Texas Bill to Make Filming Police Illegal

Texas Rep., Jason Villalba introduced a bill that would make it illegal, a misdemeanor, to film the police in any proximity closer than 25 feet, if you're carrying, 100 feet.

Texas Bill Would Make Recording Police Illegal

House Bill 2918, introduced by Texas Rep. Jason Villalba (R-Dallas) on Tuesday, would make the offense a misdemeanor. Citizens who are armed would not be permitted to record police activity within 100 feet of an officer, according to the Houston Chronicle.

Only representatives of radio or TV organizations that hold an FCC license, newspapers and magazines would have the right to record police.

Villalba claims this bill is aimed at protecting the police by stopping those who impede the police, who are just doing their jobs, by trying to record them.

The legislator disagreed with people on Twitter who said he's seeking to make all filming of cops illegal.

"My bill ... just asks filmers to stand back a little so as not to interfere with law enforcement," Villalba tweeted.

I understand this to a degree, but what if you're the one being stopped and questioned? Does this mean that you wouldn't be able use your cell phone to record the interaction? If there was a need to document the event, we'd have to hope some random citizen was so inclined to film the interaction from 25 feet away.

I think this proposed law is bad timing and sets a bad precedent when police, in general, are less than trusted by the average citizen. We need more transparency, not less. We'll have to wait and see if Texas lawmakers pass this bill. I won't be surprised if they do, though.

a reply to: windword

Until the law stating that the cops have to wear cameras that they cannot tamper with or turn off comes into play, I say no.

Until then, someone has to hold them accountable if they won't do it themselves. It's not as if they should have a problem with it if they have nothing to hide right?

Now where have I heard that before?

Jude11

a reply to: windword

So no one can film the close ups or do any cameo shots
except the cops. Now that's convenient!

Get me a camera with super zoom!

a reply to: windword
I was wondering when this was going to start. Get a bill passed in one state that "sounds reasonable", then incrementally work toward what you really want: To make it a felony to video the thugs...er... police, and make it inadmissible in court.

a reply to: Klassified

and make it inadmissible in court.

AAh! I hadn't thought of that angle!

I also don't understand the 100 foot restriction for those filming who are armed. If they're filming they can't shoot! You can still shoot a gun from 100 feet though.

a reply to: windword

None of this matters. Texas can't overrule the constitution. The supremes already ruled on this subject.

Citizens have a right to record public servants while they work at all times in public places.

No sorry attempt at blocking this by a state legislature can change this.

It is unconstitutional, and will be shot down like all the other retard crap these idiots keep trying to pull.

I'm sure when questioned about the events that unfolded, and in regards to a citizen that filmed a cop... the cop will say the citizen filming was within 25 feet 100% of the time.

And if it's proven the citizen was more than 25 feet away while filming... then of course the cop will say the citizen was armed. Don't cops always carry a second firearm in case they need to plant one??? I thought it was department policy.

The supremes already ruled on this subject.

I think I'll wait until Diana Ross has had her say.

I've got a better idea for a bill: let's make it a felony to interfere with or obstruct recordings of leos, to intimidate photographers or videographers recording public officials or LEOs, or confiscate, erase, damage or attempt to confiscate or erase recordings of police or any other public officials that specifically overrides qualified immunity.

a reply to: johnwick

I thought about that, and the subsequent law suits. But I also thought about the "Free Speech Zones" where NO free speech is allowed, like in front of the Supreme Court.

I don't trust "them" NOT to try and weasel this law through, lawsuits be damned!

Man, they really dressed up that headline didn't they? It might be illegal to film cops!....from less than 25 feet away, or 100 if you're strapped.

Guess that last bit took up too much space for a catchy headline.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Man, they really dressed up that headline didn't they? It might be illegal to film cops!

However, 25 feet's quite the distance if you're recording your own stop, eh? Or if you're in the car that's stopped.

Pretty convenient for cops. I wonder how much the union offered to pay Villalba?

a reply to: windword

Well I personally think they're well aware that most mobile phone camera footage will be useless from 25 feet...


Crafty sick bastards.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Man, they really dressed up that headline didn't they? It might be illegal to film cops!

However, 25 feet's quite the distance if you're recording your own stop, eh?

This.

I use my phone as a "dash cam"- it happens to record audio, so if I were stopped and things went bad, I'd have audio of it.

originally posted by: windword
I understand this to a degree, but what if you're the one being stopped and questioned? Does this mean that you wouldn't be able use your cell phone to record the interaction? If there was a need to document the event, we'd have to hope some random citizen was so inclined to film the interaction from 25 feet away.

I think this proposed law is bad timing and sets a bad precedent when police, in general, are less than trusted by the average citizen. We need more transparency, not less. We'll have to wait and see if Texas lawmakers pass this bill. I won't be surprised if they do, though.

While I disagree with your claim that the "average citizen" doesn't really trust police, I agree with the rest of your comment. I wonder if anyone else has brought up the concern about the one being stopped by police...we have a right to record in public. Just because an officer steps at us and it impedes on the 25-foot zone if we're filming doesn't mean that the citizen is responsible for the crime. And we should have the right to document any interaction with public officials, to include LEOs, if we desire.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Man, they really dressed up that headline didn't they?

They did. I played around with rewording it for accuracy, but it came out too long.

Guess that last bit took up too much space for a catchy headline.

Yep. But the issue is real and is really problematic, would you agree?

Reminds me of the big 2003 anti-war demo in London, where cops with cameras were followed around by people with cameras. Also reminds me of that time at St Andrews, Birmingham, when two cops went around the entire stadium with a camera pointing into the stands...then when it reached the Tilton, the whole ground suddenly erupted with "You can shove your feckin' camera up yer arse! You can shove your feckin' camera up yer arse!". Then again, this ain't Texas... people don't normally carry guns in England.
 

a reply to: Bedlam

Sure is. Which is why I don't see this proposed amendment getting anywhere. And if it does, it'll wind up tanked pretty quick I would think.

What's interesting is that this dude ran on the platform of "reigning in government." He sure has a strange idea of how to do that.

His campaign donors are listed, btw.

And none of that changes the intentionally misleading headline

a reply to: windword

Totally agree with you. See my post above. Or below yours. Whatever. See my post on this page somewhere other than this one

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bedlam

Sure is. Which is why I don't see this proposed amendment getting anywhere. And if it does, it'll wind up tanked pretty quick I would think.

I admit it would creep me out if I was arresting someone and a bunch of people started crowding me.

There's good enough interference/obstruction laws on the books in Texas that you don't need more that are blatantly there to prevent recording of LEOs and nothing else.

You guys have bad enough PR without someone trying to float a stinky turd like this one.