YA the loser tries to be funny

@grantnoroyan4083 just keep hate watching. The algorithm thanks you haha

💀Yahsir Sean-Paul the goat audit entertainer ever, Massive W in the chat, when he tried giving the book of the constitution I lost it 💀😂 these tyrant losers can hardly take a joke… why so serious 🤡?

@@grantnoroyan4083 You mean the loser who's protecting your freedom of speech right now, that allows you to type these things?

More like "The Constitution for Dummies" ... Our founder's told us to organize our Constitutionally protected militias for a reason ... Sadly we didn't listen ... Shame on us !

No...what he proved was you can't teach a man what he thinks he already knows. This is ignorance.

I live a couple of towns away I hope I never run into him!

Sean does not realize it going to these small towns, but many of these bad attitude cops are about more than violating people's rights, they outright don't like some people and they can hardly hide it.

Couldnt? didnt even try

He doesn’t like freedom.

YEP ANOTHER BUFFOON LIKE SEAN PAUL REYES! TRUE

It seems to me that many of these P.D.s serve the purpose of "welfare" for a certain class of people. Its a jobs program for a lot of mid to low intellect people.

That seems to be the standard in most cases.

@@suicyco4life666 - It is in my hometown of Burlington, Iowa.

Definitely

I hope you call the library also and ask for in person

Psychiatrists label narcissists as the equivalent of child molesters.

Yes, because of these FBI FUSION CENTERS. EVERYTIME your name hits NCIC OR CLETS, IT ADDS TO YOUR Overall Library Card. The fbi actually calls that. Predictive Policing is the scariest thing I've been around. The bigger cities have to ban the algorithm. (Pred Pol)(Geolotica) Because it goes against the constitution. Bigger cities are more educated. The smaller cities who are still PARTICIPATING IN THIS DYSTOPIA need to be sued till the cows home. They can get away with it bc their population is not educated. Modesto CA is ranked 147th out of 150 cities to be uneducated in America!! But has and has 14 drones, a surveillance airplane with $200k of cameras on a $200k plane. Over 50 live cameras. Over 200+ ALPRs.. and a civilian police force that follows their neighbors. Registered RING DOORBELLs to use for surveillance on unsuspecting neighbors.. and using these Neighbors apps to abuse and harass anyone they want. In the guise of predicting police. Targets Americans to the point they want to lose it. It's perfect the homeless. Mental illness situations. They are actually EXTERMINATING PEOPLE LIKE PESTS. AND BRAGGING IT'S THE FIRST PROGRAM IN THE NATION. NATIONAL STORY, HOMELESS PPL ARE LITERALLY HIDING ON THE SIDE OF THE TUOLUMNE RIVER. DIGGING OUT ELABORATE CAVES. HELICOPTERS AND FACE RECOGNITION OR VIDEO ANALYTICS IS HAVING WEARING MASKS. It's so scary because social justice is the norm and actually train ppl. And they think it's a constitutional protected activity. It's not.

And the ID is for retaliation

LIA was100% right [as a viewer] ,I could tell that the Sgt. had nothing but disdain for LIA and his passive aggressive demeanor was coming through [on the video] in a BIG way !

Finks a weird guy...might be worth a look at his hard drive

Very well said.

HE KNOWS HE JUST DOESN'T CARE

What makes you think that his superiors are any different than he is?

No, he NEEDS a permanent black mark in his conduct jacket!.

That isnt their job. They took an oath to defend the constitution, but their job is to investigate crimes and make arrests.

oh his name was Wilson my mistake i thought it was Richard Head

Him and Ben Dover are building a family together.@@scottthepoet9040

Too Apree’s video came out first but I’m sure you’ll be first to get some justice

Yeah, what a clown. Dude is the definition of a fire starter.

You cant view a nj officers disciplinary record

I would say he didn’t.

Not struggling, completely failing

He's stupid, just not that stupid in this day and age.

The Sgt. Is a total wank*r filled with ego and -GROSS IGNORANCE !

It's the last thing an officer would ever want to look at, read or enforce. They only enforce their feelings and ego's. Half the police out there do NOT even know the laws they enforce, lets let that one sink in a bit.

And his reaction when he saw what it was

For real. Sean was right. That was overkill and that last cop was super disrespectful and disingenuous. The children ! 🤦‍♀️

The sergeant was annoyed as he was busy eating donuts previously..

Every department is over staffed, they only cry about being understaffed when they want more money, which means an increase in taxes. No department is ever short handed, I think that towns under the population of 5-7K shouldn't even have departments, the county sheriffs department can patrol those towns.

Yeah. Thee always plenty of psychopaths anxious to put on that badge.

The department in my town has been whining about being shorthanded for 3 years.

Never confuse ignorance with autocracy. It's a fine line between being a director and a dictator.

And Wilson has serious brain damage.

A person can remain intelligent until they open their mouth then all doubt goes away!

In Kreimer v. Board of Police of Morristown, NJ, an important court opinion addressing a library user’s right to enter and use the library, the court held that because public libraries are a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to those expressive activities that are consistent with the mission and purpose of the library. A public library is only obligated to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the government’s intent in establishing the library as a limited public forum for the purpose of receiving information and accessing the library’s books, programs, and online resources. According to the Kreimer opinion, other activities, including activities such as photography, filming, petition-gathering, assemblies, and public speeches, may be regulated by the library using reasonable, viewpoint neutral, time, place, and manner rules. Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 142, 86 S. Ct. 719, 724, 15 L. Ed. 2d 637 (1966). A library is "a place dedicated to quiet, to knowledge, and to beauty." Its very purpose is to aid in the acquisition of knowledge through reading, writing and quiet contemplation. Thus, the exercise of other oral and interactive First Amendment activities is antithetical to the nature of the Library. These arguably conflicting characteristics, at least in a First Amendment sense, support our conclusion that the Library constitutes a limited public forum, a sub-category of designated public fora.21 See Brody v. Spang, at 1118. We thus adopt the reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Travis v. Owego-Apalachin School District, 927 F.2d 688 (2d Cir. 1991), where the court held that a limited public forum "is created when government opens a nonpublic forum but limits the expressive activity to certain kinds of speakers or to the discussion of certain subjects.... In the case of a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to expressive activity of a genre similar to those that government has admitted to the limited forum." Id. at 692 (emphasis supplied).22 Hence, as a limited public forum, the Library is obligated only to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the nature of the Library and consistent with the government's intent in designating the Library as a public forum.23 Other activities need not be tolerated. Adderley v. Florida the Supreme court ruled in that case that the state can own property and they have a right to restrict access to the property at anytime. Understand policies are not laws, but you can be trespassed from any building for not following their policies. For example, the policy of no shoes, no shirt, no service, has been around for years. Where it is not a law you must wear shoes if you break the policy they can deny you service. Once you are denied service you can not use the building in its intended purposes so you can be trespassed. It doesn't matter if the place is public what matters is what type of fourm the government has designated to the place. The Supreme Court established three different types of public forums in Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983): traditional, limited and nonpublic. Limited and nonpublic fourms can limit the use of the public space to its designed purpose, and can even reasonably restrict or limit a person's first amendment rights. Courts have ruled that filming is subject to Time, Place, and Manner if the place is a nonpublic forum filming can be restricted. A missconception is being passed around the internet that you can not be trespassed from public property unless you violate a law, this is not the case anyone can be trespassed from a space for not following the rules or policies posted within the space. Each state has their own trespassing laws you should read the law in your state to better understand the law many states leave the law vague on when a person is guilty of criminal trespassing. Where you do have a right to film, it is not absolute the government reserves the option to limit a person's rights in certain spaces they designate as nonpublic forums. Typically nonpublic forums are established inside Courthouses, Libraries, Schools, and Universities but can be expanded to include other public spaces. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights and held that a citizen has the right to film public officials in a public place; the public's right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press. This case upholds that every citizen has equal rights to film in public places as the press. However, the court also noted that the right to film public officials was subject to reasonable limitations with respect to the time, place and manner in which the recording was conducted. This means everyone has equal rights to film the press are granted no extra privileges wherever a citizen is restricted in filming the press are bound to obey the same limitations. Now lets get into filming the courts have ruled filming is a person's right, but that right can be limited by Time Place and Manner restrictions. Where you have the right to film in most public spaces anywhere a person can reasonably expect privacy filming can be restricted. For example, a restroom is a public space open to the general public, but filming inside a restroom is illegal. Now lets get into why they can film but you can't. Where they do have security cameras thoses recordings are not public they are not publicly accessible and uploaded to social media sites, but a person can request the footage. When a person requests the footage they look at the reason the person wants the footage, if there is good cause and it is decided to release the footage, it is the job of the Custodian of records to review the footage and ensure it contains no private information, if it does it can be edited to remove names addresses and blur out faces to protect people's identities. This is not the case of third parties they do not have a responsibility to protect the libraries patrons, if a employee releases footage that contains private information, that employee can be fired for disobeying their policies. Where they can not fire a person who doesn't work there for breaking a policy they can trespass the person from the property to ensure the privacy of their users remain safe from unnecessary exposure. Where you have no expectation of privacy in most public spaces nonpublic forums recognize there are some spaces where a person can expect a limited amount of privacy in public and the need to protect that right to privacy. Libraries are not only places to check out books they are places where people do research and develop new ideas and theories or work on inventions. Because people bring a lot of intellectual property into Libraries and Universities the government employees are obligated to try and protect peoples intellectual property from unnecessary exposure. If people are live streaming to a social media site and purposefully or accidentally film personal intellectual property there is a risk of that information being stolen or being plagiarized by others. Libraries also have policies that the American Library Association (ALA) have put in place and a libraries Bill of Rights, this the the ALA'S position on privacy. "Privacy is essential to free inquiry in the library because it enables library users to select, access, and consider information and ideas without fear of embarrassment, judgment, punishment, or ostracism. A lack of privacy in what one reads and views in the library can have a significant chilling effect upon library users’ willingness to exercise their First Amendment right to read, thereby impairing free access to ideas. True liberty of choice in the library requires both a varied selection of materials and the assurance that one's choices are not monitored. The possibility of surveillance, whether direct or through access to records of speech, research and exploration, undermines a democratic society. One cannot exercise the right to read if the possible consequences include damage to one's reputation, ostracism from the community or workplace, or criminal penalties. Choice requires both a varied selection and the assurance that one's choice is not monitored. For libraries to flourish as centers for uninhibited access to information, librarians must stand behind their users' right to privacy and freedom of inquiry." I encourage people to look up all the information I've provided before you comment it is important to know your rights, and it is just as important to know when and where your rights can be limited.

I agree, not only is she ignorant of the constitutions 1st amendment but she is ignorant of customer service etiquette also.

Exactly and explain to her the waste of taxpayers money just to entertain this nonsense, Reyes didn’t need the explanation

Exactly my thoughts!!

Amen

That Sargent was seething he was so upset to be told he could leave .

Imagine being a cop and being worried about filming kids in public buildings yet the child trafficking has already surpassed the illegal drugs trade under law enforcements watch or participation. Let that sink in people...

He's a complete idiot.

Sgt Wilson is such an embarassment. Every word that comes out of his mouth is utter nonsense. How did he ever become a police officer? People like this should get a different job. He's not fit or smart enough to be a cop. Thanks for exposing these hypocritical idiots that have no common sense or logic. They're a bunch of brainwash fools. A reflection of the government. Pathetic.

I agree. THIS is the main takeaway from this audit. She needs to be replaced with a human

True and important to point out. ☝️

most probably cause shes not doing anything the whole day and gets exposed

I guarantee that ignoring cnty attitude is no where to be seen when she greedily grabs her pay check that we all pay for. Absolute subhuman.

What are you going to video, the homeless watching porn on the internet

Without pension

"Her ego won’t allow her to be wrong" I have met a lot of woman who are like this, it's common with woman it seems !!

They both look like they’re in the same wiccan cult. Very common in that area of jersey.

I agree. Both are a huge waste of tax dollars.

Sour turd servants

You mean that Nobody 🤯🤡

But there were imaginary children there. They were hiding in the stacks.

It doesn’t even make sense cause as Sean said there are children everywhere he could be out on the street filming and a child passes by.

Americans and cops need to quit with the "filming of children" nonsense.

@@8minato It's not supposed to make any sense. It's only supposed to f--- with your mind.

He's projecting. Said the same thing to Too Apree. Creepy

That passive aggressive police state Sargeant was out of his mind bc his ego and cense of power were challenged and it was taking a hunk of them in a big ball in his throat he was about to choke on them.

Ego is how they compensate for infantile micro wiener syndrome complex@@edwardgensheimer6640

She’s a cowardly, fire-starting dictator wannabe.

Yeah, she was butt hurt big time, like a child when she couldn't get her way. Wannnnnnnn

She was butt hurt because she couldn't use her perceived authority to kick Sean out of "her" library.

His entire career is a hypothetical. How he stole those stripes is certainly it's own mystery 🕵‍♂️

He was willing to say anything to get the desired outcome : get the auditor out of the library. He was ready to say anything, invoke feelings, make assumptions, etc. He wasn't arguing reasonably, he wasn't even listening. He already had his mind made up in favor of the library director, that's it. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Deflection 101@@dsprg

Deflection 101@@ironshoes1720

Especially bringing up recording kids or the school a block away... smh

They hire bottom of the barrel phycopaths.

KKKops don't become Psychopaths... Psychopaths become KKKops. Imagine their Home and personal lives. ...and there is no "off switch".

Preach !!

He wouldn't know what prior restraint was if you tattooed it on his hand.

@@bdwilcox Two black eyes after finding him out of costume would sure give him a hint.

They want to be "tyrannical" but the Constitution interferes with that... otherwise known as "little boy" syndrome.

Should pit something like this on a T-shirt for Sean lol

They can't follow the law. Neither can criminals.

Neanderthals don’t know how to read.

Amen to that. You listening, Reyes?@@jackiedan2450

Great Comment, i wonder what his paycheque is; please find out Sean, i think that Oldy 225.000 dollar and that disgusting Thug; i’m talking, 165.000 paid by the Public, he must be Gratefull instead being A Bully.

The more he speaks, the dumber he sounds. He is garbage

I just told my brother the exact same thing. What a tyrant ...Atrocious behavior. He should be ashamed of himself.

@lizerdkeng Yes it is! People like him often project their own inadequacies and iniquities on others.

@@kiddhudi The "sargent" says: Hypotheticals! as if his rank chevrons+ aren't hypothetical-MILITARY??? for his use of dominations of WE THE PEOPLE"? Comedian RON WHITE said: "YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID!" as this audit has recorded.

That's exactly why that Sargent went into Law Enforcement, his INADEQUACIES!!

She's probably been library director for 30 years. There needs to be " term limits " for anyone who holds public office and is in a position of power.." Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely "

In Kreimer v. Board of Police of Morristown, NJ, an important court opinion addressing a library user’s right to enter and use the library, the court held that because public libraries are a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to those expressive activities that are consistent with the mission and purpose of the library. A public library is only obligated to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the government’s intent in establishing the library as a limited public forum for the purpose of receiving information and accessing the library’s books, programs, and online resources. According to the Kreimer opinion, other activities, including activities such as photography, filming, petition-gathering, assemblies, and public speeches, may be regulated by the library using reasonable, viewpoint neutral, time, place, and manner rules. Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 142, 86 S. Ct. 719, 724, 15 L. Ed. 2d 637 (1966). A library is "a place dedicated to quiet, to knowledge, and to beauty." Its very purpose is to aid in the acquisition of knowledge through reading, writing and quiet contemplation. Thus, the exercise of other oral and interactive First Amendment activities is antithetical to the nature of the Library. These arguably conflicting characteristics, at least in a First Amendment sense, support our conclusion that the Library constitutes a limited public forum, a sub-category of designated public fora.21 See Brody v. Spang, at 1118. We thus adopt the reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Travis v. Owego-Apalachin School District, 927 F.2d 688 (2d Cir. 1991), where the court held that a limited public forum "is created when government opens a nonpublic forum but limits the expressive activity to certain kinds of speakers or to the discussion of certain subjects.... In the case of a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to expressive activity of a genre similar to those that government has admitted to the limited forum." Id. at 692 (emphasis supplied).22 Hence, as a limited public forum, the Library is obligated only to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the nature of the Library and consistent with the government's intent in designating the Library as a public forum.23 Other activities need not be tolerated. Adderley v. Florida the Supreme court ruled in that case that the state can own property and they have a right to restrict access to the property at anytime. Understand policies are not laws, but you can be trespassed from any building for not following their policies. For example, the policy of no shoes, no shirt, no service, has been around for years. Where it is not a law you must wear shoes if you break the policy they can deny you service. Once you are denied service you can not use the building in its intended purposes so you can be trespassed. It doesn't matter if the place is public what matters is what type of fourm the government has designated to the place. The Supreme Court established three different types of public forums in Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983): traditional, limited and nonpublic. Limited and nonpublic fourms can limit the use of the public space to its designed purpose, and can even reasonably restrict or limit a person's first amendment rights. Courts have ruled that filming is subject to Time, Place, and Manner if the place is a nonpublic forum filming can be restricted. A missconception is being passed around the internet that you can not be trespassed from public property unless you violate a law, this is not the case anyone can be trespassed from a space for not following the rules or policies posted within the space. Each state has their own trespassing laws you should read the law in your state to better understand the law many states leave the law vague on when a person is guilty of criminal trespassing. Where you do have a right to film, it is not absolute the government reserves the option to limit a person's rights in certain spaces they designate as nonpublic forums. Typically nonpublic forums are established inside Courthouses, Libraries, Schools, and Universities but can be expanded to include other public spaces. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights and held that a citizen has the right to film public officials in a public place; the public's right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press. This case upholds that every citizen has equal rights to film in public places as the press. However, the court also noted that the right to film public officials was subject to reasonable limitations with respect to the time, place and manner in which the recording was conducted. This means everyone has equal rights to film the press are granted no extra privileges wherever a citizen is restricted in filming the press are bound to obey the same limitations. Now lets get into filming the courts have ruled filming is a person's right, but that right can be limited by Time Place and Manner restrictions. Where you have the right to film in most public spaces anywhere a person can reasonably expect privacy filming can be restricted. For example, a restroom is a public space open to the general public, but filming inside a restroom is illegal. Now lets get into why they can film but you can't. Where they do have security cameras thoses recordings are not public they are not publicly accessible and uploaded to social media sites, but a person can request the footage. When a person requests the footage they look at the reason the person wants the footage, if there is good cause and it is decided to release the footage, it is the job of the Custodian of records to review the footage and ensure it contains no private information, if it does it can be edited to remove names addresses and blur out faces to protect people's identities. This is not the case of third parties they do not have a responsibility to protect the libraries patrons, if a employee releases footage that contains private information, that employee can be fired for disobeying their policies. Where they can not fire a person who doesn't work there for breaking a policy they can trespass the person from the property to ensure the privacy of their users remain safe from unnecessary exposure. Where you have no expectation of privacy in most public spaces nonpublic forums recognize there are some spaces where a person can expect a limited amount of privacy in public and the need to protect that right to privacy. Libraries are not only places to check out books they are places where people do research and develop new ideas and theories or work on inventions. Because people bring a lot of intellectual property into Libraries and Universities the government employees are obligated to try and protect peoples intellectual property from unnecessary exposure. If people are live streaming to a social media site and purposefully or accidentally film personal intellectual property there is a risk of that information being stolen or being plagiarized by others. Libraries also have policies that the American Library Association (ALA) have put in place and a libraries Bill of Rights, this the the ALA'S position on privacy. "Privacy is essential to free inquiry in the library because it enables library users to select, access, and consider information and ideas without fear of embarrassment, judgment, punishment, or ostracism. A lack of privacy in what one reads and views in the library can have a significant chilling effect upon library users’ willingness to exercise their First Amendment right to read, thereby impairing free access to ideas. True liberty of choice in the library requires both a varied selection of materials and the assurance that one's choices are not monitored. The possibility of surveillance, whether direct or through access to records of speech, research and exploration, undermines a democratic society. One cannot exercise the right to read if the possible consequences include damage to one's reputation, ostracism from the community or workplace, or criminal penalties. Choice requires both a varied selection and the assurance that one's choice is not monitored. For libraries to flourish as centers for uninhibited access to information, librarians must stand behind their users' right to privacy and freedom of inquiry." I encourage people to look up all the information I've provided before you comment it is important to know your rights, and it is just as important to know when and where your rights can be limited.

@@ronberman8947 But Rhett. What shall I do. Where shall I go?

Go watch “Too Apree” do his audit on this same Library lmao it’s hilarious. He just dropped the video as well.

there were no people taking shelter from the cold, at the Library. There might be something more sinister going on than US Constitutional violations.

Same thing in Houston...

And that, is the problem.

Captain obvious

yet, they do it every day...

REALLY?

So they TRIED to make a crime and it didn't work.

​@@mikeburgh3956no, they wanted him to leave and he left! Fake audit!

@@yoo_zen No!! It was a successful audit. Audit fail because they called the pigs. But they didn't make him leave, he only left because I'm sure he has better things to do instead of hanging in a library all day. He did what he went there for. "A cop walk of shame" Edit: also I'm sure he was in there alot longer than vid shows, he edits them to shorten the vids. Alot of ppl don't like watching 1-2hr vids!

​@@yoo_zen He left on his own free will later not forced out, you loser.

@@mikeburgh3956 come on! Get real! The management refused to talk to him. She totally ignored him without any consequences. The cops kicked him out! The cops treated him like sh.t. without consequences. Only thing he did is to make a totally foolish argument with an ignorant cop. He lost that too. Nobody came out of this that cops shouldn't have been called. His behaviour is not suspicious! If he would go back the cops would show up again. They would still argue. The argument about the kids were pathetic. This auditor is uninformed , a fake, a sellout!

Exactly, we have the same shittt here in Britain 🇬🇧

The cops try to exorcise rights. We exercise our rights as citizens.

@@goodcitizen3638 Cops have duties, we have rights ✌🏼

Dudes a tool

@@suzibachata6232 exorcise: drive out or attempt to drive out. @goodcitizen3638 was contrasting exorcise vs exercise.

She should be charged for harassment. Having to talk to five police officers for this extended time over nothing is a literal harassment. Most people would’ve been afraid for their lives and their heart rate and blood pressure would probably be dangerous levels because of this interaction. As far as I’m concerned, she should spend a couple nights in jail for harassment.

It's a fine line between being a director and a dictator.

Libraries are increasingly becoming disfunctional and irrelevant and should probably be defunded - along with much of the police force. Most Americans can no longer afford homes and cars but pay a lot of taxes for this nonsense.

Too Apree interacted with these same cops at this same library. Crazy to see you guys both do the same place same people. 🤙🫡🇺🇸🇮🇱

@@omCi Unfortunately, the police don't see it this way. They love answering calls like this. Standing around wasting time is so much less risky than chasing and apprehending actual criminals.

Visually, she projected a very self-righteous condescending attitude

That must be why the books you take out and computer use is sent to a government database.

@@joe-ut9kb Really?

Shockingly, they get paid a whole lot for a job that would normally pay $15 an hour at a book store. No wonder they have bad attitudes, even though most are outcast geeks.

In Kreimer v. Board of Police of Morristown, NJ, an important court opinion addressing a library user’s right to enter and use the library, the court held that because public libraries are a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to those expressive activities that are consistent with the mission and purpose of the library. A public library is only obligated to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the government’s intent in establishing the library as a limited public forum for the purpose of receiving information and accessing the library’s books, programs, and online resources. According to the Kreimer opinion, other activities, including activities such as photography, filming, petition-gathering, assemblies, and public speeches, may be regulated by the library using reasonable, viewpoint neutral, time, place, and manner rules. Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 142, 86 S. Ct. 719, 724, 15 L. Ed. 2d 637 (1966). A library is "a place dedicated to quiet, to knowledge, and to beauty." Its very purpose is to aid in the acquisition of knowledge through reading, writing and quiet contemplation. Thus, the exercise of other oral and interactive First Amendment activities is antithetical to the nature of the Library. These arguably conflicting characteristics, at least in a First Amendment sense, support our conclusion that the Library constitutes a limited public forum, a sub-category of designated public fora.21 See Brody v. Spang, at 1118. We thus adopt the reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Travis v. Owego-Apalachin School District, 927 F.2d 688 (2d Cir. 1991), where the court held that a limited public forum "is created when government opens a nonpublic forum but limits the expressive activity to certain kinds of speakers or to the discussion of certain subjects.... In the case of a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to expressive activity of a genre similar to those that government has admitted to the limited forum." Id. at 692 (emphasis supplied).22 Hence, as a limited public forum, the Library is obligated only to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the nature of the Library and consistent with the government's intent in designating the Library as a public forum.23 Other activities need not be tolerated. Adderley v. Florida the Supreme court ruled in that case that the state can own property and they have a right to restrict access to the property at anytime. Understand policies are not laws, but you can be trespassed from any building for not following their policies. For example, the policy of no shoes, no shirt, no service, has been around for years. Where it is not a law you must wear shoes if you break the policy they can deny you service. Once you are denied service you can not use the building in its intended purposes so you can be trespassed. It doesn't matter if the place is public what matters is what type of fourm the government has designated to the place. The Supreme Court established three different types of public forums in Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983): traditional, limited and nonpublic. Limited and nonpublic fourms can limit the use of the public space to its designed purpose, and can even reasonably restrict or limit a person's first amendment rights. Courts have ruled that filming is subject to Time, Place, and Manner if the place is a nonpublic forum filming can be restricted. A missconception is being passed around the internet that you can not be trespassed from public property unless you violate a law, this is not the case anyone can be trespassed from a space for not following the rules or policies posted within the space. Each state has their own trespassing laws you should read the law in your state to better understand the law many states leave the law vague on when a person is guilty of criminal trespassing. Where you do have a right to film, it is not absolute the government reserves the option to limit a person's rights in certain spaces they designate as nonpublic forums. Typically nonpublic forums are established inside Courthouses, Libraries, Schools, and Universities but can be expanded to include other public spaces. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights and held that a citizen has the right to film public officials in a public place; the public's right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press. This case upholds that every citizen has equal rights to film in public places as the press. However, the court also noted that the right to film public officials was subject to reasonable limitations with respect to the time, place and manner in which the recording was conducted. This means everyone has equal rights to film the press are granted no extra privileges wherever a citizen is restricted in filming the press are bound to obey the same limitations. Now lets get into filming the courts have ruled filming is a person's right, but that right can be limited by Time Place and Manner restrictions. Where you have the right to film in most public spaces anywhere a person can reasonably expect privacy filming can be restricted. For example, a restroom is a public space open to the general public, but filming inside a restroom is illegal. Now lets get into why they can film but you can't. Where they do have security cameras thoses recordings are not public they are not publicly accessible and uploaded to social media sites, but a person can request the footage. When a person requests the footage they look at the reason the person wants the footage, if there is good cause and it is decided to release the footage, it is the job of the Custodian of records to review the footage and ensure it contains no private information, if it does it can be edited to remove names addresses and blur out faces to protect people's identities. This is not the case of third parties they do not have a responsibility to protect the libraries patrons, if a employee releases footage that contains private information, that employee can be fired for disobeying their policies. Where they can not fire a person who doesn't work there for breaking a policy they can trespass the person from the property to ensure the privacy of their users remain safe from unnecessary exposure. Where you have no expectation of privacy in most public spaces nonpublic forums recognize there are some spaces where a person can expect a limited amount of privacy in public and the need to protect that right to privacy. Libraries are not only places to check out books they are places where people do research and develop new ideas and theories or work on inventions. Because people bring a lot of intellectual property into Libraries and Universities the government employees are obligated to try and protect peoples intellectual property from unnecessary exposure. If people are live streaming to a social media site and purposefully or accidentally film personal intellectual property there is a risk of that information being stolen or being plagiarized by others. Libraries also have policies that the American Library Association (ALA) have put in place and a libraries Bill of Rights, this the the ALA'S position on privacy. "Privacy is essential to free inquiry in the library because it enables library users to select, access, and consider information and ideas without fear of embarrassment, judgment, punishment, or ostracism. A lack of privacy in what one reads and views in the library can have a significant chilling effect upon library users’ willingness to exercise their First Amendment right to read, thereby impairing free access to ideas. True liberty of choice in the library requires both a varied selection of materials and the assurance that one's choices are not monitored. The possibility of surveillance, whether direct or through access to records of speech, research and exploration, undermines a democratic society. One cannot exercise the right to read if the possible consequences include damage to one's reputation, ostracism from the community or workplace, or criminal penalties. Choice requires both a varied selection and the assurance that one's choice is not monitored. For libraries to flourish as centers for uninhibited access to information, librarians must stand behind their users' right to privacy and freedom of inquiry." I encourage people to look up all the information I've provided before you comment it is important to know your rights, and it is just as important to know when and where your rights can be limited.

Bet you over $600,000 a year for these losers to just stand around.

And then they have the audacity to say that they have better things to do

Circle jerks

HE SHOULDNT HAVE BEEN THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE MORON!!!!!!!!

Most cops are and do.

And he doesn’t care. He will face no punishment or financial loss

The "police manager" handled Asif Khan better. He helped him get his footage.

He still violated Too Apree's rights.

In 2022, New York city paid out over $220 million for police misconduct. There were 10 payouts that were over $6 million each.

Go watch “Too Apree” do his audit on this same Library lmao it’s hilarious. He just dropped the video as well.

That first cop "Blum" was funny to see him ask Sean some leading questions and then when he didnt get the answer he was fishing for he finally just outright asks "where are you from" LOL. The entitlement to your personal information is astounding. I hope this guy teaches his kids Stranger Danger even though he is trained to act like that exact person.

people don't respect them, don't like them and often hate them as they are not accountable for their actions and hide behind qualified immunity and the thin blue line gang mafia

You should understand that public property doesn't mean that the property is always open to the public a military base for example is public property, but it restricts access to the general public. In Kreimer v. Board of Police of Morristown, NJ, an important court opinion addressing a library user’s right to enter and use the library, the court held that because public libraries are a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to those expressive activities that are consistent with the mission and purpose of the library. A public library is only obligated to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the government’s intent in establishing the library as a limited public forum for the purpose of receiving information and accessing the library’s books, programs, and online resources. According to the Kreimer opinion, other activities, including activities such as photography, filming, petition-gathering, assemblies, and public speeches, may be regulated by the library using reasonable, viewpoint neutral, time, place, and manner rules. Brown v. Louisiana, (1966). A library is "a place dedicated to quiet, to knowledge, and to beauty." Its very purpose is to aid in the acquisition of knowledge through reading, writing and quiet contemplation. Thus, the exercise of other oral and interactive First Amendment activities is antithetical to the nature of the Library. These arguably conflicting characteristics, at least in a First Amendment sense, support our conclusion that the Library constitutes a limited public forum, a sub-category of designated public fora.21 See Brody v. Spang, at 1118. We thus adopt the reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Travis v. Owego-Apalachin School District, 927 F.2d 688 (2d Cir. 1991), where the court held that a limited public forum "is created when government opens a nonpublic forum but limits the expressive activity to certain kinds of speakers or to the discussion of certain subjects.... In the case of a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to expressive activity of a genre similar to those that government has admitted to the limited forum." Id. at 692 (emphasis supplied).22 Hence, as a limited public forum, the Library is obligated only to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the nature of the Library and consistent with the government's intent in designating the Library as a public forum.23 Other activities need not be tolerated. Adderley v. Florida the Supreme court ruled in that case that the state can own property and they have a right to restrict access to the property at anytime. Understand policies are not laws, but you can be trespassed from any building for not following their policies. For example, the policy of no shoes, no shirt, no service, has been around for years. Where it is not a law you must wear shoes if you break the policy they can deny you service. Once you are denied service you can not use the building in its intended purposes so you can be trespassed. It doesn't matter if the place is public what matters is what type of fourm the government has designated to the place. The Supreme Court established three different types of public forums in Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983): traditional, limited and nonpublic. Limited and nonpublic fourms can limit the use of the public space to its designed purpose, and can even reasonably restrict or limit a person's first amendment rights. Courts have ruled that filming is subject to Time, Place, and Manner if the place is a nonpublic forum filming can be restricted. A missconception is being passed around the internet that you can not be trespassed from public property unless you violate a law, this is not the case anyone can be trespassed from a space for not following the rules or policies posted within the space. Each state has their own trespassing laws you should read the law in your state to better understand the law many states leave the law vague on when a person is guilty of criminal trespassing. Where you do have a right to film, it is not absolute the government reserves the option to limit a person's rights in certain spaces they designate as nonpublic forums. Typically nonpublic forums are established inside Courthouses, Libraries, Schools, and Universities but can be expanded to include other public spaces. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights and held that a citizen has the right to film public officials in a public place; the public's right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press. This case upholds that every citizen has equal rights to film in public places as the press. However, the court also noted that the right to film public officials was subject to reasonable limitations with respect to the time, place and manner in which the recording was conducted. This means everyone has equal rights to film the press are granted no extra privileges wherever a citizen is restricted in filming the press are bound to obey the same limitations. Now lets get into filming the courts have ruled filming is a person's right, but that right can be limited by Time Place and Manner restrictions. Where you have the right to film in most public spaces anywhere a person can reasonably expect privacy filming can be restricted. For example, a restroom is a public space open to the general public, but filming inside a restroom is illegal. Now lets get into why they can film but you can't. Where they do have security cameras thoses recordings are not public they are not publicly accessible and uploaded to social media sites, but a person can request the footage. When a person requests the footage they look at the reason the person wants the footage, if there is good cause and it is decided to release the footage, it is the job of the Custodian of records to review the footage and ensure it contains no private information, if it does it can be edited to remove names addresses and blur out faces to protect people's identities. This is not the case of third parties they do not have a responsibility to protect the libraries patrons, if a employee releases footage that contains private information, that employee can be fired for disobeying their policies. Where they can not fire a person who doesn't work there for breaking a policy they can trespass the person from the property to ensure the privacy of their users remain safe from unnecessary exposure. Where you have no expectation of privacy in most public spaces nonpublic forums recognize there are some spaces where a person can expect a limited amount of privacy in public and the need to protect that right to privacy. Libraries are not only places to check out books they are places where people do research and develop new ideas and theories or work on inventions. Because people bring a lot of intellectual property into Libraries and Universities the government employees are obligated to try and protect peoples intellectual property from unnecessary exposure. If people are live streaming to a social media site and purposefully or accidentally film personal intellectual property there is a risk of that information being stolen or being plagiarized by others. Libraries also have policies that the American Library Association (ALA) have put in place and a libraries Bill of Rights, this the the ALA'S position on privacy. "Privacy is essential to free inquiry in the library because it enables library users to select, access, and consider information and ideas without fear of embarrassment, judgment, punishment, or ostracism. A lack of privacy in what one reads and views in the library can have a significant chilling effect upon library users’ willingness to exercise their First Amendment right to read, thereby impairing free access to ideas. True liberty of choice in the library requires both a varied selection of materials and the assurance that one's choices are not monitored. The possibility of surveillance, whether direct or through access to records of speech, research and exploration, undermines a democratic society. One cannot exercise the right to read if the possible consequences include damage to one's reputation, ostracism from the community or workplace, or criminal penalties. Choice requires both a varied selection and the assurance that one's choice is not monitored. For libraries to flourish as centers for uninhibited access to information, librarians must stand behind their users' right to privacy and freedom of inquiry." I encourage people to look up all the information I've provided before you comment it is important to know your rights, and it is just as important to know when and where your rights can be limited.

​@@urgreatestenemy3044it's is not the same my friend. There a reason why the military has it's own police and court system vs civilian police and court system.

Thay can start with that haughty director resigning.

@MWAclanGaming Public property just means it was paid for by tax dollars it doesn't mean it is open to the general public. You can look it up just because it is public property that doesn't give people the right to access the property for example a park is public property it doesn't mean it can not close to the public and restrict access to it. You don't own public property the state owns the land they have the right to restrict access to their properties just as a citizen has the right to restrict access to their own property.

@@urgreatestenemy3044 What a fantastic post. Thanks for that. I would urge all auditors to read and take note of all the cases cited. I would also urge them to understand the logic in the reasoning. If you're studying or researching subjects in a library, you should have the right to not be filmed without some auditor sticking a camera in your face and plastering your image on KZfaq for all their followers to brand you as a Karen if you simply ask not to be filmed. Of course auditors want no privacy at all. If you walk out your door, you can be filmed by anyone, any one can request government surveillance footage. AI and facial recognition will in future be able to track anyone and everyone in all of their movements whenever they walk outside. They relish the thought of Orwell's 1984 where everyone can film and track everyone else as soon as they walk out teir front door. In all public buildings they can have policies that limit filming unless each and every person consents, and that's the way it should be. You can request performance records for public servants, and you can request to film the building outside public hours when there are no citizens there if there is a legitimate public interest. Your average Joe doesn't care about filming libraries, post offices, or motor registry offices.

Time of day matters.

"So why does a library exist?" Excellent question! Libraries are no longer repositories of information open to the public. They are now primarily becoming community social and day-care centers, funded by taxpayer $$$. In other words, the primary purpose of public libraries has been purposely rendered obsolete and replaced by an imposed extension of the public school system.

The staff wasn't actually abusive. The library director is the dictator of a nanny state organization. It is an extension of the public school system. They now treat everyone there as though we are all children. Therefore, man with a camera is seen an a threat and an intruder.

@@ByeByeBS And places where men dressed as women can confuse children of their gender identity while reading fairy tales.

In Kreimer v. Board of Police of Morristown, NJ, an important court opinion addressing a library user’s right to enter and use the library, the court held that because public libraries are a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to those expressive activities that are consistent with the mission and purpose of the library. A public library is only obligated to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the government’s intent in establishing the library as a limited public forum for the purpose of receiving information and accessing the library’s books, programs, and online resources. According to the Kreimer opinion, other activities, including activities such as photography, filming, petition-gathering, assemblies, and public speeches, may be regulated by the library using reasonable, viewpoint neutral, time, place, and manner rules. Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 142, 86 S. Ct. 719, 724, 15 L. Ed. 2d 637 (1966). A library is "a place dedicated to quiet, to knowledge, and to beauty." Its very purpose is to aid in the acquisition of knowledge through reading, writing and quiet contemplation. Thus, the exercise of other oral and interactive First Amendment activities is antithetical to the nature of the Library. These arguably conflicting characteristics, at least in a First Amendment sense, support our conclusion that the Library constitutes a limited public forum, a sub-category of designated public fora.21 See Brody v. Spang, at 1118. We thus adopt the reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Travis v. Owego-Apalachin School District, 927 F.2d 688 (2d Cir. 1991), where the court held that a limited public forum "is created when government opens a nonpublic forum but limits the expressive activity to certain kinds of speakers or to the discussion of certain subjects.... In the case of a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to expressive activity of a genre similar to those that government has admitted to the limited forum." Id. at 692 (emphasis supplied).22 Hence, as a limited public forum, the Library is obligated only to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the nature of the Library and consistent with the government's intent in designating the Library as a public forum.23 Other activities need not be tolerated. Adderley v. Florida the Supreme court ruled in that case that the state can own property and they have a right to restrict access to the property at anytime. Understand policies are not laws, but you can be trespassed from any building for not following their policies. For example, the policy of no shoes, no shirt, no service, has been around for years. Where it is not a law you must wear shoes if you break the policy they can deny you service. Once you are denied service you can not use the building in its intended purposes so you can be trespassed. It doesn't matter if the place is public what matters is what type of fourm the government has designated to the place. The Supreme Court established three different types of public forums in Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983): traditional, limited and nonpublic. Limited and nonpublic fourms can limit the use of the public space to its designed purpose, and can even reasonably restrict or limit a person's first amendment rights. Courts have ruled that filming is subject to Time, Place, and Manner if the place is a nonpublic forum filming can be restricted. A missconception is being passed around the internet that you can not be trespassed from public property unless you violate a law, this is not the case anyone can be trespassed from a space for not following the rules or policies posted within the space. Each state has their own trespassing laws you should read the law in your state to better understand the law many states leave the law vague on when a person is guilty of criminal trespassing. Where you do have a right to film, it is not absolute the government reserves the option to limit a person's rights in certain spaces they designate as nonpublic forums. Typically nonpublic forums are established inside Courthouses, Libraries, Schools, and Universities but can be expanded to include other public spaces. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights and held that a citizen has the right to film public officials in a public place; the public's right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press. This case upholds that every citizen has equal rights to film in public places as the press. However, the court also noted that the right to film public officials was subject to reasonable limitations with respect to the time, place and manner in which the recording was conducted. This means everyone has equal rights to film the press are granted no extra privileges wherever a citizen is restricted in filming the press are bound to obey the same limitations. Now lets get into filming the courts have ruled filming is a person's right, but that right can be limited by Time Place and Manner restrictions. Where you have the right to film in most public spaces anywhere a person can reasonably expect privacy filming can be restricted. For example, a restroom is a public space open to the general public, but filming inside a restroom is illegal. Now lets get into why they can film but you can't. Where they do have security cameras thoses recordings are not public they are not publicly accessible and uploaded to social media sites, but a person can request the footage. When a person requests the footage they look at the reason the person wants the footage, if there is good cause and it is decided to release the footage, it is the job of the Custodian of records to review the footage and ensure it contains no private information, if it does it can be edited to remove names addresses and blur out faces to protect people's identities. This is not the case of third parties they do not have a responsibility to protect the libraries patrons, if a employee releases footage that contains private information, that employee can be fired for disobeying their policies. Where they can not fire a person who doesn't work there for breaking a policy they can trespass the person from the property to ensure the privacy of their users remain safe from unnecessary exposure. Where you have no expectation of privacy in most public spaces nonpublic forums recognize there are some spaces where a person can expect a limited amount of privacy in public and the need to protect that right to privacy. Libraries are not only places to check out books they are places where people do research and develop new ideas and theories or work on inventions. Because people bring a lot of intellectual property into Libraries and Universities the government employees are obligated to try and protect peoples intellectual property from unnecessary exposure. If people are live streaming to a social media site and purposefully or accidentally film personal intellectual property there is a risk of that information being stolen or being plagiarized by others. Libraries also have policies that the American Library Association (ALA) have put in place and a libraries Bill of Rights, this the the ALA'S position on privacy. "Privacy is essential to free inquiry in the library because it enables library users to select, access, and consider information and ideas without fear of embarrassment, judgment, punishment, or ostracism. A lack of privacy in what one reads and views in the library can have a significant chilling effect upon library users’ willingness to exercise their First Amendment right to read, thereby impairing free access to ideas. True liberty of choice in the library requires both a varied selection of materials and the assurance that one's choices are not monitored. The possibility of surveillance, whether direct or through access to records of speech, research and exploration, undermines a democratic society. One cannot exercise the right to read if the possible consequences include damage to one's reputation, ostracism from the community or workplace, or criminal penalties. Choice requires both a varied selection and the assurance that one's choice is not monitored. For libraries to flourish as centers for uninhibited access to information, librarians must stand behind their users' right to privacy and freedom of inquiry." I encourage people to look up all the information I've provided before you comment it is important to know your rights, and it is just as important to know when and where your rights can be limited.

Wilson is a disgrace!

Breaking a policy is not breaking the law. 💪💪

Very glad I'm not the only one who couldn't stand him!

That dood hates freedom. He needs to not make it home. All those fries and NO ketchup.

If cops are so concerned about minors in the library, then they shouldn’t gang up and bring guns into the library.

👍👍👍

Sean tried to hand him a copy of the written permission. They just didn't want to look at it

In Kreimer v. Board of Police of Morristown, NJ, an important court opinion addressing a library user’s right to enter and use the library, the court held that because public libraries are a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to those expressive activities that are consistent with the mission and purpose of the library. A public library is only obligated to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the government’s intent in establishing the library as a limited public forum for the purpose of receiving information and accessing the library’s books, programs, and online resources. According to the Kreimer opinion, other activities, including activities such as photography, filming, petition-gathering, assemblies, and public speeches, may be regulated by the library using reasonable, viewpoint neutral, time, place, and manner rules. Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131, 142, 86 S. Ct. 719, 724, 15 L. Ed. 2d 637 (1966). A library is "a place dedicated to quiet, to knowledge, and to beauty." Its very purpose is to aid in the acquisition of knowledge through reading, writing and quiet contemplation. Thus, the exercise of other oral and interactive First Amendment activities is antithetical to the nature of the Library. These arguably conflicting characteristics, at least in a First Amendment sense, support our conclusion that the Library constitutes a limited public forum, a sub-category of designated public fora.21 See Brody v. Spang, at 1118. We thus adopt the reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Travis v. Owego-Apalachin School District, 927 F.2d 688 (2d Cir. 1991), where the court held that a limited public forum "is created when government opens a nonpublic forum but limits the expressive activity to certain kinds of speakers or to the discussion of certain subjects.... In the case of a limited public forum, constitutional protection is afforded only to expressive activity of a genre similar to those that government has admitted to the limited forum." Id. at 692 (emphasis supplied).22 Hence, as a limited public forum, the Library is obligated only to permit the public to exercise rights that are consistent with the nature of the Library and consistent with the government's intent in designating the Library as a public forum.23 Other activities need not be tolerated. Adderley v. Florida the Supreme court ruled in that case that the state can own property and they have a right to restrict access to the property at anytime. Understand policies are not laws, but you can be trespassed from any building for not following their policies. For example, the policy of no shoes, no shirt, no service, has been around for years. Where it is not a law you must wear shoes if you break the policy they can deny you service. Once you are denied service you can not use the building in its intended purposes so you can be trespassed. It doesn't matter if the place is public what matters is what type of fourm the government has designated to the place. The Supreme Court established three different types of public forums in Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators' Association (1983): traditional, limited and nonpublic. Limited and nonpublic fourms can limit the use of the public space to its designed purpose, and can even reasonably restrict or limit a person's first amendment rights. Courts have ruled that filming is subject to Time, Place, and Manner if the place is a nonpublic forum filming can be restricted. A missconception is being passed around the internet that you can not be trespassed from public property unless you violate a law, this is not the case anyone can be trespassed from a space for not following the rules or policies posted within the space. Each state has their own trespassing laws you should read the law in your state to better understand the law many states leave the law vague on when a person is guilty of criminal trespassing. Where you do have a right to film, it is not absolute the government reserves the option to limit a person's rights in certain spaces they designate as nonpublic forums. Typically nonpublic forums are established inside Courthouses, Libraries, Schools, and Universities but can be expanded to include other public spaces. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of police carrying out their duties in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights and held that a citizen has the right to film public officials in a public place; the public's right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press. This case upholds that every citizen has equal rights to film in public places as the press. However, the court also noted that the right to film public officials was subject to reasonable limitations with respect to the time, place and manner in which the recording was conducted. This means everyone has equal rights to film the press are granted no extra privileges wherever a citizen is restricted in filming the press are bound to obey the same limitations. Now lets get into filming the courts have ruled filming is a person's right, but that right can be limited by Time Place and Manner restrictions. Where you have the right to film in most public spaces anywhere a person can reasonably expect privacy filming can be restricted. For example, a restroom is a public space open to the general public, but filming inside a restroom is illegal. Now lets get into why they can film but you can't. Where they do have security cameras thoses recordings are not public they are not publicly accessible and uploaded to social media sites, but a person can request the footage. When a person requests the footage they look at the reason the person wants the footage, if there is good cause and it is decided to release the footage, it is the job of the Custodian of records to review the footage and ensure it contains no private information, if it does it can be edited to remove names addresses and blur out faces to protect people's identities. This is not the case of third parties they do not have a responsibility to protect the libraries patrons, if a employee releases footage that contains private information, that employee can be fired for disobeying their policies. Where they can not fire a person who doesn't work there for breaking a policy they can trespass the person from the property to ensure the privacy of their users remain safe from unnecessary exposure. Where you have no expectation of privacy in most public spaces nonpublic forums recognize there are some spaces where a person can expect a limited amount of privacy in public and the need to protect that right to privacy. Libraries are not only places to check out books they are places where people do research and develop new ideas and theories or work on inventions. Because people bring a lot of intellectual property into Libraries and Universities the government employees are obligated to try and protect peoples intellectual property from unnecessary exposure. If people are live streaming to a social media site and purposefully or accidentally film personal intellectual property there is a risk of that information being stolen or being plagiarized by others. Libraries also have policies that the American Library Association (ALA) have put in place and a libraries Bill of Rights, this the the ALA'S position on privacy. "Privacy is essential to free inquiry in the library because it enables library users to select, access, and consider information and ideas without fear of embarrassment, judgment, punishment, or ostracism. A lack of privacy in what one reads and views in the library can have a significant chilling effect upon library users’ willingness to exercise their First Amendment right to read, thereby impairing free access to ideas. True liberty of choice in the library requires both a varied selection of materials and the assurance that one's choices are not monitored. The possibility of surveillance, whether direct or through access to records of speech, research and exploration, undermines a democratic society. One cannot exercise the right to read if the possible consequences include damage to one's reputation, ostracism from the community or workplace, or criminal penalties. Choice requires both a varied selection and the assurance that one's choice is not monitored. For libraries to flourish as centers for uninhibited access to information, librarians must stand behind their users' right to privacy and freedom of inquiry." I encourage people to look up all the information I've provided before you comment it is important to know your rights, and it is just as important to know when and where your rights can be limited.

Yes, his immaturity and lack of professionalism was pretty telling... he certainly showed his true colors and they are not flattering!

He was late for the party that taught his dept. officers about citizens rights.

I think it's because Too Apree was there earlier.

@@hearthrob300 😂 o ok we’ll still dumb to call police, I didn’t realize that though thanks

Yup he's trash

Sgt Wilson is such an embarassment. Every word that comes out of his mouth is utter nonsense. How did he ever become a police officer? People like this should get a different job. He's not fit or smart enough to be a cop. Thanks for exposing these hypocritical idiots that have no common sense or logic. They're a bunch of brainwash fools. A reflection of the government. Pathetic.