It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Oregon Man Arrested for Recording Militarized Police Raid in Neighborhood
These power abusing pigs dress as soldiers and use force without provocation and confiscate one’s personal possessions. He’s on his property, not breaking curfew, plus people have the right to endanger themselves, I mean we own our bodies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujb0pxY853E
Thing is, some states have laws that require consent before recording someone. If this is true in Oregon then sucks for him. If not, I bet charges will be dropped.
Ralph_SwaggumThing is, some states have laws that require consent before recording someone. If this is true in Oregon then sucks for him. If not, I bet charges will be dropped.
(In all states) this law does not apply to policemen. If you start getting harassed by a cop, it is 100% your legal right to film them.
Ha that guy was a fucking twat, he deserves to go to prison for being so dumb. If SWAT officers are raiding a house across the street from you and tell you to go inside, just dont be dumb, they're not trying to kill you.
I think you guys are missing the point. why can't he be outside on his own property? he isn't breaking a single law. it is perfectly within his right to be there. the better question is... why do the police care that he is filming them?
you guys aren't allowed to hit any more rails or booters because it *could* be dangerous and you *could* get hurt. i'm looking out for your safety. no skiing allowed anymore. now get off the mountain and go home. oh, you want to keep hitting that rail? now your pass is confiscated for the rest of the season.
the police were on a public road in the state of oregon. here is what the law says in oregon:
Feeling empowered by your iPhone? Here's what's allowed under the law in Oregon:
Taking video or snapping a photo of police officers? As long as you're in a public place -- where the courts have ruled that there is "no reasonable expectation of privacy" -- and you're not interfering with the duties of law enforcement, it's perfectly legal to snap photos and shoot video.
What about recording audio? This is where modern-day video gets tricky. If you're going to record a conversation with a police officer (or anyone else), Oregon law says that you need to first notify all parties that you're capturing the exchange on a device. You don't need their consent; you just need to tell them what you're doing recording the sound of your voices. With the advance of technology, separate laws for video and audio is an anachronism, Fidanque said."The law needs to be clarified and updated," he said.
So what about filming police activity in large crowd such as a protest in the street? You don't have to shout out, "Hey, everyone, I'm recording audio!" Portland attorney Duane Bosworth, who represents clients in communications, media law and litigation, said the state law provides exemptions for gatherings such as press conferences, public meetings and rallies. "There you go, rallies," he said.
Not all public buildings have the same recording policies. For instance, a Multnomah County Library patron recently got into trouble for filming a conversation between sheriff's deputies and a man inside the downtown branch, Fidanque said. "He violated the library's policy, which requires consent before you can record," he said. His advice: Know the rules of a public building before you hit the record button.
quixoticI think you guys are missing the point. why can't he be outside on his own property? he isn't breaking a single law. it is perfectly within his right to be there. the better question is... why do the police care that he is filming them?
you guys aren't allowed to hit any more rails or booters because it *could* be dangerous and you *could* get hurt. i'm looking out for your safety. no skiing allowed anymore. now get off the mountain and go home. oh, you want to keep hitting that rail? now your pass is confiscated for the rest of the season.
the police were on a public road in the state of oregon. here is what the law says in oregon:
Feeling empowered by your iPhone? Here's what's allowed under the law in Oregon:
Taking video or snapping a photo of police officers? As long as you're in a public place -- where the courts have ruled that there is "no reasonable expectation of privacy" -- and you're not interfering with the duties of law enforcement, it's perfectly legal to snap photos and shoot video.
What about recording audio? This is where modern-day video gets tricky. If you're going to record a conversation with a police officer (or anyone else), Oregon law says that you need to first notify all parties that you're capturing the exchange on a device. You don't need their consent; you just need to tell them what you're doing recording the sound of your voices. With the advance of technology, separate laws for video and audio is an anachronism, Fidanque said."The law needs to be clarified and updated," he said.
So what about filming police activity in large crowd such as a protest in the street? You don't have to shout out, "Hey, everyone, I'm recording audio!" Portland attorney Duane Bosworth, who represents clients in communications, media law and litigation, said the state law provides exemptions for gatherings such as press conferences, public meetings and rallies. "There you go, rallies," he said.
Not all public buildings have the same recording policies. For instance, a Multnomah County Library patron recently got into trouble for filming a conversation between sheriff's deputies and a man inside the downtown branch, Fidanque said. "He violated the library's policy, which requires consent before you can record," he said. His advice: Know the rules of a public building before you hit the record button.
There guys were doing him a favor, they knew that things might get hairy so they wanted the filmer to be safe. It is his fault that he didnt go inside when he was told to, but I do think arresting him was a bit too much
.Hugo.All the guy had to do was go inside. That simple and nothing would have happened
And sit quietly idian style with his hands in his lap?
WOW what a joke.
While I agree that calling cops pigs is a little over the top sometimes...it's this type of mentality that is wrong with todays society.
The guy was on HIS Property. HIS property!!!! He wasn't interfering with a police investigation. He was on his property, doing nothing wrong.
If it is a safety issue then fine. A police officer can tell someone to go in their house for their own safety but they can't order someone, or force someone inside their own home.
This comes down to power hungry police officers that think they can do whatever they want whenever they want.
I am willing to bet that this becomes a civil suite, and all the charges against him will be dropped.
What about recording audio? This is where modern-day video gets tricky. If you're going to record a conversation with a police officer (or anyone else), Oregon law says that you need to first notify all parties that you're capturing the exchange on a device. You don't need their consent; you just need to tell them what you're doing recording the sound of your voices. With the advance of technology, separate laws for video and audio is an anachronism, Fidanque said."The law needs to be clarified and updated," he said.
You kinda just shot yourself in the foot.... by recording video that has audio in it he broke this law. He did not announce to the officers that he was recording them beforehand
Anyone who thinks the cops acted OK in that situation does not value our freedom. The man did nothing wrong yet was arrested and you guys defend the cops. Jesus
If a ski patrol told you not to ski a certain area even though it was not closed or OB then took your pass for skiing the area you would all be outraged. This is no different. The cops made their own rules and enforced them. This is America, thats not how it works here.
It doesnt matter if it was for his own safety or not. That is 100% irrelevant. It doesnt matter if it would have been easy to comply with the officers. That is also 100% irrelevant. What matters is that he was not breakin any laws and you dumdums still agree with his arrest.
.Hugo.You kinda just shot yourself in the foot.... by recording video that has audio in it he broke this law. He did not announce to the officers that he was recording them beforehand
Thats not why he was arrested so that is a moot point.
Im surprised at hugo and frenchy. Both of you are gun owners and I expect a different mentality from you guys.
.Hugo.You kinda just shot yourself in the foot.... by recording video that has audio in it he broke this law. He did not announce to the officers that he was recording them beforehand
You needs to get your facts straight.
You do NOT need to tell the officer that you are recording. The officer is a PUBLIC SERVANT, and is located on a PUBLIC street.
There are no privacy or eavesdropping laws anymore in this type of situation .
RusticlesToo bad the shit stain with the camera didn't catch a stray bullet when a shoot out erupted.
A dude standing in his yard deserves a bullet for standing in his yard.
You guys who like oppression so much should move to a shit bag country where it is the norm. Thats not how America should operate and Americans shouldnt be ok with it
For audio, you really only need to announce that you're recording audio if you're in a direct encounter with the police.
Cops are taking video and audio all the time, and the only time they ever let you know is if they have just pulled you over and are in a direct encounter. That law has a shitload of grey area being that it's still from the 1970's when you required separate devices, but regardless, audio and video are synonymous today, and if one is allowed, then both should be.
DingoSeanFor audio, you really only need to announce that you're recording audio if you're in a direct encounter with the police.
Cops are taking video and audio all the time, and the only time they ever let you know is if they have just pulled you over and are in a direct encounter. That law has a shitload of grey area being that it's still from the 1970's when you required separate devices, but regardless, audio and video are synonymous today, and if one is allowed, then both should be.
Iphones have awful audio anyway.
There really isn't any more grey area. I am from Illinois. Which had the oldest eavesdropping laws in America... until recently.
You don't need to say anything. Not one word.
Especially while interacting with a police officer.
Lastly, this had nothing to do with safety. Did you see the way the cops where walking around? If there had been a real safety threat they wouldn't be just walking around like that.And would not arrest someone like that in plain view if there was a safety threat.
This had to do with the Police not wanting to be recorded.
All these types of arrest due is cause their local villages money. Cases like this usually end up being dropped, followed by a civil suit.
El_Barto.A dude standing in his yard deserves a bullet for standing in his yard.
You guys who like oppression so much should move to a shit bag country where it is the norm. Thats not how America should operate and Americans shouldnt be ok with it
Yeah being told to put the fucking camera down and go inside while the SWAT team was busting down a door is real oppressive. Maybe, just maybe he had the kids best interest in mind when he was telling him to go inside. I'm guessing they didn't get the SWAT team there just for some exercise, maybe they were expecting some resistance that's why they brought armoured cars and assault rifles. Maybe they wanted him inside so that when a cracked out thug came running out with guns blazing they could easily identify the assailant and return fire without fear of gunning down an innocent man.
RusticlesYeah being told to put the fucking camera down and go inside while the SWAT team was busting down a door is real oppressive. Maybe, just maybe he had the kids best interest in mind when he was telling him to go inside. I'm guessing they didn't get the SWAT team there just for some exercise, maybe they were expecting some resistance that's why they brought armoured cars and assault rifles. Maybe they wanted him inside so that when a cracked out thug came running out with guns blazing they could easily identify the assailant and return fire without fear of gunning down an innocent man.
But hey...... FUCK THE POLICE
Maybe you're wrong.
Maybe that home was swatted.
Maybe the guy was on his own property and within his legal right.
Maybe if that guy wants to stand out on his front lawn and get shot by the "cracked out thug" "with guns blazing", he has every right too. Especially because we know that happens quite often...
Maybe you're whole argument is irrelevant to the fact that the filmer should have never been arrested in the first place.
Maybe the guy was on his own property and within his legal right.
Maybe if that guy wants to stand out on his front lawn and get shot by the "cracked out thug" "with guns blazing", he has every right too. Especially because we know that happens quite often...
Maybe you're whole argument is irrelevant to the fact that the filmer should have never been arrested in the first place.
Maybe he could have shown some god damn respect and acted a little more polite instead of some entitled little punk waiting to get the next shot of an officer putting a pinky toe on the other side of the line in a heated moment and then maybe they would have been a little more respectful in return.
Are things so fucking bad down in "MURICA" that you guys feel the need to film cops at all moments to make sure that they are doing there jobs to a T. Do you honestly feel like they are patrolling the streets waiting to beat down anyone that isn't following the law.
Do you not hear the fucking guy on the loud speaker say "neighbors stay inside and away from windows"? Clearly they were going to use force and we're preparing for the worst. The last thing they need when they are worried about their lives is some dumbass fuck who just wants to find reasons to hate the police's life too. If a police officer is using force against you or wrongfully assaulting you then sure, film it. But this guy had the complete choice to not film it or film it from inside his house. For someone to go completely out of their way to exploit the police then they deserve to look like a dumbass in court
RusticlesAre things so fucking bad down in "MURICA" that you guys feel the need to film cops at all moments to make sure that they are doing there jobs to a T. Do you honestly feel like they are patrolling the streets waiting to beat down anyone that isn't following the law.
Honestly, the militarization of police forces and their actions is out of control once you go below the 49th parallel.
This 'raid' was likely conducted with a looser ROE than we were allowed to do in Iraq in 2009-2011 or Afghanistan 2012-. Likely because the guy/gal was suspected of selling a small amount of weed or other narcotic sometime in his/her life.
The same result would have likely been achieved during the day, with a coordinated traffic stop and simultaneous knock and enter. All while putting the officers in less danger. That however, would not justify the several hundred thousands of dollars in taxpayer money spent on cool kit and tactical toys.
Maybe, if Officer tacti-cool was really lucky he got to flash bang a grandma and shoot a yapping dog.
RusticlesYeah being told to put the fucking camera down and go inside while the SWAT team was busting down a door is real oppressive. Maybe, just maybe he had the kids best interest in mind when he was telling him to go inside. I'm guessing they didn't get the SWAT team there just for some exercise, maybe they were expecting some resistance that's why they brought armoured cars and assault rifles. Maybe they wanted him inside so that when a cracked out thug came running out with guns blazing they could easily identify the assailant and return fire without fear of gunning down an innocent man.
RusticlesYeah being told to put the fucking camera down and go inside while the SWAT team was busting down a door is real oppressive. Maybe, just maybe he had the kids best interest in mind when he was telling him to go inside. I'm guessing they didn't get the SWAT team there just for some exercise, maybe they were expecting some resistance that's why they brought armoured cars and assault rifles. Maybe they wanted him inside so that when a cracked out thug came running out with guns blazing they could easily identify the assailant and return fire without fear of gunning down an innocent man.
But hey...... FUCK THE POLICE
Hahaha, I love how many kids on this site still believe they use SWAT raids only occur in highly dangerous situations where they're taking down a known violent and/or armed suspect. I guarantee this raid was done to apprehend a non-violent criminal over a non-violent crime. Time to wake up. The use of SWAT, no-knock raids and other forms of using militarized police against citizens has become commonplace and you should be fucking worried. Go educate yourself before blindly defending the "police".
SideShowBobDo you not hear the fucking guy on the loud speaker say "neighbors stay inside and away from windows"? Clearly they were going to use force and we're preparing for the worst. The last thing they need when they are worried about their lives is some dumbass fuck who just wants to find reasons to hate the police's life too. If a police officer is using force against you or wrongfully assaulting you then sure, film it. But this guy had the complete choice to not film it or film it from inside his house. For someone to go completely out of their way to exploit the police then they deserve to look like a dumbass in court
You're missing the point.
He wants to take the risk, and he has the power to. He's absolutely free to stand and film wherever he wants on his property.
yeah i totally forgot that part in the constitution where it says i cant stand on my own lawn????
thats basically a load of bullshit, and by the cops arresting him on his lawn is pretty shitty, and hell if there were going to be bullets flying, the cops could of recommended that the guy go inside so he dosen't get shot, but they cant make him. they had enough armored trucks blocking the street anyways so no stray bullets would hit anyone.
but, calling the cops pigs makes you look like some doushebag who forgets that their gonna be saving his ass when he's getting the shit beaten out of him a week later.
cobra_commanderHonestly, the militarization of police forces and their actions is out of control once you go below the 49th parallel.
This 'raid' was likely conducted with a looser ROE than we were allowed to do in Iraq in 2009-2011 or Afghanistan 2012-. Likely because the guy/gal was suspected of selling a small amount of weed or other narcotic sometime in his/her life.
The same result would have likely been achieved during the day, with a coordinated traffic stop and simultaneous knock and enter. All while putting the officers in less danger. That however, would not justify the several hundred thousands of dollars in taxpayer money spent on cool kit and tactical toys.
Maybe, if Officer tacti-cool was really lucky he got to flash bang a grandma and shoot a yapping dog.
The Gestapo also liked to raid at night.
I guess were fairly sheltered to that kind of shit up here in Canada. I guess it's kind of hard to believe that that shit is actually happening down there.
Yeah I do actually own my own body. why? because I'm generally fairly polite with police officers and treat them like human beings and in return their generally respectful in return.
JenniferGarnerHahaha, I love how many kids on this site still believe they use SWAT raids only occur in highly dangerous situations where they're taking down a known violent and/or armed suspect. I guarantee this raid was done to apprehend a non-violent criminal over a non-violent crime. Time to wake up. The use of SWAT, no-knock raids and other forms of using militarized police against citizens has become commonplace and you should be fucking worried. Go educate yourself before blindly defending the "police".
Well this shit does not happen in Canada. If SWAT gets called in, it's generally for a good fucking reason, and I highly doubt anyone would stand on their lawn and birddogs the cops with a camera waiting to nail them if they're too rough with the perp.
RusticlesYeah I do actually own my own body. why? because I'm generally fairly polite with police officers and treat them like human beings and in return their generally respectful in return.
Well this shit does not happen in Canada. If SWAT gets called in, it's generally for a good fucking reason, and I highly doubt anyone would stand on their lawn and birddogs the cops with a camera waiting to nail them if they're too rough with the perp.
With the exception of that incident on the bus in TO a few years ago
RusticlesWell this shit does not happen in Canada. If SWAT gets called in, it's generally for a good fucking reason, and I highly doubt anyone would stand on their lawn and birddogs the cops with a camera waiting to nail them if they're too rough with the perp.
Stores are a dime-a-dozen because it's such a fucked up issue. Guess how many SWAT raids happen in the US a year? 50,000. Yeah, that's completely warranted.
RusticlesWell this shit does not happen in Canada. If SWAT gets called in, it's generally for a good fucking reason, and I highly doubt anyone would stand on their lawn and birddogs the cops with a camera waiting to nail them if they're too rough with the perp.
Source?
The police officers were throwing flash bang grenades at 4 a.m, who wouldn’t go outside and see what was going on. Plus, the cops approached the cameraman on private property and/or public sidewalk. The cameraman does not interfere in any way. It was an unlawful arrest.
He was charged with resisting arrest and interfering with a “peace officer."
Gresham PD:
"Our core values of service, integrity, and respect for the individual are the cornerstones of our organization. Respect for the Individual: We will respect and protect the constitutional rights of all citizens, treating them with courtesy and respect, using force only when necessary."
"We hold ourselves accountable to the highest standards of moral and ethical conduct and strive to be role models for our community."
JenniferGarnerStores are a dime-a-dozen because it's such a fucked up issue. Guess how many SWAT raids happen in the US a year? 50,000. Yeah, that's completely warranted.
RevolverHustleOYou're missing the point.
He wants to take the risk, and he has the power to. He's absolutely free to stand and film wherever he wants on his property.
That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard.
The police still have to protect his life
Therefore if whatever happens and that guys life is in danger, they aren't just going to let him get hurt
Therefore, one more person they have to worry about
I honestly hope this guy gets fined
SideShowBobThat's the dumbest shit I've ever heard.
The police still have to protect his life
Therefore if whatever happens and that guys life is in danger, they aren't just going to let him get hurt
Therefore, one more person they have to worry about
I honestly hope this guy gets fined
Why hello there, welcome to the real world where the police really don't give a fuck about your safety but instead care more about evidence of them violating a citizen's rights or hurting/killing a citizen without reason which would result in their buddies becoming fired or their department from losing money via lawsuits.
You clearly have zero knowledge about this issue and are stuck in your perfect bubble of where you don't care to look beyond what mainstream news is telling you. This has nothing to do with the actual police, this has to do with the carelessness of how they use militarized police forces in mundane situations... you know the cops who are trained not to look at you as citizens but rather potential combatants. That's what SWAT does. They're not out there to protect you, you ignorant fetus. They're there to neutralize threats.
Go do 5 mins. of googling for stories by legit sources on the ease and unwarranted use of SWAT and hand-me-down military equipment to police forces... or not and continue to look like a jackass. Either way.
Feeling empowered by your iPhone? Here's what's allowed under the law in Oregon:
Taking video or snapping a photo of police officers? As long as you're in a public place -- where the courts have ruled that there is "no reasonable expectation of privacy" -- and you're not interfering with the duties of law enforcement, it's perfectly legal to snap photos and shoot video.
What about recording audio? This is where modern-day video gets tricky. If you're going to record a conversation with a police officer (or anyone else), Oregon law says that you need to first notify all parties that you're capturing the exchange on a device. You don't need their consent; you just need to tell them what you're doing recording the sound of your voices. With the advance of technology, separate laws for video and audio is an anachronism, Fidanque said."The law needs to be clarified and updated," he said.
So what about filming police activity in large crowd such as a protest in the street? You don't have to shout out, "Hey, everyone, I'm recording audio!" Portland attorney Duane Bosworth, who represents clients in communications, media law and litigation, said the state law provides exemptions for gatherings such as press conferences, public meetings and rallies. "There you go, rallies," he said.
Not all public buildings have the same recording policies. For instance, a Multnomah County Library patron recently got into trouble for filming a conversation between sheriff's deputies and a man inside the downtown branch, Fidanque said. "He violated the library's policy, which requires consent before you can record," he said. His advice: Know the rules of a public building before you hit the record button.
In the last sentence of B, it states: if you're not interfering with law enforcement. The cops felt he was so it sounds like technically by law, he had to follow the orders of the cops. Not that I agree with it, I have no opinion.
Dolan.Escobarfucking pork. pork that barges into ppls homes for drug busts deserves to go to the slaughterhouse and end up as pork chops. Thats just the way i feel
-benedettoThe cops felt he was so it sounds like technically by law, he had to follow the orders of the cops. Not that I agree with it, I have no opinion.
Oh, I didn't know we were in the military. What you describe there is a literal police state. A cop cannot randomly show up and start giving you orders. Regardless, these are SWAT. They are trained not to protect innocent civilians but to detain/control them so they can remove them as possible threats. If you don't "follow their orders" you are a threat, that's why they arrested/detained him. Wake the fuck up.
