Detained By An MP. (feature)

[@joshbostian640]

wow that officer just radioed his supervisor because the gentleman refused to waive his rights....that's literally what the officer said...i need back up, i can't bully this guy on my own

[@michaelbradley7529]

What that MP did was absolutely laughable. He has no right to make contact with on public property let alone detain you. Frustrating and sad at the same time. Nice work as usual.

[@gregkasza1925]

In the end, the military guy is a coward and a liar.

[@walterarrit5511]

Maps are generally very poorly trained. However the Maps in Saigon served with honor during TET of 68. God bless them and their families.

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

@@gregkasza1925 EVERYBODY FAILED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@USAWoody]

"this person would like to refuse to waive their rights". Probably the funniest statement for 2013.

[@carljensen5730]

6:30 You don't have to defend a constitutionally protected activity, like practicing your religion. A better answer to his ABSURD piece of stupidity would be "they probably ate eggs and bacon for breakfast before their crimes, but eggs and bacon aren't criminal either. Understood?"

[@bullitt1313]

Love how the dash cam shows the officers intelligence as he holds his phone up to his face (like an old fashion camera) to take pictures.

[@dixon97a]

Love these vids the best part is always when the fella who believes he is in authority demands your id and you politely decline, the look of shock gets me every time. . .

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

disturbing is how fast Jeff gave up his 4th Amendment .........EVERYBODY FAILED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@robertalgar3198]

Actually the "MP" was in violation of The Posse Comitatus Act. Military Police have NO jurisdiction outside the base.

[@steverooney1660]

Every video when you question police they immediately go on their radio and ask for another officer. Stall tactics because they are clueless.

[@MsMsmak]

There is something deeply, deeply disturbing about this. Thank you for taking the time to do this.

[@Joe-rd8we]

Idiot it's called 911 and then January 6th.

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

disturbing is how fast Jeff gave up his 4th Amendment .........EVERYBODY FAILED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@h8ncars]

First mistake was giving any form of ID without being accused of committing a crime.

[@xXsaberlineXx]

If you are being detained that indicates that the officer has reasonable suspicion. If you fail to ID yourself at that point you can be arrested. They don't have to tell you why you are being detained. Jeff knows what he's doing here.

[@HONORYOUROATH]

I did not hand over my rights card with my name and DOB until after the MP stated that I was being detained. Once you are being detained it is best to give name and DOB regardless of whether the detainment is legal or not and obviously this was an illegal detainment. I am doing this upon the advice of my attorney so don't take it personnel because I value my attorneys a dice over yours. :)

[@jerrybushman]

xXsaberlineXx Unless they tell you why you are being detained do you have to show them your ID. You can not be arrested simply for protecting your rights

[@xXsaberlineXx]

jerry bushman I must respectfully disagree with you. According to the Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada case, the Supreme Court upheld state laws requiring citizens to reveal their identity when officers have reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity may be taking place. Commonly known as “stop-and-identify” statutes, these laws permit police to arrest criminal suspects who refuse to identify themselves. Therefore, if a police officer has reasonable suspicion and you have been detained you must ID yourself. An officer is usually required to tell you why he is arresting you but not why he is detaining you. You can ask but he does not have to say. What's more if you refuse to ID yourself they will book you as John Doe and run your prints. It will take even longer to get out. They may also try to throw in Obstruction and if you even twitch while they are arresting you, Resisting. Also, your 5th amendment rights do not apply to your identity. How can giving someone your name incriminate you?

[@jerrybushman]

A cop can ask for ID but you don't have tp provide it unless they tell you that you are suspected of a crime and what crime that is. They can't willy nilly make something up.

[@RockAfella73]

That card pisses me off ... you give up you're ID . What is the point? Cmon Jeff i know this is old but i hope you are not doing this anymore.

[@DVincentW]

If the card pisses you off- get a different job.

[@Jimfundercover2]

That card was something he made up. It had no real information on it.

[@nerole4638]

They can run him with only his name and DOB.

[@MikeM4729]

The law in FL is pretty harsh. If you’re detained and don’t give name/dob they can arrest you.

[@bevtrader348]

Jackass using 911

[@ianbattles7290]

"What *specific crime* are you accusing me of committing?" "What *specific facts* make you think I have violated the law?" They never seem to have an answer for that besides "it's suspicious"...and "being suspicious" isn't against the law because it's completely subjective. The "suspicious" man in my yard could just be the cable guy looking for the utility box.

[@420nVA]

Jeff Grey you are an American Hero, its people like you that will make a difference, now we just need a few million more just like you.

[@justanotherguy4339]

8 years on, you were dead right. Well done

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

disturbing is how fast Jeff gave up his 4th Amendment .........EVERYBODY FAILED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

@@justanotherguy4339 disturbing is how fast Jeff gave up his 4th Amendment .........EVERYBODY FAILED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@xrismanessa3993]

1. The battausai 2. HonorYourOath 3. SGV news first 4. SLO county 5. Tyrant hunter 6 Bay Area transparency You guys know your work .💡💡💡💡

[@DVincentW]

Jeff, your work is really informative...when you give them that card I can always see them deflate, like the air is being pulled out of their rear.

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

What that he stands up for the 2nd but kneels down in front of him on the 4th ...!!!!!!!!!!!

[@admobeer9551]

My most despised profession in the world: M.P. They are mini-tyrants growing up within a tyrant culture. Consistently, they have been the most power hungry people I have ever encountered.

[@Hondaridr58]

@ 2:30 The MP said "This person refused to waive their rights". Wow. No shit, sherlock. Why would ANYONE willingly waive their rights?

[@austonpliler6859]

they have to say that learn your laws

[@alienwarex51i3]

He said that because of the card Jeff gave him, which states that.

[@electricaf365]

😂😂

[@JohnThomas-xo2fe]

You are detained....... why? Because "I've got you on camera taking photos of the base." The irony is lost on that jug-head, steroid ridden tree stump of an MP. Classic.

[@HONORYOUROATH]

Am I the only one thats troubled knowing that MP's are using cameras to spy on citizens off of base property.

[@christian4u69]

+sqawayma That's the definition of 'spying', not to mention 'invasion of privacy', you jackass. Regardless of public opinion, the military DOES NOT have the legal right to take pictures of, or record video of private citizens who are not on military property, while doing it from military property.

[@marcuscortes5667]

+Chris Bowman Jackass? How quickly you are to resort to name calling. Regardless of YOUR opinion, ANYONE has the right to take pictures and record video of citizens who are in a public space. Don't you remember what PINAC is all about? If it is illegal, please feel free to show me a code or statute that states so.

[@mattslattery4107]

+Marcus Cortes It is not against the law however: its plain moronic to post locations of military bases on You-tube.Why not sell them to Russia also. No more than a traitor in my eyes.

[@christian4u69]

Marcus Cortes You are right. ANYONE has the right to take pictures, or audio/video record anyone or anything else that is on public property. The other half of that statement is...as long as they themselves are also on public property, which a military base IS NOT. So, my original statement is true. The military DOES NOT have the right to take pictures of, or take audio/video recordings of private citizens who are on public property if the ones doing are on military property. And yes, you still are a JACKASS.

[@DavidWestBgood2ppl]

Wow!!! Craziness!!! Way to stay calm Jeff... as usual. Thanks!

[@The.Messenger.2832]

That MP looked like a kid in a candy store. Finally, he gets to ascert the authority he doesn't have, look tough and intimidate a member of the public out of their rights. These clowns need to be filtered out as and when caught.

[@jeffs-reviews]

If he is off base he is out of his jurisdiction, and you gave in so fast it made my head spin.

[@gregkasza1925]

So, your camera filmed me and my camera in public filming you and your camera, and you want my ID? Weird!

[@rotcod2886]

There's always that delay. Where they stand around and confer. Presumably until ONE of them shows up who understands the inalienable rights granted to us. Also, it's clearly a power thing too.

[@Ndqar]

It all pensionable time.

[@justanotherguy4339]

Passing their day, as they are bored off their fat heads and have nothing better to do

[@pjfoltz8810]

So is he going to stop every car with a camera passing by the airfield?

[@JollyRogerProductions]

I think the MP just got schooled!

[@Klausmaus5869]

I really cannot fathom why ANY police officer would approach him in this setting...

[@AliValentine143]

Bombings, remember all those bombs here in the US? "Those guys staked the places and took pictures first". Oklahoma City he was never seen with a camera. Ted didn't need to take pictures before or after he mailed packages because mainstream media with their homemade self-printed "press credentials" did that, same with Boston marathon.

[@YourFather143]

Haha I would have told the officer "I'm not bombing anything, but right now you're photobombing."

[@Clarencechapman]

More telling is that he called in saying "The subject refuses to waive his rights". Tell him to get back on the base where he has authority.

[@weid1888]

That MP was use to people listening to him or being scared of him, not this time. His face was funny, it was like oh shit I have nothing to say or to back it up hahaha.

[@therealrimdellbarbour8622]

Jeff you are the big dog. Number 1 Auditor

[@why1itsme]

I love that he refuses to answer when asked what crime the photographer has committed. Obviously, if there was a real crime, he would know what crime he committed. Also, whenever I see someone say you can't film something, I immediately get on Google Earth to see what I can see. So far, I can ALWAYS see more with Google.

[@darleneclarke4001]

And all of this when google can be seen every where all over the entire world and americans are being attacked because of what the government allowed ain't that just dandy as hair on a frogs ass. Police even checking plates over a human right. Go find some undocumented aliens who have missed court and should be paying taxes like everyone so cops get paid and help this country then the rest of the planet. Sorry , Jeff it just pisses me off kids dying while auditors and homeless get harrassed damn shame.

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

disturbing is how fast Jeff gave up his 4th Amendment .........EVERYBODY FAILED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@why1itsme]

@@mid-ohioguardian6927 This was 8 years ago. Learned more since then.

[@mid-ohioguardian6927]

No he didn`t .. he still gives up is id some times when he didn`t have to !!

[@speedman11111]

Did he just catch him saying. Suspect refused to waive his rights. Bro what kinda backwards society od we live in.

[@ctg18158]

Giving full name and date of birth is compliance.Why did your attorney advise to give them that much info?

[@HONORYOUROATH]

I did not hand over my rights card with my name and DOB until after the MP stated that I was being detained. Once you are being detained it is best to give name and DOB regardless of whether the detainment is legal or not and obviously this was an illegal detainment. I am doing this upon the advice of my attorney so don't take it personnel because I value my attorneys a adivce over yours. :)

[@ctg18158]

HONORYOUROATH Don't get get your nickers in a bind.I was asking a question not giving advice.

[@mookiewilson4166]

“This person refused to waive their rights....” -Costumed Coward, unironically.

[@starsorion9803]

Love when he asks why he's being detained, the MP has to radio in. Clearly has no idea and just flexing his muscles.

[@benderbender9846]

Wish you would go back to this location again and see how they act after 8 yrs

[@kaciesp]

Ok, there are way to many people here who think they know what they are talking about. I spent 12 years in the Navy as a Master-at-Arms (Navy Police). 1. the first guy only is Navy Police. He is a Master-at-Arms (Navy enlisted who works as a Navy Police Officer). 2. the second guy is the DOD (Dept. of Defense) Civilian Police Officer that you will find on most Navy bases work along side the Master-at-Arms. 3. the third officer that someone referred to as a blue belly is a Jackson County Sheriff's Deputy. He stated that on his vehicle and on his uniform. All military police have what is called mutual agreements. They are the same as the ones that many civilian police departments have that are right next to each other. Under that agreement, the Navy has the right to investigate and enforce laws outside of the base up to the road. In this case they were beyond that area and under that agreement they must notify the local civilian police and have them respond. In that regard, the Master-at-Arms and the DOD officer (the first two officers) over stepped their bonds. Per the mutual agreement, they were to have local authorities handle the issue. Sadly many civilian and military personal in military law enforcement thing they are federal officers just because, they have been granted federal authority since 9/11. All this authority does is grant them the authority to go off base after anyone who they have a warrant for and arrest them. Of course they still must notify the local authorities. Before we had to go with local authorities and be an observer while the locals did the arrest. Then once at the local jail we could do the transfer of the prisoner. The federal authority is no additional power, it is set up to help stream line activities and paperwork only. Both the first two officers over step their authority and bonds. And the Sheriff Deputy got a lesson in freedom of photography.

[@minorcatledge1230]

What most of these so called Law Enforcement Officers fail to understand is that, THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT TO ARREST THEM UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAW, FOR VIOLATION OF FEDERAL OR STATE LAW... and the SHERIFF IS REQUIRED TO ENFORCE SUCH ARREST!

[@archangel2790]

Jackson county? seriously? did you watch the video? Jacksonville Sheriff's Office. lol www.coj.net/departments/sheriffs-office.aspx

[@zerocool1884]

Seems like all these cops think they are gonna find al capone. its sad and pathetic

[@Delboyandc0]

why did you give him your ID, that request is unlawful

[@jihadmeathello4760]

Pretty much...I would love to have called his bluff. Unlike most cops, this nobody wannabe doesn't travel as part of a pack, I mean seriously what's he going to do?

[@jackal7610]

You've been doing this for a hot minute.

[@mike5556]

"I have you on camera taking pictures" Do they realize how stupid they sound?

[@a.kramer1615]

Putting a fighter jet next to a road......... MP: why are you taking pictures?

[@AliValentine143]

Suspicious

[@umhchud]

Why did you give him anything?

[@darkseid6412]

thats what i asked????

[@razorproductions599]

Because you cannot argue law, or case law with these goons! All they see is "He must be guilty of something". No words, will dispel that! Their mind is made up, before contact is even made, and nothing can be said that will penetrate their thick skull!

[@shannoncarnahan4238]

What’s sad is that this clown soldier is the one fighting for rights and what he’s doing is violating this man’s rights!

[@Wavetrains]

You're fine, keep doing what you're doing, since I'm giving you permission to do something entirely legal and within your 1st Amendment right, just know you're going to be hassled and your rights will be challenged or terminated in the name of liberty.

[@lennycottingham]

People like you and Mikael Hoffmann are braver than brave Doing this in 2013 b4 everyone had an iPhone you really paved the highway 👍❤❤🇺🇸🇺🇸🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇺🇸🇺🇸❤❤

[@slikdarelic]

i really hate when cops come up and ask u for ID and u have no idea who tha fuck they are.. how about "hey how are u.. im Officer so and so, badge number blah blah blah.. can i see ur ID please.. damn.. start off like that for a change.. smh..

[@georgemegaw2925]

So strange he seems bothered by ‘a ton of calls’ with HYO standing on the side of the road. YET, the police REGULARLY claim their reason for thuggery is “we got a call”. Also, is there a reason that the actual police avoid driving on pavement and select grass or medians?

[@lookatwhatic8620]

Now really how many pictures can you take of a license plate, before you have it right, I believe he got nervous when you mentioned to him he was out of his jurisdictions, which it's my belief he was local law enforcement did not arrive until after he called so his initial encounter with you off-base was clear to see,

[@grampypantsdonovan2610]

i know this is an old one jeff but damn, dont know how i missed this one, well done

[@TRIMDOC]

Another great video, Thanks Jeff.

[@4catsnow]

The four guys have HYO on the next plane to Gitmo. Officer wolf man jack gets there in time to come in for the big win and save Jeff..

[@yanney4667]

"this person refused to waive their rights" LOL

[@TRIMDOC]

I have question, how was the camera moved in your car? Does it work on motion or were you moving it from ur location while talking to the MP?

[@zumackis2]

I wondered the same thing. I watched that part a few times over. When the cop is taking a photo of the front you can still see part of the interior of the vehicle on the left, (you'd think it would be the inside of the drivers door but its not, its where the drivers seat belt comes out) Hmmm how did the camera miss the entire door? ~~ somethings fishy here :)

[@Shaddai]

zumackis2 It's actually pretty obvious when the camera is moving. There's a distinct line between the views meaning there's 2 separate cameras. One is looking at the back, and one is looking at the front. What he was showing you was a side-by-side interaction of both cameras as the officer moved around the vehicle. The cameras are stationary, whatever he was using to record that data afterward was not. Likely recording from a computer with both camera videos up at the same time.

[@MirrorWitch13]

The problem here is that nobody is educating these officers on the law. I'm sure most of them think that they're doing the right thing, but they just don't know where the lines have recently been drawn. The state should educate it's employees on this sort of thing; the Supreme Court ruling on photography and privacy, the fact that unless suspected of committing a crime a citizen does not have to product ID, etc. They are really not telling them all this. If they knew, I'm sure they'd behave accordingly.

[@Kattakam]

See how the MP lied to cause escalation. I would have filed a complaint on that one. I know it’s way too late but in the future if it happens again. The excuse of “well you know in war war two they took pictures…” ok not WWII but it proves my case of any 20/20 incident. Love your work

[@walterarrit5511]

Another stupid MP just making up stuff.

[@jimatmile56]

Jeff, you always do good work, thanks.

[@a049806t]

QUESTION: At 5:25, how did the camera in your vehicle spin around if there was nobody in the vehicle?

[@nsm484]

Its more then Likely a Dual Dash Cam... that can record out the front window, and inside the car at the same time. Do a Google search for "Dual Dash Cam", there are alot of products out there..

[@armyretired8885]

You caved in the beginning. Not even worth watching.

[@MtgCoach]

Nice to see how times & your knowledge have changed, Jeff. Keep up your great work, exposing & educating the unknowing.

[@toolmkr1]

Does anyone know what authority an MP truly has over a citizen off base?

[@Ugot2BkddnMe]

United States military police are prohibited from enacting state police powers and domestic peace officer powers under the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services from exercising state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States. However, The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order...

[@000JP]

Not that it matters, but in the Navy they're called MAs not MPs. They don't have the right to hassle anyone off of the base and in my experience most MAs know that.

[@toolmkr1]

***** Thanks for clearing that up.

[@toolmkr1]

Ugot2BkddnMe Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

[@toolmkr1]

Jacob Robinson That explains why he never talked to Jeff after he got the card, He called the cops because he knew he shouldn't have been confronting him.

[@Max-nu1bd]

We've come to the point where people piss their pants enough to call 911 on someone filming in a public area. Common sense about human rights is not all that common anymore

[@TheAmerikanInfidel]

Head Phone user's warning : Train.

[@DVincentW]

Thank you : )

[@AllEyezOnMark]

Jeff, what is the camera set up that you have in your car? I'm interested in getting the same thing in my car. Love your videos, keep up the great work!

[@cayogator]

They were more worried about you than the oxycontin mills behind them lol

[@johnvandyk3591]

Jeff what type of cams are using in your vehicle and also as a primary? I want to get equiped and Im sure others do too. Right now I just have a handheld camcorder. John from "GunnisonUndercover" (youtube)

[@RogueReflections]

Another excellent video, courtesy of HonorYourOath. Well done, sir.

[@jondc32]

Question, how is it that the dashcam in your vehicle turned from the side view to the rear? Thanks

[@nhdphoto1]

post editing from the front camera to the back, notice the split between the two feeds.

[@sh1701-A]

Explain to me how this guy isn't in violation of federal law by acting as a police officer off base.

[@ebsenraptzski9522]

Scott Haskin he's in violation period, because what Jeff is doing is not a crime, but this asshole thinks it is

[@KillingByNature]

Scott Haskin Because he is a federal Law Enforcement Officer. Also military police and local police have jurisdiction mutual aid agreements allowing officers to perform their duties outside of their primary jurisdiction.

[@KillingByNature]

Gil Jones Again like I said before. Mutual aid agreements allow officers to work outside of their jurisdiction. Just like in Florida a city police officer has zero jurisdiction inside the county. However the sheriff gives mutual aid to the City cops and the Chief gives mutual aid to the County deputies. Same thing with surrounding counties. The Sheriffs all have agreements with the surrounding counties to allow the deputies to enforce the laws in their counties.

[@KillingByNature]

Gil Jones Also another thing is how do we know that the base property is not extended past the gate? Many installations have property the extends past the gates. Also there are federal codes that ban the taking video or pictures of military installations without the consent of the commanding officer. Then the CO must review the footage to ensure it is nothing of danger to the installation.

[@ebsenraptzski9522]

brainwashed

[@psnewsauditor-az5244]

Didn't even introduce his self

[@TAWNYVLOG]

hey I was just waiting for Doc Brown to come in that railroad, straight from 1885....

[@bwright925]

TAWNY Great Scott!!! that would have been cool.

[@smith5312]

How many cars with dash cams are driving past the base recording ?

[@steveo288]

@6:05 the coercion starts. Then at the end, the M.P. goes away a smarter (we hope) man. Another good one, Jeff!

[@ianbattles7290]

Without facing any consequences for his ignorance of the law, the MP has no incentive to change his behavior.

[@gillianorley]

Why are Navy uniforms in blue-colored camouflage pattern? How is that supposed to work?

[@paulsreay1]

switched off as soon as you gave your ID. BIG FAIL

[@jpayne3616]

the cop detained him. you have to do what they say if they detain you.

[@paulsreay1]

NO NO NO

[@Ken4Pyro]

What he gave that full of himself MP was nothing, it was a card with his name and date of birth printed on it. It wasn't a government issued ID, however what it did was make that neanderthal stop for a moment to try and figure out how it wasn't good enough. It's a marvelous tool, and Grey is the master of using it to shut people up. As for taking pictures of the base, well, sonny, in about two weeks from the date of this encounter, the base open house was scheduled, and anyone who wanted to come on the base, with a camera was completely welcome to do so. This is the typical NCO, full of his own (imagined) authority, telling Grey he was a police officer, when he clearly is not, and insisting that Grey put down his phone, which was a fail when Grey said, quite clearly, "No I will not." And more to the point, it's relevant I think to notice that he had to call the civilian law enforcement to do anything further. Here's an NCO whose commanding officer hasn't given him enough work to do.

[@davidshelton5639]

Why would you allow that MP to violate your 4th amendment right so easily without a fight let alone detain you?

[@gjl2711]

"DONUT BOY" needs to get his ass back behind that gate within his jurisdiction!

[@brandongreen6488]

This. I was an MA at NAS and he has no business being where he is. This "I'm a police officer" crap needs to stop. Master-At-Arms are not police officers. They are armed security.

[@psnewsauditor-az5244]

Outside of their jurisdiction

[@jdub74able]

why did you give them what they want....bad video...never give them ur i.d

[@HONORYOUROATH]

I did not hand over my rights card with my name and DOB until after the MP stated that I was being detained. Once you are being detained it is best to give name and DOB regardless of whether the detainment is legal or not and obviously this was an illegal detainment. I am doing this upon the advice of my attorney so don't take it personnel because I value my attorneys a advice over yours. :)

[@555Trout]

Unfortunately its the right move Jeff. They will arrest you illegally also at the point sometimes if you don't comply with their illegal detention and ID. Though it could be argued that's the "pure" way to handle it, to not id, then face arrest, the consequences are just too sketchy. The last thing you want is to be in custody of the type of cretins that would first, illegally detain you, and then illegially arrest you. Until cameras are everywehere 24/7 on everything LEOs do, body, cars, booking, jail, then we are where we are and have to play smart. We're getting closer to cameras everywhere 24/7 though, and that's gonna solve a lot of this stuff.

[@TheNyion912]

HonorYourOath Civil Rights Investigations you and your lawyer are dumb

[@justaamerican1266]

The following letter was emailed to the Chief of Naval Operations: Sir: I bring a serious matter to your attention. I have just witnessed a video, see: Detained By An MP. (feature). This video clearly shows a situation where a Sailor at NAS JAX willfully deserted his post as willfully left his on post on the base in an illegal attempt to deny the civil rights of a Private Citizen of the United States of America on public property not under the jurisdiction of any military command. Unfortunately, this man reminded me of my days in the Navy where security was handled by a Deck Ape who was given a Badge and a club told he was security. Over 40 years ago I was instructed of my duties while standing my security watches, See 11 General Orders of a sentry. As this man appears to be a sentry, a rovering motor patrol, he left his assigned post to confront an individual that was simply enjoying his legal rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness outside of his assigned station, i.e., NAS JAX. Accordingly, I respectfully request that this man be held accountable for his behavior and actions by being charged with violations of articles 93, 97 and 113 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This individual should also be charged under 18 U.S. CODE § 242 - DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW The most disappointing action that this individual took was his Thuggish Like attitude and demeanor towards a civilian. He treated this civilian as if he was the enemy. Highly recommend that you instruct the appropriate parties under your command to not allow those that when it the course of their assigned duties cannot determine the difference between a civilian and members of the military to come into contact with civilian. In this time where more and more American Citizens are becoming very vocal of the government denying them of their Constitutional Rights, Sadly, this videoed story does not do much to counter this perception. Isn't it the Constitution what both both you and I took an oath to defend? Thank you very much for your service as you provide the leadership to our NAVY.

[@strupj19]

I'm sure the Chief of Naval Operations is going to personally read a letter that refers to his MPs as, "deck apes." I am curious how the MP had a thuggish attitude? He kindly asked for Jeff's ID card after Jeff clearly sought trouble through violating U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 37 › § 795 18 U.S. CODE § 795 - PHOTOGRAPHING AND SKETCHING DEFENSE INSTALLATIONS. Jeff came off as an instigator looking to incite the MP, however the MP didn't take the bait. By the way, if you truly did serve in the military, it is shocking you would look to fry a veteran and use such derogatory language.

[@justaamerican1266]

Mike Tyrone I very well know that CNO will not be personally reading my message. But I do know that a member of his staff will and that I will get a reply. Will also, be sending a message to the Commander of Judge Advocate Corps. If that doesn't work there is always DoD and DoJ. Plus letters to members of congress. Obliviously, you were not in the Navy as you would know that a Deck Ape is what a another sailor calls a Boatswains Mate. Every rate in the Navy has a nickname nothing derogatory just Navy Talk. To your points, let us exam the facts of the matter: The sailor had absolutely no authority to ask for anything or of anyone. Reason: The sailor has no jurisdiction off of military property or reservation. See Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. As for Jeff coming off as an instigator looking to incite the Sailor, Whom approached whom. Clearly the Deck Ape with a Badge and A Gun approached Jeff. Again, Jeff comment no illegal act as Photography is not a crime. This Bluejacket's poor attempt to be a law enforcement officer reminded me more of a 3rd Class Deck Ape trying to order a Seaman Recruiter right out of boot camp around, rather that a proper interaction with a civilian. Your comment on my frying a veteran is not exactly right, the sailor is not a veteran as he still is on active duty. A veteran of the military is no longer on active service. While I am sorry that you were shocked at my stance, I do hope that you were grounded. I would Never defend or shield any individual for an action that I know or suspect of being illegal. Doing the popular thing is not always right. Being Right is not always popular.

[@strupj19]

Actually, you are quite wrong on your argument. First, Jeff violated Federal Law: U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 37 › § 795 18 U.S. CODE § 795 PHOTOGRAPHING AND SKETCHING DEFENSE INSTALLATIONS. This is clear in black and white. If you were in the military I think you would know it is illegal to take pictures of military installations particularly near gates. Going further, according to the Internal Security Act of 1950, Section 21, a CO has the inherent right to protect their installation which was technically being violated under the above U.S. code. Under this circumstance, civilians can be detained utilizing the minimum amount of force necessary and then turned over to local police. Jeff was lucky he wasn't turned over to civilian police where he could be held liable for violating federal laws. I know what you are thinking, he wasn't on federal property and the MP left his post. Did you consider that he was actually on federal property? Being a veteran, you would know that the military jurisdiction of several military bases can run well outside the gates via joint jurisdiction with civilian police. Now, lets go your request that this person violated several articles of the UCMJ. I am curious how he inflicted cruel and unusual punishment on Jeff? I fail to see any of his actions meeting the elements of that article. Also can you explain to me how this is false imprisonment? I could be wrong, but I think he was not put in restraints and still had a freedom of movement. Again this was a field interview not an arrest. If you look up the contemporary or normally accepted definition of veteran it is anyone who has or is serving. Hence, in the eyes of most Americans this sailor is a veteran. I looked up a Blue Jacket and it is junior enlisted. This sailor has some rank on him and doesn't seem to be junior. Finally, please answer my previous question on how this veteran was "thuggish?" He seemed professional and didn't make any threats.

[@FreeTheRocks]

Mike Tyrone Wrong again professional apologist. The law says "certain vital" military installations.....as deemed by The President Of The United States......jackass.

[@strupj19]

Free the Rocks, why do you resort to name calling? Usually in debates people can act civil. Please do some research and you will find it is a vital installation. You also fail to address how the property outside the gate is part of military jurisdiction.

[@TheZincZipper]

@micheldunnjr to insinuate that's it's not worth flexing your rights is absurd. You tell the countless individuals that have been accosted and arrested over photography and then filed suits in which settle out of court that it's not worth it and see what they tell you. I wouldn't care if they settled for $1,000 or $100,000 it's the symbolic ruling that matters. It's a damn shame that we have to win our rights back (hypothetically speaking) WELL DONE JEFF. :)

[@beyonderist]

blood has to be shed for freedom. best to have a gand hrenade and the will to use.

[@oOBL4CKH4WKOo]

2:05 can someone explain to me, what and why all the officers and MP's talk over the radio as soon as this video-guy asks, for what reason he is (or should be) detained? I mean it is just some little chit chat, why would the the officer report anything to HQ?

[@MaddawgJAG]

Gomer needs to read the law

[@sushicraves]

The moment you said "Am I being detained" and he said "Yes you are.!" I'd say "For what reasonable and articulable suspicion do you have that I have or about to commit a crime or offense?" And everytime he asked I would repeat until he would maybe say "You were taking photos of the base" I then would reply "Supreme Court and Ammendment 1 of the constitution of the USA preserves my right to film and although it has some restrictions the situation here doesn't have those restrictions. You swore to uphold and defend the constitution of the US and to obey it's laws. Right now you are unlawfully detaining me. I do not by law have to surrender my ID and you are off your installation where you have no authority under state and fed law... Got it?" I will notify your CO and prove to him or her that you violated your Oath, and committed violations under the articles of the UCMJ

[@frankieperez1967]

Jeff, I am watching your videos in chronological order starting with your oldest. I understand that everyone does these audits their own preferred way, but something I learned watching other auditors is that if you're going to exercise one of your rights, you should exercise all of them, including your right to remain anonymous. I like your videos, but I wish you'd resist more giving up your info.

[@ryobie1]

The sheriff handled him self correctly. Kudos to him. The MP, Not so much. There's now way to hold them accountable other than what you're doing. Thank you!

[@ontarioman100]

Cool Vid!

[@jasonhall5149]

How many different pictures can you take of a license plate

[@ragindon6540]

Great work here Jeff, thank you for your continued diligence. Ok, after watching this video and reading the comments, i did a bit of research. First Jeff thank you for your constant professional demeanor in these videos you make. Secondly, while people like to think this was an example of harassment, I would after doing the necessary to find out about the local laws, ordinances, and policies for the agencies involved have come to the conclusion that this was a good example of how this type of situation should play out. Let me explain before you attack me. Jeff approaches the military installation, he takes pictures of a display jet out in public view, nothing wrong with this. Jeff stands around, for another few minutes, and we know this was done for the sole purpose of seeing if he gets confronted. An MP eventually comes out and demands ID, and informs Jeff that he IS being detained. Ok here is where most people get derailed, so I will back up and explain what we are seeing. Jeff did NOTHING wrong here, however that being said the fact that he lingered for so long is notable to any person who has any background in security or policing. People in these fields are encouraged and tasked with being suspicious and curious and sensitive to certain types of behavior. So in this situation, based on what we see while this young MP is Assertive when he is confronted by Jeff; and note how Jeff confronted him he was firm, he was sure of his accuracy and his rights, and was not rude, he responds by seeking counsel from his dispatch, and support from other agencies. The MP and the other officers are not overtly aggressive, they barely respond to his video recording. The deputy was spouting questionable factoids about pictures and terrorism, but officers are allowed under the law to lie, so accept that they will use lies to rationalize behaviors, it is what they do. So in summary when looking at the video as a whole i have to give everyone a pass. All of that being said, while i acknowledge that they are allowed to lie, I do NOT think they should be able to do so, and I believe this situation is a perfect example of why they shouldn't be able to.

[@Ugot2BkddnMe]

@ DR - the point I think you really miss here is the fact Jeff was "DETAINED". You can attempt to justify this action all you like and that will never change the fact there is no probably cause to take such action.

[@justaamerican1266]

The only point here with regard to the sailor is that the Sailor didn't one bit of authority to even approach Jeff. He no civilian police powers off of Government Property. Across the street from the Naval Base is not the same thing! He is trained to protect our country from enemies. Last time I checked, our government was not officially at war with its Citizens!

[@JasonAguirre]

To the issue of officers lying...They are citizens first and foremost, so while I agree they shouldn't be able to mislead you about your rights since part of their oath is to properly inform you of that, they have every right to lie to you about anything else... Not a good practice but the same freedom you have, and to my knowledge, not impacted one bit by any oath they take. Now if it were causing harm that is a different story, but in this case of relating questionable facts about terrorism surveillance, he could also just be misinformed, which sadly is also not illegal ;) I happen to think it is utterly ridiculous to take the stance that terrorists don't use photography and other surveillance. Of course they do! I have no doubt that at least some of them have dressed up as tourists and taken photos just like Jeff was doing. They would be stupid beyond belief not to! Even more likely, they do as people always demonstrate terrorists could do if they wanted easy surveillance, and just look at Google Earth! The point is that regardless of the purpose, photography is not a crime on public property! That should be the beginning and end of the debate on such things! To consider any other level of scrutiny on such perfectly legal things is to infringe on our most basic rights! In point of fact, terrorists have the same rights as anyone, up to the point where they commit or intend to commit a crime. Intend does not just mean think about it though, they have to take some premeditated action, which must also be illegal and would certainly not include photographing a public street.

[@ragindon6540]

I agree with you all on the issue of detainment, however the courts have repeatedly agreed that this type of detainment is NOT illegal. I disagree with the courts of course, but as i am a believer in the Constitution I am left with accepting the courts decisions on the subject. This is not my way of justifying their behavior, just the simple fact that as long as the courts keep allowing this behavior as reasonable, and legal I am without recourse to address it, from a legal perspective. Furthermore, when the courts have heard cases like this they always give the LEO's a very wide range of power, in that the officer noticed the prolonged lingering of an individual with photographic equipment around what the courts would declare a national security site, ie air force base. Again do not hate me because I understand what the courts have ruled on the subject, repeatedly. There is NO court in America today who would rule against these officers for this action depicted in the video. Here is a a very scary legal truth. If any agency or officer of the government at any level claims suspicious activity at or near a National Security site, you will find the court will always give more credence to National security over your rights. That is not to say i agree with the way the courts have been ruling in this area just a true statement of it.

[@JWA8402]

 You are absolutely correct and that is a very reasonable stance to take. I think for all that it is important that we question our government, hold it accountable, and tear parts of it down when they are not working correctly, we must also accept it when a law or decision is 'lawfully' upheld through the courts or voting, or even the President's decision. People like to scoff at soldiers saying they are just following orders but if they didn't there would be chaos instead of an army, and so too the people must support and abide by the government sometimes, giving it the benefit of the doubt, or else we just have a country of anarchists. Now whether we choose to allow things like this to keep happening as a result of the status quo is a different matter. We can and should change things, either through forceful overthrow, establishing precident and protections in the courts, passing or eliminating laws, or voting in new officials. Each way has it's costs and limits though, so we as a people need to decide exactly what we are trying to get and how far we want to go, because at some point there is a diminishing return or even a backlash on any of these methods.

[@Trasher6]

Is it legal for them to run your plates like that? Also, why do you choose to park so close when you folks seem to park away from where they are filming? Thanks for your work!

[@4catsnow]

Where did the Navy MP develop the authorization to tell HYO to put the camera down?

[@danjones7258]

I was outside the base, in the base. With professional equipment and no one bothered me. Keep up he good work!

[@donneary7104]

We always hear from our U.S. govt how lucky we are to live in a free country while behind the scenes, they practice the laws of the Democratic Republic of Korea, ( North Korea).

[@calj01]

What did you do about all the illegal running of your tags through david?

[@iwemcurry]

Since when is the shore patrol considered mp's? When did the military's authority end at the wall's?

[@alastermyst]

"People were taking pictures before they blew up stuff so we have started detaining people for taking pictures". Yeah, bullshit, even if true. They were talking before they blew stuff up too, going to start detaining people for talking as well? They were wearing cloths before they blew up stuff, how about using that for your reason for detaining people. They were whatever gender they were, had whatever hair-color/eye-color they had, etc. etc. etc. and none of those are reasonable reasons for detainment either.

[@fireskycam9889]

You may as well just roll over and give them everything as soon as they arrive. You hand over your ID within a minute. You make it so easy for them to find you car.

[@roger5322]

First of all, yes the MP was out of his jurisdiction. Also by detaining and demanding ID I'm pretty sure he is in violation of the Posse Comitatus act ( before the military can enforce civil law the president has to declare marshal law) also this took place before 2018 so it wasn't in effect at that time but in 2018 the Department of Homeland Security issued a operational readiness order ( HQ-0R0-002-2018) to all federal departments: federal courts, post offices, military bases...ect if it was me I'd request a " commanders inquiry" and see how the base commander feels about one of his soldiers violating a citizens rights.

[@TheDrewks]

What bodycam do you use?

[@HONORYOUROATH]

My body cam is just a 4th generation iPod. It's in a vertical case and I hang it from my shirt collar.

[@TheDrewks]

Thanks, and keep up the good work!

[@stacky512a]

Problem is, more than half the country's population would APPLAUD the LEOs over zealous reactions..