Pt2 In a real life senario; using your smartphone

[3 gun]

The guy who started the other thread didn't really think about it did he?

I normally carry my phone in my shirt pocket. The quick action button facing in starts voice recording. I use it anytime I'm approached by someone I don't know or I'm in a public area. Paranoid? So far But one day it might be key evidence in my self defense case. With the memory card I have I'm good for about 3 hours.

My phone will also video record/take pictures while using the phone or speaker phone. It would be a horrible idea for me to get a record of the crowd/witnesses/evidence while calling 911, right? I can video record about 40 minutes or get more than 50 pics on my card.

I don't even have the newest gadget or app out but I can find a good uses for my phone. Anyone else have something constructive to add because if you have not thought about it you are leaving a useful tool behind.

[curt.45]

two words, or is it one, YouTube.

[atlctyslkr]

I'm the guy that started the other thread. I figured it would get locked eventually just not so fast. I started it off kind of jokingly and that was probably a mistake. A smartphone could have alot of uses like voice recording (already mentioned). I don't think I would try and cruise the internet for advice on how to get out of a shootout.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Using your phone to record an incident could be useful in certain scenarios.

Unfortunately, all phones that I know of do not allow recording while there is a call going on. That's stupid enough, as if it's the phone company's problem if you illegally record a phone call, but they should at the very least allow recording when you dial 911. In fact, I think it would be a great idea to have the phone AUTOMATICALLY start recording when you dial 911.

Anyway, I doubt that starting a recording device is going to come before dialing 911 in most scenarios. If I feel the situation is chinky enough to record, I'm starting with a call to 911. The 911 call is likely to last long enough to preclude any recording. Plus, 911 is going to be recording most of the event for you.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by peetzakilla

911 is going to be recording most of the event for you.

Exactly. It seems to me that it's hard enough, in a crisis, to be a good witness and describe the situation as calmly as possible to the 911 dispatcher, without trying to "multitask."

And while pictures and video might be useful in a subsequent investigation and/or prosecution, there is, to me, something a little creepy in the idea that a person in such a situation would pay more attention to "making memories" than to dealing with the situation at hand. It's bad enough that every local TV station encourages viewers to react to emergencies by filming them (and letting the station have the film for the evening news) -- I see no reason to elevate this to the status of a "self-defense tactic."

I know reporters do this during emergencies. It's their job. But there's still an ethical dilemma there, in that observing a calamity, reporting on it, conflicts with other possible actions such as helping the victims. If someone is bleeding out in front of me, I'm going to be trying to help them, not filming while they die.

[Mike Irwin]

"I use it anytime I'm approached by someone I don't know or I'm in a public area."

Do you inform people of that fact, or are you just recording the conversation?

In some states I would think that that could get you into a LOT of trouble.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

"I use it anytime I'm approached by someone I don't know or I'm in a public area."

Do you inform people of that fact, or are you just recording the conversation?

In some states I would think that that could get you into a LOT of trouble.

Perhaps one of our resident legal eagles might chime in on the differences, legally speaking, between recording phone conversations, recording face-to-face conversations, and video recording, with or without sound. Businesses do the last routinely, of course, as a security measure; if silent video recording is legal for a business, I presume it is also for an individual. Is the reason security videos are "silent" one of legality or of cost-effectiveness?

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by Vanya

Perhaps one of our resident legal eagles might chime in on the differences, legally speaking, between recording phone conversations, recording face-to-face conversations, and video recording, with or without sound. Businesses do the last routinely, of course, as security measure; if silent video recording is legal for a business, I presume it is also for an individual. Is the reason security videos are "silent" one of legality or of cost-effectiveness?

It gets complicated.... In NY, for example, it is legal to record a conversation so long as one party is aware of the recording. My business security system records both audio and video. I have signs up notifying everyone entering that there is video AND audio recording as premises so, really, "everyone" *knows*, though I doubt most even notice the signs.

--

Walking through a mall recording everything happening would be legal, I would guess, because there's no reasonable assumption of privacy in a public place. News media do it all the time. They don't need the permission of every one who walks by having a conversation.


Somehow though, I'd have to question the assertion that "I use it whenever... I'm in a public area." Recording the entire time you spend in public would be beyond paranoid, even if it is legal. Besides the obvious technical difficulties.

[Jake Balam]

All video recording must be announced in writing in a business. NO audio is allowed. Any audio recording taken without a persons knowledge is inadmissible in court.


True story: customer of mine had three home burglaries in a short period of time. Set up video surveillance. Caught said burglars on video, sheriff said there was nothing he could do since it wasn't posted they used video surveillance for their home

[Capt. Charlie]

Perhaps one of our resident legal eagles might chime in on the differences, legally speaking, between recording phone conversations, recording face-to-face conversations, and video recording, with or without sound.

Yeeeouch! This one can get dicey and really, really complicated. It boils down to your "actor's" expectation of privacy. Generally, say on a public street within earshot of others, you have none. In your vehicle, you do.

One classic example (sorry, I can't find the verifying link) is the phone booth (remember those? ). If you talk on the phone without attempting to close the door, you lost that expectation. If you tried to close the door, but it was broken, you do have a right to expect privacy.

These are general rules, but every case is judged on its own merit. Couple that with the variations between state laws, and you have a legal migraine.

My advice: Research your state's laws and proceed with caution .

[TXAZ]

Here is a link we've used frequently as a summary guide prepared by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/

[Evan Thomas]

That is a very nifty link, and worth bookmarking just on general principles. Thanks, TXAZ.

[Mike Irwin]

That link seems to deal primarily with with phone calls, not recordings made by a phone (without broadcast) or other recording device without the knowledge of the other individual, which is how I'm taking the OP's statement.


OK, in reading through some of the state summaries, it's clear that more than just recording phone conversations is covered.

Virginia law, where I live now, is QUITE different from Pennsylvania law, where I used to live.

[armoredman]

To truely be a deterrent, the sign should say video/audio taping in progress, off site data storage. They can't ransack to find the VCR and make off with the tape, or computer disk. Just a thought.
I will have to look up AZ law on this matter, interesting ideas.

[Brian Pfleuger]

To truely be a deterrent, the sign should say video/audio taping in progress, off site data storage. They can't ransack to find the VCR and make off with the tape, or computer disk. Just a thought.

Off-site recording signage might be a deterrent to entry, but my recording IS off-site even though the sign doesn't say it so if anyone breaks in and thinks they'll destroy the recorder before they leave, they're going to be sad, sad, in their handcuffs.... if they get that far... since the location is occupied 24/7.




On topic with the OP... The logistics are iffy but I doubt there could be any legal ramifications for recording an incident. It may or may not be admissible in court but I can't see how you'd ever get in trouble for actually recording what was or reasonably believed to be a violent encounter.

[justapatriot]

I carry this pen in my shirt pocket. A simple tap on the top activates recording and this is also a working pen.

http://bensoutlet.com/products/spy-pen-16gb

[TXAZ]

Originally Posted by peetzakilla

Off-site recording signage might be a deterrent to entry, but my recording IS off-site even though the sign doesn't say it so if anyone breaks in and thinks they'll destroy the recorder before they leave, they're going to be sad, sad, in their handcuffs.... if they get that far... since the location is occupied 24/7.

Peetza,
my employer does a lot of video systems. Consider sacrificial or humoring recorders. Every now and then, a semi smart BG wants "THE TAPE". Give it to them! From a practical perspective, humor a BG, as some may not believe or have heard of off-site storage (hey if these guys were genius rocket scientist, they'd have better jobs than what they're doing): Hook up a sacrificial old vhs recorder, (you only have to leave it on, and have a cable coming out of the back) stick a blank tape in it. In the event that things get complex, you can point the BG to where 'the tape' is and let them get on their way. In a tough situation, the goal is to get space between you and BG's, not get into a tech discussion.

Good luck!

[Crosshair]

"I use it anytime I'm approached by someone I don't know or I'm in a public area."

Do you inform people of that fact, or are you just recording the conversation?

In some states I would think that that could get you into a LOT of trouble.

Most states are one party consent states. The link provided gives the details.

The good thing is that many devices are supporting live upload. "Officials" in some areas are getting uppity about having their misdeeds recorded in public and deleting the local copy will do no good when it's already on YouTube.

[troy_mclure]

as a frequent open carrier, i always have a small voice recorder on me. it is on when i leave the door, and off when i return home. it holds 60hrs of voice, with a 90hr battery life.

louisiana law states you have no expectations of privacy while out in public, to include businesses.

opencarry.org has a list of the states laws on recording.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by TXAZ

Peetza,
my employer does a lot of video systems. Consider sacrificial or humoring recorders. Every now and then, a semi smart BG wants "THE TAPE". Give it to them!

I do, actually. I had considered the possibility that they may go looking for a recorder, so I left the old one in it's place, plugged in with it's little light blinking away like it's going great guns.... but it does nothing...


There is a real camera pointed right at it though!