Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I've been arrested twice in three years for photographing cops against their wishes

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:23 AM
Original message
I've been arrested twice in three years for photographing cops against their wishes
The first time was back in 2007 in an incident that was first discussed on DU. That compelled me to start a blog on photographers' rights because photographers getting harassed and arrested for doing something that is protected by the First Amendment is an ongoing issue.

The second time was last year on Miami Beach in a incident I just started publicly talking about because I did not want it to interfere with the probation conviction from the first arrest.

I had been placed on a one-year probation after my first arrest because a biased judge allowed improper evidence during my trial. He allowed the prosecutor to introduce portions of my blog to convince the jury that I hate cops, which is why I got myself arrested, even though that blog did not exist at the time of my arrest.

Because of this, the jury acquitted me of refusing a lawful order and disorderly conduct, but convicted me of resisting arrest without violence. I appealed that conviction pro se (without a lawyer) and won it, which nullified the conviction and my probation, even though I served a year.

This is good because now all I am facing is a resisting arrest charge from my second arrest instead of a probation violation, which would have sent me to jail for a year. All for taking photos of cops in public.

So this is an ongoing battle for me. I not only write about these issues on an almost daily basis on my blog, I am out fighting the battle on the streets. It has cost me thousands in legal fees, way too many hours behind bars and several lost job opportunities because I am considered controversial.

This is why it is so important for me to win the Sun-Sentinel Best Overall Blog contest. I am currently in second place behind a blog about the Miami Dolphins which has a strong and loyal following, so they are constantly voting.

For me, winning the contest is more than the $100 gift certificate at Target. I'm willing to donate that to a poor family.

For me, winning the contest is about further establishing my blog as a legitimate source of information about police abuses. It's about making more people aware of these incidents that occur on a daily basis.

It's about sending a message to police and judges that people are paying attention.

And I really need DU's help in this because this is the only site that has the mass numbers that I need to help me beat that sports blog. And it would be almost like coming full circle considering I first wrote about my first arrest here where it ended up going on Digg with more than 2,400 votes.

To vote, you need to register on the Sun-Sentinel, which takes a couple of minutes. However, once you register, you can vote at least once a day in each category.

This is what I ask of you:

1. Create a free Sun-Sentinel account (requires valid e-mail address). Click here to do that.

2. Click here to vote for Photography is Not a Crime as the Best Overall Blog in South Florida. You can type in "Photography is Not a Crime" into the search box on the screen or just find it in the drag down menu. Then click on "Vote For best overall."

3. Click here and scroll down to the categories of "Art/DIY," "Photography" and "Politics" and click the "vote" link under Photography is Not a Crime (this step is not as important as step 2 if you're in a rush, but it helps).

Remember, you can vote in each category at least once a day until 10 a.m. (eastern time) on March 1st.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. done K&R nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
2. I also like to say that I donated to DU more than 24 hours to reinstate my donor status
But so far it hasn't done it yet.

I'll always be a DUer, even if I stay away and focus on my blog, which is what I've been doing the past three years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. That's weird!
I might drop the Admin a line about the star. Might have been a problem with your transaction because my star has always appeared immediately after a donation.

Congrats on your blog doing so well, Raging! I've been voting right along! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. I just sent a request to ask them to fix that for you
Hopefully that will get cleared up :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
951-Riverside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
3. Stuffing a camera in a police officers face while screaming about your first amendment rights....
Is bound to get a negative reaction and I'm sure you're fully aware of this which is why you keep doing it.


One of the cops told me to keep walking because this was a "private matter".
I said that I will not keep walking because this is a "public street".


You're not an innocent journalist just taking photos you have an axe to grind.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Municipal servants rough people up
and a private citizen on public land takes a photo. And you want to blame the citizen? :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. So I should have just kept walking because the cops told me to?

I never stuck a camera in anybody's face. I shoot from a respectable distance. Getting in their face would be interfering with an investigation, which is illegal.

I stay out of their way to let them do their job, but I expect the same respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
951-Riverside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
44. That was your choice. You could have chose to keep walking and filed a complaint
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 01:42 PM by 951-Riverside
Instead you chose to argue your perceived rights, was arrested, put on trial, was convicted by a jury and placed on probation. Despite all of this you chose to do the same thing all over again.

I assume you argued your 1st amendment rights yet for some reason (that you probably left out of your post) they didn't rule in your favor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #44
59. The conviction was overturned. And thank gawd someone is fighting
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 02:37 PM by EFerrari
for our "perceived" rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #59
214. I agree. What a nation of good little followers we have become. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #44
63. Your reading comprehension is low. In his post, he clearly states his conviction was overturned.
And further, he stated that the judge improperly allowed "evidence" into the case that did not even exist at the time of incident (i.e. blog entries made after the incident occurred).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #63
73. The really creepy thing that I read about the first case
was the judge saying that he showed a shocking lack of remorse -- for what amounts to being beat up while doing his job!

That was unreal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #44
97. Your agenda is showing...once again.
And your reading comprehension is nil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #44
108. "You could have ... filed a complaint"
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Why didn't the Freedom Riders, Vietnam Protesters, Suffragists, and Abolitionists think of that?

I mean nothing gets more action than "filing a complaint." That's why we have complaint boxes.

--imm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moochy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #108
124. complaint boxes..
complaint boxes are to complaints as

free speech zones are to free speech.

:+
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #108
217. Thanks. What a damned country of wimps and go alongs we have become
It's disgusting to think what some went through in many conflicts to gain and protect the rights of all and see today's average American ready to negotiate away those rights or turn a blind eye to the violations of them. Anything to avoid getting off the couch, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #108
243. When you have cops investigating cops
The complainant is the one who becomes the suspect, not the cop
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #108
285. .
:applause:

Excellent!

I wonder if we will ever again be a nation of Freedom Riders, Vietnam Protesters, Suffragists, and Abolitionists?

Affluency has weakened us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #44
136. Yes you chose to behave like a person that actually had any rights!
Damn it..when will you learn that a good citizen is a good slave and just obey? :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #44
168. Can't uyou read or are you so biased against the guy that you choose not to do so?
The CONVICTION WAS OVERTURNED. He isn't guilt of anything except expressing his rights as a citzen. Would you run along if told to by cops who are beating the hell out of one of your fellow citizens?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #44
182. Perceived rights? They're real rights, and they were abridged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #44
241. Did you not read the part where the judge allowed improper evidence?
So no, I did not leave that part out of my post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #3
11. So did the people who photographed this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #11
25. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
104. bingo!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #11
213. What a story that photo tells...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:22 PM
Original message
Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
951-Riverside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
37. Loitering, disorderly conduct, interfering with a peace officer, disturbing the peace...
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 01:31 PM by 951-Riverside
Obstructing a peace officer, interfering with an investigation, etc are all crimes. Of course the OP failed to detail the specifics of the charges he faced or if he had prior convictions for similar conduct.

In the first instance the OP could have simply walked away and filed a complaint against the officers instead he chose to do otherwise and by his own admission convicted and placed on probation. I hope any media agency that decides to pick up this story do a little research before jumping on this story.

I had been placed on a one-year probation after my first arrest because a biased judge allowed improper evidence during my trial. He allowed the prosecutor to introduce portions of my blog to convince the jury that I hate cops, which is why I got myself arrested, even though that blog did not exist at the time of my arrest.


I'd love to learn about which part of the blog they cited in their case also the OP's blog is publicly accessible, not sure why he would think that couldn't be used as evidence. In any case overly aggressive photographers (and there are 3 or 4 in every major city) make it increasingly difficult for professional photographers who don't have an axe to grind to make a decent living.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #37
52. Except none of that happened. He wasn't interfering with that crime scene
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 02:34 PM by EFerrari
And there's photographic evidence to prove it.

Do you have a job? How long would you keep it if you just were told to walk away from it?

Your smearing of this poster shows you're not familiar with this case, with him or with the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
951-Riverside Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #52
96. Re: "He wasn't interfering with that crime scene"
I never said it was a crime scene.

Do you have a job? How long would you keep it if you just were told to walk away from it?


Employers tend to have a problem with their employees engaging in conduct that ends up getting them arrested and convicted so I wouldn't expect to have a job for long if the circumstances were the same plus each day in jail = lost revenue. Of course I have no idea what his employment status is nor do I really care.

you're not familiar with this case


You're right. I would love to have a copy of the court documents and police reports instead of just going by his version of events but that will never happen.

Google: Nicole White TSA
http://www.eyeonannapolis.net/2009/10/17/tsa-blogger-go... /


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #96
98. The docs are posted to the blog. Edit:
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 04:08 PM by EFerrari
And this is what the SPJ says in case you are remotely interested:

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=016561358561312553625%3Ajr...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cartach Donating Member (361 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #52
158. Because he's an obvious nut case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #158
230. It must be terrible to channel J. Edgar Hoover.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #158
244. And your obviously an UnAmerican that hates civil rights...
Go live in communist china if you want to live like a damned dog of a slave.
We are Americans damn it...and we are NOT going to take this shit any longer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #37
138. It is NOT a crime to stand around and take a few pictures...
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 10:50 PM by winyanstaz
It is not "loitering" to be walking around in a public space unless you have been there for a long time. The public has a right to be in a public space.

The police have NO right to order a citizen out of a public space unless they are breaking a law. They are NOT your Masters so get up off your knees.

It is also not a "crime" to hate a cop...nor is it a "crime" worthy of a years probation for heaven's sake.
If you think so...show me the law.

Where was he interfering in anything? That is something I believe you just pulled out of your hat.

It is not "obstructing" a police officer to take their picture either.

Its news....its a paid public servant being photographed by his boss for heaven's sake. The servants are NOT the boss you kowtowing wimp. So now the taking of photos of possible news or public servants is a CRIME??

Things written in anger about an unjust arrest AFTER THE FACT is not "evidence". It is an opinion which was written after the fact and not admissible as evidence of the person's thoughts at the time of arrest.

Thought crimes are not on the books yet dang it.... And again..its NOT A CRIME TO HATE A COP.

What the !@##$%# is the matter with you people???...You are nothing but a yellow belly coward if you are not OUTRAGED at the loss of civil liberties and the way the police and the courts are acting anymore.

You are brain-washed sheeple to allow this to continue and to justify it is beneath contempt.......and unworthy of freedom.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 05:40 AM
Response to Reply #138
164. love your rant
and incidentally i agree wholeheartedly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #138
193. well said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #138
216. +1
"Please may I exercise my civil rights, Mr. Police Officer?" is no way to run a free country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #138
220.  " to justify it is beneath contempt.......and unworthy of freedom."
Right on! What the hell is wrong with us, these days? Your post is excellent!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:24 AM
Response to Reply #37
169. I think you are posting on the wrong board if this reflects your convictions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #37
200. "loitering." Heard that a lot as a kid (Pre-'64 Civil Rights Act).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Macoy Donating Member (102 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #37
294. Wow
Wow, attacking some one for documenting what the authorities are doing on a public street. Whats that phrase the cons use?? If you are doing nothing wrong, you should have nothing to hide I think documenting what the police are doing is a great thing.

Seems to me that the good police would want their actions publicized, if only to counter all the cop bashing. Of course, bad cops dont want the publicity.


Macoy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
51. Except that didn't happen. No camera was stuffed in anyone's face.
And journalism isn't on trial here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
91. And precisely how far away should one be from an LEO
"Stuffing a camera in a police officers...."

And precisely how far away should one be from an LEO whilst holding a camera to not have it considered "stuffing?" What is that answer based on?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #3
112. -1,000,000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nyc 4 Biden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #3
118. - 1 million
guess u've never been beaten up by a cop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
citizen snips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
120. It's not innocent journalism
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 08:54 PM by citizen snips
It's just amateur muckraking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
140. Spoken like a real German resident, ca. 1935.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #3
144. What you post is utter crap.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 11:51 PM by Hissyspit
Sorry. It is.

I worked as a professional journalist and photographer for several years.

http://www.andrewkantor.com/useful/Legal-Rights-of-Phot...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unapatriciated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #144
273. Just read the first part of your link and damn, we broke the law last May in NY
My dad is a retired bridge builder (west coast). We took many pics of different bridges while we were in NY. We made a nice gift for him using those pics.
The things you learn on DU :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #3
181. There are no laws against photography on a public street
Arresting somebody for participating in a legal activity on a public street is an egregious abuse of power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
190. wow...
You really have already decided percisely what the scene looked like. Complete with stupid action movie impression of a journalist/activist as being an instigator. Nice how you take the word of cops who you never met and whose side of the story you haven't even heard.

I suppose the first amendment is kind of irritating and why should police ever have to bear the burden of public scrutiny?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
201. And what is your axe to grind?
IMO the police have gotten too pushy. They manhandle people, taser people, shoot people, and even kill people without much oversight. There is a very fine line here and we all should make sure they stay on the proper side of the line. It's bad enough that our government is borderline fascist without letting the police rough people up with impunity.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
215. We all should have an ax to grind with law enforcement arresting people engaged in perfectly legal
activities which are protected in the bill of rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugabear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #3
247. "Stuffing a camera in a police officer's face" - it's easy to see which side you support
Take a look at this photo, and tell me where the "stuffing a camera in a police officer's face" comes in.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
256. Nice post, Judge Fernandez. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
4. Legally you are supposed to ask permission before you photograph
anyone in public or at the very least inform them that you took a picture and then ask them permission to use it publicly. I know it's hardly ever done, but it has something to do with right to privacy laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. You're absolutely wrong
Maybe in some other country, but not the U.S.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
139. You are correct...
It is polite to ask..but it is NOT the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. This is why my blog is important
Too many people are uninformed about these laws
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #4
17. That's true of private citizens, but not public officials doing their jobs
Or public personas, i.e. celebs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. It's not even true of private citizens
Although I personally do ask permission unless they are doing something outrageous or just drawing attention to themselves.

But legally speaking, nobody has an expectation of privacy if they are out in public.

If I can see you, I can photograph you.

If you are in a dressing room or a public bathroom, the rules change, of course, because you have an expectation of privacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #18
43. See my post #40 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
19. "Legally" can you cite an actual law? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #19
40. Right here.
http://communications-media.lawyers.com/privacy-law/Pho...

Photography or Video Taping Consent
Text Size:


Lawyers.comsm

People take their cameras with them to many different places and photograph or videotape lots of people doing different things. Depending on what you videotaped or photographed and where you used your camera, you just might expose yourself to a lawsuit unless you got consent from the people that you taped or photographed.

You can't help but videotape or photograph other people when you take your camera and go out to a crowded place or out by yourself and shoot photographs or movies of some scene that interests you. Be careful, if you intend to sell the videotape to a local television news company or publish it in the local paper. If someone is featured in that shot or footage, that person just might sue you for invasion of privacy unless you obtained their consent.

More at link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #40
47. Fail. You cited no law. You are conflating possible civil tort with criminal
liability. Civil tort simply does not apply to what the OP is facing.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Whatever.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 02:27 PM by Cleita
See what you want to see, even though it's in your face. I suppose you didn't get to this part.

Generally, it is perfectly legal to videotape or photograph any person and anything while on public property, except:

You cannot take pictures of areas that are usually considered private such as bedrooms, bathrooms, changing rooms, locker rooms, hotel rooms and so on
Certain public places have banned the use of cameras such as mass transit systems, courthouses, capital buildings, secured government buildings, jails or prisons unless you obtain written permission
You cannot film or photograph if it interferes with police, fire, medical or emergency operations
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #48
62. What the OP was doing does not interfere with the officer's jobs
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 02:42 PM by Bjorn Against
It is perfectly legal to take pictures of the police unless it is in direct interference with them, in other words you can't go stand next to an injured person and start taking pictures of them if you are getting in the way of the police or medical teams that are trying to help them. As long as you keep your distance and don't stand directly in the way of the police as they work it is not legally considered to be interfering with a police officer to take their picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #48
65. "if it interferes" photographing from distance DOES NOT INTERFERE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #48
66. MAJOR caveat you miseed: "...interferes..."
If I'm across the street filming the police doing something, then how could the police say I'm interferring unless I am within physical reach of them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #66
70. Haha, you haven't been around police action much have you?
They can say you interfered until a judge and jury says you didn't. In the meantime enjoy your trip to jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #70
72. Actually, I have. I was a rescue volunteer with the Red Cross following Katrina.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 02:52 PM by Selatius
Saw a lot of shit go down that didn't need to go down. Lots of people were arrested in those days, and a lot of them were released without charges, which tended to lead to a lot of lawsuits against the police, especially those cases the NAACP and ACLU and NLG got behind.

But then again, it's irrelevant to whether or not there was police interference. As a public servant in a public setting, the police officer has no real claim to privacy in regards to stopping journalists or anybody else from filming them while on duty in public, especially since nearly all police forces now use dash cameras to film their actions in regards to motorists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #72
75. So you see how one act leads to another that leads to a lawsuit.
There are laws that protect people's privacy. Now in a public disaster, sure everyone is going to be out there taking video and film and it will all be sorted out by our courts in the end, but to claim that you have any right to photograph anyone, anywhere in public without possible consequences is disingenuous. I have taken pictures at protests in the past, but I always have asked permission first. Many people have thanked me and allowed me to photograph their signs while they hid their faces behind them. Many have said no so I don't take a picture. With everyone running around with cell phones today taking picture of everything that happens we are facing major violations of our privacy to even go shopping for eggs.

I would also resent anyone coming into my workplace taking pictures of me at work without my consent. I believe the police and firemen feel the same way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #75
79. I never claimed photography of the police entailed absolutely no consequences.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 03:12 PM by Selatius
Even in my posts on this thread, I've already mentioned that people have been falsely arrested. My issue is whether the arrest and possible charges resulting from the arrest are just or are just trumped up. If we assume that the person is speaking the truth, then the charges against him were false, since they were overturned.

But again, I reiterate that as a public servant operating in a public setting, the officer has no real legitimate claim to stop photographers or journalists or anybody else out in public from filming them, and if the officer feels resent, then that's really too bad, unless, as your paralegal citation shows, the journalist is interfering with the police officer's duties. Feeling resent is no excuse to breaking the law by abusing police powers.

Furthermore, if the police officer does break the law and files false charges against an innocent person, not only could he face consequences from internal affairs up to and including termination, he could also face an expensive civil lawsuit from groups fighting for civil rights from the NAACP to the ACLU and more.

Legally speaking, you need no permission to film a public servant such as a police officer on duty in the public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #79
81. I'm not dissing RIM for his activism or even his moral righteousness in doing
so. All I'm saying is that there are laws out there and many of them are admittedly fuzzy. He is putting himself into a position of possibly being arrested no matter how wrong it may be from an ethical point of view. Cindy Sheehan got arrested for wearing a T-shirt and many other times for her activism. Dr. Flowers got arrested by Senator Max Baucus for asking to be able to speak in front of his committee for single payer health care. I even put up a post about it and how outrageous I thought it was, yet many DUers agreed with the Senator. Eventually, I'm sure the court system will judge him as guilty or not guilty. But if he really feels strongly about this issue and keeps doing it, he can expect to keep being arrested until he gets enough people and public officials outraged about it to do something about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #81
84. The point is legally you don't need permission to film police in public.
That's been established precedent for a long time now. Only if you interfere is there grounds for arrest, but aside from that, no, he didn't need any permission to film the police. Given that the charges were overturn at trial, I think it's safe to assume that the charges were false. He wasn't filming anybody else. He wasn't filming a private citizen, nor was he doing anything like crashing a congressional committee hearing. He wasn't doing any of that, and none of that is relevant as a result.

All he was doing was filming on the street a public servant, a police officer. That's not illegal, and the courts affirmed it when it overturned the charges on appeal. That's the point I'm trying to drive home, and ultimately, I'm responding to your original post, the post that started this subthread and several others that he needed permission to film, and legally he didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #84
86. See, "the courts affirmed it when it overturned the charges on appeal" just
what I have been saying if he's not at fault. But the fact is he had to do that whole jail thing. Police don't arrest arbitrarily unless they think they can make it stick, so there is a basis there of law that they were basing his arrest on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #86
89. But that's still beside the point. You still don't need legal permission to film them in public. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #86
90. So, you finally admit that there is NO LAW?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #90
147. ... and it only to like 10 posts to do so.
yay!

Some posters in this site seem to be unable to wrap their heads around the concept of due process, and why that is supremely important for any functioning free society. After all, the police and the power brokers have never ever done anything wrong, ever... thus their actions are what they are because they are, and otherwise they wouldn't be so... and that is that ergo they are justified and always correct.

Good Americans, indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #86
101. Police arrest arbitrarily all the time
Because most people don't bother fighting the charges in court
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCappedBandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #86
115. "Police don't arrest arbitrarily unless they think they can make it stick"
Is that a joke?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HillbillyBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #115
137. Its not a joke in Miami!
They will arrest you for lookin stoopid.
Just maybe it depends on mrs cops attitude when mr cops went to work in the am.

I left after my experience there..and I lived there for a couple years. I moved bat to FtLaud where actin stoopid was normal..

then when the stoopids elected Naugle (and some job downsizing etc) we moved to Mayberry NC..Haven't seen anyone arrested here unless they were doing something outright unlawful..as in I have not seen anyone arrested here at all..maybe it is that folks and police are more law abiding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:07 AM
Response to Reply #115
167. Must be
There has of course never been a case of someone been arrested for doing something the cop(s) just did not like them doing, wihtout there being a legal support for the arrest. Not ever. Has never, ever happened.

(Is this where I put a sarcasm smiley?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #115
196. Clearly the poster had never been to a protest.
People there are arrested frequently and released without charges shortly afterwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TiredTexan Donating Member (489 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #86
130. Are you a lawyer?
Doesn't sound like it. I am, and you are dead wrong. You cannot use someone's likeness for commercial purposes without permission. Commercial purposes does not include any use by the press. Commercial purposes does include using someone's likeness for advertising. Moreover, even if you do use someone's likeness without permission and for a commercial purpose, it is not a crime. That person can sue you for the money you made from the transaction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #86
170. Like trumped up charges claiming he was interfering with them beating up some citizen?
There are far too many cases of the police engaging in unlawful actions to be coming to their defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CLANG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #86
179. That is the root of your misconceptions...
Police arrest people all the time with no real cause other than the wish to harass and punish those they don't like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unapatriciated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #86
274. Your joking right?
I lived in a small town during the grocery strike of 2003
The police openly took the side of our manager (who was also a couch for the local football team).
We were harassed endlessly, for walking a legal picket line.
Our manager even tried to put out a restraining order against hubby and myself (for legal picket line activities).
Which would mean we couldn't man our line.
He lost in court but that didn't stop the local cops from harassing us daily, asking for our id's, running them and threatening us with arrest if we didn't comply. This was a very small town and I had checked their groceries many times over a period of five years. I was on a first name basis with most of them so they knew who we were and had no need to constantly ask for our ID's. For them to ask for my id on a daily basis was intimidation and harassment. We filed a complaint, all that accomplished was an increase in their harassment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #81
189. The laws are not fuzzy at all
In public, you can take photographs, it's that fucking simple.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #70
78. I see you completely abandoned your legal argument
While the police can say anything that does not make it a legal argument that will hold up in court, and if they arrest someone for merely taking a picture they can be sued for a lot of money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #78
82. Cleita's argument never existed. You don't need permission to film police in public nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #78
83. Or a judge can throw out any charges for false arrest or whatever they do.
The fact is that there is an issue here that makes photographing people without their permission different than walking on the sidewalk in front of their house. If you step on their property then you might be guilty of trespassing. There is a difference that turns it into a legal matter no matter how fuzzy it may seem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #83
85. There's nothing 'fuzzy' about it. It is clear cut. The only thing confusing about this
is left wing support for authoritarianism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #85
87. Well, if we didn't support the rule of law then we'd be libertarians and
worshipping on the altar of Ayn Rand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #87
88. So why don't you support the rule of law? Why do you hate our rights?
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 03:28 PM by Edweird
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #88
93. I do support the rule of law, however, laws vary by municipalities and yours
seems to be about Oregon. What problem do you guys have with asking people if you can take pictures? I do it all the time. I'm trying to document some problems in my area about poverty and homelessness, but I always ask first. If you feel that you want to risk filming police and other officials or maybe not official like gang bangers because you are a good citizen, by all means, follow your conscience but be prepared for the consequences if things don't go so well. I mean how many photojournalists have been killed documenting revolutions and such not to mention being thrown into jails and beaten and tortured. They are heroes but they are well aware of the fact they are going into the jaws of the shark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #93
94. The law is the law. You are on the side of rights violations by authoritarians, not the law.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 03:38 PM by Edweird
Educate yourself.

The Constitution does not vary by municipality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TiredTexan Donating Member (489 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #93
132. Laws about photographing someone in public don't change
by jurisdiction within the US. You are wrong. There are civil suits brought for using someone's likeness for commercial gain, but no criminal statutes due to the First Amendment. Reporters are protected in every jurisdiction here by the First Amendment. However, if a reporter took a picture and used it to sell a product without permission, then he could be sued for the money he gained from the transaction unless he obtained permission from the person. Such permission never has to be obtained by the press for photos taken in public and used in reporting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #93
149. You are aware that we live in a constituional democratic republican federation. Right?
Edited on Fri Feb-26-10 01:11 AM by liberation
I am just checking, because reading your posts tends to point to the contrary. The constitution applies to every single inch of our country... except maybe for whatever area the tertiary syphilis ridden body of Dick Cheney happens to hoover over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:49 AM
Response to Reply #93
171. By your reasoning citizens shouldn't demand their rights if the cops intimidate them?
If my recall of history is correct this is how the Brown Shirts brought Hitler to power. But, after he came to power he so feared these ruthless thugs that he had them massacred.

Anyone who is given authority over their fellow citizens must be subject to intense evaluation to assure that they are not abusing their authority. Sadly, we have far too many police who are guilty of abuse and far too many citizens that condone it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCappedBandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #87
110. Supporting illegal abuse of power, clearly, is not supporting the rule of law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #87
218. The rule of WHICH law, in this case? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCappedBandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #70
109. Police can say and do lots of things
They routinely abuse their power, and get away with it just as often.
That doesn't make it right, legal, OR acceptable.

That is why what the OP does is courageous AND crucial.

As for the legality of his actions, there is no question. You've shown that you were wrong and only keep digging the whole deeper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HillbillyBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #109
133. That's the truth
Ever live in Miami?
Bang Bang your daid stop Miami Police!!!

I was arrested when a guy broke into my apt and clobbered me with a skillet off my stove the called the Miami Police and told them I tried to kill him....

He was a former druggie roomie (not on the lease) whom I had put out for slugging me and robbing me(i reported it, they never bothered to show up) .

They stormed the apartment. While I was on the floor having a nice grandmal seizure, they clubbed me, pepper sprayed me and charged me with resisting arrest with violence then threw my ass in the county lock up for 8 months.
I was charged with a felony resisting arrest with violence. While the intruder was out the next day..lived in my apartment wrecked my car.....

I now have a felony on my record. When I went before the judge the dick pubic att pleaded nolo contendre. When I said I had something to say I was told to shut the fuck up. Then given 12 mos probation...

go Ragin in Miami ..don't get dead, you need to expose these pos for the criminals they are.

My partner and I went to Vt to get married, due to a small legal problem we did not.
We decided to go to Montreal on a whim..we got stopped at the border and all that felony bullshit came up and we were turned back..but only after 'questioning'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueamy66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 02:48 AM
Response to Reply #133
156. Absolute bullshit
and I won't be able to sleep tonight...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Incitatus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #70
127. You are right .They can say that and send an innocent person to jail.
I'm glad we have people in this country who stand up against this bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #70
188. So many fascists here at topix
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #70
222. Enjoy your stay in the police state!
I think the 'interference' LEO's are worried about these days is the 'interference' with their abusive tactics towards citizens which have been captured on videos and in photographs and nailing them on their illegal uses of force and harassment of people. Easy to see why law enforcement calls it 'interference.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #48
105. Again, I ask you to cite a law. Not the Intertubes. You offered a legal
opinion, kindly support it with something of substance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #48
187. Note the key word in your highlighted sentence: Interferes
Photographing in public, from outside of the line set up by the police is not interfering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #40
77. That's about publishing, not the right to photograph. This is mis-information.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 03:10 PM by Edweird
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #40
186. From your own source:
Generally, it is perfectly legal to videotape or photograph any person and anything while on public property, except:

You cannot take pictures of areas that are usually considered private such as bedrooms, bathrooms, changing rooms, locker rooms, hotel rooms and so on
Certain public places have banned the use of cameras such as mass transit systems, courthouses, capital buildings, secured government buildings, jails or prisons unless you obtain written permission
You cannot film or photograph if it interferes with police, fire, medical or emergency operations
There are also restrictions on videotaping and photographing on private property:

If the private property is open to the public, such as retail stores, private stadiums or tourist areas, filming may be allowed unless there are signs posted that expressly forbid videotaping or photography
If the private property belongs to someone other than a commercial business, you had better get the property owner's permission
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ManiacJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #40
227. Taking the picture vs publishing the picture.
Two very different acts with two different sets of laws governing them. The act of taking the picture has almost no restrictions. Publishing them has many restrictions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cetacea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 03:10 AM
Response to Reply #227
292. You can publish it if it is editorial, just not commercial
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
34. If that is true can I sue all the people who put surveillance cameras around the city?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. See my post #40 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #41
49. The key words are right here...
"Depending on what you videotaped or photographed and where you used your camera"

Yes, you need to be careful about photographing in private settings, but you can photograph to your heart's content in public areas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #49
53. Not really.
Read my post #48.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #53
67. Reread post number 48. You're missing something. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #53
68. Yeah, really. You are spreading a lot of mis-information.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 02:48 PM by Edweird
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:48 PM
Original message
Me? I'm only linking to a legal website. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
74. Yes you. You are posting false information, and using unrelated text as 'proof'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
76. Permissible Subjects
Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary,
the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully
from public places:
accident and fire scenes
children
celebrities
bridges and other infrastructure
residential and commercial buildings
industrial facilities and public utilities
transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
Superfund sites
criminal activities
law enforcement officers

http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Edweird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
92. "Members of the public have a very limited scope of privacy rights "
Members of the public have a very
limited scope of privacy rights when
they are in public places. Basically,
anyone can be photographed without
their consent except when they have
secluded themselves in places where
they have a reasonable expectation of
privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms,
medical facilities, and inside
their homes.

http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downtown Hound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
126. You are absolutely completely without a doubt 100% wrong
If you are out in public, then you are subject to having your picture taken and there's nothing you can do about it. Look up the law for yourself. This is an area that has been argued by the courts incessantly and they have always ruled this way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
143. Wrong.
Not when you are witnessing the public's business (law enforcement) being attended to. That rule is only for private individuals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:55 AM
Response to Reply #143
172. You are dead wrong and post the law that makes it illegal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
145. Nope.
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 11:50 PM by Hissyspit
http://www.andrewkantor.com/useful/Legal-Rights-of-Phot...

Legal Rights of Photographers
Version 2.01 May 2009
By Andrew Kantor andrew@kantor.com

Even before 9/11, photography had been under siege. Anyone with a camera
larger than a cell phone was considered some sort of threat, and since 9/11 its
only gotten worse.

Theres an incredible amount of misinformation about what rights photographers
in the United States have. People have written to me about how they were told,
You cant take pictures of police, and You cant shoot children without their
parents permission and You cant take pictures on private property without
permission.

None of these are true.

Photographers have been harassed, threatened, and killed all for capturing a
moment on a memory card or on film. Images have been deleted or confiscated,
police have been called, and innocent people have had to deal with know-nothing

- snip -

A school field trip. Do I even know
all these kids? Nope. But I dont
need permission to publish this.
If you can see it, you can shoot it.

You can legally take pictures of anything that is visible to the general public (without special equipment
e.g., a telephoto lens), whether it or you are on public or private property.

That means you can legally take pictures of children, athletes, people on the street, beach bathers,
buildings, cars, policemen, accident scenes, government officials, airplanes, airports, trains, and so on.
You can legally take pictures when you are on private property, if that property is open to the public
(e.g., a mall or office complex).

Perhaps a better phrase is: If anyone can see it, you can shoot it.
You do not need permission to take pictures. The answer to the
question, What law says you can take that picture? is Youve got it
backwards. What law says I cant?

All that said, there are two important caveats.

1. While there are few exceptions to what you can photograph,
there are exceptions to what you can publish. (More on that in
a moment.)

2. Although it is legal to take pictures while on private property,
you could still be guilty of trespassing if the owner of that
property tells you not to, or if he demands that you leave.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #4
154. Public servents, performing their duties, in public...
Edited on Fri Feb-26-10 01:57 AM by PavePusher
have NO legal expectation of privacy.

How can you possibly think anything else, and claim to support liberty, freedom and/or transparent government?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:03 AM
Response to Reply #4
166. Only need approval for commercial use - not the act of photographing in public
And news reporting has its own exceptions on top of that.

You don't need permission to photograph anyone in public space - and that goes for most western countries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #4
183. No permission is needed to photography anybody, or anything in public
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
279. not true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
10. Done. Just hope I don't get email from the paper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GReedDiamond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
13. Just voted for your blog...
...and I'll go back tomorrow and do it again.

Good luck, I hope you win it (and your court case).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
14. Cops don't like being photographed when they're committing crimes... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
27. And there's the REAL, true reason they're against filming
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #27
224. It is absolutely the reason they are against it.
How many have been nailed for their illegal crap in recent years cause someone had a video camera nearby?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
35. Life was so much easier when they could just get 2-3 buddies to lie for them.
Now they have to stop the cameraman, arrest him, forcibly take his camera, make a hamfisted attempt at deleting the incriminating photos, etc.

Poor guys!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattvermont Donating Member (428 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
15. It really doesn't matter
what the motive is. It is a noble act to remind law enforcement that they are public servants
I, for one, applaud what you are doing, even if it pisses off cops.
It may be appropriate to ask a victim of the cops actions if you can photograph, but
the cops should have no say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
16. Done! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ceile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
20. Done
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TuxedoKat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
21. Done
and good luck. I'll try and remember to vote every day. Please be careful though! You are brave to do this, but don't want you to get hurt. Some of those cops can be very vindictive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fast Walker Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
22. It is a slippery slope.
Law enforcement must be able to do their jobs unfettered by the general public. But I am also against banning of photography in public. As long as the police officers grant permission for their images to be taken I see no problem with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cal Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Why should the officers need to grant permission?
How does taking pictures from a reasonable distance interfere with their activity?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
36. Last time we allowed police to do their jobs unfettered by the general public ...
... we ended up with a death row full of innocent men.

Google "Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge" once.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #22
64. It's actually not a slippery slope. The law is clear about what
can be photographed and where and Carlos was yards away from these officers, interfering not at all with their work.

The real slippery slope that I see on this thread is paved with assumptions that Authority is always right -- without any resort at all to the facts of the case or to the law that protects our civil rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:04 AM
Response to Reply #64
175. The slippery slope is the cops abuse of their authority.
If the police are acting properly then they should welcome that their protection of citizens is being photographed.

What possible objection could they have about it being made public? Their only cause for objection would be that they don't want their abusive behavior made public.

Anyone that would attempt to argue that the police should be exempt from being observed and photographically recorded are living in the wrong country. I would suggest China would be a better choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #175
229. Well said. Yes, that is the larger danger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCappedBandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #22
100. "Law enforcement must be able to do their jobs unfettered by the general public"
Of course, if they're actually doing their jobs properly, there would be no reason to photograph them, nor would there be cause for concern on their part by being photographed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #22
151. Wow, so our constitution is a "slippery slope" now?
Edited on Fri Feb-26-10 01:16 AM by liberation
... I also do not know if you are trying to equate "unfettered" with "without scrutiny"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #22
177. Idiot..
... sure, police officers committing the crime of official oppression are going to consent to being photographed.

God what is WRONG with you dumbasses?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #22
235. Does it also "beg the question?"
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #22
236. Should the videographer in the Rodney King incident have asked permission?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #22
270. I don't need a cop's permission to exercise my constitutional rights.
Fuck that noise.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #22
280.  must be able to do their jobs unfettered by the general public
oh really? And if their job happens to be violating the rights of the general public? But I digress, how exactly does recording what the police are doing 'fetter' them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
23. That guy "Johnny Law" who comments to your blog is an idiot
And he's a cop too? I don't know what to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
26. Recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
28. k and r--bookmarking so I can do this when I get back from the ICU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Feel Better!! Love and smooches!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #28
58. niyad! Please check in when you can.
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
29. funny, I've been photographed many, many times by them
at peace demonstrations, all the way back to the days of the Vietnam war.
It's always a one way street.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
31. Thank you for standing up for the rights of all of us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
32. hey! long time no see!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
33. Police are only against filming because it documents when they break the law
Every single police officer should wear a helmet camera, a handgun camera, a 360 car mounted camera, and a backup chest mounted camera. They should be responsible for making sure everything gets filmed.

If they are caught turning the camera off(other than for bathroom) they should be fired on the spot. If there is a cases against them and they didn't document the incident there should be a 100% assumption of police guilt.

There is no reason outside criminal intentions to oppose police cameras.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jkid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #33
99. I like your idea!
Too bad it's a bit impractical. How it would be implemented though?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Grand Taurean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #33
123. We have the technology for this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #33
225. What if the story they tell in the police report doesn't match the one told
by the camera. Suppose that the system has x amount of days before they tape over it, and you or your attorney don't get access to it.... Wouldn't most people believe that to be obstructing justice? Not sure but just another case of not wanting a filming to be viewed...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #225
233. Then it would be obvious the police were lying
If they destroy the tape for any reason it should be criminal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leftist Agitator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
38. You're at #1overall right now, Carlos!
Here's hoping that you stay there until Monday!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueamy66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
42. done
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Michigan-Arizona Donating Member (516 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
45. Done! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
46. I don't want someone following me around with a camera in my face - thats harassment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #46
54. That would be harrassment. And it has nothing to do with this case.
Geeze, did you even bother to go look at the blog, the pictures, anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demmiblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. Some people watch too much TMZ.
:shrug:

Seriously, I remember when RIM posted this (before I was an official DUer)... chilling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. I remember, too. And remember being grateful he wasn't tazed.
The Society of Professional Journalists, unlike some posters to this thread, have been squarely behind him at every point. That should say SOMETHING about this case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #46
69. Then you shouldn't become a police officer, who is a public servant. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
50. Go, Carlos.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rcrush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
55. These cops don't like it either
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #55
165. OMG the last one. The girl at Wendys!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
56. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
61. done again. . n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #61
71. He's looking good, anna!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue-Jay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
80. The cops in Chicago don't mind a few pics.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jokinomx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
95. Done... Good Luck... from a fellow photographer....
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
102. Kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eomer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
103. Done (by a fellow Miamian)
Thanks for taking a stand on such an important issue!

I'll try to vote each day.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
106. kICK
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCappedBandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
107. Done and Done. K&R. And a thank you
It's funny that the pro-police-brutality crowd can not establish an argument without blatantly misrepresenting the actual scenarios.


"Shoving your camera in someone's face is harassment! What do you expect!"

Yeah? And when the hell was the OP shoving his camera in someones face? Taking pictures at a respectful distance while consciously avoiding getting in the way is not harassment.

"They told you to keep moving! You disobeyed!"

Police do not have the right to tell you to do random things just because they feel like it.

Let's say I was in the gym and a cop saw me doing an exercise in a way he was unfamiliar with. Does he have the right to command me to do the exercise differently? Would I deserve to be assaulted if I didn't listen?

Personally, I'm glad we have brave journalists like the OP. I have to assume that the posters telling him to just walk away and report it later simply don't understand the importance of quality journalism in a free society.


And as for "asking for their permission"? What a friggin' joke. If they were doing something that they wouldn't mind being photographed, would it even requite outside documentation?
Wake up people. Ask yourself: what reason would a cop have for doing everything in his power (and more) to prevent his/her actions from being recorded?
Uhhh.. HELLO!!! It's because they're doing something WRONG.

Sheesh.



Seriously OP, I commend your bravery and thank you for this service that you do for all of us. Photo-journalism has always had tremendous appeal to me.. if I had actually chosen to pursue it as a career, I like to think I would be as strong as you are to do what you do.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
:hi: :yourock:

B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CLANG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
111. Done. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warm regards Donating Member (350 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
113. Why not just take their pictures discretely?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #113
211. Why? If they aren't doing anything wrong, and they aren't being
interfered with, why should they care?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #113
228. Well maybe I would
If it were actually against the law
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
114. DONE!
Thank you! Your daily vote for "Photography is Not a Crime" has been entered in the best overall category.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
116. I have the BOB awards bookmarked and will vote each day!
You deserve it! n standing up for your rights, you were also standing up for everyone's rights!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nyc 4 Biden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
117. Done. Good Luck Rage!
I will vote as much as I can. Keep up the good fight!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
119. three strikes and you're out.
maybe they'll let you take pictures of the other lifers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #119
121. The conviction was OVERTURNED. But 'way to support this DUer!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #121
208. way to recognize sarcasm...
you're not very...bright, are you...?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #119
128. That was a really ignorant reply.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #128
207. not half as ignorant as someone who can't recognize sarcasm.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #119
148. One conviction was overturned
And the other has yet to go to trial.

But if you really think someone deserves life in prison for taking photos, then get the fuck out of my country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #148
153. ... you are actually rocking the boat and doing something
some posters in this site, who love to play pretend and mentally masturbate about issues, may feel a tad uneasy with someone who is more "hands-on." Plus, blaming the victim is much easier and much quicker. Because, you know... if people start to actually stand for something, they too may be forced to stand for something or put their money where their mouth is. And well, that is just not that much fun, is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #148
209. your country...?
i always wondered who held the mortgage. :eyes:

now learn to recognize sarcasm, or get the fuck out of my galaxy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #209
238. Get the fuck out of my universe
Just kidding. Seriously, I didn't see the sarcasm.

Sometimes it's hard to pick it up on the internet if you are not familiar with the person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Grand Taurean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
122. K AND R! Your are the hero. The cops in the photos are COWARDS
and we would be better off without them on the streets!
Quote that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Incitatus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
125. With the amount of police brutality taped in recent years, it's no wonder cops hate being filmed.
It doesn't interfere with them doing their jobs. It interferes with them doing their jobs the way they want to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dystopian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
129. KandR. Done.
peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CLANG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
131. You're No. 1 - Yeahah!


1. Photography is Not a Crime
2. The Phinsider
3. Dos Beer-igos
4. Your Daily Cute
5. Florida Keys Girl
6. Midtown Chica
7. GrillGrrrl - Adventures of a Girl on the Grill
8. Abigail...a collection of poetry
9. Worstpizza.com
10. Mike Loves Beer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
134. Done, done & done! Good luck!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
135. This has gotten so out of hand....the cops and the justice system are broken...
To be "convicted for "non-violently" resisting arrest ....what the hell does that mean? You were not sub-servant enough?
Arrested for taking a photo in a public place of a public servant? Bull crappy! We are NOT slaves.
That is unconstitutional...there is a right to take photos or to even talk to a cop if you want to.

Why are we putting up with this crap?

Where are the young people out there protesting? Does your grandma have more balls than you do?

Who is going to fight for the civil rights of Americans? Sure isnt the courts anymore.

Insanity has run amok and is in public office. Frickin fascists! It is not coming into being a police state.
It's already here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
141. BACK ON TOP!!! COME ON DU - LET'S KEEP HIM THERE!
Bookmark it and check in each day!!!

:woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
veganlush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-25-10 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
142. registered and voted in the categories plus over-all. for today..
Edited on Thu Feb-25-10 11:22 PM by veganlush
..will return there tomorrow to do it again----good luck!

edited to add: It looks to me that your blog is in the lead!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 12:20 AM
Response to Original message
146. You guys just rock!
Seriously. DU is a serious political machine.

Don't forget you can vote at least once a day with the same registration.

We really can't underestimate the second place blog because he has a strong following and they can easily come back.

So let's try to bury them!

Thank you, DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ConsAreLiars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
150. Glad to K&R. You are doing important work. Thank you! (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dyingnumbers Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
152. Photography Organizations
Sign up for a press pass, or buy some sort of license, legitimately identifying you as a media photographer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #152
161. You don't need to "buy" a license to take pictures in a free country.
You must have more of a trust for the mainstream media than many of us do around here. Consider that you are suggesting that only corporate employees should be allowed to report the news. Do you realize how crazy it sounds to suggest that a journalist needs to "buy some sort of a license?" Does "freedom of the press" have any meaning for you?

One more time -- you needn't be "legitimate" or "licensed" or "identified" or "media" to take pictures in a Constitutional democracy.

--imm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #152
281. so much ignorance all in one response
so, that pesky first amendment only applies to official government sanctioned 'press', is that your contention?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Agony Donating Member (865 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 02:26 AM
Response to Original message
155. kick...done. Thanks for what you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cartach Donating Member (361 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 02:58 AM
Response to Original message
157. What the hell is DU allowing this for ?
How is anyone here in a position to support this guy without full knowledge of the facts regarding his current case at least? To me he is just another paparazzi. They usually annoy the hell out of and invade people's privacy and deserve whatever ass-kicking they get. It would seem to me that in this case he probably was interfering with some kind of police operation by getting in the way and exposing himself or others to danger. Police ,with good cause, do not like being distracted while performing their duties,one mistake could have disastrous consequences. And again,this guy wants us to "vote" for him without facts. Not me because in a good many cases photography is a crime, but be sucked in if you must.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
immoderate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #157
160. A lot of us old timers know Carlos and his work.
Edited on Fri Feb-26-10 04:07 AM by immoderate
I'm wondering if you know what a paparazzi is.

When is photography a crime? Did you notice that his blog is called "Photography is not a crime?" Maybe you should do the public a service and write a blog called, "Oh yeah? Photography is too a crime," with all the true facts about the laws against taking photographs. :eyes:

OTH, you could check out Carlos' blog, and read his journals here and you won't sound so uninformed. (His Cuba pictures were well received here.)

--imm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:04 AM
Response to Reply #157
174. The facts are and have been available
in this case. Just because you haven't taken the time to look into it doesn't mean they are not available. You must be more comfortable on authoritarian forums which verify the veracity of all posts before they are allowed? Where is that?

Police ,with good cause, do not like being distracted while performing their duties,

Can you understand 'tough shit'? The police, I know, always act with absolute appropriateness. How dare a member of the public look on whilst they perform their public service! Now off to Tiananmen Square with you!

You do understand that you are at Democratic Underground now, not Free Republic, no?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #157
178. Evidently you don't know you right hand from your left.
You made a left turn when you entered this site, not a right turn into the fascist site that you must have been seeking that believes the Constitution is just another damn piece of paper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #157
185. And here come the defenders of the pigs.
:pukes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #157
194. Fail - take your fascist sympathizing elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #194
239. Ok...that right there is just wrong.....eom/lmao
Edited on Fri Feb-26-10 07:30 PM by pipoman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #157
197. People deserve an ass-kicking for engaging in a legal activity?
Photography isn't a crime. Educate yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #157
221. Mmm, lots of "concern" there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #157
282. "paparazzi"
by the way, are exercising their first amendment rights to photograph and report on what happens in public.

" Not me because in a good many cases photography is a crime" really? What crime is it exactly when one takes a picture?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #157
311. Because DU has access to the law? Because DU doesn't always ASSume
that authority is right?

Because we've read up on this case and have agreed with the Society of Professional Journalists that Carlos is fucking in the right?

Unlike yourself, who apparently doesn't know the law or the case in any way. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 03:34 AM
Response to Original message
159. Surprised you weren't tased! (bro)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 05:11 AM
Response to Original message
162. delete
Edited on Fri Feb-26-10 05:44 AM by Nailzberg
delete
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 05:36 AM
Response to Original message
163. i did it
and you're number 1!

:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 06:58 AM
Response to Original message
173. wow. the amount of ignorance and obsequiousness in this thread is amazing.
Edited on Fri Feb-26-10 07:02 AM by KG
get up off of your knees, citizens. sheesh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #173
176. And, may I add?...
the amount of authoritarian kool-aid drinkers 'round here is unbelievable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #173
312. I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
180. I voted. Hope I remember to vote tomorrow. Memory is a little fuzzy.
Good Luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
184. The pigs don't like people reccording their evil behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flipper999 Donating Member (185 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
191. Done
Good luck!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
192. K, R and Done. Thanks for your efforts; fight those blue shirts. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
195. Done, kicked, and recommended!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #195
202. I've also set up a calendar reminder so I don't forget to vote while the contest is still on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigErnMcCracken Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
198. Bah....
This whole thread is going nowhere. It's destined to always be stuck in two camps.

The OP is an axe-grinding jagoff who has admitted he hates cops and is trying to stir up shit.

The people saying he's a jagoff are being painted as sheep who have never been roughed up or abused by an officer of the law.

Is it a bad time to remind everyone that there ARE good cops and bad cops? I'll tell you what, I live in a state where four police officers have been shot in cold blood in the past eight months. Men with children, wives, mothers, who were simply doing their job. I'll take some of the bad cops and try to weed them out properly while giving most of them - GRUDGINGLY - because I'm no fan of the flat top wearing gung-ho cop either, the benefit of the doubt. When I go to work I know that unless I drive off the road on the way home, I'm coming HOME alive to my friends and family. They can't say that every day. No pressure there though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #198
240. Enjoy your wine
your pizza is on the way..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueamy66 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #198
277. And they are forced to take this job why? and how?
Come on....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autonomy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
199. Done. You're currently in first place
over Phinsider, which is I guess the Dolphins' blog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
203. Kick!
Just voted again today.

Thanks for reminding the police that they are there to stop crime not to interfere with peaceful activities. Standing up for your rights isn't easy and is often a thankless process.

I appreciate that you refuse to be bullied despite the time and cost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Christa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
204. K, R and voted. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
panzerfaust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
205. This problem is even worse in the UK (but they are further along the road)
Photographer films his own 'anti-terror' arrest Man held in police station for eight hours after taking pictures of Christmas celebrations in Accrington...

'You're filming for fun? I don't believe you' Police community support officers (PCSOs) stopped Italian student Simona Bonomo under anti-terrorism legislation for filming buildings in London. Moments later, she was arrested by other officers, held in a police cell and fined. She talks Paul Lewis through the footage she recorded of her conversation with the PCSOs ...

A few photographs add up to a minor terror alert. Paul Lewis takes his camera to a London landmark and minutes later police officers are on their way to stop and search him under anti-terrorism laws ...

And, the best link last:
The stories of photographers being prevented from taking pictures under terror legislation are numerous. There was the Austrian tourist who admired a London bus station, a Kent photographer who snapped Mick's Plaice fish bar in Chatham and was questioned because he was deemed to be suspiciously tall, the man who took a picture of St Paul's Cathedral, the BBC photographer who shoots background scenes for the Top Gear programme, and the man who stood on a rail bridge and photographed trains.

The abuse of section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is an established part of British life and is affecting the work of professional photographers and journalists, as well as the pleasure of amateurs. It is an outrageous infringement of an elementary liberty and it is something that we all should be concerned about, because this particular battle has symbolic significance...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Locrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
206. kick!
K&R - I'll sign up and vote as well.

Keep up the good work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dajoki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
210. Done and Thank You!!
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heidi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
212. Ignore the badge sniffers, RIM.
You're a credible journalist, you know the law pertaining to photojournalism and you've demonstrated respect for it. There's no good reason any law enforcement officer would object to you photographing them--from a reasonable distance--doing the jobs we're paying them to do.

Recommended.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #212
231. What Heidi said.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
219. It's to protect their families as much as anything. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
223. Done
Thank you for doing what you do. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
226. Kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tpsbmam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
232. You're #1 now! Keep voting, everyone.....
Done. Too late to R but definitely giving you the votes and a :kick:

Great blog & what a war! Thanks for hanging tough for all of us -- we all win with every battle you win.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
234. Kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #234
237. kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #237
242. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dystopian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
245. Vote kick.
peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
246. Keep voting, Kids! the blog is #1 now!
WTG, Raging! :headbang:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #246
248. Done, again.
Go, Carlos! :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-26-10 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
249. and a kick....
too late to r. Sorry. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
250. Two more days of voting left!
If you've already voted, vote again because the contest allows you to vote once a day.

That's the only way I'm going to win this contest. If people vote over and over. I know it's stupid, but that's how it's set up.

The sports blog that is in second place is going to make a serious attempt at regaining the lead in the next two days, so I'm really counting on you guys!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #250
251. Kick and Done!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eomer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #250
252. Done again (and again)
And a kick.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #250
253. I voted again this morning.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dystopian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
254. Today's vote
Good luck!


peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
255. You're #1 today.
I popped you another vote this AM.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #255
257. kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supply Side Jesus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
258. As a Deputy Sheriff
I welcome your video taping. It only serves to protect me. I carry a camera Pen, and my patrol mic on any time I have citizen contact. It is great for recording exciting utterances and getting confessions without having to ask a single question. Also, great evidence when someone tries to files a false report against me. Technology works for everyone.

I hope you also get to record when we give death notifications. Nothing like a stranger in your arms after you just told them their child committed suicide. Or when a LEO tries to convince a battered victim to assist with prosecution against a spouse. Or trying to convince someone with mental issues that no one is outside their window at 3am. I hope you get to capture the obscene to the absurd in the daily routines of a LEO. I hope you get all aspects of what a Law Enforcement Officer does on video.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #258
259. RagingInMiami shoots still photography, not video.
But it's nice to hear from an officer supportive of his work. You are absolutely right about media working for everyone. If he took a shot that looked like senseless police brutality, the photograph might also reveal what he, as an eye witness, missed, i.e., a concealed weapon in a waistband, or a bloodied victim lying in shadow.

FWIW, I don't think Raging has anything against law enforcement per se, but he does live in an area that has a history of police misconduct and so he has taken to shooting it when he sees it. But if he were to witness an officer comforting someone who'd just lost a loved one, for instance, I'm sure he would attempt to capture that pathos as well. From a respectable distance, as his other photos have been.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #258
263. I appreciate the difficulty of the sad tasks you describe.
And, respectfully, point out, they are not the province of LEOs but of communities. I've done each one of them and suspect that most people have done one or more.

What I have never done with four of my colleagues is tackle someone and pound their head on the pavement for no better reason than because we could.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supply Side Jesus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #263
296. Never done that either
Never saw the point of it. It's criminal and its wrong. I've been in several knockout drag out fights when a perp decides to take a swing, but why brutalize someone cuz he showed contempt of cop?! It's so detrimental on all levels. You can forget him ever cooperating with you on any investigations in the future. And hope he just doesn't decide to shoot the next cop the next time he has contact with one!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #296
299. Like any organization, imho it's about leadership.
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 01:27 PM by EFerrari
I've lived in three different precincts in San Francisco and they were all really different.

Of course individual cops are different but at the level of cop culture, the guys who do the Haight, who work Ingleside and who work the Sunset districts might as well be in different departments because the way they do things are not the same. Ingleside tended to thuggery, Parkside cops who work the Haight are hip but a little on the hassled side from dealing with high density AND tourists, Taraval Sta seems to be the most community oriented. That's not fair to any single cop who works out of those offices but it's a pretty fair description of those stations on the whole and maybe of how each one gets its tone from leadership.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #258
271. I wish more cops were like you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supply Side Jesus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #271
297. There is a lot of us out there
Unfortunately the douche bag exposures tend to skew it all to hell.
Thank you msanthrope, I always enjoy your posts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #297
300. I'm not at home right now but I'd go on teevee for the guys who work my neighborhood.
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 01:35 PM by EFerrari
They probably have their share of DBs but I've never seen one of them in all these years. On the contrary, I've seen more than one go out of his/her way to get the best outcome for the neighborhood even if it meant taking a little bit more trouble. Like the time a bi-polar woman on our block started basically assaulting people near her building and at the grocery store next door. We called it in and tried to lay out the mental health part. The response was great, they came out with a psychologist and she wound up in the hospital, not in the jail -- which is the usual in this town. It was a win for that lady, win for the neighborhood and win for the LEOs.

Go, Taraval Station!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tallahasseedem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #258
276. +1
Thank you for all that you do. Take care! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hutzpa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
260. This is where Justice
failed it populace.

Very sad.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
261. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-27-10 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
262. Still need votes today through Monday.
:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #262
264. It's after midnight, so I just entered my Sunday votes! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #264
266. Yay, Lisa!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dystopian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
265. Today's vote kick.
Seems like it was only today that I voted earlier....


peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 01:41 AM
Response to Original message
267. One more day...
Voting for the 2010 BOB Awards begins Feb. 15 at 10 am and ends on Monday, March 1 at 10 am.

Don't forget to vote again on Monday! Early a.m.!

Thanks again to Carlos/OP for standing up for our rights when it is often difficult to do so. Photography in public spaces is not a crime!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #267
268. Welcome to DU, gvstn.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #268
269. Thanks for the welcome! :)
I want to add to this thread to remind people that although photography is not a crime, arresting someone for photographing when you know it is not a crime should be criminal. It is abuse of power, intimidation and harassment.

It is a crime just the same as someone walking up and strong-arm robbing the man of his camera. It disturbs the peace and should be prosecuted not just nullified in court (after much inconvenience and expense to the innocent citizen).

Taking a picture of a cop on duty may not seem like something to make a fuss over but as your father used to say, "It is the principle of the thing". It is worth the fight. Police are supposed to be professionals and enforce the law and protect the peace not detain citizens for doing things for which they don't personally appreciate the value.

If I were to walk around in a public place in my flannel pajamas it might seem strange. An officer could inquire about my well being because it disturbed other people's sensibilities. However, he does not have a right to tell me to dress "normally" because others don't like my attire or arrest me because I refuse.

A good cop responding to a complaint would ascertain that I am mentally competent and recognize that he cannot control my attire and go on about his day. A bad cop would harass or intimidate or arrest me if I did not go home and change. Until the police recognize that they do not have some special power to bend people's wills to their liking it is critical to point out their abuses. However small they may be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
272. PLEASE BE SURE TO VOTE TODAY AND TOMORROW MORNING!
You can bet the other bloggers will be rallying their fans to vote!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
275. Gave you another vote. You're still ahead.
Can't rec it again (too late anyway), but

Kicque :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
278. Less than 24 hours left of voting
And Photography is Not a Crime still remains in first place!

If you've already voted, remember you can vote once a day.

Thank you for all the support!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
283. Kick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #283
284. kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #284
286. Home stretch!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-28-10 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
287. IT'S MIDNIGHT ON THE EAST COAST!!! VOTE!!!!!!
:woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
288. Just a few hours left. Get your last vote in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #288
289. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TommyO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 02:59 AM
Response to Original message
290. Kickity-kick, kick, kick!
If you haven't done so already, vote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Agony Donating Member (865 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
291. Done x3
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cetacea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
293. Proof that he was at a considerable distance



Notice the compression blur behind the police officers. This kind of compression only occurs with a telephoto lens. To fit an entire body into a frame and still get that compression effect you's have to be quite a good distance away, and certainly beyond being able to "shoving a camera in someones face".
In addition, it appears that he cropped the photo to make them appear closer for the viewer, again indicative of having been far away from the officers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
295. Kick - please vote you only have a short time left
The blog is down to second now, please get out there and vote to bring it back up to first before time runs out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
298. Final results on March 03...
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 11:39 AM by gvstn
Hmmm, It sounds like the pizza blog jumped up to first place and PINAC was second place right around vote closing time.
We'll have to wait a few days to get official result.

Holy Cow, that Worst Pizza went from

3rd overall to 1st overall in the span of 2 hours

Last hour to vote! Everyone jump in one last time.


by Fr8Train on Mar 1, 2010 9:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

cmon, guys, 3rd overall

lets go out and vote!!!

by finzrule on Mar 1, 2010 9:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs


From: Phinsider http://www.thephinsider.com/2010/2/27/1327277/final-pus...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #298
301. Let's keep this kicked (rather than archived) so we can see results.
Carlos already wins in my book, no matter what these people decide.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #301
302. kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #302
303. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
304. kick for pending results...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gvstn Donating Member (485 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
305. Congratulations! Carlos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #305
306. WHOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOO!
:toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast:

Omg, how great is this! :party:

Thanks gvstn! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lisa0825 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #306
307. WOOHOOOO!!!!!
Congrats Carlos!!!! You deserve it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
308. Congrats!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lefty2000 Donating Member (151 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
309. Howard Zinn said:
They only have power because we obey them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #309
310. Welcome to DU, lefty2000.
Howard was right. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagingInMiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
313. Thanks, DU
I never would have done it without you.

http://carlosmiller.com/2010/03/04/pinac-wins-best-over...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #313
314. More wellwishers here:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC