Taking video while open carrying...

I don't want to get ahead of myself or jinx anything but....

Lets say it becomes law, will any of you be taking video while carrying? Especially if stopped or questioned by LEOs?


I only ask because photography/videography is a hobby of mine and here recently I've gotten into shooting at night time mainly around downtown Fort Lauderdale and I've been questioned a few times (mainly because it's late at night) without any real incident. Ft. Lauderdale PD is actually pretty cool about it, one time I got an Officer to turn on the lights while driving down the road for me to take slow shutter speed pictures, the red and blue light trails came out great

However it got me thinking about how doing the same thing while open carrying could bring more attention my way and whether or not I should take video should a situation occur.

What do you guys think?

I might carry a voice recorder if I were to walk around in hostile territory.

The problem with other states is that it has always been legal but nobody did it in urban environments and it was forgotten about until recently. If SB 234 passes it will make the nightly news and LEO's should be made aware of the changes in a memo if they don't hear about it on the news or from a colleague. I don't expect law enforcement to be a problem. Honestly, you know where it will probably get the least amount of attention is in those jurisdictions whose sheriff was so against it. Everyone who works for that sheriff office or department will know about it. And if they do "draw down" on you, they won't for long because they'll be slapped with a lawsuit so fast they won't know what hit em.

Digital camera and camcorders are standard fare at many meet-ups, picnics etc.

Also cell phone cameras have been used to good end at some confrontational incidents.

Better to over prepared IMHO, than under prepared.

My digital camera has this handy lanyard, I make a necklace out of it and just let it hang. It's sideways, but ti gets everything.

Let it hang under your shirt, if you see the fuzz getting close, pop it out and push the button. Works for me anyway....

77zach said:

I might carry a voice recorder if I were to walk around in hostile territory.

The problem with other states is that it has always been legal but nobody did it in urban environments and it was forgotten about until recently. If SB 234 passes it will make the nightly news and LEO's should be made aware of the changes in a memo if they don't hear about it on the news or from a colleague. I don't expect law enforcement to be a problem. Honestly, you know where it will probably get the least amount of attention is in those jurisdictions whose sheriff was so against it. Everyone who works for that sheriff office or department will know about it. And if they do "draw down" on you, they won't for long because they'll be slapped with a lawsuit so fast they won't know what hit em.

Click to expand...

If your decide to audio record a LE contact be SURE to inform the Officers in a clear and understandable tone that you are audio recording their contact with you. In Florida both parties must be aware that they are being recorded.

SGB said:

If your decide to audio record a LE contact be SURE to inform the Officers in a clear and understandable tone that you are audio recording their contact with you. In Florida both parties must be aware that they are being recorded.

Click to expand...

Cite?

I'm fair certain that only applies to PRIVATE conversations. Public employees acting in their official capacities in a public place enjoy ZERO expectation of privacy.

Phssthpok said:

Cite?

I'm fair certain that only applies to PRIVATE conversations. Public employees acting in their official capacities in a public place enjoy ZERO expectation of privacy.

Click to expand...

Yes, I believe that is true it applies only to private conversations. I believe there is an old thread that this was discussed.

SGB said:

If your decide to audio record a LE contact be SURE to inform the Officers in a clear and understandable tone that you are audio recording their contact with you. In Florida both parties must be aware that they are being recorded.

Click to expand...

Last I read it, it was quite the contrary. The particular law is tough to read because the part that exempts the notification business, is in the definitions far earlier in the Statute. If you don't read that part, too, it does appear to require two party consent. It's a shame the two segments are separated by so much gibberish, it creates this misunderstanding quite frequently.

The definition excludes places in which one does not have a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy. Since the section covering this is so huge and convoluted, it was easier to change the definition than rewrite the whole mess when the SCOTUS came down.... This is the ol' "Come over here so we can talk/away from all those people/so you don't get embarrassed/so we can talk privately... Don't fall for it no matter how they phrase it. While an Officer of the State supposedly doesn't enjoy any Expectation of Privacy in any official activities, it's just one more thing you'll have to fight if you let them pull it. Along with that bogus "Disturbing the Peace" "Resisting Without Violence" and "GATTTOTP" crap they'll pile up...

A lot of laws in Florida are like this. "Everything is illegal" but then you'll find the exceptions peppered around in places you wouldn't think to look.

Jesus H.. For the last time, Ladies.. IF it passes, just carry the damned thing and go about your biz like normal. Dont start making a scene of yourselves already.
If you really really need attention, go try out for American Idol or some such..

10x said:

Yes, I believe that is true it applies only to private conversations. I believe there is an old thread that this was discussed.

Click to expand...

.
And another one.. once,more, for the last time ladies, by all means take the advice and mis-interpretations of interweb shade-tree lawyers, and find out the hard way which way it goes down...what's 5 + years, and $10k in fines anyway?:banghead:

10x said:

Yes, I believe that is true it applies only to private conversations. I believe there is an old thread that this was discussed.

Click to expand...

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...79119&highlight=florida+recording#post1479119

j4l said:

.
And another one.. once,more, for the last time ladies, by all means take the advice and mis-interpretations of interweb shade-tree lawyers, and find out the hard way which way it goes down...what's 5 + years, and $10k in fines anyway?:banghead:

Click to expand...

http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/florida/florida-recording-law

j4l said:

Jesus H.. For the last time, Ladies.. IF it passes, just carry the damned thing and go about your biz like normal. Dont start making a scene of yourselves already.
If you really really need attention, go try out for American Idol or some such..

Click to expand...

Here's the problem with your mentality, most people who open carry, do go about their business like normal. It's these anti-gun cops and p*ssy ass citizens that make a scene. That's why we need cameras... I drive with a camera in my car 24/7, AND, I have a watch camera, for when I am outside my vehicle. Most people I know, who carry cameras, don't want attention. They are just protecting themselves.

On another note, I was recently pulled over, and, here in PA, officers don't have have an expectation of privacy, but they may have an expectation of non-interception. So, in order to eliminate any possibility of setting myself up to go to federal prison, I told the officer that he was being recorded. Needless to say, he wasn't too happy .

[video=youtube;pbxuP3mNHFM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbxuP3mNHFM&feature=channel_video_title[/video]

Watched your video KeepShootin.

I am so terribly tired of hearing the "you look scared", "you look nervous", "you're acting funny". Do you realize why he said that? He's fabricating RAS so he can justify having you exit the vehicle for a pat down or a cursory search of your passenger compartment.

It's become a fishing routine with police departments lately.

Keep in mind if the officer believes he's established RAS of criminal activity, you're now subject to being disarmed at his leisure as well.

j4l said:

Jesus H.. For the last time, Ladies.. IF it passes, just carry the damned thing and go about your biz like normal. Dont start making a scene of yourselves already.
If you really really need attention, go try out for American Idol or some such..

Click to expand...

i am in 100% agreement. wont be trouble if you dont go looking for trouble. like will smith said on MIB" wont be nothing if you dont start nothing" i think. :idea: as always avoid shady areas you know has trouble in it and you will be fine. most of the time.

KeepShootin said:

Here's the problem with your mentality, most people who open carry, do go about their business like normal. It's these anti-gun cops and p*ssy ass citizens that make a scene. That's why we need cameras... I drive with a camera in my car 24/7, AND, I have a watch camera, for when I am outside my vehicle. Most people I know, who carry cameras, don't want attention. They are just protecting themselves.

On another note, I was recently pulled over, and, here in PA, officers don't have have an expectation of privacy, but they may have an expectation of non-interception. So, in order to eliminate any possibility of setting myself up to go to federal prison, I told the officer that he was being recorded. Needless to say, he wasn't too happy .

[video=youtube;pbxuP3mNHFM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbxuP3mNHFM&feature=channel_video_title[/video]

Click to expand...

as much as i would like to support this video. i am surprised you only allowed us to view 2min3secs of it. did something happen you did not want us to know about. leaves alot of suspicion in my mind honestly. :question: i understand the video theory but i have never had any probs with LEO's any time i have been pulled over, kill em with kindness works 99% of the time. if you have a prob with something they do you get them back later either thru dept and or courts(if you received a ticket). of course an atitude will get you no where but on the ground every time. :exclaim:

crashnjax said:

as much as i would like to support this video. i am surprised you only allowed us to view 2min3secs of it. did something happen you did not want us to know about. leaves alot of suspicion in my mind honestly. :question: i understand the video theory but i have never had any probs with LEO's any time i have been pulled over, kill em with kindness works 99% of the time. if you have a prob with something they do you get them back later either thru dept and or courts(if you received a ticket). of course an atitude will get you no where but on the ground every time. :exclaim:

Click to expand...

You need more than 2 minutes and 3 seconds of video, to see that he was being an a**hole? If I started the video mid-traffic stop, I could see you having a point, but, that's not the case. I wasn't being disrespectful at all. I was just letting him know that he was being recorded. It wasn't, "Hey! You're stupid, and I'm recording you! HAHAHAHA". I was being polite. What does he have to worry about, being recorded? Is he going to violate my rights? I didn't post the rest of the video, because he just ran my info, and gave me 2 tickets. Is that really something you want/have to watch? Lol

j4l said:

Jesus H.. For the last time, Ladies.. IF it passes, just carry the damned thing and go about your biz like normal. Dont start making a scene of yourselves already.
If you really really need attention, go try out for American Idol or some such..

Click to expand...

Recording the Cops is a much broader concept than OC. If you feel so compelled, go do it right now.

It has saved many from 'fix it in the report' LEOs. OC and otherwise.

Being armed with this knowledge, and ability, is paramount.

Referring to people more intelligent, educated, and prepared than yourself with intended-to-be-insulting female monikers is neither useful, nor detrimental to anyone but yourself... It's all about you, it would seem... You make your own choices. Discouraging education and preparedness doesn't seem like a sound philosophy. One does not have to be a lawyer to read the law any more than one needs to go to college to read any other book. It is not a special book that only certain 'only ones' are able to read.

My advice is far more useful than yours has been. I'm still not a Lawyer and don't want to be. But it beats knowing nothing and suggesting ignorance as a useful course...

What is this ridiculous and baseless obsession with claiming everyone but yourself is an attention whore? You're drawing a lot of attention to yourself with that behavior... How many times was the word 'yourself' used in this message?

The matter of recording the cops in Florida has been covered. There is a very recent case of such an incident in Tarpon Springs. The SA won't even prosecute. If it's so illegal, why won't the SA prosecute? Oh, a further look at the charges reveals they weren't even charged with the made-up idea that you can't record the cops, because you can...

Find for me the case in Florida in which video/audio recording the cops in a place where they have no reasonable expectation of privacy wasn't thrown out.

I'll wait.

Grapeshot said:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...79119&highlight=florida+recording#post1479119



http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/florida/florida-recording-law

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that web site leaves out a critical definition from the statute:

“Oral communication” means any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation and does not mean any public oral communication uttered at a public meeting or any electronic communication.

Click to expand...

The Florida Supreme Court and several Federal appellate courts have ruled:

This expectation of privacy does not contemplate merely a subjective expectation on the part of the person making the uttered oral communication but rather contemplates a reasonable expectation of privacy. A reasonable expectation of privacy under a given set of circumstances depends upon one's actual subjective expectation of privacy as well as whether society is prepared to recognize this expectation as reasonable.

Click to expand...

If you tell the officer you are recording (or it is clearly obvious from the circumstances - a video camera), there is no possibility that he can have a reasonable belief that the conversation is not being recorded. This is not to say that you are required to tell him, but if you do so, that would clearly be a lawful recording.

brboyer said:

Unfortunately, that web site leaves out a critical definition from the statute:


The Florida Supreme Court and several Federal appellate courts have ruled:

If you tell the officer you are recording (or it is clearly obvious from the circumstances - a video camera), there is no possibility that he can have a reasonable belief that the conversation is not being recorded. This is not to say that you are required to tell him, but if you do so, that would clearly be a lawful recording.

Click to expand...

Under the statute, consent is not required for the taping of a non-electronic communication uttered by a person who does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that communication. See definition of “oral communication,” Fla. Stat. ch. 934.02. See also Stevenson v. State, 667 So.2d 410 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996); Paredes v. State, 760 So.2d 167 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000).