Questioned by the FBI and Local Police

There are cops who are good and cops who are bad. My late uncle was a cop and I personally know a deputy sheriff (in fact I talked to him this morning). Even he has told me there are some people he works with that he doesn't approve of. It is probably a very good idea to be aware of this and act accordingly.

The bad cops are easy to spot, they always try to escalate incidents into more serious situations. These types will always assume everyone they encounter is a criminal. They push people's buttons, make wild accusations, and deliberately upset us. Fear and intimidation are their friends. They are quick with the taser and pepper spray. Eventually they end up in the pages of badcopnews.com and bring disgrace on their department. Unfortunately, some politicians support this style of law enforcement. It's the US Federal model so it's often tied to federal handouts.

A good cop will always try to defuse a situation. If somebody is upset they will try to calm them down, not egg them on. They are slow to anger and brush off harsh words. Most citizens are not criminals in their eyes. They feel their job is to maintain peace and let people go about their affairs. They are not looking to fill the jail up every night, their goal is to have a community where people can live productive lives without fear.

MP_Wayne said:

THAT second part of the demand for ID was illegal search and seizure, not the initial questioning and my providing of answers.

I hope this clarifies my earlier points, as random spot check demands for IDs is the France of today (but with a Napoleanic legal code) and Germany of the 1930s and 1940s. We do not want to be there. I am not anti-law enforcement - far from it - but I will not abide by sloppy, abusive police work when observation and reasonable discourse handles most situations. An unwarranted ID check is NOT in keeping with a so-called "free" society.

Click to expand...

I believe the police do have the right to identify who you are. Just like while driving, you're presenting licence and registration, when approached by the police they do ask you for ID to check for outstanding warrants.

Granted, you're doing nothing illegal, but you are doing something "out of the ordinary" and the vigilant eye of LE wants to know who you are.

This is why I don't shoot architecture. I want to fly around the world without my cavities examined on every border crossing. I will get approached, they might put me on some list and then I'll be in trouble.

The evil machine silenced me already.

nsurit said:

Any who think this is the usual mode of operation for law enforcement have not thought this one through very thoroughly. Bill Barber

Click to expand...

Maybe it now is the usual mode? I hope not..

arigram said:

I will make one last comment.
Society cannot be held together by violence.
Laws and their enforcement tools are violent
A society that is violently bound will violently
explode when its binds are too tight.
Violence breeds violence.
The more rotten a society is, the more violence is present.
Problem is that most people stick to their
basic instincts like babies: they like to be bound as to feel secure.

Its not the police or laws that protect me from "bad guys" its a
well functioning and caring society.

Click to expand...

Ari,

Terrorist want to see us falter and fail on this philosophy (last sentence). And so far, they are winning. They would rejoice the day we begin to instill draconian 'laws' they would implement themselves. As long as we keep reminding ourselves that their version of utopia is what you state in your first sentence, hopefully Enough of us will be sane enough to give them the finger by taking lots of photos in public places without incident.

Regards, Art

If, by 'Terrorists' (or terrorist as you said) you mean the Fed and the Banks and others in power above THEM - then I suppose I'd agree. I'm not sure which 'terrorists' you are referring to otherwise. I think someone's been watching too much '24'...!

gr82bart said:

Ari,

Terrorist want to see us falter and fail on this philosophy (last sentence). And so far, they are winning. They would rejoice the day we begin to instill draconian 'laws' they would implement themselves. As long as we keep reminding ourselves that their version of utopia is what you state in your first sentence, hopefully Enough of us will be sane enough to give them the finger by taking lots of photos in public places without incident.

Regards, Art

Click to expand...

jd callow said:

At least that is my opinion -- in my tiny mind I find it beyond funny to think these folks live to destroy our freedoms, our way of life and that they intend to convert.

Click to expand...

That's because it wouldn't ever happen - to my mind. I think this administration has used it as an excuse for certain actions that gullible or vain people would buy (sorry- i know some won't agree with me) - but I don't think that ANYBODY is SOOOO important that others would bother devoting their lives to that cause. We'd just like to believe that about ourselves. I mean - THINK about it...! Under WHAT conditions would you devote YOUR life to making others miserable..? I think pretty much everyone lives by the 'live and let live' credo unless directly attacked (we can look at the perpetual back and forth of israel/palestine to see an example of this!). I mean - doncha think...?

Sparky said:

I think pretty much everyone lives by the 'live and let live' credo unless directly attacked

Click to expand...

I'm not so sure about that.

The real threat to our way of life is cyberterror. Not bombs, not train wrecks or plane crashes. Computer crashes. And should they develop hacking capability into SCADA systems, our entire power generation and water supply infrastructure could be crippled in the twinkling of an eye.

c6h6o3 said:

I'm not so sure about that.

The real threat to our way of life is cyberterror. Not bombs, not train wrecks or plane crashes. Computer crashes. And should they develop hacking capability into SCADA systems, our entire power generation and water supply infrastructure could be crippled in the twinkling of an eye.

Click to expand...

Black Hats and Crackers (as opposed to legit hackers) have always been a problem since day one on DARPA, which eventually became the backbone of the Internet in the USA.

Ever read, "The Cuckoo's Egg"? Not a new problem, NOR is it an exclusive result of the latest battle of imperial or religious head-butting.

Yes, people are trying to break into our (the USA's) sensitive networks, just like we are trying to break into theirs, don't kid yourself.

That we are vulnerable to script kiddies or even experienced foreign agent black hats is more of a mark against the administrators who have known about the problems for now going on decades and have yet to adequately secure their systems.

These are not natural forces that are unpredictable; the systems and the fixes are known and costly and inconvenient, but the choice has been made (in practical terms) to overlook the problems and take the risks; for whatever reason.



i

Kino said:

These are not natural forces that are unpredictable; the systems and the fixes are known and costly and inconvenient, but the choice has been made (in practical terms) to overlook the problems and take the risks; for whatever reason.

Click to expand...

Microsoft pays well?

I started to read this topic, and I must admit, I'm not that much surprised.Stories about USA and some liberties now seem truth.

I was in Iran last summer, and had taken thousand of photos, of people, transportation, landscapes...Do I have to tell you that literally, NO ONE bothered me about taking photographs?Only government buildings are prohibited to take photos, so if you wanna take photo, police politely shows you that it is forbidden.And I have Nikon F80, which is not small camera by general means.

I bet no one of you guys that live in USA can't believe that what I wrote?

And, I must agree with walter23, as he stated:

Being interrogated, while going about your daily business, by federal agents (with the power to throw you away without trial) is the antithesis of living in a free society.

Is that the free society if you are being practically interrogated by police for taking photographs?

Well, I must say that Croatia is similar with this in means of railway photography.People that don't have license are often bothered by railway security guards, and sometimes they call police also.
Also in border areas, police will tell you that photographing is forbidden.

Reactionaries and the Security State

Whew, this is a long thread. As per the OP's original experience:

I was out photographing in downtown Albuquerque just 2 days ago. Although I didn't have a tripod or LF camera with me, just a rangefinder - although it's a Zorki IV, so it could be misconstrued as Baltic economic terrorism, and I was using that unAmerican Ilford film - I was at the very same transportation center that the OP referred to. I was also taking pictures of the Amtrak and its passengers and employees. I wasn't hassled; even had a chance to talk with a conductor.

Perhaps the problem is that the tripod makes one's actions very obvious. I suspect what caused the problem with the OP was that someone called in a complaint. Simple as that. And the security apparatus that's been setup since 9/11 is geared to respond to every little complaint. After all, no career professional wants to compromise his retirement over inadequate response.

When the security atmosphere operates with a working motto of "you can't be too careful", it ignores the common-sense reality that, yes, you CAN be too careful; that's called over-reaction. Perhaps Reactionaries are less than sensitive to over-reaction; don't know.

I am amused by the multi-agency 'response' to the incident. Although it could have been initiated by some uber-reactive multi-agency task force, bent on ridding the world of all non-embedded photojournalists, I suspect it was really a group of feds walking back from lunch at Tacano's, the Brazilian restaraunt across the street from the transport center, and happened to spot the OP out on the street with his gear, and decided to check it out.

Your tax dollars at work.

~Joe

Hey Joe....glad to hear you did not have any problems.

Also, I did not use a tripod. Just me and the camera standing in the middle of the road.

Joe,

I take it then that you were photographing up on the platform area? That isn't in the street and is out of eyesight of the Greyhound security guards. I don't like them, they are real mean to people, even Amtrak passengers. It wouldn't surprise me if they didn't phone it in. David, you were in front on First St. so I suspect that was the difference. Not only can Greyhound security see you but also security for Alvarado Transit Center. Maybe the parking garage attendants on the west side of the street could have phoned it in. There are tons of homeless around there and they don't put up with much.

BNSF doesn't own the tracks anymore and so far NMRX doesn't give a flip about photography. That is good because my property borders theirs out here in Alameda. I take photos at my back fence all the time (sunsets and storms to the northwest). Rail Runner engineers just wave!

nc5p said:

I take it then that you were photographing up on the platform area?

Click to expand...

I was up on the platform, and also on the sidewalk in front of the Transit Center, as well as up and down Central and Gold avenues, stalking for street photos. Some folks were behind the El Rey Theater, in the alley, clearing out stuff from the recent fire, and I took some shots there, too.

I didn't actually stand in the street, however. I learned that years ago, as a sailor in San Diego, when SD police would run 3 red lights to ticket a sailor for "jaywalking" who had literally stepped just one foot off the curb onto the gutter. But them streets was sure a lot safer for it, yessirree.

I dunno, but if a person needed to stand out in the street in order to photograph, it might be smarter to get a permit, and post red safety cones and barricades and signage, etc. But it takes a lot of the sponteneity out of street photography that way, doesn't it?

~Joe