Why is photography now considered a terrorist act?

Started Oct 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
Dan Marchant Senior Member • Posts: 2,776
Re: So you're the one decided that photography is a terrorist act.
1

Wheatfield wrote:

Dan Marchant wrote:

For all you know they were getting ready to work there and he was calling his boss to let him know they had finished their previous job and are ready to start the next one. Now having not bothered to find out what his reasoning was you just decided to come here and start throwing around the T word.

You are just making stuff up at this point in a rather lame attempt to make an argument.

Of course I was "making stuff up". That is how one poses an alternate possibility when arguing a point. It is also exactly what the OP did when he ascribed evil intent to someone without actually bothering to find out why the man was asking him to leave. If you don't know why how do you know it was a valid reason or not?

There is a real problem today with mall cops, members of the public and even real police (who should know better) harassing photographers. However, just because someone asks you to leave/stop doesn't automatically mean they don't have a valid reason for doing so. When challenged we need to ask people what their reason is, not simply pack our bags, leave and then no crying harassment in the nearest web forum.

I was challenged as to what I was doing for the first time two weeks ago. I was in Victoria Station in London taking photographs. A station employee came up to me and asked why I was taking photographs of the signs. I told him, in a calm manner, that I was trying to find unusual views of everyday things. After talking to him it became apparent he was just worried that there was a problem with the signs, because "people don't usually photograph the signs unless there is something wrong with them". He had a valid reason to be coming up to me and by engaging with him I found out what it was.

Really? An employee of Victoria Station doesn't know just by looking if there is "something wrong with the signs"? The term for believing that sort of tripe is "gullible".

The man in question was, what my sister who works with special needs students in employment would describe as, "on the spectrum". What I was doing was outside the norm for him and his only relateable experience was people taking photos in order to report something wrong. He in fact stood around for several minutes repeating the same thing about the signs to himself, more than to me, until my repeated reassurances that there was nothing wrong with the signs calmed him and he wandered off. But then you knew all of that because you were there.... oh wait you weren't, you were just making stuff up in a rather lame attempt to make a argument.

-- hide signature --

Dan
-
f/2.8 is a smaller number than f/22 in the same way that 100 is a smaller number than 20.
I am learning photo graphee - see the results at www.danmarchant.com

 Dan Marchant's gear list:Dan Marchant's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow