A story on photo bullying

Here's an article Life Hacker on being bullied while photographing.

http://lifehacker.com/5593080/why-p...s-illegal-and-you-dont-have-to-put-up-with-it

Enjoy.

You know, that's interesting, but I'd be careful following what amounts to legal advice from an article on a blog. Every jurisdiction is different. I just found out, listening to NPR, that in my home state of Illinois, recording a police officer in the course of duty is a felony, even if the police officer is in a public place. Other states have similar, though not as draconian, laws. Now, recording is apparently interpreted as video and audio recording, but you never know, especially as more digital cameras include video.

This is in my mind a horrible trend, and a deeply offensive, wrong-headed and ridiculous law, and I would hope it's barred by the Constitution. But ... if you are faced with a felony charge carrying a 4-11 year prison sentence, it would be hard to stand on principle and challenge it rather than accept a misdemeanor plea.

Anyway, the point is, every jurisdiction is different, and I wouldn't rely on this article. I also would not rush to accuse a police officer of "bullying" you unless you want to be in a world of trouble. Even though you are right.

-Laura

Just because it's in a law code doesn't make it Constitutional; The 1st Amendment trumps State law, every time. These sorts of laws are illegal but as long as they are on the books, cops are going to use them. If we don't protect our civil rights, we will lose them.

tac said:

Just because it's in a law code doesn't make it Constitutional; The 1st Amendment trumps State law, every time. These sorts of laws are illegal but as long as they are on the books, cops are going to use them. If we don't protect our civil rights, we will lose them.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. IANAL, but don't take state law at face value - it cannot override constitutional rights except in exceptional cases.

Mainecoonmaniac said:

Here's an article Life Hacker on being bullied while photographing.

http://lifehacker.com/5593080/why-p...s-illegal-and-you-dont-have-to-put-up-with-it

Enjoy.

Click to expand...

I wrote my congressman support Rep Towns' proposal.

Police, in general will not stop increasing their power until they 'own' all three capacities: legislative, judicial, enforcement. Excuses are sought by them in order to fabricate reasons to beat, humiliate, intimidate, essentially 'own' the 'perp' they corner. Whether defining new laws against picture taking (or anything else that forces them to be seen in clear daylight) they tenaciously hold onto their collective elitism in order to become master and lord. I am so afraid of police (and their 'users', like the management crowd at the Second Sunday show in Wayne, NJ who almost had me arrested for my mentioning interest in a El Nikkor that a patron had for sale two years ago) that I am not afraid, albeit through numbness. Police are supposed to be on society's leash but, in fact, fear has nullified that reality. Unenforced laws remain 'on the books' because that gives police 'reasons' to continue harassment. Photography is only too easy for them not to pass up. But, essentially, it is not only a battle against police malfeasance. It is also a battle of the grand support these actions receive from people most likely to benefit: conservatism in general, Attys General who wish to prevent states from having to pay lawsuits (legitimate or not), DAs who wish to enhance their careers, etc. I am too afraid NOT to post my address: David Lyga, 2003 Chestnut Street # 308, Phila, PA 19103. Land line: 215.569.4949 (Moderator, do what you must.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-10723274 - Nuff said.

David Lyga said:

like the management crowd at the Second Sunday show in Wayne, NJ who almost had me arrested for my mentioning interest in a El Nikkor that a patron had for sale two years ago

Click to expand...

That sounds odd... how can you be threatened with arrest for interest in an item for sale at a camera show? What happened?

rthomas said:

That sounds odd... how can you be threatened with arrest for interest in an item for sale at a camera show? What happened?

Click to expand...

You can be threatened with anything, it's only words. An actual action would be a totally different matter though.

Does sound a bit stupid though. I would have kept enquiring just to test it!


Steve.

tac said:

Just because it's in a law code doesn't make it Constitutional; The 1st Amendment trumps State law, every time. These sorts of laws are illegal but as long as they are on the books, cops are going to use them. If we don't protect our civil rights, we will lose them.

Click to expand...

Okay. You go first. I'll visit you on weekends.

Yea, freedom's not free. But there's got to be more to the process than just violating the law on principle, then hoping for the best. I suppose if our political process were really "by and for the people," there'd be some redress to one's representatives in government, or the courts, or at least a more open-minded process. But it seems lately that the law enforcement/security/military communities are themselves a significant lobby.

As a friend of a friend overheard from a Texas Trooper, "a Police State's not a bad thing ... if you're the police."

~Joe

Here's an interesting link re: several state laws on "recording."

http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/state-law-recording

Sadly, it takes a good deal of $$ to take something to the Supreme Court. If you have it, go get'm.

bobwysiwyg said:

Here's an interesting link re: several state laws on "recording."

Click to expand...

It still amazes me that each state can have different laws. Here in England the same laws apply to the whole country.

That's got to be easier to keep up with if you are a lawyer.


Steve.

You contrast the amazing bit that each state can have its own laws by saying that within one state, the same laws apply?

So the law in England applies to all England, yes.
But how about those other bits of the U.K.?

Steve Smith said:

It still amazes me that each state can have different laws. Here in England the same laws apply to the whole country.

Click to expand...

States' rights were a significant sticking point in the founding of the country, and have been defended by various methods, including, unfortunately, civil war.

Fifty sets of laws = more lawyers; they're very happy with the current arrangement.

Q.G. said:

So the law in England applies to all England, yes.
But how about those other bits of the U.K.?

Click to expand...

Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have variations on the law. Not sure why though.


Steve.

moose10101 said:

Fifty sets of laws = more lawyers; they're very happy with the current arrangement.

Click to expand...

But does it mean that a lawyer in one state cannot work in another state without re-qualifying?


Steve.

Steve Smith said:

But does it mean that a lawyer in one state cannot work in another state without re-qualifying?


Steve.

Click to expand...

Admission to the bar rules. Some state have reciprocial agreements, some don't. So even more lawyers are needed to find out where lawyers can practice law.

RTHOMAS:
About the Second Sunday Camera Show that you asked about: I had been going from Philadelphia (public transport) for about two years and there was a patron on the bus with me who was a regular like me. He had a 50mm El Nikkor for sale for $15 and I said I would like it. We got off the bus and walked to the Firehouse (where the show is held) and as we were walking in I asked to see it. The proprietor told me that that was not permitted so we went out to the parking lot. He followed us and started to give me royal hell and threatened to call the police. NOTE: the patron NEVER received even a modicum of criticism and HE was the person selling the lens. I gulped and went back into the show area and made my purchases as always. I will state now that I bought tons of stuff every show because there is a dealer there (A Duren) who is a human example of exemplary humanity. After the show was over I went to the female at the ticket counter and apoligized for anything I might have done despite the fact that I distinctly heard her thank the thug who did all the screaming. I then left to go back to get the bus to Newark where I would get my train back to Philadelphia. I thought and pondered and decided to write a rather lengthy letter to the show's management and also posted it in the 'Lounge forum' (I believe Jan 2008 or thereabouts). I received a torrent of hate emails from many of the show's dealers and many, many hate postings from this forum. Oddly, Photo.net respondees were much more understanding and conciliatory. Thinking hard and honestly about this incident I have come to the conclusion that the hate was really because I was such an astute buyer and did not patronize dealers who wished to fleece me (I do not think that either Arnie nor Artie Duren, who are twins by the way, even know HOW to fleece anyone). After that hate spate I decided to never return because I was not prepared for both the hate gauntlet at the door the next time I entered and was genuinely afraid of the Wayne police waiting for me to stub my toe and then arrest me. I could name names, some of whom are familiar to this forum, but I will spare the ignominy. Each morning when I wake up I remember fully and personally acknowledge to myself that I have hurt no one. But that is not good enough for some ethically challenged people out there. - David Lyga

rthomas said:

That sounds odd... how can you be threatened with arrest for interest in an item for sale at a camera show? What happened?

Click to expand...

This confused me also. Can we get some clarification on this? (We're at a camera show, a patron of the camera show expresses an interest in a camera for sale at said camera show, and someone threatens to arrest the patron? What am I missing? :confused: )

I'm no fan of abuses by authorities of whatever kind, but something seems a little off about this story as it currently stands.

FWIW, I do think that were my camera-toting high school friends and I attempting to take the same photos we took back then (of public buildings, etc.), we'd be at least asked to cease and desist if not detained by cops/security guards trying to make the "next big score" in the War On Whatever It Is We're Against Today.

(Edit: Looks like the clarification was posted just as I was making my own post--thanks.)

David Lyga said:

RTHOMAS:
About the Second Sunday Camera Show that you asked about:

Click to expand...

(Snipped for brevity's sake)

So the proprietors of the show were more or less harassing you for not going through the dealers there...if they don't like you cutting a separate deal, they need to get over it or lose your business altogether. (But the two of you might have been wiser to keep it a little quieter. )

RTHOMAS:
About the Second Sunday Camera Show that you asked about: I had been going from Philadelphia (public transport) for about two years and there was a patron on the bus with me who was a regular like me. He had a 50mm El Nikkor for sale for $15 and I said I would like it. We got off the bus and walked to the Firehouse (where the show is held) and as we were walking in I asked to see it. The proprietor told me that that was not permitted so we went out to the parking lot. He followed us and started to give me royal hell and threatened to call the police. NOTE: the patron NEVER received even a modicum of criticism and HE was the person selling the lens. Can anyone infer why? I gulped and went back into the show area and made my purchases as always. I will state now that I bought tons of stuff every show because there is a dealer there (Artie Duren) who is a human example of exemplary humanity. After the show was over I went to the female at the ticket counter and apoligized for anything I might have done despite distinctly hearing her thank the thug who screamed at me. I then left to go back to get the bus to Newark where I would get my train back to Philadelphia. I thought and pondered and decided to write a rather lengthy letter to the show's management and also posted it in the 'Lounge forum' here (I believe Jan 2008 or thereabouts). I received a torrent of hate emails from many of the show's dealers and many, many hate postings from this forum. Oddly, Photo.net respondees were much more understanding and conciliatory. Thinking hard and honestly about this incident I have come to the conclusion that the hate was really because I was such an astute buyer and did not patronize dealers who wished to fleece me (I do not think that either Arnie nor Arite, who are twins by the way, even know HOW to fleece anyone). They were jealous that the Durens got 90% of my business. After that hate spate I decided to never return because I was not prepared for both the hate gauntlet at the door the next time I entered (both management and dealers) and was genuinely afraid of the Wayne police waiting for me to stub my toe and then arrest me. When you are a local proprietor and hold a show at the Wayne, NJ firehouse you have 'clout' and sometimes 'own' the police whom I have no reason adhere to a sense of ethics (that would place me in a neutral position). I could name names, some of whom are familiar to this forum, but I will spare the ignominy. Each morning when I wake up I remember fully, and personally acknowledge to myself that I have hurt no one. I would rather be a victim than be a perpetrator in life. But that assessment is not good enough for some ethically challenged people out there. - David Lyga (david33x@yahoo.com)

Wow, I too would have stopped going. I've met individuals (not dealers) selling items at camera shows and cut deals right on the spot. That's how I got my first Fuji 645 RF camera. It never occurred to me that anybody would take issue with that.

moose10101 said:

States' rights were a significant sticking point in the founding of the country, and have been defended by various methods, including, unfortunately, civil war.

Fifty sets of laws = more lawyers; they're very happy with the current arrangement.

Click to expand...

From a Canadian perspective here.

Different legal responsibilities are given to different jurisdictions. For example, criminal law is a national responsibility, whereas the law about wills and estates is a provincial responsibility.

It gets really fun when the subject of the law can fit in both sets of responsibilities.

Most lawyers don't get any joy from the fact that the laws vary from province to province. For example, there is nothing more frustrating than having to tell someone that most likely they will have to seek help from a lawyer 5000 km away, because their parent lived that far away, and that parent's screwed up Will is subject to that jurisdiction's laws.

Steve Smith said:

Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have variations on the law. Not sure why though.

Click to expand...

"[...] does it mean that a lawyer in one [country] cannot work in another [country] without re-qualifying?"

Q.G. said:

"[...] does it mean that a lawyer in one [country] cannot work in another [country] without re-qualifying?"

Click to expand...

That's a good question and I don't know the answer... yet!

I will find out.


EDIT: From what I can find out - England and Wales are treated as a single jurisdiction so I think if you are qualified in one of those countries, you can practise in the other. Scotland and Northern Ireland are separate though.




Steve.