Reading mode: Light Dark

Photographer arrested...

Go to last post
Gene Rollins

Gene Rollins

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
312
Reaction score
3
Location
NC, US
Except what they make up.

Personally, I liked "TERROR-BEEPERS TO HELP AMERICANS PANIC FASTER AND MORE EASILY"
 
DBevis said:
Except what they make up.

Personally, I liked "TERROR-BEEPERS TO HELP AMERICANS PANIC FASTER
AND MORE EASILY"
Click to expand...
Well, at least that one was covered by more "mainstream" media.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-975287.html
and
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/11/25/all.threat.warning/

Of course, just because it's on the net, doesn't mean it's true. Things must be verified. On the other hand, this is kind of humourous in retrospect.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/tech/FredMoody/moody38.html

I'm much more curious regarding photographer story, has anyone run had this type of treatment?
 
Ian Yates said:
I don't believe any of it!.
Click to expand...
Why don't you believe it? You think that America is not that way? Have you heard about the guy who was sentenced to thirty eight months in prison for alluding to a burning bush? How about all the 'detainees' in America? And why don't I hear John Lennon's song Imagine on the radio anymore?
 
What complaining about nothing? The cops did a proper job !

Somebody who is photographing apparently a lot of the least interesting details of a building, that just is placed, for some reason, under highest security measures, and refuses to take his film out of his camera on a kindly demand, nor hand the camera over to let it be done by the police deserves that kind of treatment.

Same kind of thing happened to me: After a proper explanation and showing the pictures it ended with a smile and a posed picture.

Attitude or behavior made the difference and of course the DIGITAL camera with instant review of the pics :-).
Hans
Gene Rollins said:
Broose Vader wrote:
http://www.2600.com/news/display/display.shtml?id=1441

There is a link to the the audio interview with the arrested
photographer
on the site.

What are everyone's opinions on this matter?
Click to expand...
 
Gavin McKinlay said:
david eyre said:
So where exactly is the Land of the Free ?

--
Dave
Click to expand...
Is it Sheffeild perhaps? Just kidding Dave have a good one.

--
Regards,
Gavin
Canon Pro90IS, B-300 Canon Pro 70
Click to expand...
--No I think Sheffield is the land of freeloaders,although I have never heard of anyone being arrested for taking photographs.In fact just this afternoon

our friendly local police were photographing people going to a football match.But I don't know where they post them.
Dave
 
Hi Hans
Hans said:
What complaining about nothing? The cops did a proper job !
Somebody who is photographing apparently a lot of the least
interesting details of a building, that just is placed, for some
reason, under highest security measures, and refuses to take his
film out of his camera on a kindly demand, nor hand the camera
over to let it be done by the police deserves that kind of
treatment.
Same kind of thing happened to me: After a proper explanation and
showing the pictures it ended with a smile and a posed picture.
Attitude or behavior made the difference and of course the DIGITAL
camera with instant review of the pics :-).
Hans
Click to expand...
An American citizen, minding his own buisness, taking photographs in a public place, has to have "right attitude?"

Was he breaking into a secure area? Were there signs or warnings?

Your post is scarier then the original story.

Dave
 
David Barkin said:
Hans said:
What complaining about nothing? The cops did a proper job !
Somebody who is photographing apparently a lot of the least
interesting details of a building, that just is placed, for some
reason, under highest security measures, and refuses to take his
film out of his camera on a kindly demand, nor hand the camera
over to let it be done by the police deserves that kind of
treatment.
Same kind of thing happened to me: After a proper explanation and
showing the pictures it ended with a smile and a posed picture.
Attitude or behavior made the difference and of course the DIGITAL
camera with instant review of the pics :-).
Hans
Click to expand...
An American citizen, minding his own buisness, taking photographs
in a public place, has to have "right attitude?"

Was he breaking into a secure area? Were there signs or warnings?

Your post is scarier then the original story.

Dave
Click to expand...
That is the whole point: Did you read the message well?

"snapped about 30 pictures of the hotel and the surrounding area - which included Denver police, Army rangers, and rooftop snipers."

I am asking you: If you see a lot of police, snipers on roofs, Army rangers within a city, dou you need then a sign: HIGH SECURITY ZONE: PLEASE NO PHOTOGRAPHS TODAY SPECIALLY NOT A WHOLE SERIES OF ALL DEATILS AROUND THE BUILDING AND SAFETY MEASURES ON PENALTY OF LOOSING THE FILM AND MAYBE EVEN, TEMPORARELY, THE CAMERA.

I am living in a country where personal freedom is highly cultivated, where cops are getting the most blows and not suspected persons, and be sure that I would complain loudly and everywhere and continuously if I was forced to go to a police station because of taking pictures on just a public place. To take pics in the given situation was just plain stupid IMNSHO.
Hans
 
Hi Hans
Hans59567 said:
Hans59567 said:
An American citizen, minding his own buisness, taking photographs
in a public place, has to have "right attitude?"

Was he breaking into a secure area? Were there signs or warnings?

Your post is scarier then the original story.

Dave
Click to expand...
That is the whole point: Did you read the message well?
"snapped about 30 pictures of the hotel and the surrounding area -
which included Denver police, Army rangers, and rooftop snipers."

I am asking you: If you see a lot of police, snipers on roofs, Army
rangers within a city, dou you need then a sign: HIGH SECURITY
ZONE: PLEASE NO PHOTOGRAPHS TODAY SPECIALLY NOT A WHOLE SERIES OF
ALL DEATILS AROUND THE BUILDING AND SAFETY MEASURES ON PENALTY OF
LOOSING THE FILM AND MAYBE EVEN, TEMPORARELY, THE CAMERA.
I am living in a country where personal freedom is highly
cultivated, where cops are getting the most blows and not suspected
persons, and be sure that I would complain loudly and everywhere
and continuously if I was forced to go to a police station because
of taking pictures on just a public place. To take pics in the
given situation was just plain stupid IMNSHO.
Hans
Click to expand...
I read the entire post. Sounds like good material to take pictures of. If the police asked me nicely I might consider not taking pictures.

The point here is that the Vice President is staying at a hotel. This is in the middle of a city. If martial law is declared then the police have a right to do what they did. If large warning signs are posted then it would be polite not to take pictures. Actaully of course they would need a court order to stop me.

They could legally stop me from entering the hotel or make me go through a metal detector. They are certainly allowed to make the site secure.

The very arguement is absurd. How long is he staying there? Would a real spy take pictures in an obvious manner? If security is at risk why is he staying at a public hotel?

In this country a beaurocrat is supposed to serve the people not lock them up for taking pictures.

Hans, you really don't get it. The government has a right to protect its members but this right is severely limited by law. Government functionaries do NOT have the right to arbitrarily declare their temporary residence a security zone.

If there is an overwhelming reason for them to do so, it has to be spelled out. As I said any American would regard this as an opportunity to take some interesting pictures.

Two last points:

If you look at some of the preceding posts there are many p[eople who simply do not believe the story. They don't believe it because of the reasons I've just stated.

Finally a story ran in the Times about a month ago about how anti-war activists are routinely stopped and held at airports for hours because their names appear on "watch" lists. They are all released after missing their fleights with apologies but their names are not removed from the lists and they are stopped over and over. There is a court case being filed over this outrageous matter.

But the real point is that the "Patriot Act" has given the beaurocracy vast new powers and like all beaurocracies they really can't help themselves.

Dave
 
Hi Bill

Yes, looking at your pictures completely convinced me that the story is not true. Nice landscapes! Who could believe that in a world with nice landscapes anything like that could be true.

Of course you might have posted a touch more information to back up the title of your post.

Still the government has declared that they have the RIGHT to declare anyone they choose as an "enemy combatant." They have also declared that the courts have no buisness getting involved in ANY case where the government so acts.

Can you figure out what this means? Perhaps this story is not true. One can only hope.

Dave
Bill Brosen said:
http://www.pbase.com/wbrosen/photoart
Click to expand...
 
Well,
Perhaps this case is not true, but mine is true !

I attended a course in Coade Engineering, Houston on May, 2002 and when coming home to Brazil I got really scared. To make things worst, although I am Brazilian, my last name is of arabic (lebanese) origin.

I was in Houston Airport and went to smoke outside, on an elevated street which leads to and from the airport. Many people smoke there.

I had bought an Oly D40, and was in love with it, so I grabbed it and took 3 pics of the vans which take the people to the rent car parking lots.

Just after the third pic, I saw the cop: he was in his fifties/sixties and had a big gun in his belt and was fat and big.

Now, he was very educated and funny. I laughed at him very much (after the case). Besides, I guess he had a near sight problem and he didn't have his glasses, so he couldn't see my passport very well.

He got my passport and started to write down my name on a small note book, but he copied my father's name and I told him and offered to write my name myself, and he agreed.

Then he asked my address and I told him. He couldn't write it of course: my address in Brasil is composed of names in Portuguese, so again I wrote it down myself for him.

Then I asked if it was forbidden to take pics and surprisingly he said: No, you can take pics. I insisted that it was a digital camera and I could delete the pics, but he said: No, You can take them.
Well after he went away my legs were shaking.

Only after some time I began to laugh. I could have writen anything cause he appeared not to be able to see at near distance :)

Now I guess where my name went, perhaps to the FBI X-files, perhaps to the trash bin ...
I am scheduled to take a course in 2003 and don't know if I will have problems.
Anyway, I can't wait to go to USA again. Reason: Oly C5050 :)
Best Regards
Eduardo
Bill Brosen said:
http://www.pbase.com/wbrosen/photoart
Click to expand...
 
Hi Dave:

" Still the government has declared that they have the RIGHT to declare anyone they choose as an "enemy combatant." They have also declared that the courts have no buisness getting involved in ANY case where the government so acts."

That is hardly to believe. I will get more info. I have no words on this moment.
Thanks for your patient explanations.
Hans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top