What exactly is the law’s position on a citizen filming an on-duty cop going about his duties? I’ve heard that it’s legal, but I’ve also seen things on the internet where the cop gets very threatening and menacing to make the person stop. What are the boundaries and limitations vs legal rights of a citizen?
It raises two issues. One is the legality of filming people in public without their consent. The other is whether the act of filming is interfering with the officer performing his duties.
The laws on both vary state-to-state, but it also depends on the context. If you are standing on your balcony filming a traffic stop on the street below, that’s different than standing next to the officer with your camera shouting “why are you hassling that guy? he didn’t do nuthin’”
I photograph cops occasionally. They’ve seen me and usually don’t seem to mind, but I don’t make a spectacle either.
You can shoot anything you want as long as you are on public property and are not invading anyone’s reasonable expectation of privacy.
Would it be legal for the police to videotape the traffic stop (they do all the time) but illegal for a private citizen to do the same?
It is legal to film anything you want in public. That includes cops. They can yell whatever they want, but they have no legal right to make you stop filming. You can’t physically impede them or get in their way, but you can photograph them all the want.
There is also no requirement to get anyone’s consent if they are in public. As much as celebrities bitch and complain, the paparazzi are perefctly within their legal rights to photograph them on public streets and don’t need permission.
This is definitely not true.
There are laws against taking photographs in many public places, including many forms of public transportation. You can’t take pictures in most courthouses, government buildings, airports, etc. In New York, the Port Authority prohibits photography in tunnels and train stations and on some bridges. Photographing police on duty in these areas could be illegal. The same holds true for nuclear sites, military bases, hospitals, etc.
Worth noting that many areas that we consider public really aren’t, such as inside a mall or a restaurant. The fact that you are allowed to enter doesn’t make it a public place.
And while it’s not directly relevant to the OP, there are some exceptions to the principle stated here repeatedly that it is legal to take pictures of anything you want in public. Some states have laws against taking pictures of minors in public without permission. There is a federal anti-voyeurism law that prohibits photography of peoples “private areas” in public and semi-public places.
These are all specific prohibitions for the sites. They prove the statement you are trying to refute, and only refine it by your second point: there are some places we consider public that aren’t. Any owner of a building can have their own rules for photographs (which would include places like the inside of a bus station or a shopping mall).
But photographing someone in public is perfectly legal. You don’t need permission from all the people in the background when you take a photo of a landmark. I’ve taken pictures of the changing of the honor guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Did I break the law? Of course not. It would also be perfectly legal to photograph police marching in a parade.
I doubt it is illegal per se to take pictures of minors anywhere in the US; otherwise you couldn’t photograph a landmark if any kids happened to be visiting. Same for laws against voyeuristic photographs: if someone wants to march nude on a public street, there’s no crime (there is one if they’re on private property, of course).
If something is actually in *public *-- on the streets, a public beach, park, a baseball stadium, etc. – then you can take whatever photos you want.
As stated, it can be prohibited by law in some place. In some places, it doesn’t even have to be a law. If you’re in Los Angeles and taking pictures around the Central Library or USBank (formerly First Interstate/Library) Tower, a certain law enforcement officer(s) will take notice of you.
Which places are these where’s against the law to do something that there is no law against?
I raised this only because it relates to the OP. You cannot film on duty cops in some places, like inside the NYC subway, at an airport security checkpoint, in a courthouse, etc. These are public places because they are government buildings, but there are specific restrictions on photography.
The federal anti-voyeur law has two intents: to prohibit taking pictures of people in bathrooms, changing rooms, etc., where the subject has an expectation of privacy; and upskirt shots, where photogs take pictures of peoples “privates” in a public place.
If a lady lifts her shirt on bourbon street, you can take a picture. If you lift her shirt and take a picture, that’s a crime.
Also from the OP, what repercussions are there for an officer that uses threats/intemidation to get someone to turn off their camera that that are legally filming with. Are they opening themselves up to being sued for abuse of power?
As I stated, Los Angeles, California. People, usually tourists, have been questioned by the police while taking photographs, even if you’re on the sidewalk. it could be the usual, “This is me and grandma at the L.A. Central Library” photo. However, as they are amongst the tallest buildings in the city, the city and police see them as potential terrorist targets. Hence, you and grandma maybe getting the layout, what person(s) always seem to be there, etc.
Absolutely everything in the world could be a “potential terror target” if you let them state that crap and get away with it. I take a lot of pictures of trains because I am a train fanatic. I’ve been questioned exactly one time by the police, and he turned out to be interested in what I was doing actually. ;). I see aircraft enthusiasts at the local airport every day, shooting photos.
I wear a t-shirt that says “I’m a photographer, not a terrorist”. :rolleyes:
IIRC, the MTA decided against a ban on photos in the NYC subway after general complaints that the law was too harsh.
Here in Canada, there have been several complaints in some cities about police confiscating photo cards and in one case, arresting a CBC camera man and consfiscting his footage of a drug raid - after complaints, the whole thing just sort of vanished from the news. Basically all that effort to prevent footage of the raid just told the underworld, “we’re touchy because one of these guys is an undercover cop.” Some police are not the deepest thinkers in the world, especially the guy who took the camera card and then denied he had; what, the guy was taking pictures without a card? The camera does not work that way…
Police will say whatever they want. I recall an RCMP trying to get a passenger in my car to indentify himself by citing the vagrancy laws, a decade after they had been tossed as unconstitutional. They can say or do whatever they want, and if you resist - that may be justified, but you’ll spend a fortune on a lawyer to prove that you are not guilty of a charge of obstruction of justice.
(Ever watch even a somewhat-close-to-real show like Law and Order? Watch carefully. They harass and bully people, arrest them in the most public and embarassing places, and never apologize for grabbing the wrong person. That about sums it up.)
The bit about taking pictures of kids? What do you expect? An adult male who seems preoccupied with taking pictures of children in the park will attract attention nowadays, and deservedly so. Some members of the public are stupid and harass anyone. Many are smart enough to pick up on creepy behaviour patterns and will be correct. I read about a case of someone in Disney World caught taking a lot of little kidddie pictures. Not too sure if it was treally true or one of these “beware!” chain-emails… (Probably not too subtle about it if he got caught) Even if it was not illegal, he (a) got himself banned from Disney - private property and (b) came to the attention of the authorities, which is the first step toward being blamed for anything that happens in your neighbourhood.
Even if it was not illegal, by the time the police review the camera for possibly illegal photos, they will know if you are taking tourist shots or nothing but pictures of kids.
OTOH, I was taking pictures of some street performer blowing giant bubbles in Washington Square park for a dozen kids and nobody asked me why kids were in the picture or what I was doing. The “no kids” warning is probably overhyped unless you look or act creepy, I bet.
Some places do prohibit photos. Many courts have blanket photo prohibitions, as I bet do various legislatures and congress - except for the accredited press. I have seen a lot of places in European museums and churches especially, that have switched from “no flash” to “no photos” because some people seem unclear on how to turn off a flash, or when is not appropriate (like a religious service) to take a photo.
Oh, and there are some places (UK?) where a work of architecture is copyright; you can take a picture, but may not be allowed to profit off it if it is a recent building…
In the US at least, I don’t believe anyone can ask to see your photo card without a warrant. Not legally.
FWIW, in Massachusetts, it’s illegal to make an audio recording of someone in public without their permission, even if the audio is just part of a video recording. This has been upheld in the courts, and does apply to recording cops as well.
Do not confuse legality of taking pictures with legal uses of those pictures. You can take a picture with kids in it, but have restrictions on publishing or selling that photo without permission,
Ther’s no blanket ban, but the MTA has signs in many specific places banning photography. All bridges and tunnels have the signs. The Port Authority bans photography in all of its facilities and the vehicles they operate. (For those of you not familiar with NYC, they cover the ferries, airports, and the trains that run between NY and NJ).
I should also note that there are restrictions on commercial photography in many public areas. You need a permit to do commercial photography in New York city, in national parks, and other places.
It happened in Harris County, Texas (Houston):Wed 12/23/2009 Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2009_4826849
"After more than seven years and $4 million in legal bills, Harris County soon will bring an end to the courtroom fallout from the arrests of two men who said they were wrongfully arrested after one of them photographed sheriff’s deputies during a drug raid. "
(emphasis added)
Regarding national parks, permits for commercial photography are only required in certain circumstances (link):