A Night Owl's Disturbance

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Erik Deckers on June 30, 2008 at 8:47am

No, they should still be allowed. On the law enforcement end, I would think we would want to know when police officers are breaking the rules they promised to uphold. (After all, "who watches the watchers?") The Video Vigilante is keeping people aware of basic human rights by capturing the violation of those rights on camera.

In both cases, I think they should be posted publicly.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Rhett N. Cochran on June 30, 2008 at 9:59am

This is one of those tricky situations where I can only justify it by stating: This is the price of free speech. The problem with video is two fold. First, taken out of context, a video clip can be exceptionally misleading. Second, simply putting videos of crimes out there for all the world to see could be a hazard to the jury trial system which, despite the jokes that most make about juries, is something that participants do take very seriously.

If these video vigilantes truly want to make a difference, then is simply posting on a YouTube style website the best way to go about it or should more traditional media be used. And if they're not using traditional media or sincerely affecting change, then what is the true nature of the video? Is it simply of a prurient and self-serving nature? I'm afraid these are questions that we'll be grappling with for a great deal longer as cameras continue to invade all parts of our lives and the internet becomes more and more democratized.

▶ Reply to This