Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorade
From the article:
“The agent in charge informed me of the potential charges against (the) scout and informed me it is a violation of federal law for any American to take a picture of a federal agent or any federal building,” Fox wrote.
So my initial thoughts are how many times this "law" gets violated in DC. Pics of the White House, US Capital, all the other federal buildings that Americans take pics of. So also is it ok for a foreign national to snap pics? Maybe this guy mis-remembered what was said but I would bet this it is close enough to what was actually said. Also I wonder if they requested the video under. Freedom of Information Act. If it was and they denied it then that is just wrong. Maybe these guys need to be transferred to the southern boarder and act like this down there against illegal crossers.
Now that I have stated my thoughts, and just for the sake of discussion let's say there were big signs posted saying photography prohibited of the facility and agents during crossings. Someone wakes up and didn't see the signs and decides to take a pic. Agent sees this and thinks something may not be right and sees all this survival gear and maybe thinks the scout uniforms could be a disguise. OK so he decides to stop the van wouldn't it be better to just explain the procedure and show them a in writing that taking pictures of the sensitive areas is illegal and request they delete the pics. Then let them on their way. Instead they go all Super Trooper and it blows up. If it wasn't for the fact that the kids were muzzled I could let this pass as needing training on how to handle the situation better. However knowing what we all know about gun safety this is in acceptable. This could have ended very badly if a negligent discharge occurred.
|
Courts are ruling over and over that people, including Law Enforcement, have no expectation of privacy while in the public thoroughfare. Twelve years ago, when our kids were toddlers, I put up security cameras. We have a corner house, I monitored/taped the whole street. One neighbor took issue with it, saying his privacy was being invaded. Cameras didn't even show his actual house, just the street. I told him to sue me. He didn't. Before he moved he came over to say good bye, and told me he had talked to a lawyer who informed him it was a public street and he had no case. Now this was way back, when a single camera setup cost me $500.00, not like today when a whole kit costs that much. I became a proponent of cameras back then for my own homes. Sometimes we cannot stop an invader, least we can do is find him later. It's public, people are free to roam, more cameras will be installed everywhere, and nobody can expect privacy. Agents need to keep guns holstered unless threatened with deadly force.