“Law sometimes sleeps, it never dies.” – Frank Abagnale
There’s been a growing movement of constitutional rights advocates which are generically referred to as “auditors.”
It takes a number of forms, but usually amounts to a person with a camera engaging in their first (and sometimes second) amendment rights in a public place, and filming their interactions with public employees and citizenry while gauging their response.
Auditors will often film in places that are legal to but tend to attract attention from police – e.g. the public sidewalk outside of a bank, the public easement outside of a correctional facility, federal buildings, airports, and Post Offices. The idea is to determine if public officials will respect or violate constitutional rights.
There’s a full spectrum of approaches by different auditors, from aggressive name calling of police, to not saying a single word when contacted. However, there are a large portion who are well versed in their rights and remain calm and professional during encounters.
Sometimes police and government employees respect the camera operator’s rights, sometimes they don’t. Sometimes it’s uneventful, other times it ends in arrest and lawsuits. 10’s of thousands of such videos may be found on Youtube, Instagram, and other social media sites.
Personally, I’m supportive of the idea of rights needing to be constantly exercised, and of the more civil approaches many auditors take. I also think it’s an important educational tool for both citizenry and government employees as most do not understand the law. And to be fair, how can we? It would take multiple lifetimes to read all the laws let alone understand them.
Of course, as someone who teaches people to daily carry, and does so himself, “auditing” is not a hill I choose to die on. My advice to all reading this is to continue to live a stealth existence and avoid contact with police, as we should be in no hurry to have a conversation about our pistols with the day shift!
The reason for my explanation of auditing is a self-defense lesson related to a video recently brought to my attention.
An auditor from Massachusetts [Youtube channel: First Amendment Protection Agency] was involved in an altercation with another private citizen who took issue with him filming in public. The disgruntled citizen came at the auditor aggressively, made verbal threats, and was introduced to a face full of OC spray.
The use of OC was completely legal, justified, and within the bounds of proper use of force. However, the auditor was arrested and charged with two felonies and one misdemeanor.
So, if he was in the right, why was he put in cuffs? Simple, the attacker called the police and reported it first. He lied and told the police that he was attacked with OC spray by some guy with a camera. (Yes, its a mystery why unhinged individual with no concept of the Bill of Rights or the Plain View Doctrine would start a fight and then lie about it to the authorities!)
Our advice to students for the past 20+ years has been this: When we are left with no choice but to engage in physical self-defense, regardless of how “low level” it may seem, it is a RACE TO THE PHONE to report it!
When the line is crossed from words to contact, one of us has now committed a battery. [Battery defined as “an unwanted or obnoxious touching.”] Battery, as a generality, does not require injury. Legally it can range from misdemeanor to felony, and is an arrestable offense. It’s serious!
It can cost not only an arrest, but also days in jail, bail, lawyer fees, a guilty verdict, serving a sentence, and a criminal record.
Because of that, we can’t defend ourselves and then just assume we’ll all retire to neutral corners and pretend it didn’t happen. We must report it – and most importantly, BE THE COMPLAINTANT!
When the attacker calls first, police arrive looking to arrest the person fitting the description the caller gave, and to have that “victim” sign the complaint. Not calling and just assuming we can reverse the course on scene is a pipe dream – even with video proof, there’s a high probability arriving officers are not going to be interested in watching it. They might, but we can’t count on it. And if they do watch it we can’t count on it changing their minds.
We need to understand that in use of force situations we can either attempt to use the system or be eaten by it – Those are the only two choices. Failing to call is a default to the second.
When we deploy physical force all we can assume is we’ll be signing something – Either a complaint, or bail paperwork. Thus, we must win the race to the phone!
“Police are like parents, they’re not interested in justice they just want quiet.” – Clare Wolf
