By the way, if people are going to get overly enraged about this without seeing what holds up and what doesn't... it should be worth noting the reason to be upset.

Wiretapping a regular person only gets you 1-3 years in Jail. Vs 1-15 when it comes to the police.

Of course one could argue that wiretapping the police could be used to more nefarious ends that themselves aren't crimes on their own, like stealing information on an investigation. (Like I mentioned above, hence the new statute).

It's also worth noting that unlike the regular law, there are exceptions with the police law... giving the police less protection then others.

People upset that people are getting arrested for taping the police without their permission are essentially getting upset that the police have the same rights as everyone else.

Come on, you know that's not true.

People are upset about this particular and questionable incident, and for a reason. You are right that the report is a bit one-sided, telling only half the story etc. It's easier to understand that law if one knows the history and motivation behind that law that you pointed out for example.

But while it's possible to understand the general motivation behind that law, it's complitely obvious that in this particular case the man shall not be punished for actual wiretapping, but instead it's effectively a punishment for putting the police in a bad light. A law with a reasonable intention is being abused for something completely different, to punish a man for taking evidence of questionable police behaviour.

Nobody likes to see embarrassing videos of himself on YouTube. In that respect policemen are no different from anyone else. The difference is that policemen have certain ways to put pressure on people that normal citizens don't.

In my country btw, the police found another stupid explanation for trying to avoid such kind of evidence against them: Due to police violence at demonstrations that hardly ever resulted in policemen actually being punished, people demanded that policemen at demonstrations should wear a visible dispatchable identification number, so that when they are being filmed acting irresponsible they could afterwards be identified by the police because of the number. The police rejects this, claiming that wearing a visible identification number poses a huuuge threat to the policemen, which I think is just ridiculous.

In Illnois, it's illegal to wiretap ANYONE without their permission.

If you tape me the same way the police were taped, I could have you thrown in jail.

The difference is, if there is reasonable suspison the police were going to do something illegal to you, you can tape it.  Well that and a judge through out this case anyway.

Even if you had reasonable suspison I was going to do something illegal to you in Illnois, you could NOT audiotape it.

Also, you don't think having a number that tells you whoa cop is, is a huge threat to the police?

I mean, I'd just look at cases like the OWS pepper spraying incident where peoples home addresses we found out and people were threatened along with their families.

Fact is, people are bitching because the police have the same rights as everyone else, not less.  (Though not even that now.)

A big reason to be upset is as follows:
The way things are going, society is increasingly becoming a surveillance state, with the government getting increases areas to spy on its citizens without a warrant. Recently, for example, without a warrant, the police flew a predator drone over farmland, without a warrant, looking for possible stolen cattle (cattle actually wandered onto the land) and did an arrest. End result is filmed information with a retraction of rights.

Then, you end up having it so the citizens can't film in defense, so the result is the state is the only one filming, meaning in an age of information, the citizens aren't able to fight back to defend themselves. And, if you don't find this troubling, you are willfully remaining blind. All this is EXACTLY how dictatorships work. The citizens are in isolation, spying on its citizens, and the citizens just take it.

You do realize that it's perfectly legal to videotape the police even under that law right?

The laws for taping video and taping Audio are completely different.

For now.

If this guy is convicted, there will be a precedent and other states will surely adopt it the way things are going.

With NDAA, militarization of local police, and domestic drone use in full swing - no doubt they'll make recording police abuses a criminal offense.

The police state is here.

So, is the fact that the police arrest people over this due to ignorance or incompetence?

http://www.whec.com/news/stories/s2174896.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdxfRKEPJRY

A case of a woman filming police resulted in her being arrested.  And earlier on, you actually did argue that it was a problem to film, and the police were justified and there were laws on the books to protect the police from gangs videorecording the police.

Neither it's just your incapability of reading.

It's legal to videotape the police... just like it's legal to tape any Illnois citizen.

It's Illegal to AUDIO tape the police, just like it is ANY Illnois citizen. (though the penalty is harsher.)

If you taped a police officer with a security camera style camera, it would be perfectly legal.

Aside from which, I'm not for the law.  However I can understand why it's in place since there are dozens of ways taped audio can be abusedto harm others, and don't think it's too obscene a law because  it's giving the police exactly the same rights as regular people, but with less protection. 

I didn't have time to watch the video at the time, I just read Galaki's comment >_<

Holy crap! I can't believe this is happening in the states! :-O

Also I reject your "more militarized" statement.

 You've never needed a warrant to fly over land. 

That's how they find illegal drug plants for one, hence why they always put them indoors or cover their growth with high trees.

Before Predator drones they used planes and police helicopters.

This is shit that's been going on since like, the 70's at least and you've just never noticed.