• DreamButt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It should be legal on a national level to film any and all public service workers (while on the job)

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I work in municipal government, but a LOT of what I do involves working with privileged information. Not my information or the city’s information, but private people and company’s information.

      You’re welcome to submit an open records request and I’ll be gladly release what I can. But sometimes information needs to be redacted and kept private for privacy or security reasons.

      • DreamButt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        51
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Great question! If it’s illegal to film a public servant then it is illegal to verify they are actually serving the public’s best interest. In particular if you catch a public servant performing amoral or otherwise corrupt behaviour there is no way to publicaly verify that. Further without explicit legal protections for things then it is easier for that action to be banned or otherwise made illegal. No protection is no protection. A corrupt public servant has a vested interest in misinterpreting law in order to prevent you from exposing them. Which is why Oklahoma’s ban on filming police is still bad even though it is framed under the guise of protecting police from harassment

        • explodicle@local106.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oklahoma’s ban on filming police

          Wow this is the first I had heard of this! Please tell me this is already being challenged on first amendment grounds.

        • Fraylor@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Do you propose the same of social workers? People who work in unemployment or welfare? I understand where you’re coming from, but without protections for civilians whose information is accessed frequently for legitimate purposes, it’s a bad move.

        • Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think broad brushstrokes are helpful here - regular people can be real assholes, and we need to balance a public servant’s individual right to privacy with the public’s right to transparency.

          Some jobs such as Police Officers, I have no qualms with filming while they’re in uniform or otherwise on-the-job. But I can also see how a blanket approval could backfire, e.g. some aggrieved person decides to stalk some poor guy who’s only job is to center divs on some government website, just because they find out he’s a government worker.

          • DreamButt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Speaking as a former employee of local government I would much rather have to deal with a world where people can film me (I was in IT) than not be able to film cops. Obviously there will be issues that need to get ironed out as we go. That’s how everything works. But that shouldn’t stop us from implementing the thing that is obviously for the better

            • Abird@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              So then do you recommend that qualified, genuinely decent people, avoid public servant jobs if they expect a reasonable level of privacy?

              I’m not debating what is reasonable, just if we should turn people away from jobs for expecting privacy of any kind.

              • GrievingWidow420@feddit.it
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Absolutely. You either get privacy or you become a public official or a public figure, which makes you public, out in the open.

                • Abird@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I personally feel that something like that could be dangerous. People who don’t respect their own privacy, in my experience, won’t respect your privacy either.

          • stonedemoman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            we need to balance a public servant’s individual right to privacy

            Except we don’t, and that’s a resolution backed by the Supreme Court. There is no expectation of privacy in public.

            If they’re being stalked or harassed that’s a different story. Committing those crimes would get you kicked out of a public building or land you a Restraining Order. Either way, this is a poor excuse.

          • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I can see that but at the same time, there’s a difference between public servants doing their job in public versus just being an office worker working. I don’t think people are arguing that office workers need to be recorded by the public, as that would be quite weird. Although at the same time, people generally argue that police officers should be recorded, even by people in private, but I think that’s more due to the fact that they have authority that can be abused in ways that office workers simply aren’t able to.

            • stonedemoman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              No we mean the office workers too, if they’re public servants. There’s an endemic going on in the US right now of city employees withholding forms and public resources in favor of helping the police cover up their misconduct.

              Uncomfortable as though it may be, it’s necessary for accountability.

              • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I’m not sure that spying on office workers is a good idea, potentially even ones working remotely too. Not only would that not be illegal but ethically it feels wrong. I feel like people should be entitled to privacy when in their own home.

                • stonedemoman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I get the concern, believe me. If it weren’t absolutely necessary (IMO) I wouldn’t be suggesting it.

                  But doesn’t it feel ethically wrong that people are having their civil rights violated by corrupt city officials and their cohorts?

                  Think about what a difference body cams made for police conduct. It’s more difficult to abuse any power you hold when you can be held accountable for it

        • okiloki@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          So do you think employees being recorded by their employers is ok as well? Because it isn’t. Having to live in constant surveillance is a mark of authoritarianism.

            • okiloki@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Are those cameras in the retail space? There are cameras at public spaces, whether it’s Walmart, the DMV or the foyer of a police station. They aren’t there to surveille employees, they are there to prevent or record crimes.

              People here are advocating to have cameras in office spaces, to specifically surveil employees. What the fuck is going to happen for people in home office? That’s illegal af, at least where I come from. And who is going to monitor these cameras? The local sheriff’s office? And who is going to review all that footage?

      • XEAL@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because your word means nothing vs the word of a cop and there are too many lying bastards out there wearing a uniform.

  • Doods@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Some cop was trying to use his position as a cop to get 5 free loaves of bread, and the bakery guy was like: “Hey person’s name get the camera, and post it titled ‘the police stealing from citizens’” and the cop was like : “yeah, uhh… escapes with his partner”.

  • mommykink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Nobody likes to be filmed in public. Go up to a Walmart worker and wave a camera in their face and they won’t be happy either. ACAB, of course, but not because cops are people who don’t want to be recorded 24/7.