In the dark of night

[stephen]

We are able to take photos of most anything we like, discounting things now considered security concerns...

Depends where you are. Readers of the UK weekly "Amateur Photographer" are aware that this is not the case in the UK.

The London police work on the assumption (apparently under orders from their bosses) that anyone taking photos in a public place where children are present is a paedophile, and should be arrested and their equipment confiscated until they can prove otherwise. The police advise that anyone wishing to take photos in a public place where children might be present should get police permission first.

In Manchester one reader was almost arrested because he took some architectural detail photos, and just happened to have a tax office as a back drop. The police took the line that photographing any government buildings was now illegal under the prevention of terrorism act.

And a reader out with an AP columnist near the Houses of Parliament had a run in with the police becaise some of his photos happened to include the spy cameras.

 

[bjorke]

What if photography was outlawed in your
country as "beholding images","idoltry",or anyone with a camera had to register it with the authorities(hey in ww2 the Nazi's had everyone register
their bicycles and that sounds ridiculous even for a dictatorship-also radios).

You know the Santa Clara police even made my children register their bicycles. I'm marching right over there to complain about that to those Taliban scum.

(PS: get and read a copy of Red Color News Soldier)

 

[jim kirk jr.]

You know the Santa Clara police even made my children register their bicycles. I'm marching right over there to complain about that to those Taliban scum.

 

[Art Vandalay]

A quick story: I live in a highly multicultural city. I was out shooting with a friend on one of the main streets here and we unknowingly wandered into a muslim section (it didn't exist 5 years ago!). While my friend went into a store for something I just happened to point my TLR at a store window that had an odd-looking rubber plant in it - I didn't take a picture. Within seconds I was surrounded by 5 muslim men who were ready to beat the crap out of me. The leader told me, in no uncertain terms, that I am allowed to photograph the sky, the trees and the birds but not people or their property (including their cars) and that as a photographer I should know that. I resisted the desire to tell him he was full of shit and should read the laws of the country he is living in, but that would've just given them the excuse they were looking for.

It was at that point that I realized that no matter how 'peaceful and serene' someone says their religion is that they might suddenly turn the opposite if their beliefs are challenged. I also thought about the question of what would happen if the fastest growing religion in the world would eventually have any influence whatsoever in my country. The answer would be that what I take for granted could be taken from me. In reality I doubt this would ever happen in Canada but the fact is that there is already a small area of my city - the city that I have grown up in - where my health could be threatened just because I put a camera to my eye.

I can't imagine living in a society where I do not have the freedoms that I am used to and I'm thankful that I live in a society that tries to use rational thought to govern rather than an old, tattered religious manuscript or the writings of a megalomaniac.

 

[c6h6o3]

I resisted the desire to tell him he was full of shit and should read the laws of the country he is living in, but that would've just given them the excuse they were looking for.

That's good. I would hate to see you stomped to death by disciples of Allah the Compassionate, the Merciful.

 

[Andy K]

I was surrounded by 5 muslim men

Did they clearly state they were moslem and that their religion was the reason they confronted you? Or were they shopkeepers objecting to their shops being photographed?
I was surrounded and threatened by railway employees not so long ago, who objected to me taking photographs around my local station. Two of them were african, one was asian, one was white, one was a woman. Do I now have a case to say 'Watch out for those women, Hindus and Christians...'?

I'm thankful that I live in a society that tries to use rational thought to govern...

Rational thought such as the following comment?

That's good. I would hate to see you stomped to death by disciples of Allah the Compassionate, the Merciful

As opposed to being bombed to death by disciples of Jesus the Saviour?
This is how wars start. One side has an ingrained generalised and ill-informed view of the other. Not all moslems are radical fundamentalists. Just as not all Christians are kind, compassionate and forgiving.

We might also remember there are many photographers who are moslem, and there may even be members of APUG who are moslem. I personally do not wish to be part of alienating anyone from this site with generalisations.

 

[TPPhotog]

As opposed to being bombed to death by disciples of Jesus the Saviour?
This is how wars start. One side has an ingrained generalised and ill-informed view of the other. Not all moslems are radical fundamentalists. Just as not all Christians are kind, compassionate and forgiving.

We might also remember there are many photographers who are moslem, and there may even be members of APUG who are moslem. I personally do not wish to be part of alienating anyone from this site with generalisations.

Well said Andy. I learned a long time ago that everyone is different and just by looking at a stranger we cannot really tell what their beliefs or the reasons for the way they act. I have met people from many different religions and belief systems each one unique as a person and deserves to be treated as such.

 

[clogz]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3980371.stm

 

[TPPhotog]

Hans thanks for the link. Alas intolerance seems to be as evident these days as it was in the days leading up to the second world war. You'd have thought that by now we would have learned lessons.

 

[clogz]

Tony, the sad thing is that it has been political correctness that landed us in this predicament. Our much cherished freedom of conscience that dated back to the 17th century is slowly coming to an end. I feel sad and if I wore a younger man's clothes I would not hesitate to emigrate.

 

[TPPhotog]

Hans the sad thing is that I keep considering emigration for the same reasons, but everywhere I've thought of moving to is the same. Remember the old proverb about 2 men meeting whilst travelling in opposite directions on a road?

 

[Dave Miller]

I simple cannot stand intolerance.

 

[jim kirk jr.]

I also thought about the question of what would happen if the fastest growing religion in the world would eventually have any influence whatsoever in my country. The answer would be that what I take for granted could be taken from me.

I can't imagine living in a society where I do not have the freedoms that I am used to and I'm thankful that I live in a society that tries to use rational thought to govern rather than an old, tattered religious manuscript or the writings of a megalomaniac.

As stated in the original post I'm trying to stay away from any sort of politcal/religous mess so I'll be brief.You brought up a good point Art but the reality is that it dosn't need to be the fastest growing religion,or political
mass movement to cause your freedoms to disappear.Just for a quik example-look at Saddam's Iraq-the minority of the country took away or severely
restricted the rights of the majority religion and other ethnic groups that were
as large in population and shared a common religion.There are many instances
in history where smaller groups with better weapons enslaved or ruled the weaker majority;Goths,Vandals,Assyrians,Romans,Greeks,all the colonial powers of the last few centuries,Mongols,Incas,Aztecs to name but a few.
All were population wise in the minority of the empires they created and yet
ruled whether by fear or otherwise with only a handful of soldiers and officials.
The problem is that it can happen from within a country these days and go
unnoticed until it's too late.But I digress from the original situation of the post.

 

[jim kirk jr.]

I simple cannot stand intolerance.

I agree.now if everyone else in the world did as well then we wouldn't even
have a word for it....I can deal with one less word in the dictionary.

 

[Art Vandalay]

As stated in the original post I'm trying to stay away from any sort of politcal/religous mess so I'll be brief.You brought up a good point Art but the reality is that it dosn't need to be the fastest growing religion,or political
mass movement to cause your freedoms to disappear.Just for a quik example-look at Saddam's Iraq-the minority of the country took away or severely
restricted the rights of the majority religion and other ethnic groups that were
as large in population and shared a common religion.There are many instances
in history where smaller groups with better weapons enslaved or ruled the weaker majority;Goths,Vandals,Assyrians,Romans,Greeks,all the colonial powers of the last few centuries,Mongols,Incas,Aztecs to name but a few.
All were population wise in the minority of the empires they created and yet
ruled whether by fear or otherwise with only a handful of soldiers and officials.
The problem is that it can happen from within a country these days and go
unnoticed until it's too late.But I digress from the original situation of the post.

I absolutely agree, which is why I included the 'writings of a megalomaniac' in my last line. Whether it's religion or rantings I don't want to governed by any of them. BTW I also don't want to be governed by purely Christian principles any more than by Islamic ideology. Both are too rigid.

 

[Art Vandalay]

I know this going to get me into a lot of trouble but I can't help notice that there is a real desire to be seen as tolerant here, but I can still clearly remember being challenged when I said something good about digital technology. I also remember at least some threads classifying people according to their camera technology. But people aren't perfect and tolerance is rather plastic in nature.

 

[jim kirk jr.]

I know this going to get me into a lot of trouble but I can't help notice that there is a real desire to be seen as tolerant here, but I can still clearly remember being challenged when I said something good about digital technology. I also remember at least some threads classifying people according to their camera technology. But people aren't perfect and tolerance is rather plastic in nature.

Point taken.
Personally digital isn't for me-I don't believe I've ever downed on anyone for using it-although I've been downed upon for not(though not here).
My original post,though extreme in it's restrictions on personally photographic
liberty,is something I don't want to see anywhere,anytime,against any people
using whatever photographic medium.

P.S.-I'm not going into the whole classifying people in terms of digital or film.I
think it's been done to death here.In any event some of the people on
this site use digital also although I'm not one of them.

 

[Art Vandalay]

Point taken.
Personally digital isn't for me-I don't believe I've ever downed on anyone for using it-although I've been downed upon for not(though not here).
My original post,though extreme in it's restrictions on personally photographic
liberty,is something I don't want to see anywhere,anytime,against any people
using whatever photographic medium.

P.S.-I'm not going into the whole classifying people in terms of digital or film.I
think it's been done to death here.In any event some of the people on
this site use digital also although I'm not one of them.

I definitely was no referring to you Jim but to the site in general. Tolerance is much easier to exercise when things are going your way