Go Back   RailPictures.Net Forums > Railroad Photography Forums > Railroad Photography Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-28-2010, 11:29 PM   #26
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

The terrorists have won!
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 12:23 AM   #27
TJFarmer
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 25
Default

To SD9,

Don't pull "my tax money paid for it" on me. I was using what is termed a "similarity", of which you missed the entire point and made a fool of yourself.

How many sports areans are paid with tax dollars? Lots of them!

You even wrote...."ones private, ones not", so being that sports arena's are paid for with tax dollars as well, which is which????? Which is private and which is not???

You, yourself, makes it a similarity in your "stupid comment".

Now drop it.


TJ Farmer
TJFarmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 12:28 AM   #28
Heymon
Senior Member
 
Heymon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Bowman View Post
I by no means think that it is okay or excusable for every cop to be like that, but when some one blatantly goes out doing what the creator of the video and his countless similar video does is plain stupid. Reminds me a lot of the people at PETA that really go too far when protesting and makes me think less of their cause.


If we feel or even know that a cop or person of authority is in the wrong there is a proper time and place to question it and it is not while that person is questioning you. If you know or feel that you are right contact their supervisors, get local media involved, even hire a lawyer, but arguing with the cop isn't the way to solve problems.
I guess I would ask if it is okay for ANY cop to be like that? Threatening to put the guy on the terrorist watch list??? What the guy in the videos is doing (I've watched some of his others) is more of a service to photographers than a detriment. He is doing what you are asking, which is getting media involved (in this case online media, but that works well these days). It's not something I would do, nor is his demeanor something I particularly agree with, but the point is the same: He is not doing anything wrong but is being hassled for it.

I think you come from a fairly rational perspective, Joey, but I just think that cops get carried away with their authority sometimes. Personally, I stand my ground if I am not in the wrong, but I am polite about it. That is the time to draw the line, IMO, not sometime later with a news crew or attorney or wasting time filing a complaint that the same officer will talk his way out of (e.g. I detained him because I thought the camera was a stinger missile). Some cops aren't used to people standing their ground and escalate the situation, but that is a risk I am willing to take if I am not doing anything wrong.
Heymon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 01:48 AM   #29
nikos1
Senior Member
 
nikos1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,775
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TJFarmer View Post
To SD9,

Don't pull "my tax money paid for it" on me. I was using what is termed a "similarity", of which you missed the entire point and made a fool of yourself.

How many sports areans are paid with tax dollars? Lots of them!

You even wrote...."ones private, ones not", so being that sports arena's are paid for with tax dollars as well, which is which????? Which is private and which is not???

You, yourself, makes it a similarity in your "stupid comment".

Now drop it.


TJ Farmer
Uh wow, are you one of these asshole cops that joined the forum just for this thread?
So if you dont think taxdollars is a valid reason I assume you are fine with being deprived of use of any public area? Since sidewalks and parks are also funded by taxdollars should police be able to deny us the right to take pictures there too?
Your just digging yourself into a deeper hole, the MTA rules state that photography is allowed, so even if it was a private entity your comment would have no bearing.
__________________


Wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=7861

More wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's http://nikos1.rrpicturearchives.net/

Video wedge shots of blue HLCX SD60's
http://youtube.com/profile?user=nikosjk1
nikos1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 02:38 AM   #30
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,807
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TJFarmer View Post
To SD9,

Don't pull "my tax money paid for it" on me. I was using what is termed a "similarity", of which you missed the entire point and made a fool of yourself.

How many sports areans are paid with tax dollars? Lots of them!

You even wrote...."ones private, ones not", so being that sports arena's are paid for with tax dollars as well, which is which????? Which is private and which is not???

You, yourself, makes it a similarity in your "stupid comment".

Now drop it.


TJ Farmer
Will you at least admit that yours was a really, REALLY bad analogy to begin with?

Also, you don't have to sign your name every time...we know who you are.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 03:23 AM   #31
chench1536
Member
 
chench1536's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Massohio
Posts: 94
Default

I see both sides of it. I have had one situation where one Transit Police officer told me to leave South Station because I was taking pictures. I told him there was no photo ban, but he wasn't having any of that. I didn't feel like standing my ground because I was 16 and too shy to stand my ground. But, the cop was completely in the wrong. I didn't have an attitude or anything, but he had an uberattitude to go along with the fact he didn't know the rule. In fact, even if I had shown him the proof that photography was allowed, he'd probably still kick me out. I think that this boils down to both the "constant threat of terrorism" and a complete lack of communication between officers, supervisors, and upper level management, especially in transit systems (along with other things). I find it absurd that the rules that were created by management are not the same ones enforced by officers.

That being said, a photographer should not be a smart-ass with a cop. I have no problem with people standing their ground, but do it in a nice manner, which is what the subject of the video completely misses the point of. Don't say "I'm taking pictures here because I can", say "it's a hobby". Then if the cop gives you lip about that, well, as we've probably figured out, it isn't your fault.
chench1536 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 03:25 AM   #32
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,040
Default

I find it funny that this video causes people to jump in defending the actions of one or the other player based on either a) the rights of the photographer or b) the answers made by the photographer.

Watch the tape again... it's a classic case of two people both getting what they deserve because they are both refusing to be human beings to each other.

Debate the law back and forth all you guys want... but within this world if you want to have a better time of it, treat your fellow human being as a fellow human being, not as an object to get past. When you do so, you will have a better time of it.

In this case, bozo one and bozo two treat each other as a non-person, but as a barrier to manipulate. The cop is going to use his position of authority to get his way and the photographer is going to snare the cop in his trap by following the letter of the law without caring for a moment about the spirit of it.

It's like the story by Dr. Seuss of the south going Zax and the north going Zax and the walk up to each other and then they just stand there because neither one of them will take a simple step to let the other one pass.

Last edited by Freericks; 07-29-2010 at 03:31 AM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 03:35 AM   #33
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
It's like the story by Dr. Seuss of the south going Zax and the north going Zax and the walk up to each other and then they just stand there because neither one of them will take a simple step to let the other one pass.
Hmm, my kids have missed out on that particular one.

http://prairiecowboy.xanga.com/519637110/item/
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 08:29 AM   #34
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Hmm, my kids have missed out on that particular one.

http://prairiecowboy.xanga.com/519637110/item/
thanks J, I was going to google that, those stubborn Zaxs
sd9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 03:56 PM   #35
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Exclamation I like it - it sure points out why the 1st Amendment exists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MNJRR View Post
Interesting, although the person in question wasn't being the most cooperative with the cop which i dont think helped the situation. Any time a cop approaches me I just out right answer his questions gotta try our best to stay on their good side and they can't arrest you if you're not doing anything illegal.
I find this video distressing since it is a text book example of what a "Shakedown" is all about.

From a legal stand point the photog did nothing wrong and what happened is a perfect example of how people get hassled and bullied into not taking photos in public places.

Sure he brought this on himself, it was a sting on the sheriffs and he stated it was such.

I would also point out that the photog walked a way from the encounter with his gear intact and the basis for a pretty serious lawsuit against both the passenger carrier and the department.


With regard to the officer's behavior:

Please take a good look at this fine example of the law enforcement community and take note of how he carries himself.

He is part of that ten or so percent of the profession that is so narcissistic that they believe they are doing God's work and that the laws and the Constitution don't apply to them.

Further, this video should really bother you since it depicts a person with a badge that could change your life, or someones else's life that you are friends with, or love, by falsifying information in a police report, lying on the witness stand, or be the subject of a multimillion dollar lawsuit that you as a taxpayer will foot the bill for.

This person does not serve the public.

This person is an arrogant individual who is just one lawyer away from a forced retirement that will cost the taxpayers of L.A. a bundle when the lawsuit goes to judgment.

He is a disgrace to the profession and an insult to all the hard working men and women who are out there every day doing their work "by the book" because that is what the law requires.

The question that now remains is how many lives will be unnecessarily impacted before that happens.

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 07-29-2010 at 04:03 PM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 04:13 PM   #36
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Talking I'm a douche bag and I like it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinderpath View Post
TJ- the photographer was not in somebody's "House", and this is an inept analogy. He is in a public place, end of story, and last time I checked, we live in a free country, and the 1st amendment still applies.

That being said, I have to agree with you: the photographer is a total wanker extrodinare, and the situation could have been handled much nicer, more professional, and is the reason why cops don't like a lot of people. Unfortunately, like it or not, douche bags are also protected under the 1st......
Ok, I admit it, I'm a douche bag and I like it!

No Pictures Please

I don't walk away either.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=321327&nseq=1

Look at the comments.

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 07-29-2010 at 04:49 PM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 04:24 PM   #37
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,900
Default

I like the debate this thread has started. It's always inteesting me to see railfans and photogs talk about this things and I think there were a lot of good points made on both sides. It's been a while since something like this happened to me. Luckily, mine never escalated beyond being an inconience. I try to be polite when it does happen. But I'm a believer in answering the question that was asked.

LEO: "What are you doing?"
Me (holding camera): "Taking pictures."
LEO: "Why?"
Me: "Because I want to."

I'll never forget what a Spartanburg, SC city officer accused me of trying to get away rom him. I had been trying to shoot a railroad bridge but didn't like the angle from which I was out. So I hopped in my Jeep Cherokee and drove down a little. That's when I noted the city man sopped about fifty feet behind me. Somewhere in these archives, I bet there's a more detailed description of that day. It went through the questions that normally get asked, etc. The best part was that it was taking place in the parking lot of the Spartanburg Chamber of Commerce and Visitor'sbuildin!

So I told Carolina Rails about it and one of the responses I got was that I should have honored the memory of the 3,000 dead from September 11 by listening to the LEO and not bothingering him like I did.

Oh, tis isn't the picture I took that day -- Iwas so rattled by the encounter that I left without actually taking the shot -- but it was the subject of my curiosity.

Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com

Last edited by Joe the Photog; 07-29-2010 at 04:33 PM.
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 04:30 PM   #38
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Talking Another way to answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post

LEO: "What are you doing?"
Me (holding camera): "Taking pictures."
LEO: Of what?

Answer: Of trains sir.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
LEO: "Why?"
Answer: Because I am too much of a dork to have a girlfriend, and my mom won't give me the money to hire a model to do nudes.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 06:45 PM   #39
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holloran Grade View Post
Answer: Because I am too much of a dork to have a girlfriend, and my mom won't give me the money to hire a model to do nudes.
My wife left me for a pilot just to spite me
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 08:38 PM   #40
John Craft
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 238
Default

The officer made a much bigger blunder than misquoting the photo policy. The officer quickly escalated the situation from an encounter about photography to one about aiding and abetting terrorism - he made it about a crime, not a policy. He repeatedly characterized the stop as both a detention (i.e., the photographer is in police custody) and a criminal investigation (the photographer is being interrogated). But he didn't Mirandize the photographer, which he's obligated to do before interrogating the photographer.

If the officer had truly believed the claims about terrorism, he's already blown the case. Especially if it had turned out the photographer was associated with terrorists. The entire interrogation and any evidence that results from it is inadmissable.

Each of us as citizens has a certain obligation to cooperate with law enforcement, including when they are performing an investigation - except for when we're the subject of the investigation.

I would encourage everyone to find the 50 minutes it takes to watch the two very entertaining videos on this page:

http://boingboing.net/2008/07/28/law...d-cop-agr.html

Especially those of you who taking the officer's side. Because in the second video, the cop will tell you you're wrong.

Quote:
In a brilliant pair of videos, Prof. James Duane of the Regent University School of Law and Officer George Bruch of the Virginia Beach Police Department present a forceful case for never, ever, ever speaking to the police without your lawyer present. Ever. Never, never, never.
The attorney professor is a great setup man, but the real punch comes from the officer.
John Craft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 09:35 PM   #41
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Exclamation The Double Standard

Shut up and get a lawyer........

That is sage advice.

Ever notice how whenever a member of the the law enforcement community gets in trouble, the first thing they do is get a lawyer?

And yet as a civilian if you do that, it is construed as an admission of guilt since innocent people don't need lawyers.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2010, 12:43 PM   #42
John Craft
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 238
Default

And the hits just keep on coming . . .

Quote:
One afternoon, Duane P. Kerzic was arrested by the Amtrak police while taking pictures of a train pulling into Pennsylvania Station. At first, the police asked him to delete the images from his camera, but he refused. He ended up handcuffed to the wall of a holding cell while an officer wrote a ticket for trespassing.

Mr. Kerzic, a semiprofessional photographer, proceeded to describe his detention on his Web site and included images of the summons. He also hired a lawyer to sue.

In due course, Stephen Colbert of “The Colbert Report” arrived to sound the gong. He turned the Kerzic story into a segment called “Nailed ’Em.” It mocked Amtrak without mercy.

“Finally,” Mr. Colbert reported, “Kerzic cracked and revealed the reason he was taking his terrifying photos.”

Mr. Kerzic appeared on the screen.

“The reason I was taking photos of trains is that every year Amtrak has a contest; it’s called ‘Picture Our Train,’ ” he explained.

Soon after the show was broadcast, a strange thing happened. The section of Mr. Kerzic’s Web site that dealt with Amtrak all but vanished. His lawsuit was settled, and as a condition of the deal, he had to remove his writings about the episode. Now his page on Amtrak — at duanek.name/Amtrak/ — contains two words: “No Comment!”

. . .

Since 9/11, a number of government bodies have sought to limit photography in railroad stations and other public buildings. One rationale is that pictures would help people planning acts of mayhem. It has been a largely futile effort. On a practical level, decent cameras now come in every size and shape, and controlling how people use them would require legions of police officers. Moreover, taking photographs and displaying them is speech protected by the First Amendment, no less than taking notes and writing them up.

. . .

LAST year, a man named Robert Taylor was arrested on a nearly empty subway platform in the Bronx, accused of illegally taking pictures. For good measure, the officer threw in a disorderly conduct charge, on the grounds that Mr. Taylor was blocking people’s movement, even though it was the middle of the afternoon, the platform was about 10,000 square feet and there was hardly anyone around. The charges were dismissed, and the city paid Mr. Taylor $30,000 for his trouble. The city had already paid $31,501 to a medical student who was arrested while he was shooting pictures of every train station in the city.

After Mr. Taylor’s case, the New York Police Department reminded officers that there was no ban on taking pictures in the subway system.
John Craft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2010, 03:29 PM   #43
Holloran Grade
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: In the California Republic
Posts: 2,774
Lightbulb After the Kerzic Incident

After the Kerzic incident, Amtrak changed their photo policy.

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/Conten...=1241267362248

What is most important about the policy is this statement:

"[T]he taking of photographs and/or video may not, in and of itself, rise to the level of reasonable suspicion or probable cause."

Ergo, "the taking of photographs and/or video may not, in and of itself" constitute the basis for the detention of the photographer under the well recognized standard of a Terry stop (Terry v. Ohio).

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 [1968] was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and searches him without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio

Consequently, were the cop in the above video were at an Amtrak facility, everything he did would have been illegal.

Last edited by Holloran Grade; 07-30-2010 at 03:36 PM.
Holloran Grade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2010, 04:46 PM   #44
KevinM
Senior Member
 
KevinM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,024
Default

Interesting topic.

My sense is that real terrorists....ones who are smart enough to have a shot at conducting a successful attack (not ones like the clown in Times Square), would probably not choose to shoot their reconnaissance photos with a big, black camera and a hefty gadget bag over their shoulder. They know even better than we do that LEOs are on the lookout for "suspicious" activity. Therefore, making a big show of it is not likely to be part of their MO. They are far more likely to do it surreptitiously with video cameras, cell phones or touristy P&S cameras. These guys want to blend in....not stand out.

That said, the particular photographer in this video could probably have saved himself a long detainment and possible further scrutiny by just being up-front with the deputy about what he was doing. Instead, he chose to provoke further confrontation with an armed LEO, who turned out to be less than a model of professionalism himself.

I wonder if any such detainment of someone taking pictures has ever resulted in the documented prevention of a terrorist act?
__________________
/Kevin

My RP stuff is here.

Link to my Flickr Albums. Lots of Steam Railroad stuff there from all over the US.
KevinM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2010, 11:21 PM   #45
khalucha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 425
Default

If I recall some time last year the Home Land Security Director, Janet N,, put something out about how they, DHS, wanted everyone to be on the look out for ANYONE taking pictures of ANY INFRASTRUCTURE and investigate as to what they are doing and why.

After 911 everyone has become afraid of their own shadows.
__________________
Kevin
Phoenix, Arizona

Webshot Photos

flickr stuff
khalucha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2010, 11:29 PM   #46
khalucha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 425
Default

"The subway is on the territory list." What is not on the list? I like the part of him saying he is taking pictures of how thick the walls are. Damn, that is some camera!
__________________
Kevin
Phoenix, Arizona

Webshot Photos

flickr stuff
khalucha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2010, 01:18 AM   #47
troy12n
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khalucha View Post
If I recall some time last year the Home Land Security Director, Janet N,, put something out about how they, DHS, wanted everyone to be on the look out for ANYONE taking pictures of ANY INFRASTRUCTURE and investigate as to what they are doing and why.

After 911 everyone has become afraid of their own shadows.
Some people need to justify their existance, the only way these idiots stay in a job is to keep people afraid.

"homeland security", what a joke
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2010, 04:11 AM   #48
khalucha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 425
Default

I could only image what it will be like in a few years.
__________________
Kevin
Phoenix, Arizona

Webshot Photos

flickr stuff
khalucha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2010, 02:16 PM   #49
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,807
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khalucha View Post
I could only image what it will be like in a few years.
Well, seeing as it's been 9 years since 9/11, I can't imagine it's going to get any worse.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2010, 02:30 PM   #50
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Well, seeing as it's been 9 years since 9/11, I can't imagine it's going to get any worse.
I think there will be a gradual incrementalism. Every decision from now on (from then on) is shaded toward extra "security" whether warranted or not.

Just Sunday I found an occasional RR spot, hadn't been there for a year or two, to be changed for the worse. It continues to creep up on us.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.