cameras everywhere pointing at everyone, where is the lawsuits? Stick to secret Society controlling the world it’s your wheelhouse and you should stay there. Why don’t you sue people first? Show us the way because you’re smarter than everyone.

He’s unbelievable.

 

[ManInBrown]

How do they live on that?

It’s mind boggling. I have no idea. I always wondered how average joes live in California. It must be 12 people in a house all chipping in.