A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To Register Surveillance Cameras



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 30th 17, 08:11 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To Register Surveillance Cameras

On 2017-04-30 18:35:10 +0000, "Mayayana" said:

"nospam" wrote

| tony twists everything he reads, solely to argue.

This is getting doggone surreal.


It got surreal with RichA's OP, and went downhill from there.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #22  
Old April 30th 17, 09:47 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To Register Surveillance Cameras

In article 2017043012100373557-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

If you have an issue with individual police file a Citizen's Complaint.


which will be reviewed by other cops, who almost always find the cop in
question was 'following procedure'. they cover for each other. very
rarely does a cop get fired.
  #23  
Old April 30th 17, 09:47 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To Register Surveillance Cameras

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

I was talking about the risks of mass surveillance. One risk
is the psychology of the sadistic, petty tyrant;
a type often attracted to positions of authority.


You assume that risk if you take the risk of speeding. Follow the
traffic laws and you never have to talk to one of those petty tyrants.


not true at all.

it's impossible to follow all traffic laws, which means anyone can be
pulled over at any time and nothing stops a cop from pulling someone
over even without seeing a violation.

That's where the cops come in. Law enforcement
is people. No better and no worse. They're not
angels who took birth on Earth to save your front
lawn from hoodlums.

You took my point and twisted it into the lies of
a reckless, scofflaw, cop-hater.


I didn't need to twist anything. You said you got caught in a "speed
trap" but furnished no explanation of what was the "trap" aspect.

To me, a "speed trap" is where something unethical is done in order to
trap you...a sudden drop in the speed limit without proper warning,
hidden signs, or some aspect in which there is a element that stops
you from being aware of the need to slow down.


your definition is very different from the rest of the world.

I don't consider it unethical for the cop to position himself where
you can't see him. If you choose to exceed the speed limit, or you
carelessly exceed it because you are inattentive, it's your fault if
you get caught. The fact that other drivers are also exceeding the
limit is not an excuse.


when the posted speed limit is inappropriate for the road, then it's
*not* the driver's fault, as is evidenced by everyone driving above it.

If you need to see the cop to reduce your speed to the posted limit,
you are only doing it because you don't want to be caught.


that's why cops should be out patrolling for all sorts of crimes rather
than hiding behind an overpass to catch someone driving above the
posted speed limit who poses no danger to anyone, just to make a few
bucks for the city/town.

You decided to
indulge yourself in an elderly good guys vs bad
guys fantasy, cooking up your version of my story
without ever really reading what I'd written.


Bull****. I read what you wrote. Sour grapes for getting caught. You
didn't even say you were not over the limit.


everyone drives over the posted limit pretty much every time they
drive, including you.

I don't see you as a scofflaw or a reckless driver because you got a
couple of speeding tickets, but complaining about being caught in a
speed trap doesn't paint you in a good light when there's no
indication of any trap involved. Man-up to your own mistake.


there's ample evidence it was a speed trap and he isn't the one who
made the mistake.
  #24  
Old April 30th 17, 10:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To Register Surveillance Cameras

On 2017-04-30 20:47:08 +0000, nospam said:

In article 2017043012100373557-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

If you have an issue with individual police file a Citizen's Complaint.


which will be reviewed by other cops, who almost always find the cop in
question was 'following procedure'. they cover for each other. very
rarely does a cop get fired.


Cops get fired far more often than folks like you believe.
I have been the lead investigator in quite a number of IA and BIR
(California Bureau of Internal Reveiw) investigations which resulted in
the subject officer having to leave the agency/department. The results
when the allegations are substantiated, can vary from referral for
prosecution, immediate dismissal, resignation with prejudice, or
resignation without prejudice.

Then there are the suspension (for up to 1 year) or reduction of pay
(usually 5, 10, or 15% for up to a year), or reduction in rank
penalties for most conduct violations which would not result in
dismissal. Also new, or probationary cops can, and do fail probation
to leave the department with little to no fanfare.

It is a myth that "rarely does a cop get fired." Dismisal, or a
compelled resignation is something which is far more frequent than
folks like you have knowledge of.

BTW: In California State agencies, and most PDs results of personnel
action due to IA investigation are usually confidential unless DA
referral and prosecution is the result.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #25  
Old April 30th 17, 10:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bill W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To Register Surveillance Cameras

On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 14:50:13 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

It is a myth that "rarely does a cop get fired." Dismisal, or a
compelled resignation is something which is far more frequent than
folks like you have knowledge of.


It really depends on the department. For example, the Las Vegas police
have near zero tolerance for misbehavior. Lots of cops get fired here.
That's not necessarily the case in neighboring Henderson, though.
There are certainly many departments where they always circle the
wagons. In time, they'll all become a lot stricter. Federal oversight
and lawsuits tend to get their attention.
  #26  
Old April 30th 17, 11:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To Register Surveillance Cameras

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:


| tony twists everything he reads, solely to argue.

This is getting doggone surreal.


You want surreal? Let's put nospam in charge of a city.

He's said that speed limits are too low, so in his city he changes the
speed limit on a residential street from 30 mph to 40 mph.


only because drivers are already going 40 mph.

He's said that most drivers exceed the speed limit, so in his city the
drivers now blast down a residential street at 50 mph or more.


your first of *many* false assumptions.

raising the posted speed limit has a negligible effect on actual speeds.

given that the prevailing speed is *already* 40 mph, raising the posted
speed limit *to* 40 will bring just about everyone into compliance,
leaving the truly dangerous drivers for the cops to target.

in other words, going from 99% violators to 1% violators (numbers not
exact but close enough to make the point) lets the cops concentrate on
those who actually pose a danger to themselves and others.

instead of a non-stop stream of violators, only the actually dangerous
people will stand out.

that means the rest of your babble is complete rubbish since it's based
on a a false assumption, but nevertheless, might as well smash a few
more myths.

He's said that insurance companies fund police radar guns, so in his
city he prohibits this. The police in his city, then, cannot provide
court-required proof of speeding offenses so speeders aren't given
tickets.


another false assumption.

cops don't need radar/lidar to determine someone is driving in an
unsafe manner, and not just speeding.

Since we know that most traffic accidents that don't involve alcohol
or drugs are caused by driving too fast for conditions or inability to
stop in time due to speed, accident rates increase in nospam's city
because police can't ticket speeders.


yet another false assumption.

driving too fast for conditions is *not* the same as driving above the
posted speed limit.

you are attempting to move the goalposts. why am i not surprised.

Insurance companies raise the
rates because insurance rates are based partially on local accident
history.


yet another false assumption.

since the speeds at which drivers travel will not change by any
significant amount when the posted limit is changed (a few mph,
typically), there will not be a significant change in collisions,
therefore there is no need to raise rates, other than the usual
insurance company greed which has nothing to do with your babble.

since auto insurance is mandatory almost everywhere (and now health
insurance as well), insurance companies can set whatever rates they
want and customers have to pay, all the while they cut benefits. it's
one of the biggest scams going.

it's generally a *far* better deal to self-insure, particularly for
safe drivers, except that it's illegal to do so (with rare exception).

Some insurance carriers may withdraw from the market in that
city because they are paying out so much, so the competition is
decreased allowing all remaining carriers to raise rate.


another false assumption.

To prevent accidents caused by speeding, nospam's city then has to buy
radar guns from their own budget.


no need for radar/lidar guns at all.

there's also *no* reason why they cost as much as they do either.

To replace the budget shortfall,
the city increases taxes and makes all drivers pay for the actions of
a few.


they already do.

that's how insurance works.

He's agreed with you that speed traps are wrong and just a way to
increase city revenue, so in nospam's city police must be visible to
all motorists when checking for traffic violations. The drivers in
nospam's city now know they can drive at any speed if no police are
visible.


false assumption again.

drivers do not drive at any speed they want when no cops are around.

this is yet another myth.

In nospam's city, if 99% of the drivers break speeding laws,"the law
itself must be bad". So, nospam eliminates speeding laws. With no
restrictions on speed, motorists are free to zoom through school zones
at any speed and generally drive at any speed they choose and the
accident rate increases.


yet another twist, and yet another false assumption.

Fire departments (if nospam's city is in a state where firefighters
are first-responders to traffic accidents) must add personnel,
vehicles, and tools like the "jaws of life" to deal with the increased
number of accidents. Taxes go up in nospam's city to fund this.


another false assumption.

there is *zero* evidence there will be more collisions.

Hospitals have to add personnel to the ERs to deal with the increased
number of accidents, so their rates go up. Insurance companies have
to pay for much of that, so their rates go up.


the list of false assumptions continues to grow...

In nospam's city, funding from traffic violation fines is wrong and
must be eliminated. But, the city still has to have funds to have a
police department, fire department, and other departments that provide
service to the residents, so tax and permit rates are bumped up even
more. New construction is impeded because permits cost so much and
taxes are so high. That means fewer jobs.


...and grow...

You want to live in nospam's city?


do not call that fictional place my city.

Wait a few years. His city will present a lot of opportunities for
photographers who want to photograph ghost towns.


you truly are an idiot.
  #27  
Old May 1st 17, 07:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PAS[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To RegisterSurveillance Cameras

On 4/30/2017 5:25 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 14:35:10 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote:

"nospam" wrote

| tony twists everything he reads, solely to argue.

This is getting doggone surreal.

You want surreal? Let's put nospam in charge of a city.

He's said that speed limits are too low, so in his city he changes the
speed limit on a residential street from 30 mph to 40 mph.

He's said that most drivers exceed the speed limit, so in his city the
drivers now blast down a residential street at 50 mph or more.

He's said that insurance companies fund police radar guns, so in his
city he prohibits this. The police in his city, then, cannot provide
court-required proof of speeding offenses so speeders aren't given
tickets.

Since we know that most traffic accidents that don't involve alcohol
or drugs are caused by driving too fast for conditions or inability to
stop in time due to speed, accident rates increase in nospam's city
because police can't ticket speeders. Insurance companies raise the
rates because insurance rates are based partially on local accident
history. Some insurance carriers may withdraw from the market in that
city because they are paying out so much, so the competition is
decreased allowing all remaining carriers to raise rate.

To prevent accidents caused by speeding, nospam's city then has to buy
radar guns from their own budget. To replace the budget shortfall,
the city increases taxes and makes all drivers pay for the actions of
a few.

He's agreed with you that speed traps are wrong and just a way to
increase city revenue, so in nospam's city police must be visible to
all motorists when checking for traffic violations. The drivers in
nospam's city now know they can drive at any speed if no police are
visible.


When drivers see a cop on the side of the road, they drive slower. If
safety is the goal, having a cop visible to motorists is better than
having one hiding in order to play "gotcha" for the purpose of giving a
ticket. It is all about revenue, just as red light cameras are. A
motorists who passes a speed trap going in the opposite direction may
flash his lights warning drivers in the other direction that they are
approaching a speed trap so that they will slow down. If driving slower
is the goal, the goal has now been met. Yet cops have gone after people
who warn other motorists about a speed trap and ticketed them. If they
want motorists to slow down, why would they hassle someone who got
motorists to slow down? Because they can't write tickets unless people
are speeding. Despite any claim to the contrary, the cops have ticket
quotas to fill. The Commissioner of the NYPD, as well as other NYPD
officials, will look you right in the eye and tell you that there are no
ticket quotas in the NYPD. That's because they don't call it a quota,
they call it a "performance goal". When NYC needs an infusion of cash,
they are instructed to write more tickets. My son has had his
performance goal set in concrete numbers. He must write x amount of
moving violations and x amount of non-moving violation tickets per
month. It's all about the money.


In nospam's city, if 99% of the drivers break speeding laws, "the law
itself must be bad". So, nospam eliminates speeding laws. With no
restrictions on speed, motorists are free to zoom through school zones
at any speed and generally drive at any speed they choose and the
accident rate increases.

Fire departments (if nospam's city is in a state where firefighters
are first-responders to traffic accidents) must add personnel,
vehicles, and tools like the "jaws of life" to deal with the increased
number of accidents. Taxes go up in nospam's city to fund this.

Hospitals have to add personnel to the ERs to deal with the increased
number of accidents, so their rates go up. Insurance companies have
to pay for much of that, so their rates go up.

In nospam's city, funding from traffic violation fines is wrong and
must be eliminated. But, the city still has to have funds to have a
police department, fire department, and other departments that provide
service to the residents, so tax and permit rates are bumped up even
more. New construction is impeded because permits cost so much and
taxes are so high. That means fewer jobs.

You want to live in nospam's city?

Wait a few years. His city will present a lot of opportunities for
photographers who want to photograph ghost towns.



  #28  
Old May 1st 17, 07:23 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PAS[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To RegisterSurveillance Cameras

On 4/30/2017 5:50 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-04-30 20:47:08 +0000, nospam said:

In article 2017043012100373557-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

If you have an issue with individual police file a Citizen's Complaint.


which will be reviewed by other cops, who almost always find the cop in
question was 'following procedure'. they cover for each other. very
rarely does a cop get fired.


Cops get fired far more often than folks like you believe.
I have been the lead investigator in quite a number of IA and BIR
(California Bureau of Internal Reveiw) investigations which resulted
in the subject officer having to leave the agency/department. The
results when the allegations are substantiated, can vary from referral
for prosecution, immediate dismissal, resignation with prejudice, or
resignation without prejudice.

Then there are the suspension (for up to 1 year) or reduction of pay
(usually 5, 10, or 15% for up to a year), or reduction in rank
penalties for most conduct violations which would not result in
dismissal. Also new, or probationary cops can, and do fail probation
to leave the department with little to no fanfare.

It is a myth that "rarely does a cop get fired." Dismisal, or a
compelled resignation is something which is far more frequent than
folks like you have knowledge of.

BTW: In California State agencies, and most PDs results of personnel
action due to IA investigation are usually confidential unless DA
referral and prosecution is the result.

In New York, the results of an IA investigation are kept confidential as
a matter of law. IMO, that is a bad law. I believe the public has a
right to know the facts about a public servant's disciplinary history.

  #29  
Old May 1st 17, 07:45 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PAS[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To RegisterSurveillance Cameras

On 4/29/2017 10:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-04-30 01:32:09 +0000, "Mayayana" said:

"Savageduck" wrote

| Do you suppose the friendly officer might give you a break
| at that next speed trap scam?
|
| You have a very twisted view of reality, and I am sure that you would
| not hesitate to call 911 when you have a need for law enforcement or
| other emergency services.
|

It's all true.


In your mind, and as portrayed in fantasy.

I have nothing against cops.


Apparantly you do.

It is a tough job.


Yup!

At the same time, they get very good
benefits. (At least where I live. They're gov't workers,
which are just about the only people still getting
pensions.)


As I have said, I cannot complain about the benefits I earned while I
worked, and my pension was also earned, and not without my monthly
contribution (we do not get Social Security, just MediCare). I also
contributed to my 457 and 401 accounts.

Every once in awhile the local papers
publish the astonishing overtime pay. some in
boston making 300K+ with overtime.


There are overtime hogs everywhere. However, not all of that overtime
is voluntary. Many times officers are ordered over due to staff
shortages, and unanticipated incidents.


What some fail to recognize is that in many cases it's simply cheaper to
have officers work overtime than it would be to hire more officers.
What LEOs encounter and are responsible for is unpredictable, conditions
can change in an instant. It's not easy to predict a precise amount of
hours that will be needed from one day to the next.


Mass seems to
be the only state where, thanks to state police
lobbying, an actual cop is required to be in attendance
for all road work. They sit there in their cars, lights
flashing. Required by law.


That depends on the State. On California State routes, and some
Interstates where major work is in progress, and sometimes (but, not
all times) when CalTrans is engaged in work on State/Interstate Hwys
You might find a CHP officer in attendance. There is a reason for that:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/paffairs/workersmemorial/worker-fatality-statistics.html

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/resources/facts_stats/safety.htm


I believe in CT an officer is always on hand at a construction zone.
You illustrated exactly why these laws/regulations exist. People do not
drive as cautiously as they should through construction zones, at least
from what I have seen as I've traveled through them and I've traveled
through more than I can remember.




When I was a teenager I worked at a drugstore.
At least half the local cops expected to come in and
get whatever they wanted for a token price. I asked
the pharmacist about it. He said if we didn't pay them
off they wouldn't show up if there was a break-in.


When you were a teenager, where? I don't doubt that you experience
that sort of corruption. However, today, that in my experience is the
exception rather than the rule.


In Suffolk County as well as other (if not all) departments, accepting
freebies or reduced rates is against regulations. But I have to say
that I see it all the time, particularly at a convenience store near my
home that I'm in quite often. One particular cop walks in, gets her
coffee, snacks, etc. and just walks out. Everytime, and I've seen it
happen quite often. After my son got on the job, other cops pointed out
all of the local businesses in the precinct that "do the right thing"
which is code for giving the officers freebies or reduced rates. Sadly,
accepting freebies is not the exception around here. I've told my son
never to accept one and as far as I know, he's heeded my advice.


Though there was one detective who absolutely
refused any discount.


A man of ethics.

I've never met a fireman who didn't have a second
job. High risk, yes. But enough free time for two jobs.


I don't know what sort of FD they worked for, but I would take into
consideration the type of schedule they worked. Different departments
work different schedules. Some work 24 hours on, 24 hours off, with 2
consecutive days off every two weeks. Some work far more grueling
schedules with 4 x 24 hour days on, and 3 days off. Not many have the
energy for that extra job.


Some of them have second jobs out of necessity. As someone with your
years of experience, you know there were times when cop and firefighter
salaries weren't high enough to support a family. My father-in-law is a
retired NYC Battalion Chief. When he started in the FDNY, he had to
have a second job to support his family because his paycheck wasn't big
enough. He knew that it would be some time before his job in the FDNY
paid enough. But he loved his job and stuck with it. I think that the
camaraderie of firefighters in the FDNY is much better than it is in the
NYPD. Their daily situations are different. They literally live with
each other when they are working and they work as a larger unit than two
cops who are partnered and patrol the streets.


For you to deny those things would be immature,


Deny what things? That some firemen work a second job when they are
not scheduled to work? Sure that happens, but that is not what most of
those folks do, it is only what you believe ALL of them do. That is
your particular prejudice. In my case, I was subject to being ordered
over for additional hours due to staff shortage or unexpected
incident. I have also been called back, and ordered in to work hours
after getting home. It is not a 9 to 5 job with weekends and holidays off.
just as it would be unreasonable for me, as a contractor,
to contest the fact that plenty of contractors cheat
people. In neither case are the stereotypes the norm,
but in both cases the nature of the job lends itself to
fulfilling those stereotypes.


My point exactly, and also not every public employee, cop,
firefighter, road worker, or DMV desk jockey is corrupt.


Not every? I think "not every" is not a fair way of putting it. It's
"the vast majority" of public employees. It's a slight minority that
are dishonest.


The last cop I talked to was the one who caught me
in a speed trap scam several years ago. He started
asking all sorts of questions, like where was I going?
Who did I work for? I finally said none of his questions
had anything to do with my infraction. He got haughty
and wrote me extra tickets, for a dirty license plate
and not wearing a seat belt. He didn't pretend that
he wasn't lying about that. I was wearing a seatbelt.
He just smiled and challenged me to argue with him
again. I contested the ticket and won, but the fees
cost me about the same as the ticket!


So, you encountered an asshole cop. They exist, and they should lose
their jobs. Many do.

What you should have done is file a formal Citizen's Complaint. Most
every law enforcement ageny has a means to formally file a Citizen's
Complaint. Check your State DOJ, and Municipal/City PD web sites for
more info.
For Mass. for example there is this.
http://www.mass.gov/eopss/agencies/msp/citizen-concerns.html

Everyone knows the only way to get along with such
cops is to grovel. They need to be boss. It's happened
to me time and again. Of course it doesn't happen every
time. My next door neighbor is a retired cop. Very
sweet guy. And if I need to I'll call 911. and I'll appreciate
the help. So please don't get all high and mighty about
respect for cops. To ignore the potential for corruption
would be naive and dangerous.


I am not getting "high and mighty about respect for cops". When it
comes to respect, cops like anybody else need to earn that respect.
However, you seem to have some ingrained prejudices against law
enforcement officers and other public employees. That I take issue
with because that is not how I conducted myself in Law enforcement for
25 years, and it is not how the vast majority of officers, and
firefighters I have worked with, conduct themselves.



  #30  
Old May 1st 17, 07:48 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
PAS[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 595
Default Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To RegisterSurveillance Cameras

On 4/30/2017 3:08 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-04-30 06:36:14 +0000, "David B."
said:

On 30/04/2017 01:55, Savageduck wrote:
At one point I worked two 18 hour days in a row and on the drive
home I fell asleep at the wheel with this result.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/dphxmzh5p3ihkt2/Ford_12.JPG
https://www.dropbox.com/s/chwxl7cfn6pvmng/Ford_15.JPG


Oops!


Oops indeed.


Damn! Had no idea that happened to you. Thankfully you lived to tell
us about it.


I hope you were not badly hurt.


I was lucky.
The car performed a barrel roll, and ended up on the roof. It then
slid into an embankment on the opposite side of the road, that
triggered the airbags. The airbag blew my right hand off the steering
wheel, and up through the now shattered sunroof. Unfortunately the car
was still sliding on the roof, so my right hand got chewed up quite a
bit, nothing broken. Just a lot like raw ham.
Along with the airbag working, the seatbelt worked pretty good. I was
left hanging upside down, and got a wicked seatbelt burn across my
left collarbone and chest. The hand injury kept me out of work for two
weeks. It healed up nicely, and all is well. That was back in 1995.

I wish you a long and happy retirement. :-)


So far so good. I pulled the plug in 2009 to become a member of the
Great Army of The Gainfully Unemployed.




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Portland Gestapo Ask Homeowners, Businesses To RegisterSurveillance Cameras newshound Digital Photography 0 April 28th 17 11:00 AM
CHICAGO GESTAPO ynx Digital Photography 1 September 1st 06 03:18 PM
Surveillance and Night Vision Cameras? BJ Digital Photography 5 July 27th 06 12:24 PM
Digital Surveillance matt Digital Photo Equipment For Sale 0 October 21st 03 10:55 PM
Portland, OR Fall Camera Show November 1, 2003 R. Peters General Equipment For Sale 0 October 20th 03 04:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.