Penn Station New York arrest

I worked with the Irish Rangers, Royal Marines, SAS, SEALs, Rangers, etc. over the years... they all trained with our unit or they acted as aggressors during war games and tried to infiltrate our facilities. It was fun and they were great people.

I was in the presence of the IDF once and that was on US soil. We had a joint training operation.

I never worked with any French forces.

The weapon you're firing looks like a MAT49 SMG. I've not fired one of those, but I have fired the FAMAS before. It's a neat rifle. The one you have pictured is a F1 varient, from the late 80's or early 90's I would say. They've since issued the F2 which looks a little different (the trigger guard is more like an AUG now).

Check out this baby face:


Last edited:
A radical element of photographers don't want us dead. Conversely, a radical element of Islam does.

The use of photography by any country/group as recon to plan an attack is a radical use of photography. The use of Islam to site terror is also a radical element of Islam. You "might" prevent a terrorist if you harass photographers. You "might" prevent terrorist if you harass people of color. You are guaranteed to violate the rights of photographers. You are guaranteed to violate the rights of people of color.

You can make any point you want but they are the same.... they both make ineffective attempts to catch that one possible criminal at the expense of the rights and freedoms of the larger public.

You admit that the majority of Muslims and Islamists (again not a race and not easily identified in a public area) are NOT terrorists much like not all photographers mean harm. Isn't that the flaw in both the profiling photographers as well as people. Lets take it outside the fear of terrorists. Some communities moved to ban cameras from playgrounds to protect children from pedophiles.... it is the same thing. You violate the freedoms and rights of a group of people in hopes to catch that one pedophile.

Again... don't forget that if a suspect is identified using a camera or of a certain race, it is perfectly acceptable to use those factors to locate and detain. That is a totally different issue all together and I have no problems with that.

the mess-ups were addressed on an individual and case-by-case basis.

And it should be no different in the general public (or race). Let me reiterate a part of Gryph's post that relates:

"rather than the behavior of an individual or information that leads the police to a particular individual who has been identified as being, or having been, engaged in criminal activity. "

important part is "behavior of an INDIVIDUAL". Racial profiling is a blanket applied to a group of people based on the color of their skin.

That is my point here-maybe racial profiling was the wrong term, but I don't think that a blanket ban on photography by Amtrak is appropriate. I think that every individual should be assessed on an individual basis and just scrutinized for anything suspicious. If there is no reason to suspect the photographer has ulterior motives, let him shoot away.

Again... you stated that "every individual should be assessed". That is NOT true with Racial profiling.

So in essence you cannot condone racial profiling and yet speak against a blanket ban on photography. The motives are the same.... and wrong.

The other element was already mentioned... The government publicly bans or limits photography. They identify people with cameras as a possible threat. The fear is directed towards photographers. The same thing will happen if the government public uses racial profiling. It identifies people of color as threat. The fear and racism is directed towards people of color.
Last edited:
Don't think for the second the government isn't doing a ton of racial profiling in the current political climate. You have no idea who the FBI and CIA are watching.

Oh yes.. I agree..

My point was to differentiate between behavior done "behind the scenes" and acceptable behavior done in "official" capacity. There is a HUGE difference in how it impacts policies and freedoms.

There is absolutely nothing in that document that specifically points out individuals of race or creed. It leaves room for an individual to fight for their rights. If it was an official stance, then there is no room for an individual to fight for their rights... essentially rights have been officially taken away. Two completely different outcomes depending on what is officially condoned practice and what is done behind the scenes.

A lot DHS's unethical activities are no different prior to 9/11 (under the individual separate branches). The difference is that a lot of those unethical activities have been written into official capacity effectively eroding the rights of the general population.
Last edited:
The weapon you're firing looks like a MAT49 SMG. I've not fired one of those, but I have fired the FAMAS before. It's a neat rifle. The one you have pictured is a F1 varient, from the late 80's or early 90's I would say. They've since issued the F2 which looks a little different (the grigger guard is more like an AUG now).


You're good! That picture is from 1992.. What you say brought back some memories-I think two of the weapons we fired were the Mat49 and Mac50.
You're good! That picture is from 1992..
I used to sit around on duty and study flash cards of various military rank, vehicles, weaepons, etc... it was part of the job. We had to be able to quickly identify uniforms, vehicles and weapons at a glance.

It kind of stuck with me. I'm a walking encyclopedia of military weapons knowledge... totally and completely useless information as a civilian. :)
I used to sit around on duty and study flash cards of various military rank, vehicles, weaepons, etc... it was part of the job. We had to be able to quickly identify uniforms, vehicles and weapons at a glance.

Remind me never to invite you over for a wife already throws stuff at me for catching the obvious weapon mistakes. :mrgreen:
I used to sit around on duty and study flash cards of various military rank, vehicles, weaepons, etc... it was part of the job. We had to be able to quickly identify uniforms, vehicles and weapons at a glance.

I think that applies to the entire Army. We had to do the same thing, and we had skills tests twice a year or once a quarter-I don't remember. On that day you saw everyone sitting around between tests studying their smart-books and decks of cards with enemy vehicles on them, reading maps and using compasses.. It was fun. We'd set up camo-nets and tables under them for test stations, and the NCO's would test the lower enlisted..

I was cleaning up the garage the other night and came across my smart book.. Of course I had to sit and read for a while..
Not true, we wer bombed by Muslim radicals in 1993 and the target was the same, the World Trade Center.

Why 911 happened is because the Clinton Administration did absolutely nothing to prevent it. He opted to prosecute the actors in court and not treat the bombing as an act of war. He didn't go after the ring leader even though he had actionable intelligence against Bin Laden.

The FBI knew about Ata being enrolled in flight school and they had other reports about members of his cell... yet they did nothing.

Exactly. Let's not forget the 1998 Embassy attacks in Tanzania and Kenya as well as the USS Cole bombing in 2000 in the Port of Aden in Yemen. While the embassy attacks were not on American soil, they targeted American Embassies and American personnel. The attack on the USS Cole was not, despite the Clinton Administration's belief, a terrorist attack. The attack of a military vessel such at the USS Cole is an Act of War.

The general populace of the United States paid little attention. "It happened in some third world country, what can you expect." was the attitude. It was however a wake up call to many in the military, the intelligence community and law enforcement. It was never a thought of would this come to our doors, but when. Then when it did happen, the general public was in total shock due to their lack of attention and concern of the affairs going on in the world.
Okay.. Let me post some facts.. Ready? 9/11.. Get that?
And what does 9/11 have to do with infringing on the rights of the people reguardless of color or, religon? While I have no love for Arabs because, they are the only people I cant get along with, I still cant condone profiling all of them. Profiling photographers wether it is saying they are potnetial terrorists, pedos or, what ever is the fashion of the week is a plain infringement of rights and, should not be tolerated. Im so tired of 9/11 being used as a justification for doing everything anymore. All 9/11 was is a wake up call or, our entrance into what the rest of the would has been dealing with for decades. All I have to say to the citizenry is welcome to the real world.
Profiling works though. It's just a fact of police work. Sometimes though, profiling leads to bad situations.

Fact: Police regularly stopped and harassed people with modified vehicles that use to cruise the 10-15mi dual highway in a town about 30 minutes from me. When they stepped up a bigger presence and cracked down on these people (yes, I like my toys), the fights, loitering, and vandalism at several places in the area went down drastically, not to mention the amount of people "street racing" through a populated area. Profiling certain individuals with a certain taste in modifying vehicles reduced crime.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, and goes to the pond with the other's a duck.

Fact: Police/Security have been stopping and harassing photographers even when they're not breaking any laws because of the whole big stigma of photographers are terrorist mastermings here to document sites and plan attacks on us. Many, many, many bad arrests have been made. The risk of terrorism has not dropped dramatically and many people are still dying from bombings around the world even though Joe Dirt was arrested for taking pictures of a courthouse in Nebraska last week.
This is where sometimes a lack of knowledge and a possibly over bearing belief in the right of the individual vs the right of the collective can come into play. The right of the individual vs the right of the collective is a fine balance that constantly shifts. It is a delicate balance. It is a balance that I do not believe any one individual can fully decide. It is constantly shifting.

The gathering of intelligence is far from the cloak and dagger world that the average person believes in, just as tv has distorted the true world of law enforcement. A vast majority of intelligence work is very mundane. Reading of newspapers, magazines, tv news broad casts etc. The vast amount of information gathered from such things is unbelievable. The things that inadvertantly turn up in the news and other places is amazing. Though not an item of great intelligence, an excellent example of things that happen to inavertantly get caught and get published. This was by google no less [FONT=arial,helvetica,helv]Google scrubs urinating woman from Street View • The Register[/FONT]

Fact: Profiling happens.
Yep, every day by everyone. If you set out certain criteria that is a profile. When you look for what matches those defined criteria you are profiling.

In law enforcement profiling is a set of critera that fits the situation. Say that a bank is robbed and the suspect is described as a white female, 30-40 ish medium build, that covers a lot of people and that is a perfectly acceptable profile. To stop a black male as a suspect in this incident is not only proposterous but is racial profiling.

Opinion: I agree that racial profiling is bad.
Nope. FACT!

Fact: Technically there's three races on Earth. Caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Those are the three scientifically defined races.
Nope, there is no single scientifically or anthropologicaly accepted theory of race.

One theory has the following 5 races of man.
Europe, West Asia and North Africa.

Mongoloid: East Asia, Oceania, the Arctic and the Americas.
Negroid: Sub-Saharan Africa.
Capoid: Southern Africa.
Australoid: Australia and Melanesia.

A second theory has 6 races of man.
Angola Man
Indonesian Man
Gypsy Man
Northern White Man
African Black Man
China Man

Anthropologist can not come up with an accepted set of rules to define race.

Opinion: So take 1/3 of the world's population (theoretically) and target them for doing whatever it is you think that they all do and you can talk about racial profiling.
No longer applies. Even law enforcement across the country does not have a defined set of races accepted or used by all. Racial profiling has in some ways become a catch term for ethnic profiling, which in itself is wrong when that ethnicity is the only reason for law enforcement to act.

Anyways, profiling happens. If it didn't, then there wouldn't be law enforcement jobs for people called "criminal profilers". Sometimes the results can be good, sometimes they can be bad.

It's when people start profiling based on stereotypes born of ignorance and fear that is can lead to harassment, murder, war, etc...
Last edited:
Ethnic Profiling is a double edged sword.

It may be needed in some small dose, but it has to be warranted, and done legally (if possible to do at all)

I can actually see balances of both in action, stereotypes are based on observation most likely, and investigations work off of facts and patterns.

If one out of 5 criteria points is ethnicity, then it makes sense to keep track of it along with all of the other criteria, but tracking past events and just outright stopping people from legal activities based on ethnicity are 2 totally different things.

I think we can all agree the latter would be very very wrong, but the first probably depends oh HOW intrusive it is. I don't mind some degree of tracking or investigation if the potential for a large death toll is very large, but they need to use common sense, and pick their battles and realize not all Muslims are terrorists, not all whites want to bomb things from Montana and not all blacks want to pillage and steal during a riot.

But if they have a checklist they use to cross off or discount certain scenarios, and one of those is based on past evidence or patterns, thats good police work, its pattern finding. But their needs to be some oversight so that it cannot be abused by someone with a racial bias, thats all.

Were all human and bound to get caught up in issues like race from time to time right ? Just realizing that can make a difference if we catch ourselves.

the article said:
Edit 01/04/09: How can you help. <blah, blah, blah>
For the print media or if you have special needs please contact me.:roll:
<blah, blah, blah>

This guy has a lot of letter writing time on his hands. He better hurry because his fifteen minutes will be over soon. Only one side of the story is presented here it may or may not be how it went down.

The management and the police department brass need to make a photography policy and make it clear to the cops walking the platform.

I probably would have just took my lumps and moved on.:D
What the **** are railroad "police" doing with handcuffs anyway???? What's next, Mall-cops with side-arms?

The Railroad Police have been around for a long time. I know since I have been chased off by them before. They are the real deal as far as having full summons and arrest power and carrying sidearms.

I think there are a couple of reasons for having their own force like the amount of jurisdictions the tracks and stations cross and at least around New York and Connecticut there is a lot of accidents and crime.
I'm sorry this is my first post, but I just gotta ask. Do you by the quote below, say that a stereotype is based upon statistical observations?

It's called stereotyping, and stereotyping exists because of the observance of a particular behavior, trait, or act over time..
Last edited:
This is hilarious to me because I used to live by an Amtrac station and I regularly walked their rails for pretty great distances taking pictures and waiting for trains to go by for photo opportunities for this same contest. It's a good thing there aren't over zealous officers patrolling the track out in the sticks, because I really do go where I am not supposed to.

Most reactions

New Topics