The one depressing thing that I find reading this thread is that it's clear that the fear and paranoia spread by our leaders has clawed its way into the consciences of many people.
I had imagined that almost every contributor would rather like to feel that they can go about their hobby or business without being interfered with by over zealous law enforcement.
It is frankly laughable to suggest that terrorists would target the location in question and even if they were of a mind to do so that they would wander around in the conspicuous manner of gmonkeh taking photographs.
Ah dear, another disgruntled law abiding citizen who feels uncomfortable going about his daily business and another victory for fear, paranoia and those who would seek to alter our way of life.
Sad times indeed.
Charlie
And the reverse can easily be said.
It's sad that everyone is SO afraid of offending people that they would prefer the cops don't do their job for risk of being accused of racially profiling.
And Angelo... there was no great tyranny here. There were two cops and a guy taking pictures. They saw him and made a judgement call as to whether they should question him or not, and they chose to play it safe and question him. Nothing else happened. No one told him to delete his photos, no one abused him, no great debacle ensued. It was pretty simple.
Amy Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep. The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
It's sad that everyone is SO afraid of offending people that they would prefer the cops don't do their job for risk of being accused of racially profiling.
And Angelo... there was no great tyranny here. There were two cops and a guy taking pictures. They saw him and made a judgement call as to whether they should question him or not, and they chose to play it safe and question him. Nothing else happened. No one told him to delete his photos, no one abused him, no great debacle ensued. It was pretty simple.
...and in my opinion it was poor judgement. However, if asking him questions was not offensive, requiring him to produce identification was, IMO.
We have a right to privacy and that includes safeguards against unreasonable search, which this constitutes.
For anyone not informed about legal policing policy in the USA, patrolmen, for whom I have great admiration and respect and number several in my family, are charged with keeping the peace and enforcing laws. That means they are to act accordingly if they witness someone violating a legal statute. Since taking photographs does not violate any such statute there was no reason to take action.
If someone in the crowd raised suspicion they should have been advised there was nothing illegal going on and directed to make a formal complaint beyond that. We have a right to know why we're being questioned and by what accusation if any. I said before and I repeat now, I would NEVER answer any questions or produce identification, to anyone, without being told why.
Remember FDR's words: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"
What's fitting about those words in today's US is that we've been led around by the nose by irrational fears of terrorism and therein lies tyranny in the 21st century.
It's sad that everyone is SO afraid of offending people that they would prefer the cops don't do their job for risk of being accused of racially profiling.
And Angelo... there was no great tyranny here. There were two cops and a guy taking pictures. They saw him and made a judgement call as to whether they should question him or not, and they chose to play it safe and question him. Nothing else happened. No one told him to delete his photos, no one abused him, no great debacle ensued. It was pretty simple.
You say the reverse could equally be said, wow, I for one will never be able to get my head around your point of view.
The one depressing thing that I find reading this thread is that it's clear that the fear and paranoia spread by our leaders has clawed its way into the consciences of many people.
...
It is frankly laughable to suggest that terrorists would target the location in question and even if they were of a mind to do so that they would wander around in the conspicuous manner of gmonkeh taking photographs.
Terrorism? Where in any of gmonkeh's post is there any indication that gmonkeh was stopped because of concerns about terrorism? The terrorism connection is all in the minds of the folks who are claiming this is a racial incident. Maybe they thought he was planning a robbery, child molestation, or who knows what. But you folks talk like it's a given that he was questioned because of race and terrorism concerns. That's the only part that's laughable here.
Here's a newsflash. People got questioned for suspicious behavior long before 9/11 or Osama Bin Laden. I previously posted an anecdote where I myself was questioned in almost identical fashion to gmonkeh -- for looking through binoculars for pete's sake! And that was 20 years ago! Was I annoyed at the time? You bet. And I still remember it after all these years. Since I'm white, I can't call it a racial incident. But if I was black, I can? No way. Just because a person isn't white doesn't automatically give them a pass by what appears to be stupid behavior by the cops.
You can argue all day long whether a cop has a right to question you for something that appears to be suspicious. That is a different question and frankly, I don't have an opinion on that. What I object to is calling it a racial incident just because the person who got questioned is of color. THAT is racism folks.
I seriously woudn't give a rat's arsehole if they questioned me or not. It was their attitude and the manner that they did the questioning. If you read the OP I was being cooperative and tried to explain to them that I was a photographer, I ran my own studio and I tried to give him a business card. He refused and got a bit defensive. I then asked him if photography wasn't allowed by the ferry terminal. He answered in a matter befitting a jackass that "You can take all the pictures you want but you will have to deal with me". And he asked me all types of questions like why did I move to Bremerton, where do I live, where did I used to live. What's my wife's name. Where does my wife work. You know, just questions you would normally expect while out taking pictures. Again I may have bite in my tone now but i'm getting tired of people alluding to this as my fault.
If they had been civil about the questioning then we wouldn't have this 8 page thread that I've come to know and love.
He answered in a matter befitting a jackass that "You can take all the pictures you want but you will have to deal with me".
All other things aside, racism, terrorism, whatever...If you were treated like crap, and given attitude, I'm sure their supervisor would be interested in knowing. If a waiter/waitress gave you attitude you probably wouldn't hesitate to tell the manager, so why should this be any different?
Charlie - what point of view do you think that is that you can't get your head around? I'm curious to know what you're suggesting.
Kdog, you make interesting points...
I'd also add that cops have had been known for their attitude problem long before 9/11... whether it has anything to do with racial profiling or not. I've been questioned by the goods one and the bad ones, and the same applies to my husband. My husband has been approached for merely sitting in his car waiting for our daughter by cops with attitude.
So Lex, really, I still don't see this as that big a deal. I honestly don't see any great injustice whether the cops had a bad attitude with you or not. That still doesn't indicate to me that you were definitivey singled out purely because of the color of your skin.
If you feel filing a complaint with the police department will solve a greater problem, that's your right, so go for it.
Amy Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep. The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
There is also nothing illegal about strolling through a mall parking lot looking at cars. Yet if two young people were doing so it would not be at ALL unreasonable for two police officers to approach them and inquire what they're doing, especially since it's quite a common area for cars to get broken into and stolen.
You make it all sound so black and white, and unfortunately, life just isn't that simple.
Amy Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep. The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
There is also nothing illegal about strolling through a mall parking lot looking at cars. Yet if two young people were doing so it would not be at ALL unreasonable for two police officers to approach them and inquire what they're doing, especially since it's quite a common area for cars to get broken into and stolen.
You make it all sound so black and white, and unfortunately, life just isn't that simple.
Yes it would be unreasonable since a mall parking lot is private property and there would be no reason for police officers to be patrolling there unless called in.
You're going to have to come at me with more than that mate.
Yes it would be unreasonable since a mall parking lot is private property and there would be no reason for police officers to be patrolling there unless called in.
You're kidding right? Cops have "no reason" to patrol private property? What world do you live in? Do you realize a very large part of a cops job is to patrol private property? Oh, and protect it. Lets see parking lots at Banks, Malls, Hotels, Parks, Restaurants, Schools, Car Dealerships and many other businesses, that expecct the police to be patrolling their property. I have also yet to meet a store owner that wouldn't welcome a police officer into his store, even though it's private property.
A mall may be privately owned, but it is open to the public. A mall near where I live was almost a victim of an act of terrorism. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/08/national/main2241229.shtml) Luckily the guy was caught before he could carry out his plan. And it's also a good thing the local police patrol that mall, even though the mall has it's own security guards, and is private property.
Your house is private property....do you expect the cops to patrol it? Or should they drive by looking the other way, unless you call them first?
I get hassled all the time shooting around NYC. I try to prevent a good deal of it by approaching any security or cops I see, but they are generally told that people with cameras are bad, that is just the climate we find ourselves in as photographers right now. So I try to keep myself visible and cooperative, and I am as white as a marshmallow
And at the same time I do probe where the limits are. I will ask them, if they say I shouldn't shoot, will you stop me, if they say no, I will continue. If they say no, but the cops will and have, then I will likely stop. Places that involve public transportation are especially sensitive, and I try to avoid shooting them, it generally is just not worth it right now.
If the shoot is important, I will try to secure prior permission where appropriate. Sometimes that can take weeks of advanced preperation. But at least it gives you the authority to tell the person trying to stop you that you have permission to shoot there.
Creator of Dgrin's "Last Photographer Standing" contest
"Failure is feedback. And feedback is the breakfast of champions." - fortune cookie
Yes it would be unreasonable since a mall parking lot is private property and there would be no reason for police officers to be patrolling there unless called in.
You're going to have to come at me with more than that mate.
First response: Read Jeffro's reply
Second response: I'm sure you're a smart guy and can come up with your own examples. I stick by the mall comparison as completely realistic, but hey since you don't like it replace "mall parking lot" with "the streets of Jackson Heights". If a couple of young men were walking up and down looking at cars and the cops felt they looked suspicious, while they aren't technically breaking the law, the cops certainly wouldn't be acting inappropriately to approach and question them. If you don't agree, you must live in happy-land where crime never occurs.
Hola Shay, my fellow-NYer
My experience around Long Island, Queens and NYC has been a mixed bag... there are times me alone or me and hubby have been questioned when we least expected it, and times where we probably should have been questioned (because of location) and weren't... It really can just be the luck of the draw on any given day.
Amy Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep. The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
You're kidding right? Cops have "no reason" to patrol private property? What world do you live in? Do you realize a very large part of a cops job is to patrol private property? Oh, and protect it. Lets see parking lots at Banks, Malls, Hotels, Parks, Restaurants, Schools, Car Dealerships and many other businesses, that expecct the police to be patrolling their property. I have also yet to meet a store owner that wouldn't welcome a police officer into his store, even though it's private property.
A mall may be privately owned, but it is open to the public. A mall near where I live was almost a victim of an act of terrorism. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/08/national/main2241229.shtml) Luckily the guy was caught before he could carry out his plan. And it's also a good thing the local police patrol that mall, even though the mall has it's own security guards, and is private property.
Your house is private property....do you expect the cops to patrol it? Or should they drive by looking the other way, unless you call them first?
No I'm not kidding, are you? Try reading the article you posted. The man involved was "under investigation" and arrested in a sting operation.
I think you need a refresher course in Civics 101. How about paying a little visit to your local police station and asking them about their patrolling practices.
In every example you cite you're dead wrong. Cops patrol neighborhoods, yes, and they look for suspicious behavior and will chase suspects whether on public or private property.
And where do you live that your local police patrol your home? I've never had a cop on my property or in my house unless they were called to come or they entered my property in pursuit of a crime suspect in the area.
Driving or walking a beat in a neighborhood of private homes is NOT patroling your home.
Second response: I'm sure you're a smart guy and can come up with your own examples. I stick by the mall comparison as completely realistic, but hey since you don't like it replace "mall parking lot" with "the streets of Jackson Heights". If a couple of young men were walking up and down looking at cars and the cops felt they looked suspicious, while they aren't technically breaking the law, the cops certainly wouldn't be acting inappropriately to approach and question them. If you don't agree, you must live in happy-land where crime never occurs.
Hola Shay, my fellow-NYer
My experience around Long Island, Queens and NYC has been a mixed bag... there are times me alone or me and hubby have been questioned when we least expected it, and times where we probably should have been questioned (because of location) and weren't... It really can just be the luck of the draw on any given day.
First response: Jeffro is wrong and I've cited why I believe that.
Second response: Cops are paid to patrol the streets of Jackson Heights so they are supposed to be looking for suspicious activity and I'm very happy you used the example you did because it brings us right back to the original point of this thread.
So these cops are patroling the streets of Jackson Heights and see this couple of ypung men looking at cars who they think look suspicious and question them. Why? Is it becasue there have been a recent series of car thefts? Were they tipped off about a probable car-jacking by two men fitting a certain description? These would be very valid points and I guarantee you those cops would, when doing their jobs correctly, tell the two men, after questioning, exactly why they singled them out.
Let's say that absent any specific reason for concern about the myriad cars parked in Jackson Heights, the cops just decide to question these two men?
One would certainly wonder if the color of their skin or their manner of dress might have something to do with it.
It's also interesting you've chosen Jackson Heights as the setting of this little drama. Is that based on the known racial make-up of that particular section of Queens? Is it based on a known ratio of crime activity in the area? Or is it based on assumptions that young men, most probably of dark skin tones in that area, would be engaged in illegal activity?
And as much as I live in La La Land, I wouldn't necessarily call it Happy Land. As much as crime in Los Angeles has dropped significantly in recent years we still have our share. I also grew up in NYC so I have those experiences to call from too.
Now back to Jefro and response one: I invite you to visit your local police station or better yet, why not just stop a cop on the streets of Jackson Heights, and ask them about "patroling private property" such as mall parking lots. When you've done that come back here and tell us what you learned.
Yes it would be unreasonable since a mall parking lot is private property and there would be no reason for police officers to be patrolling there unless called in.
Angelo, cops patrol malls all the time. And it's not a regional thing either. My "binoculars" incident occured in a small strip mall one mile from my home in San Jose, CA. That's another thing that torqued me off about the incident. I'd paid property taxes in that town for many years when I was treated like a criminal for using binoculars one mile from my home!
When I was living in NY, I parked my motorcycle against the curb in front of a drugstore in a stripmall one day because the rest of the parking lot was sloped and I was only going to be 5 minutes. When I came out, a cop was writing me a ticket. (That particular ticket miraculously disappeared when the cop found out I lived across the street from and was friends with the judge. Ah, small towns...)
Try parking in a handicapped spot in a mall parking lot and see who writes you the ticket.
Malls are actually a funny case, and I have looked into this. There are stop signs in malls, and you might think you wouldn't get a real ticket if you ran one because they're on private property. Well, you'd be wrong. There are laws in place that treat malls as public property even though they are privately owned. If pressed, I could dig up the civil code on this, but we'd have to have at least a beer riding on the outcome.
There is also nothing illegal about strolling through a mall parking lot looking at cars. Yet if two young people were doing so it would not be at ALL unreasonable for two police officers to approach them and inquire what they're doing, especially since it's quite a common area for cars to get broken into and stolen.
You make it all sound so black and white, and unfortunately, life just isn't that simple.
The problem here is if the two youths are white they probably won't be stopped and questioned but if they were black or Hispanic they probably would be stopped.
Very often, much too often, it is a case of black or white.
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Angelo, cops patrol malls all the time. And it's not a regional thing either. My "binoculars" incident occured in a small strip mall one mile from my home in San Jose, CA. That's another thing that torqued me off about the incident. I'd paid property taxes in that town for many years when I was treated like a criminal for using binoculars one mile from my home!
When I was living in NY, I parked my motorcycle against the curb in front of a drugstore in a stripmall one day because the rest of the parking lot was sloped and I was only going to be 5 minutes. When I came out, a cop was writing me a ticket. (That particular ticket miraculously disappeared when the cop found out I lived across the street from and was friends with the judge. Ah, small towns...)
Try parking in a handicapped spot in a mall parking lot and see who writes you the ticket.
Malls are actually a funny case, and I have looked into this. There are stop signs in malls, and you might think you wouldn't get a real ticket if you ran one because they're on private property. Well, you'd be wrong. There are laws in place that treat malls as public property even though they are privately owned. If pressed, I could dig up the civil code on this, but we'd have to have at least a beer riding on the outcome.
Cheers,
-joel
Joel:
I never said cops do not / can not enforce laws on private property. I said cops do not patrol private property. Each instance you cite above you and or your vehicle were no doubt visible from the street.
I'm not certain of the "stop sign" ordinances in mall parking lots and have often wondered about that myself and as no wager is necessary because I'll gladly put a cold six-pack on the table... but let me tell you about an experiience of mine... and this happened in the Bronx:
I was driving along, minding my own business, when suddenly what did appear in my rear-view mirror but the glaring, whirling red and blue lights of a police car. I dutifully pulled over to the curb, turned my interior lights on, lowered my window, placed my hands on the wheel and waitied for the officer to approach.
"Good evening"
"Good evening officer"
"May I see your license and registration"
"Certainly Officer, but may I ask why; did I do something wrong?"
"Yes, Sir, you rolled through the stop sign as you turned onto Bruckner Blvd. You failed to come to a complete stop."
"By George, I think you got me. Fair is fair!" handing the officer my documents. I waited patiently as he returned to his patrol vehicle to process a ticket. This allowed me time to think and wonder how he spotted me as I never saw his vehicle.
When the officer returned to do the ticket exchange dance I casually asked how he saw me as it appeared to me he had emerged from nowhere. When he explained his position, I kindly asked him to write that information in the comments section of the citation.
I beat that ticket.
You see, the officer had been sitting in his car, in a dark parking lot of a small shopping center. He was on break and apparently enjoying a cup of coffee (and a donut? ) and at the time, that was considered (I forget the legal term) to be covert or "he was lying in wait" and that is not legal (in most places).
Yes, the humorous characterization of the motorcycle trooper hiding behind billboards waiting for speeders only happens in the movies
I understand this example is not a proper corrolation to our earlier posts but I'm trying to illustrate that there are laws of proper policing that exist specifically to protect the individual rights of the citizenry. Without such rules we would in fact live in a police state.
I get hassled all the time shooting around NYC. I try to prevent a good deal of it by approaching any security or cops I see, but they are generally told that people with cameras are bad, that is just the climate we find ourselves in as photographers right now. So I try to keep myself visible and cooperative, and I am as white as a marshmallow
What kills me is that any terrorist with a lick of sense is not going to take surveillance photos with a DSLR and a big piece of glass. They're going to use something unobtrusive, like a P&S you can hold in the palm of your hand or a cel phone camera. Or a camera hidden in a hat or a pair of sunglasses.
I think you need a refresher course in Civics 101. How about paying a little visit to your local police station and asking them about their patrolling practices.
In every example you cite you're dead wrong. Cops patrol neighborhoods, yes, and they look for suspicious behavior and will chase suspects whether on public or private property.
The department I work for does patrol private property. Like all the ones I listed.
And where do you live that your local police patrol your home? I've never had a cop on my property or in my house unless they were called to come or they entered my property in pursuit of a crime suspect in the area.
I never said they patrol your home..as "in my house" as you stated....but have you ever heard of a vacation check? That's where a citizen leaves home for a week or even months and fills out a partol request, which could either be drive by checks or door checks. The door checks require the officer to go on the private property.
Angelo, I like ticket beating stories, and yours is a good one.
I hope you realize I'm in full agreement about understanding and exercising your rights. Cops often seem to exceed the limit of their authority and it is only us little people who will keep them in check.
I'm still certain about cops having beats in shopping malls. The mall in San Jose was fairly big. Perhaps "strip mall" wasn't the way to describe it. It was an L shaped mall with it's own parking lot that was almost completely obscurred from any main road. There was a cop hanging around that mall almost all the time. And this was in a relatively affluent area of San Jose, definitely not a tough neighborhood. I see cops at malls all the time. Perhaps some malls pay the police departments to assign a beat cop to them. I dunno.
You may also be interested to learn that the job description for beat cops in many CA municipalities includes checking the physical security of shopping malls. Here's an example.
City of Albany Job Announcement Recruitment Title: Police Officer (Job Announcement) ... Example of Duties ...
Check schools, public and commercial buildings, and shopping centers for physical security.
That same text appears in job postings for a lot of different cities in CA. And of course those are only sample duties.
Beers it is. :slurpWe just need to arrange another photo shoot some place that's convenient to LA and Kingman. Barstow is about midway if we want to shoot cheap motels.
I still disagree with you. I picked Jackson Heights because it was the first to come to mind and I'm often there. If a couple of cops saw a couple of young men looking at cars and acting, what they deemed, as suspicious, they'd have every right to approach. I said NOTHING about the color of their skin.
Jackson Heights is one of the most diverse neighborhoods in the country. I'd imagine any cop that works there would have a hard time "racially profiling" anyone, since there are so many races represented and skin of non-white color is of the vast majority.
You seem to want to make this a real cut-and-dry thing, and life just doesn't work that way. If cops were patrolling your neighborhood and saw suspicious activity on YOUR PROPERTY I'd imagine you'd want them to investigate, even if you weren't home. AND, they wouldn't be out of line to do so. Mall parking lots and neighborhood streets that are a mixture of public and private property are in their jurisdiction. Will they walk through your back yard? No. But your back yard is still part of what they patrol.
If a couple of cops are IN A STORE getting themselves coffee, I certainly think you'd expect them to ACT if they saw something suspicious, not just turn the other way because they are in and on private property.
Do you really thing that NYC cops on horseback or bike or foot patrol are only there to guard the sidewalks? They are patrolling everything they see, which is a mixture of public and private property.
The problem here is if the two youths are white they probably won't be stopped and questioned but if they were black or Hispanic they probably would be stopped.
Very often, much too often, it is a case of black or white.
YOU brought up race, not I. Apparently you've never been to Jackson Heights. Just finding two white youths could prove challenging depending on what area you're in.
The attitude you convey is exactly the problem with this thread. Everyone wants to ASSUME that the only reason Lex was stopped was because of the color of his skin... not because he was the only guy down at a ferry terminal with a big camera and big telephoto lens, the only guy approaching strangers and asking to take their photos (which can also be considered soliciting, especially since he admitted he was handing out business cards), and maybe the only guy who made eye contact with the cops and then decided to leave soon after. Maybe he was the only man of color down at the docks that day, but I could nearly guarantee it that they wouldn't have questioned him at all had you removed all the other factors. PROVE TO ME they stopped him SOLEY because of the color of his skin. You can't, and that's the point.
The whole point of this thread was that Lex felt he was singled out for being non-white. I cannot come to that conclusion based on the story told, nor can anyone else. There seems to be two extreme school of thought going on in these kinds of debates... the people who say "you are all paranoid and fearful and willing to give up your freedoms in the name of safety" -- and the people who say "cops can only question you if you are already breaking the law, and if they question anyone of color for any reason they are racist pigs". I tend to beleive that things aren't always so simple.
If Lex feels he was treated badly by the cops he should report it if he thinks it will make a difference. In no way though can he prove he was treated the way he was or even questioned just because he was non-white.
Amy Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep. The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
What kills me is why you think this thread has anything to do with terrorism.
Regards,
-joel
I think that most of us shooting in major metro centers feel/encounter a higher security/police presence since 9/11. The main variable being 9/11 (and the Patriot Act).
I also believe after a while on patrol ... cops will get bored and pick on someone that stands out ... a dSLR stands out.
Finally, having to deal directly with police on a weekly basis, (I used to be a news guy), I came to a "general" conclusion that starting out, there are two types of people that desire to be "cops". One is a person that truly wants to make society better ... and one type that got beat up way too much as a kid.
In any case, being a cop in a large city and the daily consumption of distastful events/abuse, that, after a while the cop that wants to change society and the cop that relishes the power of the shield ... all end up in the same mental place.
So, that being said, I can see situations where a bored cop just goes out and "over" excercises his/her power ... just because he/she can (especially knowing that 999 time out of a 1000, nuthin' will become of it.
Of course there are exceptions to the above ... and perhaps the above is the exception ... dunno ... but I feel that the above is very common place. Although the above is over simplistic and generalizations ...I belive that there still is much truth in my statements.
Gary
PS- I also feel that cops and teachers should be one of the highest paid of society (but that money must be earned and performance based).
G
What kills me is why you think this thread has anything to do with terrorism.
Regards,
-joel
I wrote that in response to what Shay said about the police thinking photography is bad. Terrorism (or our response to it) has quite a bit to do with police harassment of photographers. In this thread, for instance, Shay and wxwax have said how they're particularly likely to get hassled around subway stops.
A lot of people (including many people in law enforcement) think that racial profiling is a reasonable method of dealing with potential terrorist threats. I don't know what ethnicity gmonkeh is ("non-caucasian" can cover a lot of ground), but it's not outside the realm of possiblity that the police officers questioned him because he looked "Middle Eastern."
So yes, I think that it is relevant. In any event, I don't think this episode reflects well on the police officers who questioned gmonkeh.
Comments
And the reverse can easily be said.
It's sad that everyone is SO afraid of offending people that they would prefer the cops don't do their job for risk of being accused of racially profiling.
And Angelo... there was no great tyranny here. There were two cops and a guy taking pictures. They saw him and made a judgement call as to whether they should question him or not, and they chose to play it safe and question him. Nothing else happened. No one told him to delete his photos, no one abused him, no great debacle ensued. It was pretty simple.
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook
Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
...and in my opinion it was poor judgement. However, if asking him questions was not offensive, requiring him to produce identification was, IMO.
We have a right to privacy and that includes safeguards against unreasonable search, which this constitutes.
For anyone not informed about legal policing policy in the USA, patrolmen, for whom I have great admiration and respect and number several in my family, are charged with keeping the peace and enforcing laws. That means they are to act accordingly if they witness someone violating a legal statute. Since taking photographs does not violate any such statute there was no reason to take action.
If someone in the crowd raised suspicion they should have been advised there was nothing illegal going on and directed to make a formal complaint beyond that. We have a right to know why we're being questioned and by what accusation if any. I said before and I repeat now, I would NEVER answer any questions or produce identification, to anyone, without being told why.
Remember FDR's words: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"
What's fitting about those words in today's US is that we've been led around by the nose by irrational fears of terrorism and therein lies tyranny in the 21st century.
End of rant.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
You say the reverse could equally be said, wow, I for one will never be able to get my head around your point of view.
Charlie
Here's a newsflash. People got questioned for suspicious behavior long before 9/11 or Osama Bin Laden. I previously posted an anecdote where I myself was questioned in almost identical fashion to gmonkeh -- for looking through binoculars for pete's sake! And that was 20 years ago! Was I annoyed at the time? You bet. And I still remember it after all these years. Since I'm white, I can't call it a racial incident. But if I was black, I can? No way. Just because a person isn't white doesn't automatically give them a pass by what appears to be stupid behavior by the cops.
You can argue all day long whether a cop has a right to question you for something that appears to be suspicious. That is a different question and frankly, I don't have an opinion on that. What I object to is calling it a racial incident just because the person who got questioned is of color. THAT is racism folks.
Regards,
-joel
Link to my Smugmug site
I seriously woudn't give a rat's arsehole if they questioned me or not. It was their attitude and the manner that they did the questioning. If you read the OP I was being cooperative and tried to explain to them that I was a photographer, I ran my own studio and I tried to give him a business card. He refused and got a bit defensive. I then asked him if photography wasn't allowed by the ferry terminal. He answered in a matter befitting a jackass that "You can take all the pictures you want but you will have to deal with me". And he asked me all types of questions like why did I move to Bremerton, where do I live, where did I used to live. What's my wife's name. Where does my wife work. You know, just questions you would normally expect while out taking pictures. Again I may have bite in my tone now but i'm getting tired of people alluding to this as my fault.
If they had been civil about the questioning then we wouldn't have this 8 page thread that I've come to know and love.
Lex
Nikon D300
Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8
Nikkor 80-200 AF-D ED f/2.8
2 Alien Bees AB800
Nikon Speedlight SB800
Elinchrome Skyport Triggers
Kdog, you make interesting points...
I'd also add that cops have had been known for their attitude problem long before 9/11... whether it has anything to do with racial profiling or not. I've been questioned by the goods one and the bad ones, and the same applies to my husband. My husband has been approached for merely sitting in his car waiting for our daughter by cops with attitude.
So Lex, really, I still don't see this as that big a deal. I honestly don't see any great injustice whether the cops had a bad attitude with you or not. That still doesn't indicate to me that you were definitivey singled out purely because of the color of your skin.
If you feel filing a complaint with the police department will solve a greater problem, that's your right, so go for it.
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook
Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
Absolutely!!!
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
Regarding your "rant" (your word) above...
There is also nothing illegal about strolling through a mall parking lot looking at cars. Yet if two young people were doing so it would not be at ALL unreasonable for two police officers to approach them and inquire what they're doing, especially since it's quite a common area for cars to get broken into and stolen.
You make it all sound so black and white, and unfortunately, life just isn't that simple.
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook
Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
You know Gus, Eureka, is the the official State Motto of California and is found on our state seal.
http://www.library.ca.gov/history/cahinsig.cfm
This is such a small world.
Gary
Unsharp at any Speed
Yes it would be unreasonable since a mall parking lot is private property and there would be no reason for police officers to be patrolling there unless called in.
You're going to have to come at me with more than that mate.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
You're kidding right? Cops have "no reason" to patrol private property? What world do you live in? Do you realize a very large part of a cops job is to patrol private property? Oh, and protect it. Lets see parking lots at Banks, Malls, Hotels, Parks, Restaurants, Schools, Car Dealerships and many other businesses, that expecct the police to be patrolling their property. I have also yet to meet a store owner that wouldn't welcome a police officer into his store, even though it's private property.
A mall may be privately owned, but it is open to the public. A mall near where I live was almost a victim of an act of terrorism. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/08/national/main2241229.shtml) Luckily the guy was caught before he could carry out his plan. And it's also a good thing the local police patrol that mall, even though the mall has it's own security guards, and is private property.
Your house is private property....do you expect the cops to patrol it? Or should they drive by looking the other way, unless you call them first?
And at the same time I do probe where the limits are. I will ask them, if they say I shouldn't shoot, will you stop me, if they say no, I will continue. If they say no, but the cops will and have, then I will likely stop. Places that involve public transportation are especially sensitive, and I try to avoid shooting them, it generally is just not worth it right now.
If the shoot is important, I will try to secure prior permission where appropriate. Sometimes that can take weeks of advanced preperation. But at least it gives you the authority to tell the person trying to stop you that you have permission to shoot there.
"Failure is feedback. And feedback is the breakfast of champions." - fortune cookie
Second response: I'm sure you're a smart guy and can come up with your own examples. I stick by the mall comparison as completely realistic, but hey since you don't like it replace "mall parking lot" with "the streets of Jackson Heights". If a couple of young men were walking up and down looking at cars and the cops felt they looked suspicious, while they aren't technically breaking the law, the cops certainly wouldn't be acting inappropriately to approach and question them. If you don't agree, you must live in happy-land where crime never occurs.
Hola Shay, my fellow-NYer
My experience around Long Island, Queens and NYC has been a mixed bag... there are times me alone or me and hubby have been questioned when we least expected it, and times where we probably should have been questioned (because of location) and weren't... It really can just be the luck of the draw on any given day.
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook
Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
No I'm not kidding, are you? Try reading the article you posted. The man involved was "under investigation" and arrested in a sting operation.
I think you need a refresher course in Civics 101. How about paying a little visit to your local police station and asking them about their patrolling practices.
In every example you cite you're dead wrong. Cops patrol neighborhoods, yes, and they look for suspicious behavior and will chase suspects whether on public or private property.
And where do you live that your local police patrol your home? I've never had a cop on my property or in my house unless they were called to come or they entered my property in pursuit of a crime suspect in the area.
Driving or walking a beat in a neighborhood of private homes is NOT patroling your home.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
First response: Jeffro is wrong and I've cited why I believe that.
Second response: Cops are paid to patrol the streets of Jackson Heights so they are supposed to be looking for suspicious activity and I'm very happy you used the example you did because it brings us right back to the original point of this thread.
So these cops are patroling the streets of Jackson Heights and see this couple of ypung men looking at cars who they think look suspicious and question them. Why? Is it becasue there have been a recent series of car thefts? Were they tipped off about a probable car-jacking by two men fitting a certain description? These would be very valid points and I guarantee you those cops would, when doing their jobs correctly, tell the two men, after questioning, exactly why they singled them out.
Let's say that absent any specific reason for concern about the myriad cars parked in Jackson Heights, the cops just decide to question these two men?
One would certainly wonder if the color of their skin or their manner of dress might have something to do with it.
It's also interesting you've chosen Jackson Heights as the setting of this little drama. Is that based on the known racial make-up of that particular section of Queens? Is it based on a known ratio of crime activity in the area? Or is it based on assumptions that young men, most probably of dark skin tones in that area, would be engaged in illegal activity?
And as much as I live in La La Land, I wouldn't necessarily call it Happy Land.
Now back to Jefro and response one: I invite you to visit your local police station or better yet, why not just stop a cop on the streets of Jackson Heights, and ask them about "patroling private property" such as mall parking lots. When you've done that come back here and tell us what you learned.
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
When I was living in NY, I parked my motorcycle against the curb in front of a drugstore in a stripmall one day because the rest of the parking lot was sloped and I was only going to be 5 minutes. When I came out, a cop was writing me a ticket. (That particular ticket miraculously disappeared when the cop found out I lived across the street from and was friends with the judge. Ah, small towns...)
Try parking in a handicapped spot in a mall parking lot and see who writes you the ticket.
Malls are actually a funny case, and I have looked into this. There are stop signs in malls, and you might think you wouldn't get a real ticket if you ran one because they're on private property. Well, you'd be wrong. There are laws in place that treat malls as public property even though they are privately owned. If pressed, I could dig up the civil code on this, but we'd have to have at least a beer riding on the outcome.
Cheers,
-joel
Link to my Smugmug site
The problem here is if the two youths are white they probably won't be stopped and questioned but if they were black or Hispanic they probably would be stopped.
Very often, much too often, it is a case of black or white.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Joel:
I never said cops do not / can not enforce laws on private property. I said cops do not patrol private property. Each instance you cite above you and or your vehicle were no doubt visible from the street.
I'm not certain of the "stop sign" ordinances in mall parking lots and have often wondered about that myself and as no wager is necessary because I'll gladly put a cold six-pack on the table... but let me tell you about an experiience of mine... and this happened in the Bronx:
I was driving along, minding my own business, when suddenly what did appear in my rear-view mirror but the glaring, whirling red and blue lights of a police car. I dutifully pulled over to the curb, turned my interior lights on, lowered my window, placed my hands on the wheel and waitied for the officer to approach.
"Good evening"
"Good evening officer"
"May I see your license and registration"
"Certainly Officer, but may I ask why; did I do something wrong?"
"Yes, Sir, you rolled through the stop sign as you turned onto Bruckner Blvd. You failed to come to a complete stop."
"By George, I think you got me. Fair is fair!" handing the officer my documents. I waited patiently as he returned to his patrol vehicle to process a ticket. This allowed me time to think and wonder how he spotted me as I never saw his vehicle.
When the officer returned to do the ticket exchange dance I casually asked how he saw me as it appeared to me he had emerged from nowhere. When he explained his position, I kindly asked him to write that information in the comments section of the citation.
I beat that ticket.
You see, the officer had been sitting in his car, in a dark parking lot of a small shopping center. He was on break and apparently enjoying a cup of coffee (and a donut?
Yes, the humorous characterization of the motorcycle trooper hiding behind billboards waiting for speeders only happens in the movies
I understand this example is not a proper corrolation to our earlier posts but I'm trying to illustrate that there are laws of proper policing that exist specifically to protect the individual rights of the citizenry. Without such rules we would in fact live in a police state.
Now, about those beers?
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
What kills me is that any terrorist with a lick of sense is not going to take surveillance photos with a DSLR and a big piece of glass. They're going to use something unobtrusive, like a P&S you can hold in the palm of your hand or a cel phone camera. Or a camera hidden in a hat or a pair of sunglasses.
Don't really need to do that.
The department I work for does patrol private property. Like all the ones I listed.
I never said they patrol your home..as "in my house" as you stated....but have you ever heard of a vacation check? That's where a citizen leaves home for a week or even months and fills out a partol request, which could either be drive by checks or door checks. The door checks require the officer to go on the private property.
Yes it is, just like driving through a mall lot is patrolling mall property...private property.
As I stated long ago, racially motivated or not, if the OP was treated badly he should have taken it up with the officer's Sgt.
I hope you realize I'm in full agreement about understanding and exercising your rights. Cops often seem to exceed the limit of their authority and it is only us little people who will keep them in check.
I'm still certain about cops having beats in shopping malls. The mall in San Jose was fairly big. Perhaps "strip mall" wasn't the way to describe it. It was an L shaped mall with it's own parking lot that was almost completely obscurred from any main road. There was a cop hanging around that mall almost all the time. And this was in a relatively affluent area of San Jose, definitely not a tough neighborhood. I see cops at malls all the time. Perhaps some malls pay the police departments to assign a beat cop to them. I dunno.
You may also be interested to learn that the job description for beat cops in many CA municipalities includes checking the physical security of shopping malls. Here's an example.
Recruitment Title: Police Officer (Job Announcement)
...
Example of Duties
...
Beers it is. :slurpWe just need to arrange another photo shoot some place that's convenient to LA and Kingman. Barstow is about midway if we want to shoot cheap motels.
-joel
Link to my Smugmug site
I still disagree with you. I picked Jackson Heights because it was the first to come to mind and I'm often there. If a couple of cops saw a couple of young men looking at cars and acting, what they deemed, as suspicious, they'd have every right to approach. I said NOTHING about the color of their skin.
Jackson Heights is one of the most diverse neighborhoods in the country. I'd imagine any cop that works there would have a hard time "racially profiling" anyone, since there are so many races represented and skin of non-white color is of the vast majority.
You seem to want to make this a real cut-and-dry thing, and life just doesn't work that way. If cops were patrolling your neighborhood and saw suspicious activity on YOUR PROPERTY I'd imagine you'd want them to investigate, even if you weren't home. AND, they wouldn't be out of line to do so. Mall parking lots and neighborhood streets that are a mixture of public and private property are in their jurisdiction. Will they walk through your back yard? No. But your back yard is still part of what they patrol.
If a couple of cops are IN A STORE getting themselves coffee, I certainly think you'd expect them to ACT if they saw something suspicious, not just turn the other way because they are in and on private property.
Do you really thing that NYC cops on horseback or bike or foot patrol are only there to guard the sidewalks? They are patrolling everything they see, which is a mixture of public and private property.
YOU brought up race, not I. Apparently you've never been to Jackson Heights. Just finding two white youths could prove challenging depending on what area you're in.
The attitude you convey is exactly the problem with this thread. Everyone wants to ASSUME that the only reason Lex was stopped was because of the color of his skin... not because he was the only guy down at a ferry terminal with a big camera and big telephoto lens, the only guy approaching strangers and asking to take their photos (which can also be considered soliciting, especially since he admitted he was handing out business cards), and maybe the only guy who made eye contact with the cops and then decided to leave soon after. Maybe he was the only man of color down at the docks that day, but I could nearly guarantee it that they wouldn't have questioned him at all had you removed all the other factors. PROVE TO ME they stopped him SOLEY because of the color of his skin. You can't, and that's the point.
The whole point of this thread was that Lex felt he was singled out for being non-white. I cannot come to that conclusion based on the story told, nor can anyone else. There seems to be two extreme school of thought going on in these kinds of debates... the people who say "you are all paranoid and fearful and willing to give up your freedoms in the name of safety" -- and the people who say "cops can only question you if you are already breaking the law, and if they question anyone of color for any reason they are racist pigs". I tend to beleive that things aren't always so simple.
If Lex feels he was treated badly by the cops he should report it if he thinks it will make a difference. In no way though can he prove he was treated the way he was or even questioned just because he was non-white.
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.
The Dang Gallery on DangRabbit - Follow me on Twitter or on Facebook
Leica M8: Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon and 50mm f/2 Planar; Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5, 50mm f/1.5 Nokton and 75mm f/2.5 Heliar
Olympus E-P1: Zuiko 14-42 and 25mm f/2.8 Pancake; Panasonic 45-200mm and 20mm f/1.7; and M-to-m4/3 adaptor
Olympus e620: Zuiko 14-54 f/2.8-3.5
Regards,
-joel
Link to my Smugmug site
I also believe after a while on patrol ... cops will get bored and pick on someone that stands out ... a dSLR stands out.
Finally, having to deal directly with police on a weekly basis, (I used to be a news guy), I came to a "general" conclusion that starting out, there are two types of people that desire to be "cops". One is a person that truly wants to make society better ... and one type that got beat up way too much as a kid.
In any case, being a cop in a large city and the daily consumption of distastful events/abuse, that, after a while the cop that wants to change society and the cop that relishes the power of the shield ... all end up in the same mental place.
So, that being said, I can see situations where a bored cop just goes out and "over" excercises his/her power ... just because he/she can (especially knowing that 999 time out of a 1000, nuthin' will become of it.
Of course there are exceptions to the above ... and perhaps the above is the exception ... dunno ... but I feel that the above is very common place. Although the above is over simplistic and generalizations ...I belive that there still is much truth in my statements.
Gary
PS- I also feel that cops and teachers should be one of the highest paid of society (but that money must be earned and performance based).
G
Unsharp at any Speed
I wrote that in response to what Shay said about the police thinking photography is bad. Terrorism (or our response to it) has quite a bit to do with police harassment of photographers. In this thread, for instance, Shay and wxwax have said how they're particularly likely to get hassled around subway stops.
A lot of people (including many people in law enforcement) think that racial profiling is a reasonable method of dealing with potential terrorist threats. I don't know what ethnicity gmonkeh is ("non-caucasian" can cover a lot of ground), but it's not outside the realm of possiblity that the police officers questioned him because he looked "Middle Eastern."
So yes, I think that it is relevant. In any event, I don't think this episode reflects well on the police officers who questioned gmonkeh.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Link to my Smugmug site
http://www.headandshoulders.com/
"Failure is feedback. And feedback is the breakfast of champions." - fortune cookie