Police Harassing Timelapse Photographer (Video title)

[o hey tyler]

the whole time he attempted to make it harder for the cops. What was so wrong with giving his Id to ensure he is not a known criminal

-Please ignore typos I'm currently on my phone-

This is what you don't understand. If people don't uphold their own rights, you're basically being oppressed by the police force. They had absolutely no right to question him, or ask for his ID. He was WITHIN HIS RIGHTS PROVIDED TO HIM CONSTITUTIONALLY AT BIRTH to take photos there.

When Bush was president and I was still in high school, I didn't stand for the pledge of allegiance (Heck, I may not even stand for it today because I fundamentally disagree with it). Numerous times, in numerous classes I was sent to the principals office by various right wing school teachers who thought I was committing heresy. The thing is, I HAVE the right to not stand up for the pledge of allegiance, and I could have had any of the teachers reprimanded or fired for the way they treated me. I was never disrespectful or disruptive. I just chose to remain seated quietly at my desk while the pledge took place. I never once folded to the administration, or to pressure from "superiors" because I had done nothing wrong.

What you fail to realize is that this guy is in the same boat as I was.

So fundamentally you have no respect for your own county, for your flag, the people of the United States, liberty or justice. So what part don't you agree with?

This isn't about me in the thread, and I have the right to my own political opinions.

Here are the things that I do not agree with:

1. "Under god." I am an atheist, and I do not believe in a higher power. I will not pledge allegiance to something I do not believe in.
2. "and to the republic for which it stands"

I do not pledge allegiance to a republic that will send its military personnel into a war that is pointless and based on religion, and greed (See: Iraq/Afghanistan).​

​

It's interesting that you talk about having rights, but you didn't stand up for the pledge for the very country that gave you those rights. Almost a double standard.

See above. I am not unsupportive of my country or military personnel. But I will not stand up for something, and place my heart on my chest for something that I DO NOT BELIEVE IN. I'll observe moments of silence respectfully, and with thoughts about those who passed, and my condolences for their family. I will not recite the pledge of allegiance, as it's my constitutional right.

Allow me to reiterate, I used my personal experiences as an example. This is not the subject at hand.

 

[tirediron]

The police need to have probable cause to look at the guy's ID. He was pointing a camera at a freeway, not moving it, taking long exposures. There was no probable cause,

Really? What is the definition of "probable cause" in his state? I am not a lawyer, and, if I understand correctly, you are not either. I don't think either of us can make an assessment of what the police-officers at the time determined to be 'reasonable'.

This isn't Nazi Germany.

Please tell me that this statement was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Comparing a modern-day policeman in the US asking someone what they're doing on a bridge late at night to Nazi-era Germany is ludicrous. I would suggest that you head down a local retirement home and see if you can find someone who might have lived in Berlin, Dresden, Hamburg, or other large city and have them describe for you what life was like!

 

[imagemaker46]

This is what you don't understand. If people don't uphold their own rights, you're basically being oppressed by the police force. They had absolutely no right to question him, or ask for his ID. He was WITHIN HIS RIGHTS PROVIDED TO HIM CONSTITUTIONALLY AT BIRTH to take photos there.

When Bush was president and I was still in high school, I didn't stand for the pledge of allegiance (Heck, I may not even stand for it today because I fundamentally disagree with it). Numerous times, in numerous classes I was sent to the principals office by various right wing school teachers who thought I was committing heresy. The thing is, I HAVE the right to not stand up for the pledge of allegiance, and I could have had any of the teachers reprimanded or fired for the way they treated me. I was never disrespectful or disruptive. I just chose to remain seated quietly at my desk while the pledge took place. I never once folded to the administration, or to pressure from "superiors" because I had done nothing wrong.

What you fail to realize is that this guy is in the same boat as I was.

So fundamentally you have no respect for your own county, for your flag, the people of the United States, liberty or justice. So what part don't you agree with?

This isn't about me in the thread, and I have the right to my own political opinions.

Here are the things that I do not agree with:

1. "Under god." I am an atheist, and I do not believe in a higher power. I will not pledge allegiance to something I do not believe in.
2. "and to the republic for which it stands"

I do not pledge allegiance to a republic that will send its military personnel into a war that is pointless and based on religion, and greed (See: Iraq/Afghanistan).​

​

It's interesting that you talk about having rights, but you didn't stand up for the pledge for the very country that gave you those rights. Almost a double standard.

See above. I am not unsupportive of my country or military personnel. But I will not stand up for something, and place my heart on my chest for something that I DO NOT BELIEVE IN. I'll observe moments of silence respectfully, and with thoughts about those who passed, and my condolences for their family. I will not recite the pledge of allegiance, as it's my constitutional right.

Allow me to reiterate, I used my personal experiences as an example. This is not the subject at hand.

You're right it's not the subject at hand. Do you have respect for the police and the job they do and what is required for them to do that job? You must hate having money in your pocket......"In God we trust" It is your constitutional right to not support certain aspects of your own country, until you need them.

 

[zcar21]

It's all about control. The guy just didn't want to be interrogated just for taking pictures. I have been interrogated in the airport and it's bullsh... Almost made me want to say to them, do you know who are the real terrorists, trafficking guns, drugs, etc. But we can't do anything, they're above the law.

 

[12sndsgood]

so what im hearing is that if a cop approches someone and he says im not doing anything illegal. then the cop should just say okay and walk away? reality here is no one in this forum knows if he was doing something illegal or not. he had a camera and was taking pictures, does that mean he couldnt have been throwing rocks off the overpass at cars, sitting there smoking dope. waiting for someone to do a drug deal? was he doing that? probalby not. but none of us knows and neither does the cop. the cop was just trying to find out what he was up to. simple. ive been in that situation before, i was nice to the cops. showed my id, told them what i was doing and no big issue. this guy who starts telling the cops he knows the law and he's not going to do this or not do that because hes not doing anything wrong just instantly causes the cops to wonder whats really going on. guy just looked stupid when he said he new the chief and when they asked him who it was, he then backtracks saying well his dad knows him. sorry but the guy just looked like an idiot who was trying to make things worse.



have you ever watched an episode of cops. its amazing how almost everyone they arrest always says they weren't doing anytihng wrong as well. im sorry but doing something so simple as showing a cop your id isn't throwing away your rights as a person. its just common courtesy.

 

[Forkie]

I have to side with the people who said he should've just shown his ID and been done with it. It's got nothing to do with "upholding rights/constitution blah, blah", it's simply a matter of courtesy and being a civil citizen.

The police saw someone using equipment by the side of the road. Perhaps it looked suspicious from their car as they drove by, therefore they investigated. That's the police's job - if they didn't investigate and it happened to be a terrorist with a remote control for a bomb on the motorway would you still be talking about rights and constitutions?

This guy deliberately provoked the police to the point where they were no longer interested in just a checkup. The very fact that he refused to show ID made him look guilty of something. If he had just said "Good evening officers, of course you can check my ID, you'll see that I'm Jo Bloggs and I'm innocently taking photos", the police officer probably would have said "Sorry to disturb you. Thank you for your time, enjoy the rest of your evening". That would have been the end of that.

 

[o hey tyler]

John, I suggest you RE-WATCH the video. The guy was simply standing there, taking photos on a bridge or overpass. Which is indeed public property. He himself is quite knowledgeable of the law in Pennsylvania, and states that to the police officer. Throughout the entire video, the police never ONCE presented him with a reason for their questioning... Which basically means that there was no probable cause. The guy even explained to them what he was doing, and the cops acted ignorant towards him. Like they'd never seen a stop motion video consisting of stills.

The police didn't read him his Miranda rights either, which in doing so would have told him that he "has the right to remain silent." Even though he cited that in the video.

This is clearly a situation where police officers are overstepping their bounds and infringing upon photographers rights. Just like on the hundreds of other youtube videos that you'll see on the same subject.

And yes, the Nazi Germany statement was a bit tongue in cheek. However, this instance is very similar to "some nameless military or police power" coming up to someone and demanding identification without a reason or probable cause.

 

[o hey tyler]

You're right it's not the subject at hand. Do you have respect for the police and the job they do and what is required for them to do that job? You must hate having money in your pocket......"In God we trust" It is your constitutional right to not support certain aspects of your own country, until you need them.

No, I don't have respect for most police officers. For reasons such as this.

My debit card doesn't say "in god we trust" on it. So I have no issues with that.

You're Canadian anyway, what do you care? You don't know me, you don't know what I have been through, or my family has been through. Don't lecture me, grandpa.

 

[NickA]

The dude was being a d**k head and we know it. I've been pulled over many times for speeding. I was respectful to the cop, didn't make up some crazy story, and have been let off many times. There are times I'm working on a clients site late at night, and I'll give the local police a heads up that I will be there so when they see someone going in and out they know it's me. Just be respectful to authorities, they appreciate that and will leave you alone.

 

[zcar21]

"Sorry to disturb you. Thank you for your time, enjoy the rest of your evening". That would have been the end of that.

Yeah right. I don't know about the UK but I have been to several countries and cops aren't that nice. Especially, Mexico and US.

 

[NickA]

This is clearly a situation where police officers are overstepping their bounds and infringing upon photographers rights. Just like on the hundreds of other youtube videos that you'll see on the same subject.

He's a guy trying to take some cool pictures. Not a professional journalist trying to cover an important story. Did he really want to go through this hassle just to take some pics? Get a permit, or approval, or something and go back and do it again. There's a lot of paranoia going on in some of these posts.

 

[o hey tyler]

The dude was being a d**k head and we know it. I've been pulled over many times for speeding. I was respectful to the cop, didn't make up some crazy story, and have been let off many times. There are times I'm working on a clients site late at night, and I'll give the local police a heads up that I will be there so when they see someone going in and out they know it's me. Just be respectful to authorities, they appreciate that and will leave you alone.

He was respectful to the cop IMO. He even said "I want to be respectful" and "I don't have to show you my ID, because I'm not committing a crime." He wasn't committing a crime.

It's strange that so many people will roll over and play dead when they're rights are being infringed upon. But hey, if you like being wrongfully questioned by a police officer for not committing a crime, that's your thing.

 

[o hey tyler]

This is clearly a situation where police officers are overstepping their bounds and infringing upon photographers rights. Just like on the hundreds of other youtube videos that you'll see on the same subject.

He's a guy trying to take some cool pictures. Not a professional journalist trying to cover an important story. Did he really want to go through this hassle just to take some pics? Get a permit, or approval, or something and go back and do it again. There's a lot of paranoia going on in some of these posts.

He doesn't need a permit, if he did, the police should have mentioned that and it actually would have been probably cause for questioning him.

And no, there's not a lot of paranoia in these posts. What there is, is a lot of people willing to disregard their constitutional rights. Which is sad.

 

[NickA]

The dude was being a d**k head and we know it. I've been pulled over many times for speeding. I was respectful to the cop, didn't make up some crazy story, and have been let off many times. There are times I'm working on a clients site late at night, and I'll give the local police a heads up that I will be there so when they see someone going in and out they know it's me. Just be respectful to authorities, they appreciate that and will leave you alone.

He was respectful to the cop IMO. He even said "I want to be respectful" and "I don't have to show you my ID, because I'm not committing a crime." He wasn't committing a crime.

It's strange that so many people will roll over and play dead when they're rights are being infringed upon. But hey, if you like being wrongfully questioned by a police officer for not committing a crime, that's your thing.

But how did the cop know he wasn't committing a crime unless the cop asks? Should the cop just observe and come up with his own opinion without asking questions?

It's not rolling over, it's being respectful to the people we pay to protect us.

 

[tirediron]

John, I suggest you RE-WATCH the video. The guy was simply standing there, taking photos on a bridge or overpass. Which is indeed public property.

Is it? Or is it publicly accessible private property? I assume that is public property, but in fact we don't know that for sure.

He himself is quite knowledgeable of the law in Pennsylvania, and states that to the police officer.

Sorry, I have to disagree with you here. He tells the police that he knows the law. I could tell you that I know a lot about medicine; are you going to let me remove your appendix?

Throughout the entire video, the police never ONCE presented him with a reason for their questioning...

I can't watch the video here at work ('though I have watched it a couple of times), but I thought that they indicated to him that they wanted to know what he was doing ona bridge at night. I think that would constitute a reason for their questioning.

Which basically means that there was no probable cause.

I don't think either of us are qualified to decide that, but if I had to bet, I would bet that most courts would disagree with you.

The guy even explained to them what he was doing, and the cops acted ignorant towards him. Like they'd never seen a stop motion video consisting of stills.

Really? Come on... most people have no idea what makes us tick and why we would spend all night standing on an overpass taking pictures of traffic. Police are no different.

The police didn't read him his Miranda rights either, which in doing so would have told him that he "has the right to remain silent." Even though he cited that in the video.

My knowledge of US law is a little vague on this point, but AFAIK, the Miranda Act is only applicable when a person is being arrested.

This is clearly a situation where police officers are overstepping their bounds and infringing upon photographers rights.

Clearly? I think that point is debatable.

Just like on the hundreds of other youtube videos that you'll see on the same subject.

And how many of those were set up with the intent of deliberately bating police?

And yes, the Nazi Germany statement was a bit tongue in cheek. However, this instance is very similar to "some nameless military or police power" coming up to someone and demanding identification without a reason or probable cause.

Mmmmmm....... I don't think anyone who lived in the 30s-40s Germany would agree with you, but that's just my opinion.