You can't even take pictures at a public city beach anymore?
JohnCM
tropical storm offshore. A good day to head to Long Beach,NY and get
some shots of the waves and sea spray. I was taking some pictures of
the rough surf today, and I took several shots of some real nice
breakers from the boardwalk. The beach was crowded, and some women
just happened to be sitting on the beach near the jetti.
Anyway I take a few pictures, do some more walking to the end of the
boardwalk to get a few more shots and then walk back. Shortly
thereafter, I am accosted by 3 men, who say they want to see my
camera. I told them it's none of their business, and asked if they
were cops. They said no. The one younger male (the head jerk) accused
me of taking pictures of his girlfriend on the beach. I told them I
wasn't, and was taking pictures of the surf. Then the head jerk said
"look me in the eye, I know what you're doing, taking pictures of
girls on the beach undressing". I then said "so what, it's a public
beach and I have every right to take pictures". He continues to
verbally assault me, and threaten to call the cops. Then I really get
mad and start yelling back.
I tell him that I am sick of people like you who stop and bother
photographers. First it's the trains because they're worried I'm a
terrorist, now it's the beach because you're worried I'm taking
pictures of your girlfriend. I said "listen pal, this is America and
as long as I am on public property neither you or anyone else will
stop me from taking pictures". He then continued to curse at me
telling me if he sees me again taking pictures he will beat the
(censored) out of me. At this point I decide not to waste anymore time
and tell them I am walking away and want to be left alone. They
continue to make verbal and physical threats, I was so enraged I gave
them the finger and told them to "mind their own (censored) business".
Other people saw this incident but refused to back me up.
Anyway I told a few of the witnesses that they should speak up like I
did, because the way things are going it seems, our freedoms and civil
liberties will be gone in no time, because no one cares to stand up
for what's right anymore.
I told a beach worker what happened, who offered to let me on the
beach for free (it costs to get on the sand at Long Beach during the
summer) but I told them I wasn't in the mood anymore and had to leave.
I saw a few other guys filming and taking photos of the beach and told
them what happened, just to be on the lookout for people who'll bug
you for taking pictures and so on.
I tell you, I'm really considering leaving New York or this country
altogether. Perhaps it's just because I am so mad now, but I just
can't live in a society that seems so paranoid anymore. I see the MTA
Police and police all over train stations now. It's just no fun
anymore, heck, it's miserable. Today may be the last straw. I want to
live in a country like the United States we used to have. You know,
the one where protesters got respect and were allowed to march, one
where you can freely take photos on public property, one where people
trust eachother,etc. It's bad enough we lost the World Trade Center
and all those innocent lives, but now we're losing something even more
valuable.
I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
paranoia society is inflicted with these days.
Rick
> I tell you, I'm really considering leaving New York or this country
> altogether. Perhaps it's just because I am so mad now, but I just
> can't live in a society that seems so paranoid anymore. I see the MTA
> Police and police all over train stations now. It's just no fun
> anymore, heck, it's miserable. Today may be the last straw. I want to
> live in a country like the United States we used to have. You know,
> the one where protesters got respect and were allowed to march, one
> where you can freely take photos on public property, one where people
> trust eachother,etc. It's bad enough we lost the World Trade Center
> and all those innocent lives, but now we're losing something even more
> valuable.
Yep. Three years later and Bush still can't utter a single
paragraph without using the words terror or fear or
homeland security. His #1 job is keeping the American
people afraid and loyal to him.
Shades of Adolf Hitler indeed.
My advice is to wait until November's election, and if
Bush wins, flee the country. I'm planning to do exactly
that, because I sincerely believe Bush will manage to
destroy this country altogether if he's allowed another
term in office. Bush claims God told him to invade Iraq
and slaughter 13,000 innocent civilians, who knows
what "God" will tell him to do next?
Rick
YoYo
central NY also :+(
"JohnCM" <qtrai...@optonline.net>
wrote in message
news:de3c86c3.04082...@posting.google.com...
Atreju
wrote:
SNIP
>thereafter, I am accosted by 3 men, who say they want to see my
>camera. I told them it's none of their business, and asked if they
>were cops. They said no. The one younger male (the head jerk) accused
>me of taking pictures of his girlfriend on the beach. I told them I
>wasn't, and was taking pictures of the surf. Then the head jerk said
>"look me in the eye, I know what you're doing, taking pictures of
>girls on the beach undressing". I then said "so what, it's a public
>beach and I have every right to take pictures". He continues to
>verbally assault me, and threaten to call the cops. Then I really get
>mad and start yelling back.
SNIP
At this point, I would have taken out my cellphone and called the
(censored) cops myself. Let them threaten you all they want, and when
the police arrive, have them inform these (censored) thugs that you
have as much right to be there as they do, and if they cannot tolerate
the presence of a camera, they should (censored) leave.
I live in NY as well, and I plan to take plenty of pictures with the
camera I will be buying tomorrow (hopefully).
Don't get too disgruntled by things like this, just stand up for
yourself.
---Atreju---
Atreju
SNIP
>My advice is to wait until November's election, and if
>Bush wins, flee the country. I'm planning to do exactly
>that, because I sincerely believe Bush will manage to
>destroy this country altogether if he's allowed another
>term in office. Bush claims God told him to invade Iraq
>and slaughter 13,000 innocent civilians, who knows
>what "God" will tell him to do next?
>
>Rick
>
You, sir, are a serious media victim.
Try to think for yourself once in a while.
---Atreju---
Atreju
>Bush claims God told him to invade Iraq
>and slaughter 13,000 innocent civilians, who knows
>what "God" will tell him to do next?
Not to go too off topic (too late) but I would really love to see or
hear any recording of Bush claiming that god said anything to him
13,000 innocent civilians? What are you smoking?
---Atreju---
The Black Sheep
> I tell you, I'm really considering leaving New York or this country
> altogether. Perhaps it's just because I am so mad now, but I just
> can't live in a society that seems so paranoid anymore. I see the
MTA
> Police and police all over train stations now. It's just no fun
> anymore, heck, it's miserable. Today may be the last straw. I want
to
> live in a country like the United States we used to have. You know,
> the one where protesters got respect and were allowed to march, one
> where you can freely take photos on public property, one where
people
> trust eachother,etc. It's bad enough we lost the World Trade Center
> and all those innocent lives, but now we're losing something even
more
> valuable.
Move to Canada. I've been on Parliament Hill taking photos after
midnight, walking right up to the front door of Parliament, and the
only police attention I ever got was an RCMP officer nodding "good
evening" and another moving his car for me so it was out of my shot.
> I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
> man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
> paranoia society is inflicted with these days.
You are correct. Of course, there are jerks everywhere....
Next time something like this happens, advise the person that if they
touch you or threaten you again you will consider at assault. Ask
them to leave you alone, and if they don't tell them you will consider
it harrassment. Then dial 91 on your cell phone and ask them if you
should dial the last digit. Works like a charm.
Jeff Cochran
in a bikini (which he may have been) and defends her. The
photographer gets upset and combative as well. And it's all because
George Bush is President?
Somebody needs to take his Valium. Several somebodys it looks like.
Jeff
On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 17:22:57 -0700, "Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
Ron Hunter
Gee, three obnoxious people and you indict the whole country? You are
in for some ugly shocks if you travel widely. I took 470 shots while on
vacation this year, and no one complained about any of them, even though
some of them might have been of interest to a terrorist. I rather
suspect that some paranoid people decided you were up to no good and
accosted you. Why didn't you offer to let them look at the pictures and
judge for themselves? Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?
Ron Hunter
Rick,
If you need help with the ticket, let me know.
Five
m...@privacy.net says...
YOU ARE A FOOL.
--
www.fiveminutesoffame.com
Get your five minutes of FAME
Clyde Torres
news:10j2cv0...@corp.supernews.com...
> JohnCM wrote:
> Gee, three obnoxious people and you indict the whole country? You are
> in for some ugly shocks if you travel widely. I took 470 shots while on
> vacation this year, and no one complained about any of them, even though
> some of them might have been of interest to a terrorist. I rather
> suspect that some paranoid people decided you were up to no good and
> accosted you. Why didn't you offer to let them look at the pictures and
> judge for themselves? Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?
Regardless of whether he was really taking pictures of their girlfriends, he
has every right to do so. He doesn't have to show them shiite.
Clyde Torres
Mxsmanic
> I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
> man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
> paranoia society is inflicted with these days.
Terrorism is actually just one flavor of paranoia. Terrorists depend on
hysteria and paranoia to accomplish their ends. The ironic and scary
part is that governments often depend on exactly the same things for
exactly the same reasons. In other words, terrorists and governments
often are working in the same way towards similar purposes. Terrorist
attacks give governments excuses to curtail civil liberties.
Democracies are their own worst enemies; they eventually commit suicide.
And people in free societies don't know what they've got until it's
gone.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Mxsmanic
> Some guy thinks the original poster is taking pics of his girl
> in a bikini (which he may have been) and defends her.
Against what?
Mxsmanic
> Why didn't you offer to let them look at the pictures and
> judge for themselves?
Because his pictures are none of their business. He doesn't have to
prove he didn't take pictures. And even if he did take pictures ...
it's perfectly legal.
> Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?
"If you're not with us, you're against us."
John Scott Mccoy
Atreju <som...@who.hates.junkmail> wrote:
Back to the beach! EVERYBODY GET YOUR SUITS ON!
Well, my simple solution is to get yourself to the western border - New
York and Pennsylvania and follow the sun until you hit a BIG ocean! A
couple of miles before you submerge in the surf 'hack' a hard left and
follow the coast south ... you'll see a lot of Palm Trees, seagulls and
gorgeous women .... mostly with gorgeous tans.
If you run into a LOT of REALLY tanned folks speaking a foreign language
- kinda sounds like Puerto Rican, you've gone a little too far. Turn
around and sit through about an hour of traffic to get north of the
border again - sorry for the inconvenience - OR just come back with a
huge crowd of 'illegals' (but you'll have to leave your car) - it's a
lot faster than the border traffic.
Anyway, backtrack about 10 miles - it's about 2 miles north of La Jolla
- and look for signs that say, 'Black's Beach - Swimsuit Optional' and
you're there! Talk about sunsets! ... also there are 'moons' all day
long, too!
You know what they say, 'Once you go Blacks - you'll never go backs!'
Sorry pal, you were caught SWNYr. 'Shooting While a New Yorker' is your
fault. Do something about it if you don't like it. LOL
Hunt
@optonline.net says...
>
>
[SNIP]
>I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
>man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
>paranoia society is inflicted with these days.
This scene could just have easily played out, even without your camera, in
almost any "inner-city" neighborhood, had you just violated their turf, or
worn the wrong color shit.
Just an observation,
Hunt
Atreju
wrote:
>people in free societies don't know what they've got until it's
>gone.
Very often true. And moreso, they seldom stand up for themselves. I'm
a proud American, but so many many people I see around me could get
slapped in the face, and they'd only respond with "thank you sir, may
I have another"
---Atreju---
Drifter
your.business.com> wrote:
>Yea believe or not it happens upstate,
>central NY also :+(
And Washington, DC. I was out at the Cherry Blossom festival getting
some really nice shots along the tidal pool and this guy comes over
and starts giving me the same sort of grief (don't take pictures of
us) because they had walked INTO my shot. Another gentleman came over
and informed Mr. Angry that I had been setting up my shot (tripod and
camera) for about 15 minutes before Mr & Mrs Angry even came along. So
now Mr. Angry is yelling at Mr. Helpful to %@&% off when along comes
DC's finest (who says there's never a cop when you need one) who
listens to the story and then tells Mr. Angry to shut up and go away.
The cop then hangs out for a good 10 minutes to make sure Mr. Angry
doesn't come back.
For all the "threat level orange" terrorist paranoia around here it
was nice to have a law enforcement person actually stand up for a
photographer for a change!
What I still can't figure is why Mr. Angry lit into me. There must
have been 40 tourists in the immediate area all snapping away for all
they were worth. Maybe he felt threatened by my big lens <grin>.
Drifter
"I've been here, I've been there..."
dave
"Atreju" <som...@who.hates.junkmail> wrote in message
news:edh2j0d1bsgdv6rkj...@4ax.com...
I hate to tell the terrorists, but this is america, land of apathy. No one
is terrorized, or frankly, gives a crap anymore. 9/11 was forgotten within
months by 95% of the population.
Mxsmanic
> What I still can't figure is why Mr. Angry lit into me. There must
> have been 40 tourists in the immediate area all snapping away for all
> they were worth. Maybe he felt threatened by my big lens <grin>.
There's a certain species of person who feels convinced that anyone who
is taking photos and looks professional MUST be taking pictures of him.
I'm consistently amazed and amused by people who will step out of a
crowd of 200 people on a street to ask why I'm taking pictures of THEM.
Talk about ego!
Mxsmanic
> This scene could just have easily played out, even without your camera, in
> almost any "inner-city" neighborhood, had you just violated their turf, or
> worn the wrong color shit.
I'm not sure I'd want to visit a neighborhood where people wear shit, no
matter what its color.
Mxsmanic
> I hate to tell the terrorists, but this is america, land of apathy. No one
> is terrorized, or frankly, gives a crap anymore. 9/11 was forgotten within
> months by 95% of the population.
The paranoia still seems to be going as strong as ever.
ka...@sonic.net
Basically, in the US, the jerk yelling at a legal activity is
already committing assault. If he lays hands on you, it's battery. If
he tries to get your camera, you could likely throw in robbery --
after all, if a guy demands your property, what likelihood is there
that you'll get it back unharmed.
Then yell like hell to attract a crowd, preferably with
cameras, then start snapping pictures of the miscreants.
Of course, from what I hear of NY, that probably constitutes a
death sentence all by itself.
ka...@sonic.net
wrote:
>Jeez. Some guy thinks the original poster is taking pics of his girl
>in a bikini (which he may have been) and defends her.
Legally he can defend her maybe by asking politely not to take
pictures of her. Beyond that, he's ouit of luck. If she wants to show
it off, anyone has a right to look at it or take pictures of it. Once
they cross the line into loud harrassment or demanding possession of
your property, they're wrong. Period.
> The
>photographer gets upset and combative as well. And it's all because
>George Bush is President?
>
>Somebody needs to take his Valium. Several somebodys it looks like.
Wrong -- someone needs to think of who's at the top, setting
the tone that says anyone doing anything that some psychotic might
consider "strange and maybe even dangerous" should be labeled a
potential terrorist.
ka...@sonic.net
wrote:
If I didn't like your looks (missle eastern, for example) and
asked to look through your wallet to see if you had evidence of
belonging to certain organizations, would you let me? How about if I
asked for a look at your genitals to see if you were an STD carrier?
Where do you draw the line? Or do you just knuckle under when accosted
by jerks?
>Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?
No cause needed -- the Constitution gives the thugs no
authoority to abridge my legal behavior.
ka...@sonic.net
wrote:
>JohnCM writes:
Any true democracy contains the seeds of its own destruction
in that it sets limits beyond which it won't go to defend itself.
Mark M
"Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2pclv5F...@uni-berlin.de...
> > altogether. Perhaps it's just because I am so mad now, but I just
> > can't live in a society that seems so paranoid anymore. I see the MTA
> > Police and police all over train stations now. It's just no fun
> > anymore, heck, it's miserable. Today may be the last straw. I want to
> > live in a country like the United States we used to have. You know,
> > the one where protesters got respect and were allowed to march, one
> > where you can freely take photos on public property, one where people
> > trust eachother,etc. It's bad enough we lost the World Trade Center
> > and all those innocent lives, but now we're losing something even more
> > valuable.
>
> and slaughter 13,000 innocent civilians, who knows
> what "God" will tell him to do next?
Totally false.
He has never said or implied this,
and YOU are either a liar or fool.
I suspect the latter.
Mark M
"Jeff Cochran" <nos...@mydomain.dude> wrote in message
news:f7c2j09vq26gnt7p8...@4ax.com...
> Jeez. Some guy thinks the original poster is taking pics of his girl
> in a bikini (which he may have been) and defends her. The
> photographer gets upset and combative as well. And it's all because
> George Bush is President?
>
> Somebody needs to take his Valium. Several somebodys it looks like.
Wrong.
If someone chooses to walk around nudie (or close to it), you and/or anyone
else has the right to photograph it. In fact, if they want to sell your
nudie pic to the National Enquirer, they can do that as well.
Matt Ion
> "look me in the eye, I know what you're doing, taking pictures of
> girls on the beach undressing". I then said "so what, it's a public
> beach and I have every right to take pictures". He continues to
> verbally assault me, and threaten to call the cops.
See right there, I woulda told him to go ahead, call the cops... that's
enough to shut up most of these loudmouths. Cops showing up is the LAST
thing they really want.
Mark M
"Archibald" <arch...@Fotobond.com> wrote in message
news:v1r2j0p64no76s2dt...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:22:47 -0400, "The Black Sheep"
> <ma...@NOSPAMtheblacksheep.ws> wrote:
>
> >
> >news:de3c86c3.04082...@posting.google.com...
> >
> >> I tell you, I'm really considering leaving New York or this country
> >> altogether. Perhaps it's just because I am so mad now, but I just
> >> can't live in a society that seems so paranoid anymore. I see the
> >MTA
> >> Police and police all over train stations now. It's just no fun
> >> anymore, heck, it's miserable. Today may be the last straw. I want
> >to
> >> live in a country like the United States we used to have. You know,
> >> the one where protesters got respect and were allowed to march, one
> >> where you can freely take photos on public property, one where
> >people
> >> trust eachother,etc. It's bad enough we lost the World Trade Center
> >> and all those innocent lives, but now we're losing something even
> >more
> >> valuable.
> >
> >Move to Canada. I've been on Parliament Hill taking photos after
> >midnight, walking right up to the front door of Parliament, and the
> >only police attention I ever got was an RCMP officer nodding "good
> >evening" and another moving his car for me so it was out of my shot.
>
> concrete barrier and barbed wire. Land of the free!
Why would Canada need to fear terrorists? Terrorists LOVE Canada, now that
they've agreed to adopt Al-Jezeera news as a legitimate news channel--which
allows terrorists to deliver large scale pro-terrorist propaganda.
Those embassy workers are likely hiding from *Canadians.*
Canada is quickly becoming Al Qaida's pal in the media.
So...to Canadians... Before you yell at ME...go yell at your television
regulators.
Mark M
"Hunt" <no...@hunt.com> wrote in message
news:cgrdt...@news4.newsguy.com...
I've seen brown, green, red, and...well...peanut and corn.
Are there other colors?
AstroPax
> Basically, in the US, the jerk yelling at a legal activity is
>already committing assault.
Not necessarily. The following is the Utah version.
Yelling and causing a scene is actually classified as "Disorderly
Conduct" (unreasonable noises in a public place").
It's not really "Assault" unless the asshole communicates a threat
*and* accompanies that threat with a show of immediate force or
violence.
For example, I can tell someone that I'm going to kick the shit out of
them for taking photos of my topless girlfriend laying on the sand,
and I can say it all day long, and I'm not be guilty of
assault...unless I do something like shake a closed fist at them while
at the same time saying "I'm gonna kick your ass". That would be a
class B misdemeanor.
>If he lays hands on you, it's battery.
In Utah, just laying a hand on someone while at the same time
communicating a threat of violence is <simple> "Assault", a class B
misdemeanor. That's because the asshole didn't actually hurt you
(except maybe your ego), yet.
If the asshole hits you with his open fist, but it doesn't cause any
serious injuries, it's still "Assault", however, since he actually hit
you, it would be upgraded to a class A misdemeanor.
However, if the asshole causes serious bodily injury, or uses a
dangerous weapon (such as your metal-spiked tripod), then it would be
"Aggravated Assault", a second degree felony.
>If he tries to get your camera, you could likely throw in robbery --
Basically the same here in Utah.
If the asshole just takes your camera from you without saying a word
or threatening you in any way, shape or form, it's just "Theft". The
degree of theft is based upon the value of the item that was stolen.
A theft, for example, would be if an asshole thief stole my Nikkor VR
70-200mm f/2.8 lens while I wasn't looking. Because this particular
lens is valued at more than $1000 (but less than $5,000), the thief
committed a third degree felony.
However, if the thief steals a 600mm f/4, valued at greater than
$5000, then the thief committed a second degree felony.
If the asshole takes your camera through fear, force, threats, etc.,
then it's "Robbery", a second degree felony, regardless of value.
If the asshole takes your camera through the use of a dangerous
weapon, such as a knife or gun, than it is "Aggravated Robbery", a
first degree felony, regardless of value.
An attempted Theft can quickly escalate into a Robbery, or even an
Aggravated Robbery because the victim discovers the theft in progress,
and then attempts to prevent the theft while at the same time the
asshole decides to persist with the theft.
>after all, if a guy demands your property, what likelihood is there
>that you'll get it back unharmed.
> Then yell like hell to attract a crowd, preferably with
>cameras, then start snapping pictures of the miscreants.
> Of course, from what I hear of NY, that probably constitutes a
>death sentence all by itself.
Is it in the UK where they are making it a crime to call for help or
to resist during a robbery? Any truth to that?
-Astro
Journalist-North
(snip)
> The one younger male (the head jerk) accused
> me of taking pictures of his girlfriend on the beach.
(snip)
> I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
> man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
> paranoia society is inflicted with these days.
------------
Oh, come off it. You know perfectly well that the girl... if there even was
one... was his CHATTEL. He OWNED her as if he might own a classic Pontiac
Firebird and you just can't take her picture on a public beach any more then
you could take a picture of his Firebird parked on a public street without
him being fully justified in kicking the s**t out of you for doing it.
Consider yourself lucky you still have a camera... and your life. If you had
taken purvey pictures like that of the girl (or the car) in South LA rather
than in NY (where the bullies are really "pussy" about things like that), he
would have put all six 38 cal slugs into your perverted body... and then
popped out for a six pack and a pizza with his equally manly pals.
Wa-chew lookin at?
Journalist
Ryan Robbins
<ka...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:1os2j0l065kjt5ues...@4ax.com...
> No cause needed -- the Constitution gives the thugs no
> authoority to abridge my legal behavior.
The Constitution governs relations between the government and the people,
not relations among the people.
Rick
> >and slaughter 13,000 innocent civilians, who knows
> >what "God" will tell him to do next?
>
> hear any recording of Bush claiming that god said anything to him
http://www.staugustine.com/stories/052404/opi_opi314983.shtml
"In his biography of George W. Bush, "Bush at War," Bob
Woodward quotes the President as saying "God told me to
invade Afghanistan and I did. God told me to invade Iraq
and I did."
Somehow I doubt Bob Woodward would risk a stellar
40-year journalism career by misquoting Mr. Bush.
> 13,000 innocent civilians? What are you smoking?
"The only serious independent attempt to collate war statistics
is the Iraq Body Count Project, which involves both US and
British academics. The project's website currently places
Iraq's civilian toll at between 11,000 and 13,000.
"The website has been criticised in some quarters for its
tardiness in updating its figures. But Iraq Body Count Project
says it is not a news portal and puts accuracy ahead of speed.
"According to the Arab and western media, between 15,000
and 20,000 Iraqi civilians have perished since the launch of
the invasion.
"But some cast doubt on the figures, saying the number of
Iraqi civilians who have died at the hands of the US army
may never be known."
Rick
Rick
Completely true, according to the best sources.
> He has never said or implied this,
> and YOU are either a liar or fool.
And you are yet another sheltered pathetic Bush shill
who's been watching too much Fox "News" instead
of finding out what's really going on in the world.
Rick
Journalist-North
>
(snip)
>
> Why would Canada need to fear terrorists? Terrorists LOVE Canada, now
> that
> they've agreed to adopt Al-Jezeera news as a legitimate news channel--
+++ Got news for you AJ is legitimate news mostly run by ex; BBC Arabic
service types.
which
> allows terrorists to deliver large scale pro-terrorist propaganda.
+++ Propaganda is just an alternate truth. Do you really believe EVERYTHING
that you hear on Fox too?
>
> Those embassy workers are likely hiding from *Canadians.*
>
+++ Too right they should.
Journalist
Mark M
Then it should be no problem for you to cite these "best sources."
Mark M
"Journalist-North" <journali...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:wZfYc.61452$b76....@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "Mark M" <mjmo...@goaway.cox.unless.no.crap.net> wrote in message
> news:eufYc.110558$Lj.26762@fed1read03...
> >
> (snip)
> >
> > Why would Canada need to fear terrorists? Terrorists LOVE Canada, now
> > that
> > they've agreed to adopt Al-Jezeera news as a legitimate news channel--
>
> +++ Got news for you AJ is legitimate news mostly run by ex; BBC Arabic
> service types.
>
> which
> > allows terrorists to deliver large scale pro-terrorist propaganda.
>
> +++ Propaganda is just an alternate truth. Do you really believe
EVERYTHING
> that you hear on Fox too?
Was Fox talking about this?
Good for them.
> > Those embassy workers are likely hiding from *Canadians.*
> >
> +++ Too right they should.
And you feel this is OK?
AstroPax
>Completely true, according to the best sources.
Source?
-Astro
Rick
> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 00:54:00 -0700, "Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> >Completely true, according to the best sources.
>
> Source?
Look at my other posts elsewhere in this thread.
Rick
AstroPax
I have, and I see one single link to an article (not exactly what I
would consider "best sources"), an article that contains this sort of
crap:
---
"What exactly is the difference between 19 Islamic terrorists
murdering 3,000 innocent American civilians in the name of Allah on
9-11, and the most sophisticated military machine in the history of
the world indiscriminately dropping cluster bombs on the innocent
civilian population of Iraq, because George Bush believes he's God's
delivery boy?"
---
I'm sorry, but the USAF doesn't drop CBU's "indiscriminately",
dumbass.
-Astro
AstroPax
>http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
This is the same web site that uses an altered pic of a B2 dropping a
big load of dumb bombs as the background...as if that what is being
dropped on Baghdad on a daily basis.
What a crock of propaganda BS.
Also, the registrant of this domain is out of Germany. Go figure.
BTW, funny they don't mention how many Iraqi's have been killed by the
enemy, or how many were killed before the war. Just one more example
of "selective reporting".
-Astro
Ron Hunter
> "Ron Hunter" <rphu...@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:10j2cv0...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>JohnCM wrote:
>>Gee, three obnoxious people and you indict the whole country? You are
>>in for some ugly shocks if you travel widely. I took 470 shots while on
>>vacation this year, and no one complained about any of them, even though
>>some of them might have been of interest to a terrorist. I rather
>>suspect that some paranoid people decided you were up to no good and
>>accosted you. Why didn't you offer to let them look at the pictures and
>>judge for themselves? Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?
>
>
> Regardless of whether he was really taking pictures of their girlfriends, he
> has every right to do so. He doesn't have to show them shiite.
>
> Clyde Torres
>
>
That would depend on what he took, and how. No, he didn't HAVE to show
them anything, but it might have defused the situation. Or not.
Ron Hunter
> JohnCM writes:
>
>
>>I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
>>man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
>>paranoia society is inflicted with these days.
>
>
> Terrorism is actually just one flavor of paranoia. Terrorists depend on
> hysteria and paranoia to accomplish their ends. The ironic and scary
> part is that governments often depend on exactly the same things for
> exactly the same reasons. In other words, terrorists and governments
> often are working in the same way towards similar purposes. Terrorist
> attacks give governments excuses to curtail civil liberties.
>
> Democracies are their own worst enemies; they eventually commit suicide.
> And people in free societies don't know what they've got until it's
> gone.
>
Pretty cynical, aren't you?
I figure that if I become paranoid because of terrorists, then they have
won. I refuse to give them that victory. I will not modify my way of
living to accomodate them.
Ron Hunter
> Ron Hunter writes:
>
>
>>Why didn't you offer to let them look at the pictures and
>>judge for themselves?
>
>
> Because his pictures are none of their business. He doesn't have to
> prove he didn't take pictures. And even if he did take pictures ...
> it's perfectly legal.
>
>
>>Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?
>
>
> "If you're not with us, you're against us."
>
His pictures of THEM are their business, if they didn't want them taken.
More likely they thought he was spending more time taking pictures in
their direction than was reasonable (their definition), and felt
invaded. Imagine how celebrities feel about such things, and then apply
that to ordinary people, who also probably were somewhat judgement
impaired at the time.
He is lucky nothing violent happened. I would have offered to let them
see the pictures, and delete any they didn't feel were appropriate.
Most people don't realize that deleted pictures can be recovered if no
more at taken after the deletion....
Mark M
I did...and...
...Your single "best source" has about as much journalistic credibility as
my big toe.
Ron Hunter
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:29:26 -0400, "YoYo" <Yo...@none.of
> your.business.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Yea believe or not it happens upstate,
>>central NY also :+(
>
>
> And Washington, DC. I was out at the Cherry Blossom festival getting
> some really nice shots along the tidal pool and this guy comes over
> and starts giving me the same sort of grief (don't take pictures of
> us) because they had walked INTO my shot. Another gentleman came over
> and informed Mr. Angry that I had been setting up my shot (tripod and
> camera) for about 15 minutes before Mr & Mrs Angry even came along. So
> now Mr. Angry is yelling at Mr. Helpful to %@&% off when along comes
> DC's finest (who says there's never a cop when you need one) who
> listens to the story and then tells Mr. Angry to shut up and go away.
> The cop then hangs out for a good 10 minutes to make sure Mr. Angry
> doesn't come back.
>
> For all the "threat level orange" terrorist paranoia around here it
> was nice to have a law enforcement person actually stand up for a
> photographer for a change!
>
> What I still can't figure is why Mr. Angry lit into me. There must
> have been 40 tourists in the immediate area all snapping away for all
> they were worth. Maybe he felt threatened by my big lens <grin>.
>
>
> Drifter
> "I've been here, I've been there..."
It was the tripod. It's a phallic symbol, and doubtless MUCH bigger
than his. Nothing makes a person feel threatened like a tripod! Grin.
Ron Hunter
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:39:44 -0500, Ron Hunter <rphu...@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>JohnCM wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It was a warm and humid day with a stiff south breeze and a weak
>>>tropical storm offshore. A good day to head to Long Beach,NY and get
>>>some shots of the waves and sea spray. I was taking some pictures of
>>>the rough surf today, and I took several shots of some real nice
>>>breakers from the boardwalk. The beach was crowded, and some women
>>>just happened to be sitting on the beach near the jetti.
>>>Anyway I take a few pictures, do some more walking to the end of the
>>>boardwalk to get a few more shots and then walk back. Shortly
>>>thereafter, I am accosted by 3 men, who say they want to see my
>>>camera. I told them it's none of their business, and asked if they
>>>were cops. They said no. The one younger male (the head jerk) accused
>>>me of taking pictures of his girlfriend on the beach. I told them I
>>>wasn't, and was taking pictures of the surf. Then the head jerk said
>>>"look me in the eye, I know what you're doing, taking pictures of
>>>girls on the beach undressing". I then said "so what, it's a public
>>>beach and I have every right to take pictures". He continues to
>>>verbally assault me, and threaten to call the cops. Then I really get
>>>mad and start yelling back.
>>>I tell him that I am sick of people like you who stop and bother
>>>photographers. First it's the trains because they're worried I'm a
>>>terrorist, now it's the beach because you're worried I'm taking
>>>pictures of your girlfriend. I said "listen pal, this is America and
>>>as long as I am on public property neither you or anyone else will
>>>stop me from taking pictures". He then continued to curse at me
>>>telling me if he sees me again taking pictures he will beat the
>>>(censored) out of me. At this point I decide not to waste anymore time
>>>and tell them I am walking away and want to be left alone. They
>>>continue to make verbal and physical threats, I was so enraged I gave
>>>them the finger and told them to "mind their own (censored) business".
>>>Other people saw this incident but refused to back me up.
>>>Anyway I told a few of the witnesses that they should speak up like I
>>>did, because the way things are going it seems, our freedoms and civil
>>>liberties will be gone in no time, because no one cares to stand up
>>>for what's right anymore.
>>>I told a beach worker what happened, who offered to let me on the
>>>beach for free (it costs to get on the sand at Long Beach during the
>>>summer) but I told them I wasn't in the mood anymore and had to leave.
>>>I saw a few other guys filming and taking photos of the beach and told
>>>them what happened, just to be on the lookout for people who'll bug
>>>you for taking pictures and so on.
>>>I tell you, I'm really considering leaving New York or this country
>>>altogether. Perhaps it's just because I am so mad now, but I just
>>>can't live in a society that seems so paranoid anymore. I see the MTA
>>>Police and police all over train stations now. It's just no fun
>>>anymore, heck, it's miserable. Today may be the last straw. I want to
>>>live in a country like the United States we used to have. You know,
>>>the one where protesters got respect and were allowed to march, one
>>>where you can freely take photos on public property, one where people
>>>trust eachother,etc. It's bad enough we lost the World Trade Center
>>>and all those innocent lives, but now we're losing something even more
>>>valuable.
>>>I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
>>>man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
>>>paranoia society is inflicted with these days.
>>
>>Gee, three obnoxious people and you indict the whole country? You are
>>in for some ugly shocks if you travel widely. I took 470 shots while on
>>vacation this year, and no one complained about any of them, even though
>>some of them might have been of interest to a terrorist. I rather
>>suspect that some paranoid people decided you were up to no good and
>>accosted you. Why didn't you offer to let them look at the pictures and
>>judge for themselves?
>
>
> If I didn't like your looks (missle eastern, for example) and
> asked to look through your wallet to see if you had evidence of
> belonging to certain organizations, would you let me? How about if I
> asked for a look at your genitals to see if you were an STD carrier?
> Where do you draw the line? Or do you just knuckle under when accosted
> by jerks?
>
>
>>Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?
>
>
> No cause needed -- the Constitution gives the thugs no
> authoority to abridge my legal behavior.
>
I am sure you have heard about the guy who powered through the
intersection because he KNEW he had the right of way, and was killed by
someone who didn't give a damn about who had the right of way. If you
want to be 'dead right', go ahead, but trying to work your way out of a
threatening situation by giving a little and trying to be reasonable
makes a LOT more sense to me. Of course a fully loaded Glock 9mm would
also help.
Ron Hunter
I would have whipped out the cell phone and called them FOR him.
Rick
I cited Bob Woodward, and the only credible body count
that's been done in Iraq. Now it's your turn to cite references
that prove my claims are wrong.
We'll wait patiently.
Rick
Mark M
You claim Bush says God told him this or that.
Without a quote showing this, you have nothing for me to disprove.
Mark M
That would be nice of you.
But there is no law requiring one to be "nice."
I'm all for being nice, and reasonable, but let's not confuse that with what
is legally appropriate.
When visiting public places, you have no right to force others to shoot
around you, and you definintely do not have a right to demand anything when
they take any picture which inclucdes you unless it is a public bathroom or
dressing room, etc. where privacy is assumed.
There is no legal assmption of privacy in open, public places.
Mark M
I did something similar to that, though it wasn't photography related.
It's funny how quickly people shrivel when their bluff is called.
:)
Rick
Ok, for the second time:
http://www.staugustine.com/stories/052404/opi_opi314983.shtml
"In his biography of George W. Bush, "Bush at War,"
Bob Woodward quotes the President as saying "God
told me to invade Afghanistan and I did. God told me
to invade Iraq and I did."
There has never been a denial from Bush or anyone in
his administration regarding Woodward's quote.
Rick
Mark M
Are you certain that is a direct quote?
-Because Google found exactly ONE page containing those words...and surprise
surprise...it your little "best source." Nowhere else on Googles millions
of pages is that quote, or even part of it seen. Zip.
Mark M
There has never been a denial that Bush said, "I am a zombie from the planet
Zig-Zag" either, but that doesn't mean, imply or prove that he said it, or
that he is a zombie.
I'd suggest you read Woodward's book, and perhaps you'll see that your
favorite little "source" is full of crap.
If George Bush had actually said that, and had Woodward actually quoted him
as saying that, it would be on literally thousands of legitimate web-pages,
and discussed to death on the web, as well as every single media outlet on
planet Earth.
There is ZIP.
NOTHING.
Does this tell you anything, or do I have to spell it out for you further?
Clyde Torres
> There has never been a denial that Bush said, "I am a zombie from the
planet
> Zig-Zag" either, but that doesn't mean, imply or prove that he said it, or
> that he is a zombie.
> I'd suggest you read Woodward's book, and perhaps you'll see that your
> favorite little "source" is full of crap.
>
> If George Bush had actually said that, and had Woodward actually quoted
him
> as saying that, it would be on literally thousands of legitimate
web-pages,
> and discussed to death on the web, as well as every single media outlet on
> planet Earth.
> There is ZIP.
> NOTHING.
> Does this tell you anything, or do I have to spell it out for you further?
Thank you, Mr. Mark, for pointing out this obvious thing that people take
things on the internet literally and with total confidence that it is true.
There is so much crap on the internet, and I wonder all the time why people
put such faith in it. Most things deserve scrutiny, and people just don't
do it.
Clyde Torres
Mxsmanic
> Legally he can defend her maybe by asking politely not to take
> pictures of her.
Defend her against what?
> Wrong -- someone needs to think of who's at the top, setting
> the tone that says anyone doing anything that some psychotic might
> consider "strange and maybe even dangerous" should be labeled a
> potential terrorist.
What happens if that same logic is _applied_ to the top?
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Mxsmanic
> That would depend on what he took, and how. No, he didn't HAVE to show
> them anything, but it might have defused the situation. Or not.
Defusing a situation by throwing away one's rights is a bad long-term
strategy.
Mxsmanic
> His pictures of THEM are their business, if they didn't want them taken.
Not in public. One of the rights you relinquish when you go into public
and mingle with the rest of society is the right to prohibit having your
picture taken. In many cases and jurisdictions, you also relinquish the
right to forbid publication of your image as well.
> More likely they thought he was spending more time taking pictures in
> their direction than was reasonable (their definition), and felt
> invaded.
They can always leave the beach. If they want privacy, a public beach
isn't the place to find it.
> Imagine how celebrities feel about such things, and then apply
> that to ordinary people, who also probably were somewhat judgement
> impaired at the time.
The same rules apply to everyone.
> He is lucky nothing violent happened.
So are the people who were arguing with him. Prison is an unpleasant
place.
> I would have offered to let them see the pictures, and delete any
> they didn't feel were appropriate.
Would you have offered to lick their boots as well? What other rights
would you have been willing to hand over to them?
> Most people don't realize that deleted pictures can be recovered if no
> more at taken after the deletion....
Most people don't realize that if you don't defend your rights, you lose
them.
Mxsmanic
> If you want to be 'dead right', go ahead, but trying to work
> your way out of a threatening situation by giving a little
> and trying to be reasonable makes a LOT more sense to me.
It's a cowardly way to live, if it requires giving up your rights.
> Of course a fully loaded Glock 9mm would also help.
So might makes right?
Mxsmanic
> Pretty cynical, aren't you?
No, just reviewing the historical record.
> I figure that if I become paranoid because of terrorists, then they have
> won. I refuse to give them that victory. I will not modify my way of
> living to accomodate them.
But you'll modify your behavior if someone yells at you in a scary way,
even to the extent of handing over your rights.
Mxsmanic
> See right there, I woulda told him to go ahead, call the cops...
That's what I've actually done, and it works amazingly well.
Mxsmanic
> I would have whipped out the cell phone and called them FOR him.
But then it's you filing the complaint. What complaint would it be?
Atreju
SNIP
>"In his biography of George W. Bush, "Bush at War," Bob
>Woodward quotes the President as saying "God told me to
>invade Afghanistan and I did. God told me to invade Iraq
>and I did."
SNIP
Wait, don't tell me. You believe everything Michael Moore says too,
right?
What a media junky.
---Atreju---
Mojtaba
<mjmo...@goaway.cox.unless.no.crap.net> wrote:
>Why would Canada need to fear terrorists? Terrorists LOVE Canada, now that
>they've agreed to adopt Al-Jezeera news as a legitimate news channel--which
>allows terrorists to deliver large scale pro-terrorist propaganda.
I do not know anything about all you write there. I only know ONE
thing for fact: Canada never invaded any country.
Mojtaba
Journalist-North
>
> "Journalist-North" <journali...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:wZfYc.61452$b76....@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
(snip)
>
>> > Those embassy workers are likely hiding from *Canadians.*
>> >
>> +++ Too right they should.
>
> And you feel this is OK?
>
-------------
You bet! Wouldn't want the "fear" infection to spread to your northern
neighbours now would we? Never know what might happen to Canada if SARS*
gets loose there. The immediate question seems to be, however, is the barbed
wire and concrete around the embassy to keep the Canadians out or keep the
Americans in? My money is on the latter purpose.
*SARS = Slaves to America's Republican Shitheads
Journalist
Journalist-North
"Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mgi3j0p5jd1vjgplo...@4ax.com...
> Ron Hunter writes:
>
>> If you want to be 'dead right', go ahead, but trying to work
>> your way out of a threatening situation by giving a little
>> and trying to be reasonable makes a LOT more sense to me.
>
> It's a cowardly way to live, if it requires giving up your rights.
>
>> Of course a fully loaded Glock 9mm would also help.
>
> So might makes right?
>
QUOTE: "...You can get more with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word
alone..." --- Al (Scarface) Capone
LOL
Journalist
Journalist-North
"Admiral Crunch" <donotu...@itsafakeaddress.edu> wrote in message
news:donotusethis-89C0...@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <QO-dnRgMWZQ...@speakeasy.net>, "dave" <n...@no.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I hate to tell the terrorists, but this is america, land of apathy. No
>> one
>> is terrorized, or frankly, gives a crap anymore. 9/11 was forgotten
>> within
>> months by 95% of the population.
>
> What is this 9/11 thing you're referring to?
>
> 9/11ths of what?
-----------
Not to worry Crunch... it was only a pimple on the ass of history.
Journalist
Bruce Murphy
> Mark M wrote:
>
> > Why would Canada need to fear terrorists? Terrorists LOVE Canada, now that
> > they've agreed to adopt Al-Jezeera news as a legitimate news channel--which
> > allows terrorists to deliver large scale pro-terrorist propaganda.
>
>
> It pains me to say this, but al-Jezeera is as legitimate a news channel
> as Fox News.
I think it's fair to say that the world outside of america would
strongly disagree with this statement.
B>
Atreju
>Wrong -- someone needs to think of who's at the top, setting
>the tone that says anyone doing anything that some psychotic might
>consider "strange and maybe even dangerous" should be labeled a
>potential terrorist.
Nobody said anything of the sort.
You're falling victim to paranoia. And that's NOT what anyone is being
told to do.
I am a New Yorker, I live here all my life, and I go into Manhattan to
my clients almost every day of the week.
I saw 911, I saw the aftermath, and I've been here around all the
people ever since. Nobody is becoming paranoid to the extent you
describe except people who are already prone to such kinds of things.
I see tourists taking pictures of buildings, people, etc. every day.
EVERY DAY. Nobody is getting crazy about things like that, and nobody
has been told to by the President, Mayor, or anyone.
What we are being told is to use common sense, which is something that
too many people have already lost the ability to do. If you see a
tourist taking pictures, you've got to use your own judgement to
evaluate whether they're up to no good. In my opinion, why shouldn't
someone take pictures of New York?
Believe me, terrorists can get better "stakeout" material from
satellite images, news images, and things like that.
I see big cargo vans with tinted windows being stopped at toll booths
- that's sensible. I see people being scanned at entrances to big
buildings when they're hauling huge packages or luggage - that's
sensible.
Picking a fight with someone who is taking photographs of the beach is
lunacy. Ok, maybe this guy has a complex about his girlfriend... who
wouldn't if she's hot? ;-) But getting into a fight about it is not
worth it. Just go somewhere else. The bottom line in such a case is
you have no grounds to complain, so suck it up and walk away.
I invite any of you paranoia theorists to come live in New York City
for a few weeks, walk the streets, get in a cab... you'll see that
we're all just trying to live our lives, and we're just being extra
careful because we know that our prosperity and freedom is a big
target for people who hate liberty.
---Atreju---
Atreju
<mjmo...@goaway.cox.unless.no.crap.net> wrote:
>If someone chooses to walk around nudie (or close to it), you and/or anyone
>else has the right to photograph it. In fact, if they want to sell your
>nudie pic to the National Enquirer, they can do that as well.
Although, that is not very nice.
---Atreju---
Atreju
>And you are yet another sheltered pathetic Bush shill
>who's been watching too much Fox "News" instead
>of finding out what's really going on in the world.
So how recently have YOU been to Iraq?
What's your rank in the military?
How many people have PERSONALLY spoken to you from Iraq as to what's
happening over there?
Please, please oh please, don't fabricate some BS just to answer me.
---Atreju---
Atreju
<mjmo...@goaway.cox.unless.no.crap.net> wrote:
>
>"Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
>news:2pdh8fF...@uni-berlin.de...
>> "AstroPax" <as...@skiutahlocals.com> wrote in message
>news:dd33j05rgiicre9ek...@4ax.com...
>> > On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 00:54:00 -0700, "Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Completely true, according to the best sources.
>> >
>> > Source?
>>
>> Look at my other posts elsewhere in this thread.
>
>I did...and...
>...Your single "best source" has about as much journalistic credibility as
>my big toe.
>
Hey! I've seen your big toe (not up close) and I'll have you know it
is very trustworthy! ;-)
---Atreju---
Atreju
>
>We'll wait patiently.
We will all, indeed, wait patiently.
...for you to get a grip.
---Atreju---
Atreju
SNIP
>http://www.staugustine.com/stories/052404/opi_opi314983.shtml
>
>"In his biography of George W. Bush, "Bush at War,"
>Bob Woodward quotes the President as saying "God
>told me to invade Afghanistan and I did. God told me
>to invade Iraq and I did."
>
>There has never been a denial from Bush or anyone in
>his administration regarding Woodward's quote.
>
>Rick
>
Please post a video or audio file, not text.
You see, words on a page don't really cut it.
For example, I just happen to have a quote here:
"I woke up in the morning, and there was St. Peter, standing at the
foot of my bed. He says to me: 'George, you have to take the pickles
out of the oven, or they'll burn. And also, you have to have a meeting
with those representatives from Ursa Major, they're really interested
in your daughter'," said George Bush this morning.
See the flaws? By your reasoning, this text is evidence of the
conversation, therefore I suggest you immediately phone the White
House and tell George W. he's late for his meeting with those wacky
horny aliens.
---Atreju---
Atreju
>
> Of course, from what I hear of NY, that probably constitutes a
>death sentence all by itself.
Not really. Come to NY and try it. Most people will tell the jerk (the
complaining guy, not the photographer) to shove off or he'll get some
ass-whooping.
We tend to stand up for one another over here.
---Atreju---
Atreju
wrote:
>Defusing a situation by throwing away one's rights is a bad long-term
>strategy.
It's not throwing away your rights, it is putting them aside for a
moment in the interest of peaceful settlement of an argument. It is a
choice, not a requirement.
Personally, that's what I would have done. I would not HAVE to show
him the pictures I was taking, but it is usually better than a fight.
Sometimes we have to try to be nice to people, and give them a chance
to see that they were wrong.
Let me tell you something I've learned over many years of being in
business. Instead of proving someone is wrong, or proving or
convincing them of a point of view, it is SO MUCH more effective to
help them see for themselves! When a person reaches a conclusion in
his/her own mind, he/she will more easily and happily welcome that
conclusion, since they realized it on their own, instead of having it
shoved down their throat.
So was he required to show him the pictures? Of course not. However,
in the interest of diplomacy, sometimes it is a good idea to take the
more peacful approach.
However, if the offender gets violent, the gloves come off.
---Atreju---
Howard McCollister
"The Black Sheep" <ma...@NOSPAMtheblacksheep.ws> wrote in message
news:2pcphiF...@uni-berlin.de...
> Move to Canada. I've been on Parliament Hill taking photos after
> midnight, walking right up to the front door of Parliament, and the
> only police attention I ever got was an RCMP officer nodding "good
> evening" and another moving his car for me so it was out of my shot.
>
Uh huh. Until someone flies a plane into that Parliament building. Then
we'll see how close you get with your camera. Canadians are just as prone to
unreasoning paranoia as Americans.
HMc
Atreju
wrote:
>It was a warm and humid day with a stiff south breeze and a weak
>tropical storm offshore. A good day to head to Long Beach,NY and get
SNIP
After all this debate, I just want to point out that in the future, it
is probably better to get an ultra-zoom so you can get those nice
bikini shots from a safe distance.
That's what I'm going to do, anyway.
I'm getting a Minolta Z3 today, and I plan on fully utilizing that 12x
zoom, baby! ;-)
---Atreju---
Atreju
wrote:
>I am sure you have heard about the guy who powered through the
>intersection because he KNEW he had the right of way, and was killed by
>someone who didn't give a damn about who had the right of way. If you
>want to be 'dead right', go ahead, but trying to work your way out of a
>threatening situation by giving a little and trying to be reasonable
>makes a LOT more sense to me.
Absolutely.
> Of course a fully loaded Glock 9mm would
>also help.
Yes indeed.
---Atreju---
Atreju
wrote:
>It's a cowardly way to live, if it requires giving up your rights.
Not everything is cowardly!
In order to live peacefully in society, we sometimes have to forego
what is literally our right, in favor of being peaceful to one
another. Of course he was not required to show the guy his pictures,
but as a choice, it could diffuse an ugly situation in a friendly way.
For example, I go stargazing in a public park at night. I have a
permit to be there, but sometimes the Park Patrol get antsy when they
see me there with a telescope, binoculars, etc. All I really HAVE to
do when questioned as to my reason for being there is show them the
permit and tell them to piss off. But is that the best thing to do? Of
course not. I always offer the cop to take a look in my telescope, and
enjoy the sights with me. I'm not required to be nice. I could show
them my permit and tell them to go away, but my choice to be nice
usually leads to a pleasant discussion of astronomy, and a pleasant
experience in someone's otherwise dull day.
---Atreju---
Atreju
wrote:
>But then it's you filing the complaint. What complaint would it be?
Nobody's filing anything. If the guy wanted the cops called, you call
them. When (more like IF) they arrive, tell them "I called you on
behalf of this gentleman. He insists that I leave the beach because I
am taking pictures. Please explain to him that I have as much right to
be here as he does. And please explain to him that if he lays a hand
on me, as he has threatened to do, that you will arrest him." Just let
the cop explain to the guy that you have the right to be there, and if
he doesn't like it, HE can leave.
---Atreju---
Atreju
<piedty...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>It pains me to say this, but al-Jezeera is as legitimate a news channel
>as Fox News.
Where is the pain, exactly? In your genitals or your under-developed
cerebral cortex?
---Atreju---
Drifter
<nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
Well, so much for this thread.
Could we get back on topic, you know, photography.
Drifter
"I've been here, I've been there..."
Bruce Murphy
But noone hates the canadians worth a whole plane. Maybe someone would
drop a moose onto it or something. A french-speaking moose, naturally :)
B>
Big Bill
>>Somebody needs to take his Valium. Several somebodys it looks like.
>
> Wrong -- someone needs to think of who's at the top, setting
>the tone that says anyone doing anything that some psychotic might
>consider "strange and maybe even dangerous" should be labeled a
>potential terrorist.
Excuse me?
Some control freak doesn't want his girlfriend's picture taken while
she's in public, and it's Bush's fault?
Dude, you need to seriously assess your paranoia.
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"
Big Bill
<journali...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>+++ Propaganda is just an alternate truth.
Damn, that looks like a good sig line!
Big Bill
wrote:
>His pictures of THEM are their business, if they didn't want them taken.
Not so.
While there are examples of when this *might* be so, in this case, the
people who might have been photographed (according to the description
of the OP) have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Thus, what others photograph is none of their business. Even if those
photos are of them.
If the parties are upset at possibly having their photos taken, one
would properly wonder *why* they are so upset: simple ignorance, or
because they have something to hide?
Mxsmanic
> I saw 911, I saw the aftermath, and I've been here around all the
> people ever since. Nobody is becoming paranoid to the extent you
> describe except people who are already prone to such kinds of things.
It only takes a few.
> Picking a fight with someone who is taking photographs of the beach is
> lunacy. Ok, maybe this guy has a complex about his girlfriend... who
> wouldn't if she's hot? ;-) But getting into a fight about it is not
> worth it. Just go somewhere else.
To whom are you giving the advice? The photographer or the bully?
> The bottom line in such a case is you have no grounds to
> complain, so suck it up and walk away.
See above.
> ... we're just being extra
> careful because we know that our prosperity and freedom is a big
> target for people who hate liberty.
Actually, they hate countries that unconditionally bankroll and support
Israel. They don't care about liberty.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Mxsmanic
> It's not throwing away your rights, it is putting them aside for a
> moment in the interest of peaceful settlement of an argument.
Same thing. How many times will you "put them aside" before you lose
them? What good are they if you just put them aside as soon as someone
yells at you?
> Personally, that's what I would have done. I would not HAVE to show
> him the pictures I was taking, but it is usually better than a fight.
What makes you think a fight would otherwise result?
> Sometimes we have to try to be nice to people, and give them a chance
> to see that they were wrong.
When?
> Let me tell you something I've learned over many years of being in
> business. Instead of proving someone is wrong, or proving or
> convincing them of a point of view, it is SO MUCH more effective to
> help them see for themselves!
I agree. So let the guy call the cops. That would be a very good
educational experience for him.
> So was he required to show him the pictures? Of course not. However,
> in the interest of diplomacy, sometimes it is a good idea to take the
> more peacful approach.
So if someone tells you to get to the back of the bus, it's best to do
so in the interest of diplomacy?
Mxsmanic
> Not everything is cowardly!
Tossing away rights that others died to protect just because it scares
you when someone yells at you doesn't exactly sound worthy of a medal.
> In order to live peacefully in society, we sometimes have to forego
> what is literally our right, in favor of being peaceful to one
> another.
Why would that apply to the photographer, but not the guy yelling at
him?
Perhaps if someone actually stands up to the angry young male, he'll
stop yelling.
> For example, I go stargazing in a public park at night. I have a
> permit to be there, but sometimes the Park Patrol get antsy when they
> see me there with a telescope, binoculars, etc. All I really HAVE to
> do when questioned as to my reason for being there is show them the
> permit and tell them to piss off. But is that the best thing to do? Of
> course not. I always offer the cop to take a look in my telescope, and
> enjoy the sights with me. I'm not required to be nice. I could show
> them my permit and tell them to go away, but my choice to be nice
> usually leads to a pleasant discussion of astronomy, and a pleasant
> experience in someone's otherwise dull day.
I would just show them the permit. They could ask me for the permit and
then offer to let me drive the patrol car around the park with the
lights flashing, too, just to be nice and to give me a pleasant
experience, but they don't.