"Dangerous perverts wandering around your district..."?
Guys, think back to the last pizza guy who delivered to your house. Was
he by any chance a pimply faced teenager himself? So he went to the
football game and took some photos of girls... Dangerous pervert that he
was... Good thing the cops were on the job...
Mrs Reed, I suggest you lock the doors and crawl under the bed, maybe
you will be safe there. However watch out for the dust bunnies they are
dangerous indeed. And by the way, the guy is not a dangerous pervert
until 12 members of a jury and a judge say he is. Until that time you
are guilty of libel, and he can and should sue the shit out of you.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
E.R.N. Reed wrote:
William Robb wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "E.R.N. Reed"
Subject: Re: Today I Was Stopped by the Police While Photographing
With all respect, I disagree with your conclusion that this will
lead to a police state,
In the last week we have now heard three stories of photographers
being harassed by police for photographing publicly viewable subjects
in public places.
With all due respect, this is leading to a police state situation for
a particular demographic, at the very least.
I think you have a very exaggerated view of the meaning of "police
state". It doesn't mean a state in which police exist and are actively
doing their job. You also have an exaggerated view of the meaning of
"harassed." It doesn't mean politely conversed with in a public, open
setting.
I saw the same stories you did. One of them I only glanced at briefly
once, in a hurry, and since I don't want to go back and look for it, I
won't comment on it. The other two can be summarized thus: "Concerned
citizen thought something looked funny about the behaviour of a
strange man with a camera and asked police to check it out. Police
approached subject. (In one case we know that police approached
subject very politely. We have no information as to how they
approached the other.) One subject was pleasant, cooperative and
obviously harmless and police went on their way and let him go his
way. As to the other subject, the police looked at his camera, with
his consent, and (being apparently still or even more concerned) then
his car, and the more they looked at him, the more it appeared that he
might be a menace, and so he was detained."
If you want dangerous perverts to wander around your district and
never be caught, you're entitled to your opinion. (Which we have now
heard, over and over.) My opinion, (which I've also shared many times
and so I suppose this can be the last time) is that I do not want
dangerous perverts on the loose where I live, and I like the idea that
police have taken a close look at this guy -- hopefully if he actually
is a potential threat, he can be stopped before he escalates an
unhealthy interest in the pizza-delivery customers, high-school
football spectators, etc., of this area, to stalking, abduction, rape
and murder.
It is the job of the police to keep the citizenry safe. That's going
to mean that sometimes they take a look at something that might seem a
little bit unusual, and they find there's no problem there at all. And
sometimes they take a look at something that might seem a little bit
unusual, and they find a genuine, big problem.
