This Is Going Too Far

[PhiPsiRuss]

Questioning of Photo Student Challenged

Fri Jul 16, 2:49 AM ET

By ELIZABETH M. GILLESPIE, Associated Press Writer

SEATTLE - Ian Spiers had just hours to finish an assignment for his photography class. He was taking shots of a railroad bridge near the Ballard Locks when an officer with a German shepherd approached him, asked him what he was doing and requested some ID.

Later, he was questioned and photographed by a Homeland Security agent.

It was the second time in less than two months that Spiers had been questioned about taking pictures of a landmark that attracts hundreds of tourists a day, many of whom snap photos of the ships passing between Lake Union and Elliott Bay.

A growing number of photographers around the country have been similarly rousted in recent years as they've tried to take pictures of federal buildings and other major public works, said Donald Winslow, editor of the National Press Photographers Association's magazine.

More of article here: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...her_questioned

========================================
This is ridiculous. Its a real infringement on our liberties, and it needs to end.

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
This is ridiculous. Its a real infringement on our liberties, and it needs to end.

Welcome to the Patroit Act. It is mostly an affront to our liberties, I think.

I'm all for law enforcement and homeland security, but not at the risk of our basic Constitutional values.

[lifesaver]

I tend to disagree.

If they have credentials or can prove that they arent doing anything nefarious, they dont have anything to worry about. I wouldnt be upset about it if it happened to me. Being viligent is how we keep buildings from getting blown up and stuff.

[AlphaSigOU]

The same thing is happening to airplane spotters and photographers who congregate around airport runways. Few airports today are considered 'spotter friendly' with dedicated parking and observation areas. In the post 9/11 days, some airports have closed down spotter areas as well.

In Britain, they've actually enlisted the aid of spotters to keep an eye on any suspicious activities around the airport. The cops can't be everywhere everytime!

[Kevin]

Originally posted by lifesaver
I tend to disagree.

If they have credentials or can prove that they arent doing anything nefarious, they dont have anything to worry about. I wouldnt be upset about it if it happened to me. Being viligent is how we keep buildings from getting blown up and stuff.

Do y'all know how damned easy it would be to take out one of those suspension bridges? It's really no wonder they're a target. During rush hour, the potential loss of life is inconceivable. If there's even a remote chance of stopping such an attack, I don't really care if a few "artists" are harassed.

It could be a slippery slope, but who knows?

[Peaches-n-Cream]

I am happy to see that security is so strong. If I were standing around taking photos of tunnels, bridges, and various landmarks around NYC, I would hope that security would stop me.

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by lifesaver
If they have credentials or can prove that they arent doing anything nefarious, they dont have anything to worry about.

Sounds good on paper, but why would a student (which the person in question is) have credentials, and how could he/she prove it was a class assignment.

I understand that it's a thin line between security and the rights that we have cherished for over two hundred years, but I think in some cases we've crossed that line.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by Peaches-n-Cream
...taking photos of tunnels, bridges, and various landmarks around NYC...

We used to call such people tourists.

People are now banned from taking pictures in the subway here. This is ridiculous. It won't stop anything. Boxcutters were banned from airplanes before 9-11. What was needed was secure cabin doors.

Stopping photographers is a waste of resources. We're going after a potential effect of a cause, not a cause. This is completely irrational.

[Munchkin03]

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Sounds good on paper, but why would a student (which the person in question is) have credentials, and how could he/she prove it was a class assignment.

Well, I'm studying historic architecture right now, and a lot of our coursework involves documenting various buildings and landmarks in the city. Our faculty are, obviously, well aware that our behavior, which even 4 years ago wouldn't be looked at sideways, could be seen as suspicious. So, they used their contacts with a certain city agency, and when we're questioned in certain areas, we mention that we have the clearance from So-and-so. That tends to help, but it's different to do this for graduate school and not a HS photo project.

I think America is reacting to terrorism in a way that only a new country which experienced a major terrorist attack would. I don't want to call it over-reaction, but older nations with a history of major terrorist attacks have probably found better ways to protect themselves without revoking civil liberties. Soon, we will perfect the art of providing homeland security without infringing on basic civil rights.

[Rudey]

Does anyone have a better solution?

-Rudey

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by Rudey
Does anyone have a better solution?

-Rudey

Its not a solution. Its an overreaction that will erode public support for the measures that are needed. Its counterproductive.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
Its not a solution. Its an overreaction that will erode public support for the measures that are needed. Its counterproductive.

Maybe, maybe not.

Most people care if it's something that affects them. I haven't even seen a massive fight put on by photographers against this.

And again, if there is any alternative to this, I would like to know.

-Rudey

[James]

You just don't have to do it at all.

Not all security procedures are called for or justified.

So in this case, i wouldn't say they have to do something differently, they just don't have to do anything at all like that.

At the height of the cold war we didn't do stuff like that during a time when we thought the Russians wanted to destroy us.

A time before any competent person could just access all that information via the internet from a public terminal.

Or any smart person could just go tp apublic library and research major targets. As long as they don't check the books out there is no record of it. Hell they can get the schematics from a good library.

Originally posted by Rudey
Maybe, maybe not.

Most people care if it's something that affects them. I haven't even seen a massive fight put on by photographers against this.

And again, if there is any alternative to this, I would like to know.

-Rudey

[Tom Earp]

Once again The Ugly Head Arises.

It is the Patrioact Act.

The People of The USA or being subjegated to more and stricture rules.

While it is supposedly not ment for us, read what it says!

According To This Act, What I just typed here could be considered as such.

AS A Law Abiding Citizen, if I disagree, I could be held in Contempt of the Act of Being a Patriot.

Just how many know of a super Computer that Moniters Emails, Phone Calls, PMs or anything else looking for Key Words?

Key Words, well stop and think! What Super Computer is designed to do is pick these words out of all of these Services and be spyed upon.

Sorry, as sad as it sounds is True!

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

I'm not sure how to ease the overreaction except for maybe stop with the stupid Homeland Security press releases "We have no idea when or where or if it is credible, but there may be an attack" Tom Ridge is useless when he does that shit and just goes back to McCarthyism scare tactics- then you have the public and po-po reactions that photographers are threats to the US.