FIVE Law Enforcement Officers Attempt To Remove "SUSPICIOUS" Jounalist From Public! Huge FAIL! 

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 !

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.

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!

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 hope you call the library also and ask for in person

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.

@user-bf8tv8xv4w Unfortunately a lot of auditors already know this information, but they don't want to tell people about the public forum doctrine as it hurts their case that they have a right to film anywhere they want. I'm actually surprised this post stayed as YT for some reason usually removes most of my posts when it comes to certain topics. Could be because I get negative feed back as I tell the truth, I guess some people don't like to hear that their right to film can be limited to protect the privacy rights of others.

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

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.

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

Maybe those cops are gay

What is a woman anyway? Sean could be identifying as a woman today.

That’s just all fallacy and escalation by mentioning kids and females in danger. Cop is a tool

Dummy’s 🇺🇸🤡🤯🍩🐒

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.

Yes, I kind of figured that out too from the weird way he kept on saying that even though I'm not familiar with those other cases. If the auditing community continues to learn and grow it will only become more powerful.

Well the bottom line is cops don't a fraction of what they should know about the law and usually know nothing at all about the constitution and there running around with guns enforce whatever the fuck they want, I just watched a video of a cop pulling a gun on a man ride a kick scooter on the sidewalk,

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

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.

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.

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

@@kirbygene The ginger cop said "We don't need that". I WISH Sean would have said "Judging by the fact you're still here, I think you do".

That was excellent.

Same thing in Houston...

And that, is the problem.

Captain obvious

yet, they do it every day...

REALLY?

Again repeated PROOFS that POLICY-FEELINGS Policing is Authoritarianisms times 6 OAF-icers! !

I had to take a double take at the offices before I realized they were at the same location 😅.

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 typically they notify the public when they restrict access but there is no law that says it is necessary. 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 in nonpublic forums 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.

My thoughts exactly! Very nice contrast.

They will get overwhelmed with people who find these tyrants intolerable, no one has ever challenged these people and theyre used to getting thier way ! This police dept is enforcing feelings not laws They all grew up together ,went to the same schools Locals Only

They don't care about the constitution. In this case, they just wanted to make the library's directors bidding

Leadership??? My friends 9 year old has more itelligence!.

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.

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.

I don’t think they know the law. 6 weeks of law studies can never inform a police officer enough for what they need.

They try!

That's a big problem these days. People think they have a "right to not be offended"

@@ejl74you sure? I’ve taught my friends our rights within the constitution and they learned it in like 6 hours. It’s pretty straight forward when it comes to the basics of the constitution. 6 weeks you should have that drilled in your head by then. I think they know they just don’t care.

Me too and I can't stand it when cops say. "We are trying to figure out what is going on". To it means they are just stupid.

Of course he does, that's part and parcel of his pathology.

They live for that. Big adrenaline rush.

Stupid cameras.

@@harleyadams4551Until you get assaulted and need some video proof

"Worried about harassment". They are the only persons doing that. That's why most of them became policemen. To harass and abuse people with impunity.

Yeah, I bet his wife got a good beating for this. I bet he told her, "Look what Long Island Audit and Too Apree made me do to you," punctuating each word with a punch to her head. I reckon he has a lot of skeletons in the form of DNA evidence of a few missing women or, given his obsession with filming kids, a few kids too in his basement. He has 'psycho' written all over him.

Filming-fishing-poling is not a crime

smol pp syndrome

His disdain for the people who own everything he has is WHY he is a sergeant! Good kind and helpful cops don't make their way up the ranks. They leave after seeing the corruption. Bad cops rise to the top, because that's what the powers that be want.

@@dennish3962 i have met a few cops like that jerkoff..

He will cause taxpayers money.

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.

Not only would he, he probably has

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

Too Apree has a video from this place posted.

@@wadestanton One of the wealthiest towns in one of the wealthiest states.

@@bdwilcox I guess they can afford using the police to chase away cold people.

​@@bluntguy9532 And the librarian learned nothing

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 !

Taxes are very high!!! However the mass of population have been gaslighted- brainwashed with a wrong perception of what policing really is about!!! The mass believe- cops are there to serve and protect them- which is not the case-- policing for decades gaslighted - brainwashed the people with the propaganda campaigns- logos of (serve and protect- trust- community policing and such) they’ve now slowly been nonchalantly transitioning into the real deal of what policing is- and have been removing these logos throughout- The long time perception of “peace officers “ has flipped too- “law enforcement/ enforcers) and the people have allowed it!!! Supreme Court has even found the need to write up- police officers are not responsible for the peoples safety and well being! Supreme Court followed that with - police officers can eliminate (shoot to kill) any and all hostages- for officers safety!’ Policing has waged war on the peoples rights- on the people- and treat the people as their enemy!!! But- Franklin Lakes population will not see this!!! They’re way too brainwashed-

They need the cops to keep the homeless out of the library, from my observation.

Yep, violated Too Apree's rights as well

No crimes comitted until he arrives@@OnTheArchipelago

💯 fuming 😡

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.

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

Sgt. is a clueless maniac.

Needs to compare it to religion. Both covered under the 1stA.

It's an extension of the social guilt trip. Don't you care about the children?

Race is not a great analogy to recording. The issue is that you cannot change your race, but you can cease recording. Don't get me wrong, I fully support the right to record in public places. I just don't think race is a great analogy here. I think a better analogy would be something inane like "no wearing hats in the library". Not a great analogy either, since wearing a hat is not a constitutional right. It is difficult to come up with a similar constitutional right to freedom of the press. The thing that bothers me the most is how accepting people are of the government violating the constitution. For example, most post offices I have seen have a sign prohibiting carrying a firearm inside. Direct violation of the 2nd amendment, but few Americans seem to care.

But didn't you see the imaginary children there that the sgt. did? He knew there must have been children hiding in the stacks.

The librarian was the crazy one. Lib to the "inth degree" '

@@Dr.Atomicstop sucking all the orange off the Chetto’s tRump clown!!..

That director has disdain for the photographer and no customer service skills at all.

Over staffed,no work,just sucking the citizen's teat!

would love to listen to the call to dispatch. I bet it goes similar to: something something suspicious person, something something filming, something something may have a gun

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.

Same Sgt Wilson.

Free until you try to exercise your rights,then Sgt. Wilson comes along!

Right? And then the Sergeant was WAYYYY TOO LOUD for a library. He was displaying Disorderly conduct!

You know they don't care. TOO APREE did a video in this same library.

It's pretty hard to run a brick and mortar library in the age of the internet, my local library has been unofficially converted into a public restroom for the homeless.

When they talk , Sean should tell them to shut it as his policy is for public servants to shut up unless he asks a question and gives them permission to speak !@@Nutnboujee

When they talk , Sean should tell them to shut it as his policy is for public servants to shut up unless he asks a question and gives them permission to speak !@@gangoffour6690

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

Warming Peter!

JAJAJA

Hahaha I instantly recognized the chill asifer from the thumbnail

I love how SGT Wilson uses words like "you are being disingenuous" and then he also repeats "I just got here and have no idea what is going on" LOL.

It’s not the day that’s slow, it’s the occifers that are slow. They all need retraining on the difference between law & policy, before being released back into public on really short leashes

@traybern I said half because I was trying to be nice , lol 😆 but i reckon you are closer to it 🇬🇧

It's honestly mind boggling

It doesn’t matter because government entities bank on the public at large to be ignorant.

@@adgee5401 The policy of government is to keep the populace poor and ignorant. That guarantees total compliance of authority and re-election of those in power.

I hope u meant raise a middle finger 🖕 😂

If you were a lazy SOB wouldn't you be a little upset?

He likes to talk but not listen.

@@StandWatie1862he is always correct - just ask him 😂

Typical cop, they like to control the narrative with their lies and distortions of the law.

​@@jimmy999-z2j I miss Don Rickles

There is something about Sgt. Wilson that reminded me of Mitt Romney. (?)

"we don't need that"

😂

Circle jerks

😂

I used the internet just like Sergeant Donald Wilson recommended and see he's gone hands on with a 69 year old for "lack of compliance"

They need to be taught humanity and decency.

Too Apree was there, too. Check him out

Let's all call the mayor and council members and tell them all about the treatment the gentleman received, their behavior towards a citizen that help pay their salary is unacceptable and disgusting and the citizens of that community should demand that she be fired immediately, terrible attitude for a public servant to have, she needs to recognize the fact that she works for us and her attitude and behavior will not be tolerated ,she is so arrogant that she would not even speak nor did she apologize when she found out that she was wrong, we don't want those kinds of people being paid by our tax dollars,her attitude is disgusting!!!

@@kje73 make sure to watch the too apree one as well, i probably should’ve watch it 1st…. Call every time bro

@@SethGibbs-px5gp ..... "Baiting" them into doing what?? Was HE breaking/violating the LAW, or wasn't he?? If he's not doing anything wrong (creating a victim), then there's no bait for them to jump at/on. Go take a friggin' US Civics class ya friggin' dolt..... UGH..... SMDH.

@@SethGibbs-px5gp How on earth can lawful activity be "baiting people" ??

​@SethGibbs-px5gp Someone here hates freedom... Eh comrad?

You're bait douchebag!​@@SethGibbs-px5gp

@@SethGibbs-px5gp mmm, delicious taste of boots.