You can't even take pictures at a public city beach anymore?

Ron Hunter writes:

Might work, might the stuffing beat out of you before the cops arrive.

It has worked every time thus far.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:36:05 -0500, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Hunter writes:


I would have whipped out the cell phone and called them FOR him.


But then it's you filing the complaint. What complaint would it be?


Assault. Disturbing the peace. Making terroristic threats.

Don't fall for this; calling the police is not filing a complaint.

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

wrote in message . ..
On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:22:47 -0400, "The Black Sheep"
wrote:


"JohnCM" wrote in message
. com...

I tell you, I'm really considering leaving New York or this country
altogether. Perhaps it's just because I am so mad now, but I just
can't live in a society that seems so paranoid anymore. I see the
MTA
Police and police all over train stations now. It's just no fun
anymore, heck, it's miserable. Today may be the last straw. I want
to
live in a country like the United States we used to have. You know,
the one where protesters got respect and were allowed to march, one
where you can freely take photos on public property, one where
people
trust eachother,etc. It's bad enough we lost the World Trade Center
and all those innocent lives, but now we're losing something even
more
valuable.

Move to Canada. I've been on Parliament Hill taking photos after
midnight, walking right up to the front door of Parliament, and the
only police attention I ever got was an RCMP officer nodding "good
evening" and another moving his car for me so it was out of my shot.

I know today's incident wasn't related at all to terrorism, but one
man's insane jealousy and paranoia, but still, it's part of the
paranoia society is inflicted with these days.

You are correct. Of course, there are jerks everywhere....

Next time something like this happens, advise the person that if they
touch you or threaten you again you will consider at assault. Ask
them to leave you alone, and if they don't tell them you will consider
it harrassment. Then dial 91 on your cell phone and ask them if you
should dial the last digit. Works like a charm.

Basically, in the US, the jerk yelling at a legal activity is
already committing assault. If he lays hands on you, it's battery. If
he tries to get your camera, you could likely throw in robbery --
after all, if a guy demands your property, what likelihood is there
that you'll get it back unharmed.

Then yell like hell to attract a crowd, preferably with
cameras, then start snapping pictures of the miscreants.

Of course, from what I hear of NY, that probably constitutes a
death sentence all by itself.

Well I did yell at them when they started yelling at me hoping to
attract a crowd to get some attention. The beach was fairly busy, but
no one came to my aid or got involved. It was pretty scary, because I
think they could've beaten me up and still no one would have helped
me.
I guess it shouldn't suprise me, remember the Genovese murder?
I don't have a cellphone, so there was no way for me to get the cops
other than yelling "help" if they attacked me.
Now I know NY'ers have a reputation of looking the other way when
seeing crime in progress, but I'm sure this happens elsewhere as well.
For now, perhaps getting a cellphone, might be a good idea for my
safety.

Atreju wrote in message . ..
On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 04:19:25 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

people in free societies don't know what they've got until it's
gone.

Very often true. And moreso, they seldom stand up for themselves. I'm
a proud American, but so many many people I see around me could get
slapped in the face, and they'd only respond with "thank you sir, may
I have another"


---Atreju---

Not me. Even when questioned by police, I tell them how I feel,
politely. Like when I was questioned at the train station earlier this
year, I told him that this is public property and that I should take
pictures, and that limiting freedom for temporary safety is wrong. But
he said he was just doing his job. Most cops can't decide what calls
they can respond to anyway, so it's best to say how you feel politely
and then file a complaint.

Ron Hunter wrote in message ...
Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Hunter writes:


Why didn't you offer to let them look at the pictures and
judge for themselves?


Because his pictures are none of their business. He doesn't have to
prove he didn't take pictures. And even if he did take pictures ...
it's perfectly legal.


Or maybe you didn't want to do that for cause?


"If you're not with us, you're against us."


His pictures of THEM are their business, if they didn't want them taken.
More likely they thought he was spending more time taking pictures in
their direction than was reasonable (their definition), and felt
invaded. Imagine how celebrities feel about such things, and then apply
that to ordinary people, who also probably were somewhat judgement
impaired at the time.
He is lucky nothing violent happened. I would have offered to let them
see the pictures, and delete any they didn't feel were appropriate.
Most people don't realize that deleted pictures can be recovered if no
more at taken after the deletion....

If they had been more polite, I may have shown them the pictures. But
instead of approaching me politely and asking "excuse me sir but were
you taking pictures of my girlfriend" they gang up on me and say "let
me see your camera".
It's best never to give in to hostile people like that. But anyway,
friendly or not, I have the right to refuse.

JohnCM writes:

It's best never to give in to hostile people like that. But anyway,
friendly or not, I have the right to refuse.

Sometimes I quote them a price:

"Did you take pictures of my girlfriend?"
"If you want pictures, my day rate is ¤600."

That works pretty well, too.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Big Bill writes:

You very obviously do not understand the distinction between "tossing
away rights" and choosing to not excersize them in a particular
situation.

Choosing not to exercise them because you're intimidated is the same as
throwing them away.

Because the photographer can control himself, but not the other guy.

So it's okay if you can't control yourself? Isn't that a bit of a
circular argument?

Perhaps. Do you guarantee that?

I don't guarantee it, but it is far more likely than many people seem to
believe.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

After reading quite a few of the posts in this thread I have come to the one
and only logical conclusion.

too many of you have Clorox in your gene pool.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Ron Hunter writes:

No, but I would make an effort to understand and deal with their
concerns.

Why? They've already demonstrated a total unwillingness to deal with
yours.

And you feel that responding at their low level will somehow lead to a more
productive exchange?
This is not logical, Spock...

Let's see - I did a Google search and got 96,900 matches, of which at least
the first 10 pages (all I took the time to review) are directly relevant,
including this quote from many sources. Perhaps you don't know how to use
Google? Or think for yourself?

- John

"Mark M" wrote in message
news:Y8iYc.110734$Lj.36076@fed1read03...
If George Bush had actually said that, and had Woodward actually quoted
him
as saying that, it would be on literally thousands of legitimate
web-pages,
and discussed to death on the web, as well as every single media outlet on
planet Earth.
There is ZIP.
NOTHING.
Does this tell you anything, or do I have to spell it out for you further?