FW: Columnist writes about Federal guards stopping photographer

[Henry Ambrose]

Chris do you speak of your"narrah white booty" that apparently lacks enough equipment hanging beneath it to get you arrested? As outraged as you seem now why did you not challenge an obviously illegal order? That is "amazing" Ever think about showing them what you're doing? Maybe ask them if they want to look through he camera?

Kallitype, study the Constitution again before you start citing its Amendments. We still can own firearms the last I checked. And are you really " Sorry to respond to politics into a photo forum" or are you using that to let us know that you are eagerly waiting for the chance to spew your hare-brained ideas? Whatca ya smokin, duuude? As for having "no right to complain", if you don't stand up for yourself you surely can't bitch.

And of course if you didn't read the whole article you missed this part: "Ken was clear: Jeffrey should not have been told he was doing anything illegal. In fact, "as a result of this inquiry, I want to follow up with our people. Every once in a while we'll hire a couple of new security guards who don't understand how we do business. I'm going to go back and tell our area commanders to make sure the right word is going out." That doesn't sound like any kind of Nazi to me.

It seems reasonable for people to be suspicious of strange behaviour. Just because you know you're not a danger other people might not see it that way. Good thing view cameras don't look like RPGs, then we'd really be in for a tough time.

[james mickelson]

Henry, you may have the right to buy a firearm, even have it in your home, but try transporting it in any other fashion than in a locked case, with the ammo in a separate locked case. I speak from experience. I am doing public service because of not following the law to the letter even though I was an exemplary citizen causing no trouble, and even though the law is ambiguous at best. The Patriot Act has precluded your right to due process. It states that "any" public safety officer can, for any reason, stop you, question you, and detain you for no reason whatsoever, if that officer deems you a perceived threat to security. It doesn't specify public security or national security. It simply states "security." Try to debate the merits of this with a policeman, security officer, or district attorney. I have done so and it is not worth the trouble. A brick wall is easier to talk to. I agree we should ascert our right to the freedoms the constitution has guaranteed us. Unfortunately "The Partiot Act" as written and passed by "our" congress has usurped "our" rights so guaranteed. And old Hermann was right along with Mao, and Stalin. While our vaunted free press and government officials were telling us we were vulnerable to terrorist attacks, we were actually allowing our government officials to make laws that took away our rights in the name of "our" security. And "we" were so afraid for our seciruty that we were blind to what was actually going on around us. Now all the security apparatus has to do is tell us howmuch danger we face every day, and how good a job they are doing protecting us that we will allow them to pass any law they want in the name of national security. So now with CAPPS 2 they want the airlines to fingerprint us, run dossiers on every air traveler, and give each of us a security risk assesment so the country can be safe from terrorists. Yet the border by which I live, is so pourous that anyone can walk right across it at any time. Wake up people before you are hogtied with laws you can't defeat. The terror doesn't come from abroad, it is here at home in the form of our own government. Just do something wrong and have fun in court. Then you'll see just how far your freedom of speech and your right of due process goes.

[Sandy Sorlien]

I have no doubt that there are some suspicious boobs out there, but let me inject a positive story. Since 9/11 I have been photographing buildings on public streets, and bridges occasionally, all over America, including the Philadelphia Navy Base. Almost no problems. Police see me and drive by without asking wassup. Sometimes someone from the Chamber of Commerce comes out, but they are excited that I may be giving their little town some publicity somehow. I thought when I started the Main Street project I would stop and inform the police before shooting in every town. But it hasn't been necessary, and as someone noted above, sometimes it's better not to ask. Anyway, here are my tips for hassle-free architectural photography in this day and age:

1. Be female. Yes, we have an advantage. (No bananas, but an advantage.)

2. Use a wooden tripod and tie orange hazard tape around the legs. A lot of people think I am a surveyor. I sometimes block part of the street or sidewalk with orange traffic cones; only once did a police officer stop to inquire (I was blocking an entire lane of a state highway in Texas), and he ended up giving me recommendations for other cool towns to shoot.

3. Be obvious and relaxed. Hang around eating your lunch.

4. If questioned, don't be professional or officious or indignant. Smile and say, "Oh I'm just doing a personal project. It might be in a book someday, but it's just for my personal portfolio right now." Offer to show them what's in the ground glass, bore them with your composition issues. Look at the sun fretfully. Once I was shooting the main street of Pottsville PA and there was a US Armory at the edge of the shot. A polite man in uniform came out to inquire. I showed him how the Armory barely showed in the ground glass and he was fine with it.

Cheers, Sandy

[Frank Petronio]

It seems perfectly reasonable to me that a tripod and camera could be mistaken for a weapon by an average security guard. Likewise, if I were planning to drive a car bomb into a building, part of my research would be to study photographs of it in order to determine the weakest defense. The problem is over zealous (or bored) security guards and federal employees who need to justify their jobs because actual terrorists are extremely rare. I don't see it as creeping facism, and I don't think that Bush or Ashcroft are trying to sweep away our rights.

Contrast the ~800 suspected terrorists picked up since 9-11 (250 of which were found guilty of a related offense, and 450 deported) to what Democratic administrations and liberal Supreme Court Justices did during WW2 - interring thousands of Japanese-Americans. Or the sweeping arrest of over 6000 Americans related to domestic bombings during the 1930s. By any comparision the Homeland Security Administration has acted with restraint.

When you consider that we have not had any major terrorism in the USA since 9-11 - except for the DC sniper and the shootings at the LA airport (both by Muslim-Americans, BTW), I'd say that Homeland Security has been doing an excellent job. If anything I think they should increase their efforts.

Regardless of your political views, if you realize that the US is actually in a state of war – which, frankly, we are – the snafus at airport security and vague photo restrictions are really very minor. Try photographing in other countries that are threatened by terrorism to see what I mean.

[kallitype]

Henry: that should be "hair-brained", not "hare-brained"... ;-)

So you can buy a gun? Not for long, pal, see Patriot Act II provision "Our Lady of Peace".

(sorry for the bandwidth)

By Alex Jones (www.infowars.com) http://educate-yourself.org/cn/secretpatriotact12feb03.shtml Feb.11, 2003

Congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex) told the Washington Times that no member of Congress was allowed to read the first Patriot Act that was passed by the House on October 27, 2001. The first Patriot Act was universally decried by civil libertarians and Constitutional scholars from across the political spectrum. William Safire, while writing for the New York Times, described the first Patriot Act's powers by saying that President Bush was seizing dictatorial control.

On February 7, 2003 the Center for Public Integrity, a non-partisan public interest think-tank in DC, revealed the full text of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003. The classified document had been leaked to them by an unnamed source inside the Federal government. The document consisted of a 33-page section by section analysis of the accompanying 87-page bill.

*Note: On February 10, 2003, I discovered that not only was there a house version that had been covertly brought to Speaker Dennis Hastert, but that many provisions of the now public Patriot Act II had already been introduced as pork barrel riders on Senate Bill S. 22. Dozens of subsections and even the titles of the subsections are identical to those in the House version. This is very important because it catches the Justice Department in a bald-faced lie. The Justice Department claimed that the secret legislation brought into the House was only for study, and that at this time there was no intention to try and pass it. Now upon reading S. 22, it is clear that the leadership of the Senate is fully aware of the Patriot Act II, and have passed these riders out of their committees into the full bill. I spent two hours scanning through S. 22 and, let me tell you, it is a nightmare for anyone who loves liberty. It even contains the Our Lady of Peace Act that registers all gun owners. It bans the private sale of all firearms, creates a Federal ballistics database, and much more.

The bill itself is stamped 'Confidential - Not for Distribution.' Upon reading the analysis and bill, I was stunned by the scientifically crafted tyranny contained in the legislation. The Justice Department Office of Legislative Affairs admits that they had indeed covertly transmitted a copy of the legislation to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, (R-Il) and the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney as well as the executive heads of federal law enforcement agencies.

It is important to note that no member of Congress was allowed to see the first Patriot Act before its passage, and that no debate was tolerate by the House and Senate leadership. The intentions of the White House and Speaker Hastert concerning Patriot Act II appear to be a carbon copy replay of the events that led to the unprecedented passage of the first Patriot Act.

There are two glaring areas that need to be looked at concerning this new legislation:

1. The secretive tactics being used by the White House and Speaker Hastert to keep even the existence of this legislation secret would be more at home in Communist China than in the United States. The fact that Dick Cheney publicly managed the steamroller passage of the first Patriot Act, insuring that no one was allowed to read it and publicly threatening members of Congress that if they didn't vote in favor of it that they would be blamed for the next terrorist attack, is by the White House's own definition terrorism. The move to clandestinely craft and then bully passage of any legislation by the Executive Branch is clearly an impeachable offence.

2. The second Patriot Act is a mirror image of powers that Julius Caesar and Adolf Hitler gave themselves. Whereas the First Patriot Act only gutted the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and seriously damaged the Seventh and the Tenth, the Second Patriot Act reorganizes the entire Federal government as well as many areas of state government under the dictatorial control of the Justice Department, the Office of Homeland Security and the FEMA NORTHCOM military command. The Domestic Security Enhancement Act 2003, also known as the Second Patriot Act is by its very structure the definition of dictatorship.

I challenge all Americans to study the new Patriot Act and to compare it to the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence. Ninety percent of the act has nothing to do with terrorism and is instead a giant Federal power-grab with tentacles reaching into every facet of our society. It strips American citizens of all of their rights and grants the government and its private agents total immunity.

[domenico Foschi]

It is very annoing to me to see people realizing that this is not the land of the free , since the Homeland security act , when in the past government propaganda has demonized other government ideologies like communism just because the exemples that jump quicker to our eyes ( Russia & China ) have been breeding grounds for corruption and lack of human rights . How many people in the US have been allowed to know that there are experiments in communist idologies in this planet that have been working wonderfully for more than 50 years? The Mc Carthy era was only 50 years ago .... In the US now it is a Stigma to admit that your political ideas are to the left of the spectrum , when the person more worshipped by this country , Jesus Christ , was himself at best a communist , at worst an anarchist . But i'd better stop here since my being an immigrant in this country , gives the authorities the power to confiscate my green card anytime .....

[Frank Petronio]

Imagine if dozens of robed and turbaned men carried suitcases and tripods into close proximity to a bridge, dam, chemical plant, or densely populated area. Suppose they spent several hours there, fiddling with strange apparatus onto of tripods, taking measurements, and writing in notebooks or PDAs, while talking on their cell phones. Do you seriously believe that these people should not be scrutinized?

People complain about security measures; later they complain about the lack of security (listen to the Democratic candidates.) I'm not a fan of federalized airport security, expanded government agencies, or secret dealings. But geez, I'm one of those people who actually thinks that do-gooders like Dick Cheney rather be retired and skiing at his Jackson Hole ranch rather than zapping his pacemaker by having to work 15 hours a day with an idiotic congress and a million petty civil servants. It's not like he has to work for a living...

Let me know when the storm troopers knock on your door. Until then, I'm glad they're locking up Yemenis who "vacation" Osama's training camps.

(It's starting to look like the Leica forum – sorry QT.)

[Bob._3483]

"Try photographing in other countries that are threatened by terrorism to see what I mean"

Erm, you mean like the UK since 1979? Shoot away (except outside military establishmets of course) - if some jobsworth in a peaked cap comes out and moans, tell him to smeg off....

I tend to keep out of these discussions as (a) I am not a US citizen so the pain is therefore remote and (b) I have nothing original to contribute....

BTW, I don't know if it made the news in the US, but while people are being held under military detention without trial for over two years and US citizens rights are being trampled on in the name of security, a guy en-route from Washington to Dubai a few days ago was detected and arrested with several live rounds of ammunition in his pocket while changing planes at Heathrow.... <sigh>....

[kallitype]

Frank P., your point is well taken----I apologize for the soapbox rant, and will make no further replies to the off-topic Constitutional issues. I have never been accosted while photographing street scenes on Vashon Island, WA, or in the canyons of Utah, by other than folks wanting to know "what kind of camera is that?" (8x10 view). YMMV!

[Frank Petronio]

Kallitype - thank you. I am concerned about the excesses of the Patriot Act too, and I'm not at all happy with the situation we're in or the way things are headed. Glad that we can discuss it openly while disagreeing on the particulars. The nice thing is the LF Forum discussion thread isn't anything at all like the Leica forum where people would be shouting at each other and calling each other names, without actually thinking. Guess big cameras make people more polite. Thanks QT.