Mob rule and taking photos on the road

Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM

04/02/2015 09:07:32 PM · #51

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by jemison:
It may not be legally required, but why unnecessarily provoke?

Because if you don't defend your rights they will no longer exist.

+1

Exactly. What good is a right if it's not exercised and defended when trampled upon?

JakeKurdsjuk

Canon EOS R5

04/03/2015 02:32:14 AM · #52

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by jemison:
It may not be legally required, but why unnecessarily provoke?

Because if you don't defend your rights they will no longer exist.

+1

Exactly. What good is a right if it's not exercised and defended when trampled upon?

And that's where a situation like mine the decision to exercise and defend your right is somewhat fluid as you balance it with the knowledge that a parent has a right to expect their child is protected when it's placed on a bus. Had an officer, at any time, requested I do anything I was not willing to do at that moment I would have gone into personal protection mode. That's what I'm doing now having subsequently learned that my name is listed under a suspicious persons complaint.

As for lawyers fees, thankfully my company offers legal services as an optional benefit which I've paid for the last few years (came in very handy when my Dad passed). I've got a couple family members to discuss things with this weekend (one a professional news photographer who has had more than a few run-ins with police) and then I'll be calling them next week.

FromDaRock

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens

04/03/2015 03:38:10 AM · #53

Originally posted by backdoorhippie:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by jemison:
It may not be legally required, but why unnecessarily provoke?

Because if you don't defend your rights they will no longer exist.

+1

Exactly. What good is a right if it's not exercised and defended when trampled upon?

And that's where a situation like mine the decision to exercise and defend your right is somewhat fluid as you balance it with the knowledge that a parent has a right to expect their child is protected when it's placed on a bus. Had an officer, at any time, requested I do anything I was not willing to do at that moment I would have gone into personal protection mode. That's what I'm doing now having subsequently learned that my name is listed under a suspicious persons complaint.

As for lawyers fees, thankfully my company offers legal services as an optional benefit which I've paid for the last few years (came in very handy when my Dad passed). I've got a couple family members to discuss things with this weekend (one a professional news photographer who has had more than a few run-ins with police) and then I'll be calling them next week.

+1

I agree, the pragmatic approach is typically the better choice.

Mike

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

04/03/2015 04:46:38 AM · #54

I think we ought to be pushing back not against the police but against these parents who stop at nothing to protect their children from improbable fears.

04/03/2015 07:10:22 AM · #55

Originally posted by backdoorhippie:

Exactly what was that overreacting helicopter parent protecting their child from? They have a right to protect their child from real harm. Unless you were bashing kids on the head with your camera or something of that nature, there's nothing for them to protect their child from, save the parent's own paranoia.

I don't disagree with how you handled the situation, arguing or fighting with the police is a losing proposition, you're outnumbered and they have clubs, guns, pepper spray and and all kinds of other fun toys. Generally, physical compliance with their demands while verbally objecting to their actions is the best course. Save the antagonism for later when addressing the situation afterward with their masters.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

04/03/2015 07:58:48 AM · #56

Originally posted by Mike:

I think we ought to be pushing back not against the police but against these parents who stop at nothing to protect their children from improbable fears.

Just out of curiosity, in the USA, could one legally ask for that information in instances where no charges are laid?

In Canada there exists no such obligation to do so, otherwise the `Snitch`lines would simply shut down.

Ray

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

04/03/2015 08:04:58 AM · #57

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Mike:
I think we ought to be pushing back not against the police but against these parents who stop at nothing to protect their children from improbable fears.

Just out of curiosity, in the USA, could one legally ask for that information in instances where no charges are laid?

In Canada there exists no such obligation to do so, otherwise the `Snitch`lines would simply shut down.

Ray

Depends. In NM I can simply go to the Communication Authority (911/dispatch operators unit) and request a list of calls made from or about an address - given that you know where this happened, it wouldn't be hard to get the documents.

The alternative route is to file a BS lawsuit and then simply use the discovery process to get the information.

Message edited by author 2015-04-03 12:05:25.

nam

Sony DSLR-A580

Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical ED Zoom Lens for Sony Alpha

04/03/2015 08:10:14 AM · #58

The saddest thing about

backdoorhippie's "case", as I'm sure he would agree, is that so many parents and schools feel they have to raise kids with these kinds of fears and paranoias these days. My own kids are grown, but I never felt I had to teach them fear of strangers. Prudence, yes. Common sense, yes. But not a generalized, over-reaching fear that would have them imagining bogeymen behind every tree.

FromDaRock

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens

04/03/2015 08:20:00 AM · #59

Originally posted by nam:

The saddest thing about backdoorhippie's "case", as I'm sure he would agree, is that so many parents and schools feel they have to raise kids with these kinds of fears and paranoias these days. My own kids are grown, but I never felt I had to teach them fear of strangers. Prudence, yes. Common sense, yes. But not a generalized, over-reaching fear that would have them imagining bogeymen behind every tree.

Yes, teaching kids 'Stranger Danger' is security theater. The chances of them being assaulted by a stranger is lower than that of being assaulted by someone who isn't, like a family member or family friend.

Catherine_B

Canon EOS-70D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

04/03/2015 08:20:49 AM · #60

Some parents take the "stranger danger" issue too far. A while back I was at my friend's house for a family gathering. I had been to other gatherings and was considered an "honorary family memember". One of the extended families had small children and the son was about 3 years old. I had met the child before and played with him. At the gathering I approached the boy and said "Hi Mike" he took one look at me and let out a blood curdling scream shouting "Stranger!" And went running to his parents who were mortified. This took place inside the boy's Aunt and Uncle's home. The parents later said that they had been talking about "stranger danger" (no kidding) and that maybe they took it a bit too far.... That kid still avoids me, 5 years later! How much damage do we do to children in the name of keeping them safe??

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/03/2015 08:26:32 AM · #61

My family moved from California to Geneva, Switzerland the summer after I finished 5th grade. I got a new bicycle over there, and that very summer I regularly rode my bicycle across the border, into France, to a cable car station, rode the cable car to the top of a Glacially-carves slab mountain called "Le Saleve", "explored" the meadows and woods on top, then rode down the mountain and home in the late afternoon. This, in a country where I didn't even know the language (and remember, I was deaf).

Hell, in my day parents REGULARLY booted their kids out of the house and told 'em "Here's a sandwich, don't come back til dark!" Imagine that! Sigh...

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

04/03/2015 08:37:56 AM · #62

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

My sammich came with a 110cc Honda and a rifle. I had a range of roughly 30 miles, and was welcome to do whatever the hell I pleased.

ETA: Mostly it really was just the rifle and bike - if I got hungry I'd usually just kill something and then start a fire.

Message edited by author 2015-04-03 12:39:02.

Mike

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

04/03/2015 09:05:16 AM · #63

My fear of letting my kids out of sight is mainly that they may get hit by one of the assholes that fly down my street well above the speed limit. I can't wait until my son is old enough for me to trust him to keep an eye on his own safety.

Nobody wants to steal my kids and if they do I'm sure they would be voluntarily returned. Quickly.

nam

Sony DSLR-A580

Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical ED Zoom Lens for Sony Alpha

04/03/2015 09:18:14 AM · #64

Originally posted by Mike:

. . . Nobody wants to steal my kids and if they do I'm sure they would be voluntarily returned. Quickly.

O. Henry already wrote that one :)
Ransom of Red Chief

nygold

Nikon D5000

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G

04/03/2015 09:29:07 AM · #65

The difference is news and how fast it travels, if a chils is abducted in Enid Oklahoma an hour late we'll know about it.
Heck there might even be a video. 30+ years ago you would never even know it happened.

If any of you were sitting in your house and your young child came to you and said "Some man was taking my picture" you would be a fool not to investigate.
If you are a single Mom or your husband is at work maybe calling the cops is the best bet.

If the cops wan't to label you a suspicious character that's an issue with the cops not the Mom.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

04/03/2015 11:19:07 AM · #66

Originally posted by nygold:

If the cops wan't to label you a suspicious character that's an issue with the cops not the Mom.

The police don't operate out a vacuum. Someone had to report a "suspicious" activity and in many instances it is an uninformed parent, devoid of all the fact.

Let me see if I can give you a scenario.

A few years ago I was trying to photograph a gentleman who was sitting on a metal bench playing the accordion, while a steam train (billowing steam) was in the background.

I asked his permission and he gave it to me. I set up my equipment and was about to take the photo when a little girl ran into the picture.

Her mother cut into me like I was some pervert who was bent on taking advantage of her child. I tried to reason with the lady and finally out of frustration I told her that I would personally call the police to deal with the issue and that once I had all of the relevant information I would be communicating with my lawyer who would look into the issue of slander. She left.

In this scenario, just who do you think labelled me? I would add to this that this is an area where I am very well known and that the accusation did not sit well with me.

There are all kinds of ways to look at things.

Ray

Message edited by author 2015-04-03 15:20:06.

tanguera

Nikon D750

04/03/2015 11:32:18 AM · #67

Originally posted by nam:

Originally posted by Mike:
. . . Nobody wants to steal my kids and if they do I'm sure they would be voluntarily returned. Quickly.

O. Henry already wrote that one :)
Ransom of Red Chief

LOL!! I love that story. Heck, I love all his stories :)

04/03/2015 12:21:00 PM · #68

Originally posted by nygold:

The fact is that the popular notion that predatory pedophiles and others are lurking around every corner today and that there's so much more danger facing children in the world today is simply not true.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G

04/03/2015 12:24:55 PM · #69

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
My family moved from California to Geneva, Switzerland the summer after I finished 5th grade. I got a new bicycle over there, and that very summer I regularly rode my bicycle across the border, into France, to a cable car station, rode the cable car to the top of a Glacially-carves slab mountain called "Le Saleve", "explored" the meadows and woods on top, then rode down the mountain and home in the late afternoon. This, in a country where I didn't even know the language (and remember, I was deaf).

Hell, in my day parents REGULARLY booted their kids out of the house and told 'em "Here's a sandwich, don't come back til dark!" Imagine that! Sigh...

My sammich came with a 110cc Honda and a rifle. I had a range of roughly 30 miles, and was welcome to do whatever the hell I pleased.

ETA: Mostly it really was just the rifle and bike - if I got hungry I'd usually just kill something and then start a fire.

Your rifle had a range of 30 miles? Are you sure it wasn't artillery? ;)

I used to leave the house (sometimes voluntarily, other times not) in much the same way though without the motorcycle. Sometimes though, I'd leave the rifle and take my fishing pole.

nygold

Nikon D5000

04/03/2015 12:32:41 PM · #70

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by nygold:

If the cops wan't to label you a suspicious character that's an issue with the cops not the Mom.

The police don't operate out a vacuum. Someone had to report a "suspicious" activity and in many instances it is an uninformed parent, devoid of all the fact.

Let me see if I can give you a scenario.

A few years ago I was trying to photograph a gentleman who was sitting on a metal bench playing the accordion, while a steam train (billowing steam) was in the background.

I asked his permission and he gave it to me. I set up my equipment and was about to take the photo when a little girl ran into the picture.

Her mother cut into me like I was some pervert who was bent on taking advantage of her child. I tried to reason with the lady and finally out of frustration I told her that I would personally call the police to deal with the issue and that once I had all of the relevant information I would be communicating with my lawyer who would look into the issue of slander. She left.

In this scenario, just who do you think labelled me? I would add to this that this is an area where I am very well known and that the accusation did not sit well with me.

There are all kinds of ways to look at things.

Ray

Ray stop you sound silly, people call me names every day most of them I can't say in the forums. Being called something in public and being labeled something on a public record are very very different.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/03/2015 01:20:20 PM · #71

Plus, you do sorta look like a perv in that pink shirt and hat...

(I'm sooo kidding)

04/03/2015 04:00:42 PM · #72

Originally posted by nygold:

Not up on slander laws are you?

When someone calls you (whatever) in public and cannot support that allegation, it is called "Slander".

Something that constitutes a defamatory attacks contained in a public record that cannot be supported by demonstrable facts is called "libel".

Considering what this lady called me in public, I can assure you that I could have quite easily initiated civil proceedings against her and in all likelihood would have won.

If you are OK with people demeaning your character with slanderous comments, that is your business, but my good name and reputation mean a great deal to me.

Ray

04/03/2015 04:02:24 PM · #73

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Plus, you do sorta look like a perv in that pink shirt and hat...

(I'm sooo kidding)

I know you are Doc and instance like this do not fall into the category I am alluding to.

I hope all is well with you and yours and that you will have a wonderful Easter holiday.

Ray

04/03/2015 04:02:24 PM · #74

Hmmmm double post.

Message edited by author 2015-04-03 20:03:16.