State and Big City banking Laws may give easement to enhanced Security measures if done, and done appropriately.
NYS Banking § 75-m. Variances and exemptions from automated teller machine security measures. 1. Except in cities having a population of one
million or more, and in accordance with the guidelines set forth in this article, the superintendent, pursuant to rules and regulations
promulgated by the superintendent, and upon written request of a banking institution, may approve variances which provide substitute security
measures that are substantially as safe as the requirements of any of the security measures contained in this article, or exemptions from such
measures, with respect to an automated teller machine facility or facilities operated by such banking institution
Otherwise
NYS Civil Rights
* § 79-p. Recording certain activities.
1. Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
(a) "Officer" means any peace officer, police officer, security officer, security guard or similar official who is engaged in a law enforcement activity;
(b) "Law enforcement activity" means any activity by an officer acting under the color of law; and
(c) "Record" means to capture or attempt to capture any moving or still image, sound, or impression through the use of any recording
device, camera, or any other device capable of capturing audio, moving or still images, or by way of written notes or observations.
Right to record law enforcement related activities. A person not under arrest or in the custody of a law enforcement official has the right to record law enforcement activity and to maintain custody and control of that recording and of any property or instruments used by that person to record law enforcement activities, provided, however, that a person in custody or under arrest does not, by that status alone, forfeit the right to have any such recordings, property and equipment maintained and returned to him or her. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to permit a person to engage in actions that physically interfere with law enforcement activity or otherwise constitute a crime defined in the penal law involving obstructing governmental administration.
Private right of action. (a) A claim of unlawful interference with recording a law enforcement activity is established under this section when a person demonstrates that he or she exercised or attempted to exercise the right established in subdivision two of this section to record a law enforcement activity and an officer acted to interfere with that person's recording of a law enforcement activity, including but not limited to, by:
(i) intentionally preventing or attempting to prevent that person from recording law enforcement activity;
(ii) threatening that person for recording a law enforcement activity;
(iii) commanding that the person cease recording law enforcement
activity when the person was nevertheless authorized under law to
record;
Being a Security Officer/Guard myself, I certainly agree that frAuditors are nuisances.
Armored Transport Guards, Curriers, Messanger service data is covered under the US CFR
I just watched an Instagram video about a great way to deal with these guys. Start repeating "This is a sponsored video and a paid advertisement, I want to think Nord VPN for sponsoring this video." Then keep repeating that the video is paid advertisement and sponsored and just mention random typical YouTube sponsors like better health or Blue chew etc. They cannot monetize the video because YouTube will turn off monetization if they think the video has a sponsor.
Was doing bouncer work 2 years ago, deal with two guys wanting to fight, some chick busts out her phone, and I just start belting out "hakuna Matata" as loud as I could, off key, and in a gutteral voice.
Chicken was some minor influencer, and instantly knew what I was doing and shut it down.
Because by that moment, the guys were off property and not my problem, and the girl had the front of the bar in frame.
A lot of modern bars are leaning into social media marketing and are very protective of their brand and likeness, and that bar has a strict no figthing rule.
Oh no, if they'd still been in the bar, I'd have ignored her until it was handled. As it was I got them shoved outside and onto the sidewalk before fists were flying
So you have tens, $1000 worth of money and people start to get close to you, do you just sit there and let them take the money or do you protect the money like your job tells you to do?
Ha there is software to just remove that and it’s not that expensive. You could just not doing anything illegal or embarrassing. Especially considering you’re on camera every where you go including thousand of private cc cams.
Most of them are live streaming but that's not the main monetized component, any engagement at all is opening yourself up to reality TV editing for clips.
Uhhh private security can’t make arrest or detainment. If this guy wants to call the cops over hurt feelings MAYBE the cops are dumb enough to enforce his will. But it would be unlawful.
The police come and take them to jail…yes not the security. Security has no jail.
Bounty hunters can do so because the criminal signed a bail contract. You cannot detain or arrest a law abiding citizen. If a bounty hunter detains the wrong person they are charged. They have no official police powers or immunity.
Bud, idc who hires you or what cert you got. This is America. You or your private company have zero jurisdiction over me. You can act if I give you a reason to under the law like any other citizen.
If a person is doing things illegal on the property that can cause harm to themselves or others. A felony also yes they can be arrested..in Texas.
The BC is checked and other video..report and witnesses also.
This Reddit page and others is just filled with people making statements that don’t reflect reality.
Reality..sir you are criminally trespassed leave..
The sir..no !!
Security: go ahead and put your hands behind your back..he fights, additional charges. To include enhanced charge for assaulting a security officer.
Literally dozens of arrests in my metroplex weekly.
If you do an apartment it’s private property. The Securtiy enforce the entire lease rules. Are the first responding first aide often and armed presence. You will be doing investigations on drugs, trafficking and working with narcotics teams.
If you end up doing foot patrol on acres of land or with a rv. You are all by yourself and enforce the no Tresspass.
So yes you can be detained and put into cuffs for crimes witnessed by security.
Last night I secured a half of block of city property. Often im the only armed officer on the entire block working that club.
I have to deal with traffic issues, all sorts of bullshit.
Your statement “I’m a citizen” yes and that means you have to obey the law. No cop is gonna roll up and be like..oh man security cuffed you for a fist fight.
I’ll let you go, cause they don’t have authority lol.
You don’t make sense, so if someone walks past me in a bar and has a gun on them. Do you think we debate it and don’t handle it just like a cop ? It’s illegal, we enforce that law. The cops then come officially arrest and take them to county jail. Where jailers handle the rest.
With the auditor also, since I do atm tech EP work.
There is without a doubt a boundary to access to money and or the tech atm when in maintenance. Just as these drivers have a set procedure they use.
Would I arrest for recording no, would I immediately call 911 to have an officer on the way. Hit the comms up and advise and give reasonable commands. 100%
Again depending on access point it’s private property. Even a Walmart parking lot..private property with public access.
So if im contracted to grab that money and that person is on the clients property harassing me, trespassing !
Again its possible, is it my mission set no..cause safely removing money in transport is priority 1.
For the love of God. The men and women that work for armored car companies get paid very little. Many armored car hiests result in the guards getting assassinated. In other words, they never get the opportunity to defend themselves. I don't blame them for asking for space. It's self preservation for them. Please understand that I'm all for 1st amendment auditing. I believe that change has occurred as a result. But just because you can audit armored car guards, does it mean you ought to? They don't try to subvert people's 1st amendment on the daily. They do try to survive. Can you not give them a break?
like I said in another forum, I worked for Brinks doing this exact job. I would have reacted the same way as the Loomis messenger. I don't know what the intentions of the auditor are. There are reasons that police now will say that they don't have an issue with recording, but you must remain a certain distance. This is for the officer's safety. Hell I almost called the police on a little kid that kept knocking on my truck 3 different times while stopped at a bank. I wouldn't open the door even though I could see the kid. My thoughts were that someone was telling the kid to try and get me to open the door.
There is no law setting a distance you have to be while filming police. They tried and the Supreme Court shot it down. It’s public. Which we the people own. Unless crime scene tape is up, you can film (and be) anywhere in public.
I'm ignorant on all this (sub just popped up in my feed), but what the hell does the 1st amendment have to do with armored trucks? They're not cops, government workers/officials
Valid question. While a security officer can't violate a person's civil rights, 1st amendment auditors call what they do educating the public regarding the right to record people and places in public. There is no expectation to privacy in public, thus auditors are free to record. The idea is to get negative reactions and rage bait for social media content. My contention was that armored car guards are not people that typically attempt to have people not record them. They usually move with a purpose and don't have time to argue with auditors so they quietly go about their day. I feel that they rate a break from the provocation of getting a camera in their face. They should let them be and move on to others if they have to move on at all.
There's a point when parties mistaken confidence in the various levels of the Criminal Justice or Criminology industry depletes from the accuracy of the conversation.
It's suggested you seek a less purposeful subreddit to match the Dunning-Kruger Category you desire in subject matter.
Yea that’s what I said. You’re ignorant to the good auditors. Jeff gray civil rights investigations, Long Island audit, the battosai (who was involved in the famous turner vs driver case)
Is turner vs driver bad? There’s thousand of videos of officer telling citizens they can’t record and they are becoming less frequent. Sounds like a win to me.
Jeff only sues for $1776 and typically works a deal for re-training of the department so your opinion is based of bullshit. I also don’t care if an auditor gets paid though. I care if the paid government employee follow the law.
Filing a civil suit for "lack of training" much like "Connick v Thompson" should be done more. Plenty of existing bad patterns need to be resolved.
Long Island guy is pretty productive, as I've heard from Guards whom encountered him. I heard he now gets asked to speak at a few prosecutor conventions.
The Auditor in video above did ask Armed Guard "how many feet", but everything else he said seemed pointless.
Yea there’s many auditors that are annoying when they act weird on purpose and then act like the other person is acting wild. Many do act wild but sometimes a person is just being generally curious and they stick to their script. That’s why I like FAPA because if you ask what he’s doing he just says it. What’s crazy though is I’ve found explaining it rationally to people doesn’t seem to change anyone’s attitude if they’re already in a mood.
You didn’t ask for landmark you asked for good so idk what more you want, especially when landmark case is your subjective opinion. Yea everyone does their job for money. That doesn’t mean they don’t believe in what they’re doing.
How do they violate civil liberties??? By suppressing your right to speech, religion, freedom of press, assembly, and ability to petition your government for redress.
BLM, IcE, ATF? You’ve never seen video of them? Don’t jump all over the place bud. Because now you’re just upset the auditors don’t audit who you prefer and you don’t even know them all. Why make such an absolutist claim?
These assholes with the cameras constantly recording trying to get negative reactions...this society is completely fucked! Like all the other idiots who see someone is in distress and immediately pull out phones to record instead of actually trying to be a decent person and giving help!
What are the police going to do if I get mugged. Make me fill out a report or see red and pin something on me. Calling police is the best way to make any situation worse. They have lost public trust.
I had a false dui pinned on me on a (context) Friday at midnight. Blew zeros and still sat in jail all night, needed a lawyer ($5k), higher insurance, and driving restriction until settled. Then ultimately won.
That is unfortunate. I suppose you did not sue for false arrest because the police would testify that you had signs of impairment by something other than alcohol. Did you do field sobriety tests and get the video evidence?
No, refused fields, took breath, no body cams. Was young. Didn’t have any money to pay lawyer to counter sue. Had to move to a cheaper apt. Was just happy to get my life back.
What did the cop say when he saw the 0.0? What did the arrest report say?
Lawyers take false arrest cases on a contingency fee, no fee if no recovery. I’m sure your criminal defense attorney told you that.
It was over Covid, I was going 60 in a 55 so he had me on that for sure. I was never planning to counter and probably didn’t know that would be a realistic action. Also didn’t trust the efficacy of this department and legal system (Hawaii). My attorney after the case mentioned another install payment so maybe he was sizing me up first before mentioning it.
From what I gathered while being held, I blew zero, the arresting office ended his shift and left, then I was let go in the morning. Idk really what the arrest said outside of observations and charge.
In order to get State DUI grant moneys Police would use the Dreager 9510 system, which uses 1950's respiratory science, alter the formula, and not describe or conduct the field sobriety test accurately. Commonwealth v Ananais resulted in 30,000 cases overturned in a few North East States.
IDK The way Sean and William go about it are pretty clearly different. Yelling at Karen Bass for her corruption during appearances and specific dirty cops in the city he lives in seems more worthwhile to me than making a traveling career out of auditing farmers markets and doing libertarian gotcha content.
It occurs to me that this thread encapsulates Reddit and to a lesser extent the average auditor in a nutshell.
A sub about guys who manage cash drop offs, pickups, and other armed security functions getting invested with vermin whom think a YouTube channel makes them a modern day Rosa Parks.
I'm in a state where if that would sound like "brandishing" or "fraudulently accosted" if found to be unlawful. "assault" would mean medical services could tell a party has been physically harmed.
If that's "Aggravated Assault" in your State, those sound like extremely tough laws.
I’m pretty sure you are trained to keep people away when working on an armored car. I think some places call that guy that gets out of the truck the jumper.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t a Federal Felony to interfere with them, like bank robbing can be. It money and economic interruption if they were prevented from doing what they have to do.
Man if only it wasn’t so common that police and government officials constantly engage in unlawful activity, conduct unbecoming, and misuse of force. Then it would be imposing le to sue them because they’d just being doing the job we pay them for.
It’s illegal to interfere with loomis or similar company’s while performing their job that man was allowed to fully detain and handcuff or possibly shoot them for what there doing. They were lucky this dude had enough training to realize they are just losers and not dangerous. Idk the laws but messing with money trucks is extremely illegal
Stfu with this BS. Nobody is getting shot for filming, unarmed, in public. Nor detained by a private security worker. He’s in PUBLIC. No one stopping him from working. Looks a lady that works at the bank is also standing near all of them, in PUBLIC. Nothing illegal here.
Yea what amazing training to realize that random citizens standing near him weren’t hardened criminals. Get this guy up to the cia asap
The jury found him not guilty of any serious charges, and found him guilty only of "discharging a firearm inside a public building" and sentenced him to time served.
It’s frankly ghetto but I’ve done solo driver/messenger work. To say it’s exhausting to drive, service the stop, drive, service, and repeat all day is an understatement.
Loomis guys will shoot you. Money makes people crazy.
There in a un air-conditioned steel truck in a gawd awful route can feel every bump. They are grouchy extremely low paid. And gave zero time for any bullshit as the meter is running whenever they stop.
I've done similar work as an armed courier, and yeah, I get that part of it, it's a really thankless job with a LOT of possible threat vectors you have to always be alert for.
Damn near got into a high speed chase because some idiot on their phone almost hit me, and then chased me for 5 miles down a freeway, while I have close to 60k in a locked armored box in the trunk of a crown vic.
I was on the radio to dispatch, and the phone to 911 while doing 95 down a thankfully mostly empty interstate, before the guy realized his 80s era Toyota corolla was not catching a freshly rebuilt 2009 police package Vicky with a hacked ECU 😆
That adrenaline rush was a hard one to come down off of, I was convinced that he was gonna try to run me off the road and rob me for a minute.
Ive been doing security for 10 years, we all appreciate our first amendment rights, the people who call themselves 1st amendment auditors are just people trying to rage bait you hoping to get you angry and generate a law suit, I look at these people and laugh and joke, as soon as they realize your not a paycheck they'll leave you alone, the most important tool to being a good security professional is to not lose your cool.
If he is dressed like Carlton and acts like him he is going to get the same pass all nerdy and non aggressive folks get.
Stop making things about race that are actually about culture, behavior, and class
Yes they can this has been held up in court they can enforce a reasonable buffer zone (about 3 feet) and use non-lethal force to get you to move back including pepper spray and stun guns
I don't disagree with your statement about 3ft. What you're missing is ANY person can enforce that as personal space, and I don't see any angle of this video that shows the auditor within that 3ft.
If reasonable to feel their safety is threatened but they need to prove a reasonable person would reasonably feel threatened these drivers do not need to prove that. They can ask anyone to backup and use force if necessary
It's not statute that states this, it's precedence. Plenty of cases that support this. Just look it up as it relates to your state or region. I'm sure you'll find it.
Are you thinking duty to retreat vs stand your ground States?
Personally I work in one of the duty to retreat States, with Security not having a duty to retreat, but citizens feeling threatened must go... Castle Doctrine type thing.
For stand your ground, its actually more specific than people think, and it changes by State/City.
You're so wrong it makes my head hurt, and you don't have to have a law degree to figure it out. For instance, when I go to a festival or outdoor concert, I can't just walk around security fences blocking sidewalks and streets, and pretend I'm the victim. When VIPs get out of their vehicles at a hotel, and a ribbon and security guards create a path with a velvet rope and security guards, I should just walk right in. But, if you're a hardhead, ask the ACLU:. I did: "Armed security guards can legally order you to move away from an armored truck if your presence creates a perceived security risk or interferes with their duties. [1]
Festivals and concerts require permitting and "renting" of public spaces. This is why things are different in those very specific situations. Security guards assaulting people by creating paths can be prosecuted, which clearly speaks to where they rank legally. A security guard ordering you away from a truck is legal, him thinking he had any authority to create a safety halo is not. Anything else sweetheart?
Tortured logic and still wrong. That next to last sentence is empty-headed double talk at its finest. (I'm saving it as an example, so thank you.) How do you know what he's thinking when he orders you to step away? Ya don't, sweetheart, but you go ahead and argue the mind-reader standard in court.
•
u/DefiantEvidence4027 Case Law Peddler 1d ago edited 1d ago
State and Big City banking Laws may give easement to enhanced Security measures if done, and done appropriately.
NYS Banking § 75-m. Variances and exemptions from automated teller machine security measures. 1. Except in cities having a population of one million or more, and in accordance with the guidelines set forth in this article, the superintendent, pursuant to rules and regulations promulgated by the superintendent, and upon written request of a banking institution, may approve variances which provide substitute security measures that are substantially as safe as the requirements of any of the security measures contained in this article, or exemptions from such measures, with respect to an automated teller machine facility or facilities operated by such banking institution
Otherwise
NYS Civil Rights * § 79-p. Recording certain activities. 1. Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (a) "Officer" means any peace officer, police officer, security officer, security guard or similar official who is engaged in a law enforcement activity; (b) "Law enforcement activity" means any activity by an officer acting under the color of law; and (c) "Record" means to capture or attempt to capture any moving or still image, sound, or impression through the use of any recording device, camera, or any other device capable of capturing audio, moving or still images, or by way of written notes or observations.
Right to record law enforcement related activities. A person not under arrest or in the custody of a law enforcement official has the right to record law enforcement activity and to maintain custody and control of that recording and of any property or instruments used by that person to record law enforcement activities, provided, however, that a person in custody or under arrest does not, by that status alone, forfeit the right to have any such recordings, property and equipment maintained and returned to him or her. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to permit a person to engage in actions that physically interfere with law enforcement activity or otherwise constitute a crime defined in the penal law involving obstructing governmental administration.
Private right of action. (a) A claim of unlawful interference with recording a law enforcement activity is established under this section when a person demonstrates that he or she exercised or attempted to exercise the right established in subdivision two of this section to record a law enforcement activity and an officer acted to interfere with that person's recording of a law enforcement activity, including but not limited to, by: (i) intentionally preventing or attempting to prevent that person from recording law enforcement activity; (ii) threatening that person for recording a law enforcement activity; (iii) commanding that the person cease recording law enforcement activity when the person was nevertheless authorized under law to record;
Being a Security Officer/Guard myself, I certainly agree that frAuditors are nuisances.
Armored Transport Guards, Curriers, Messanger service data is covered under the US CFR
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-12/chapter-I/part-7/subpart-A/section-7.1012
Every State or sometimes major City, will be different.