Know your rights

[THORHAMMER]

The issue here is not about "acting like an adult", it's about our RIGHTS.

I don't think that many people capture the concept of TERRORISM... it's not to kill random people, that is just a tool used to create TERROR, and by changing the way we live is nothing more than succumbing to their demands.

That being said, I am all ABOUT preventing terrorism, but Americans losing their rights as citizens is too great a cost. What starts with no Photography at night of an airplane can easily transform into "no photography within 100 yards of an airport" which can easily transform into something much much worse! It's a slippery slope of losing our civil liberties.

The simple fact is no terrorist is going to gain much by taking pictures of an airport at night... there is no information to gather that cannot be gathered otherwise, unless they've also trespassed onto the property (but thats another story).

To the parents that worry if their child is going to become obsessed over, do you wrap them in beekeeper outfits when they leave the house? If not, someone is going to SEE them eventually, and yes, you'll run that risk. I'm willing to wager that a photographer out in the open taking pics of kids frolicking is not doing it for ill-intent, unless he is hiding in some bushes with a 400mm lens.

As a father of two little girls you can best believe I would still ASK anyone taking pictures of my kids, but to this day I've never ONCE seen the scenario at any playground or part where someone without kids is taking pics of other peoples kids at random. Just doesn't happen frequently to worry about.

I'm not suggesting people start getting rude with each other, but we DO need to know our rights as photographers, and it's each of our responsibilities as citizens of the USA (for those of us that are) to uphold the rights that we have!

RMT,-

Your wasting your time on this one. a few people do understand whats really happening, but for the most part everyone else are just lemmings or just trying to provoke an argument.

Of course we understand what can look suspisious, but we shouldnt also expect to have our civil rights violated just for doing something thats totally legal.

How is it we can research and learn the laws better then the police ? We scour the net and find out what is happening in other cities, but the security guards and police cannot "discover" what it is we are doing with cameras, were all terrorists automatically ? Come up, what a bunch of lazy donuts.

 

[Lacey Anne]

Interesting thread. I've never been asked to stop taking pictures in public. I probably wouldn't react well.

 

[Los Angeles]

The issue here is not about "acting like an adult", it's about our RIGHTS.

I agree with you it is about rights. But the rights that are important to you are not nesassarly important to others. Respectfully I would ask who's right is more important a photographers right to take a photo of a child or a parents right to not have their child's photo taken. Some parks in my neighborhood have a rule that you can not be there unless you are with a child. Thats correct you must acomany a child to be there.

Who's rights are more important the person that does not want to take off their shoes to get on an airplane or the person who wants to make sure everyones shoes do not contain explosives.

I know this is just a photography conversation but its a messed up world we live in and your rights are going to be compromised or your gonna pay.


PS Im a gun wielding Democrat.

 

[Village Idiot]

Some parks in my neighborhood have a rule that you can not be there unless you are with a child. Thats correct you must acomany a child to be there.

That's discrimination. I'm a single male with no kids. I don't want kids. I don't even really like a lot of kids...just my friend's who says "moo" a lot.

I do have a dog though. He likes the slides at the local park.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

I agree with you it is about rights. But the rights that are important to you are not nesassarly important to others. Respectfully I would ask who's right is more important a photographers right to take a photo of a child or a parents right to not have their child's photo taken. Some parks in my neighborhood have a rule that you can not be there unless you are with a child. Thats correct you must acomany a child to be there.

Who's rights are more important the person that does not want to take off their shoes to get on an airplane or the person who wants to make sure everyones shoes do not contain explosives.

I know this is just a photography conversation but its a messed up world we live in and your rights are going to be compromised or your gonna pay.


PS Im a gun wielding Democrat.

Let me get this straight. You live in an area where there are some public parks that adults are not allowed into, unless they are with a child? Are you okay with this? Hasn't anyone challenged this ridiculous law in court yet? What the hell is wrong with someone going to a park?

Your paranoia will be your downfall, my friend. You are the perfect example of the fear factor. Run, run, the sky is falling. Take away all of my rights so I may be protected from the the latest fear.

You have been hoodwinked, bamboozled, and lied to, to keep you in line. Wake up. Like I've said before- be aware, be cautious, but do not live in fear. That is how the bad guys win.

 

[abraxas]

...
I know this is just a photography conversation but its a messed up world we live in and your rights are going to be compromised or your gonna pay.
....

BS

 

[THORHAMMER]

this is an un-needed dilema, nobodys actual legal civil rights need to be compromised in order to maintain good security.

In order for the system to work, law enforcement has to communicate within its own agencies, Go through the checks and balances in the system so that we know its not THEM that are the terrorists,
Think with their pens and phones first before immediately resorting to fists and guns when it comes to encountering someone "out of the ordinary"

The easy approach is just to use force and over-monitor everyone. This is easy to see. This is what china does, and what russia used to do. This is what is happening in the UK.

The whole point about the phtoographer and the kids is just an courtesy issue, All Ive heard in here are arguments for breaking the law and assualting the photographer who is not breaking any law himself.
I would have no issue to ask the parents myself, but If I didnt like someone taking my daughters picture I woudl just strike up a conversation and find out what they say. If they are hell bent on taking only HER picture for more then like 2-3 minutes, I would probably go to another park, or move to a different side of the park.

If its more aggressive then put her in the car, and talk more to the guy, or leave.

It the guy follows you around, tell him its making you uncomfortable and 99% of the time a normal guy would then stop and apologize.

But there is never a time when its ok to assault the guy cause hes taking pictures, your in a public place, get over it. odds are in favor hes a photographer not a pervert. Instead of crying about your comfort level,
educate yourself and learn something about people photography. Find out what is so special about capturing an image of kids playing, its not a crime.

My point is, if you are having to break the law to get your rights across,
then you should be thinking if this is a good idea.

If you are threatening to assault, or coerse someone to not take your picture, then it is YOU my friend that is the terrorist.

 

[Los Angeles]

Let me get this straight. You live in an area where there are some public parks that adults are not allowed into, unless they are with a child? Are you okay with this? Hasn't anyone challenged this ridiculous law in court yet? What the hell is wrong with someone going to a park?

Personally I think that not allowing kidless adults to go to a park is overkill. But it demonstrates the point that what is right for one person is not for the next.

As for me being "hoodwinked, bamboozled, and lied to" your right only that I have been lied to, as have all of us. I see whats going on. I believe there is a threat. Where its coming from is where I differ from the current administration.

Can you acknoledge there is a threat?

What do you think 8 more post until this gets closed?

 

[Los Angeles]

this is an un-needed dilema, nobodys actual legal civil rights need to be compromised in order to maintain good security.

In order for the system to work, law enforcement has to communicate within its own agencies, Go through the checks and balances in the system so that we know its not THEM that are the terrorists,
Think with their pens and phones first before immediately resorting to fists and guns when it comes to encountering someone "out of the ordinary"

The easy approach is just to use force and over-monitor everyone. This is easy to see. This is what china does, and what russia used to do. This is what is happening in the UK.

The whole point about the phtoographer and the kids is just an courtesy issue, All Ive heard in here are arguments for breaking the law and assualting the photographer who is not breaking any law himself.
I would have no issue to ask the parents myself, but If I didnt like someone taking my daughters picture I woudl just strike up a conversation and find out what they say. If they are hell bent on taking only HER picture for more then like 2-3 minutes, I would probably go to another park, or move to a different side of the park.

If its more aggressive then put her in the car, and talk more to the guy, or leave.

It the guy follows you around, tell him its making you uncomfortable and 99% of the time a normal guy would then stop and apologize.

But there is never a time when its ok to assault the guy cause hes taking pictures, your in a public place, get over it. odds are in favor hes a photographer not a pervert. Instead of crying about your comfort level,
educate yourself and learn something about people photography. Find out what is so special about capturing an image of kids playing, its not a crime.

My point is, if you are having to break the law to get your rights across,
then you should be thinking if this is a good idea.

If you are threatening to assault, or coerse someone to not take your picture, then it is YOU my friend that is the terrorist.

Calling some else a terrorist makes you look like you have a week argument....

Your being naive and unrealistic. Here is a question for you. If you were about to get on a plane and the person infront of you went through the scanner and it beeped. Security said we want to search that person and he/she said no its a violation of my right to privacy would you still want to get on the place with that person?

 

[Village Idiot]

Calling some else a terrorist makes you look like you have a week argument....

Your being naive and unrealistic. Here is a question for you. If you were about to get on a plane and the person infront of you went through the scanner and it beeped. Security said we want to search that person and he/she said no its a violation of my right to privacy would you still want to get on the place with that person?

Then security would ask him to leave, then have him arrested if he didn't. Planes are not public property. You pay for the privledge to use that company's air transportation. You have to do whatever they ask of you or they won't allow you on their planes.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

Calling some else a terrorist makes you look like you have a week argument....

Your being naive and unrealistic. Here is a question for you. If you were about to get on a plane and the person infront of you went through the scanner and it beeped. Security said we want to search that person and he/she said no its a violation of my right to privacy would you still want to get on the place with that person?

You are confusing the issue. The issue is our rights as we know them under the Constitution. Of course we live in dangerous times and measures have to be taken to prevent attacks against us and our country. But that type of scenario you described is a real, tangible, possible threat that we know that we need to exercise caution and check out.

Taking away the rights of folks to take pictures here and there, restrict who can go into a park and who can't, to restrict exactly where a person can go and what they can do, and so on is not a direct deterrent to the situation you described. When you have government agents running into libraries to see what everyone is looking at on the internet- there is something fundamentally wrong with that. To illegally wiretap our own citizens in the name of national security, to spy on our own citizens illegally- there is something wrong with that. This is where this is going. I don't want to live in a society like that.

The more rights we give up, the more they will take. Trust me.

My father once told me to always respect authority, but to never just blindly bend down and kiss it's ass. When we do that, we will give up every right we have.

 

[THORHAMMER]

Sorry im no naive, You are about to be "POWNED NOOB "

I guess that fact that textbook definition of terrorism from princeton university :
(the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear )

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=terrorism


Yeah, that would include threatening to assault someone cause they wanted to do something not inherrently suspisious or illegal like pictures of kids at a park.

I guess Princeton is pretty naive. What a lame school , what do you have to say about that my realistic little friend ?

Your question about the plane is verbal diaherrea , that IS the law. You can legally be searched for setting off the machine. Why are YOU questioning the law? I thought I was the unrealistic one ?
Oh, maybye you dont know the law.

Go back and research the law before you post. might help. I'm not even questioning the law, I'm questioning its abuse.

The NOOB is now POWNED

 

[abraxas]

Sorry im no naive, You are about to be "POWNED NOOB "
...
The NOOB is now POWNED

I'm not cool so I had to look that one up:

http://www.purepwnage.com/

Best- TH, Rick & VI.

 

[Socrates]

Then security would ask him to leave, then have him arrested if he didn't. Planes are not public property. You pay for the privledge to use that company's air transportation. You have to do whatever they ask of you or they won't allow you on their planes.

The same things take place at the entrance the the Liberty Bell, which is of course public property. In fact, if you shoot film, it WILL go through the X-rays. It probably also takes place at the White House and the Capital Building, again public property.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

I'm not cool so I had to look that one up:

http://www.purepwnage.com/

Best- TH, Rick & VI.

Boy, no kidding. I had no idea what the hell Thor was talking about. :mrgreen::mrgreen:

Sometimes I feel like I am a million years old.....:x:x:x:x