How paranoid can someone get ???

[Exodus]

http://www.wxyz.com/wxyz/ys_investigations/article/0,2132,WXYZ_15949_4436686,00.html

Did they ever stop to think that the person taking pictures could be a tourist, or someone documenting the events, or someone who is into urban architecture/landscapes and photography ? If this "Tim" was concerned, why didn't he just casually approach the individual and start up a conversation and subtly pick him for info ?? It's pretty darn bad when someone calls the authorities on someone for snapping pictures:rolleyes: For all you photographers out there, watch out for people like "Tim", or you just might get hauled in for questioning.

[secondson]

I don't think what Tim did was so out of line, and I don't think he was really paranoid. For one thing, he couldn't just strike up a conversation with the person, because that person was driving. And it's not a common thing to see someone driving with a camera on their steering wheel, snapping pictures of touristy areas and government sites. Most tourists are walking around taking pictures of major tourist sites - not ordinary buildings. And I don't think a serious urban/skyscraper fanatic would be taking pictures out of their car.

I think the gist of the story really wasn't about Tim being paranoid. It was to highlight how he wasn't able to easily report something to Homeland Security. I applaud him for what he was trying to do. If the photographer had turned out to be innocent, I'm sure the authorities would have let him go.

[Amanita]

I've attempted to take pictures out of a car window before, when the person driving didn't want to or couldn't stop. Although they didn't turn out too well:(
And not all the skyscrapers I and others like to photograph are big name tourist sites. They just happen to look cool.

[LSyd]

Tim just sounds like an OCD dumbass. i was followed by a security guard (who was maybe also Atlanta PD, as it was on the back of his jacket) for 3 or 4 blocks, and into a McDonald's. all i was doing was taking pictures of buildings. some were at the base of one tower, when i ran into another guard there who told me no photography on the property...so i went to the sidewalk before walking to McDonald's and being followed by the other guard. they didn't ask me what i was taking pictures of, or if i had a business card, or anything...just followed me (i did look pretty sketchy as i didn't get much sleep and was sort of hungover.) i think they were just really bored on a sunday morning though.

-

[passdoubt]

The signs telling you not to take photos in the Holland Tunnel are particularly ridiculous.

[BnaBreaker]

Just make sure you take overtly "artsy" shots, like of a trash can or some graffiti or something and it seems to get any potential nosey assholes off your back.

[SD_Phil]

I've definitely taken pictures while driving. Why not? Sometimes you get good/unusual angles and surprises. Sometimes they're the only pictures you have time to take. But really this masks the real issue doesn't it. Why the fuck was he presumed guilty of something just because he was taking pictures? Since when did taking pictures become a reason for calling the police? Fuck Tim. Really.

[Boris2k7]

LOL, I've only ever had trouble with a single person, and that was back in the summer when we had a small forumer photo-shoot. This guy was on the opposite side of the intersection, and as soon as he sees us he comes romping over and demanding that we stop taking pictures of him. I mean, it's not like it was blatantly obvious that we were more interested in the buildings behind him, given that there were 5 of us pointing cameras upwards in very different directions... idiot. People like to think that they are so damn important.

Otherwise I've had no problems. Taking pictures of the towers here is so common here that almost nobody really notices. It would probably be a bad idea to harass tourists and businessmen who are in town, let alone the locals who will raise hell.

Tim sounds like a fucking asshole.

[MayorOfChicago]

how can you live your life as a happy person when you're constantly just looking for "that guy" who you assume is out trying to kill you every day of ever year.

[Doady]

I always carry my tripod with me when i take photographs, even in broad daylight. My tripod is all metal and very sturdy and quite heavy, so if anyone tries to start shit with me I can use it to fuck them up.

[Urban Zombie]

Tim just sounds like an OCD dumbass. i was followed by a security guard (who was maybe also Atlanta PD, as it was on the back of his jacket) for 3 or 4 blocks, and into a McDonald's. all i was doing was taking pictures of buildings. some were at the base of one tower, when i ran into another guard there who told me no photography on the property...so i went to the sidewalk before walking to McDonald's and being followed by the other guard. they didn't ask me what i was taking pictures of, or if i had a business card, or anything...just followed me (i did look pretty sketchy as i didn't get much sleep and was sort of hungover.) i think they were just really bored on a sunday morning though.

-

You should've called the police and said that some suspicious dudes were following you around...:D

[Jeff_in_Dayton]

Yes Ive had people question me, most where generally ok when i told them what I was doing but there have been one or two assholes. So far (knock on wood) no problem with the police doing this.

[JRinSoCal]

I always carry my tripod with me when i take photographs, even in broad daylight. My tripod is all metal and very sturdy and quite heavy, so if anyone tries to start shit with me I can use it to fuck them up.

I like the way you think.:tup:

[gripja]

I wonder which forumer it was who was taking the pictures? If I ever went to Detroit I might take some pictures from the car, for 1, I dont know the city and 2, Detroit doesn't have the best reputation, so out of my own ignorance I may not want to walk around a strange area of a strange city. As for Tim, if he is so paranoid about people driving around then he is probably just as paranoid about people walking around taking pictures. Sounds like he should go into law enforcemnt so he annoy people on a daily basis. Another thing Tim, Homeland Security is a farce, everyone knows that. Our government is as clueless today as they were in 2000.

[Taller Better]

Face it, Tim is what we call " paranoid". If he had lived in Communist China he would have denounced his Grandparents as Running Dogs. If he had lived in McCarthy's days he would have turned in his wife and kids as suspected Pinko Commies for doing things like "staring at him in a strange way". Respect for an individual's rights are deminishing in America in these Orwellian days of panic and suspicion.

In all the time I've taken photos on the sidewalk, twice I've had someone run out of a building and tell me I can't
take pictures without permission. I had to remind both of them that I can photograph any damn thing I want on the sidewalk as it is public space.

I think in the States it is illegal to photograph a bank, though. I remember being told that in New York City once.

[CGII]

OMG! He took pics of the federal building! WTF MATES! CALL HOMELAND SECURITY!

[wrab]

Ridiculous.

[chi-townJay]

you can ride and take pics all you want in chicago but if I see a MTF taking shots of federal government buildings then screw what you say that shit aint NORMAL what the hell are you people talking about,you want a picture of the fed building etc.then google it,walking around saying everythings cool and its nothing alot of times really be something.

[CGII]

you can ride and take pics all you want in chicago but if I see a MTF taking shots of federal government buildings then screw what you say that shit aint NORMAL what the hell are you people talking about,you want a picture of the fed building etc.then google it,walking around saying everythings cool and its nothing alot of times really be something.

I guess you must have big problems with the millions of people who take tourist photographs of the US Capitol each year.

[KevinFromTexas]

You know, it's probably wrong, but I have to laugh a little at this incident. Although it's not really funny. I suppose the guy learned that evening that people taking photos of stadiums isn't as big of a problem as people who don't answer the phone at the homeland security office. Which is the bigger threat to national security?

[vid]

you can ride and take pics all you want in chicago but if I see a MTF taking shots of federal government buildings then screw what you say that shit aint NORMAL what the hell are you people talking about,you want a picture of the fed building etc.then google it,walking around saying everythings cool and its nothing alot of times really be something.

Where do you think Google got those pictures? :frog:

[SteveD]

On the flip side of all of this, I do commercial real estate "due diligence" work for my livelihood, and I'm continually amazed at how I can walk into buildings (office buildings, hotels, retail buildings, warehouse buildings, etc), into back stock room areas, mechanical areas, electrical rooms, onto roofs, etc, all the while busily taking pictures, writing notes in my clipboard, and being observed by numerous people, who completely ignore me and never ask me if I'm supposed to be in the building or what I'm doing.

[Cleveland Brown]

Tim sounds like an ex-urban asshole who works downtown. He probably believes that there is nothing in Detroit that is beautiful or photo worthy, thus anyone taking photographs must be a terrorist!

Tim has to be vigilent because Detroit has a large Arabic and Muslim population so sooner or later they'll be up to no good. :rolleyes:

[alps]

Tim sounds like a fucking asshole.

I second that.:koko:

[Rail Claimore]

I don't think anyone should be harrassed by authorities for taking photographs of something. That's a clear violation of the First Amendment. And the question shouldn't be "Why should anyone take photographs of government buildings and look suspicious?" Rather, it should be "Why should the government limit the rights of photographers in the first place?"

But realistically speaking, I must point out that I feel more comfortable taking photographs with a group of other photographers. You're less likely to be harrassed for obvious reasons. Groups look more "official" and amateur security guards and LEOs don't like difficult "prey" so to speak. There's something to be said for strength in numbers.

[Urban Zombie]

What I find particularly frightening is that the article is grumbling about Homeland Security's lack of a "customer service hotline" rather than paranoid, imbred dipshits wanting to notify the authorities everytime ordinary citizens run around town with a camera.

[Exodus]

What I find particularly frightening is that the article is grumbling about Homeland Security's lack of a "customer service hotline" rather than paranoid, imbred dipshits wanting to notify the authorities everytime ordinary citizens run around town with a camera.That is exactly what concerned me. I think the news missed the real story.

[ajmstilt]

Carry a clipbaord and wear "nice" (a shirt with a collar tucked into some khakis for example) clothes. You can get *anywhere* if you carry a clipboard and look busy. Capitol building, secure areas of airports, office buildings, sporting events...

I used to go to sporting events by going to the loading docks (where the broadcast trucks were) and carrying a spool of coaxial cable, a clipbard and wearign a lanyard with 15 or so badges on it.
Only got stopped once, and when i explained exharsperatedly: "that J.R. needed this spool for camera 3 like 20 minutes ago... and I fucked up and brought the wrong one earlier... and this'll be my job. ok, can you take this to him, tell him the DH34 is misalligned and needs to be set at 2.35...."

Guard let me by

[Taller Better]

you can ride and take pics all you want in chicago but if I see a MTF taking shots of federal government buildings then screw what you say that shit aint NORMAL what the hell are you people talking about,you want a picture of the fed building etc.then google it,walking around saying everythings cool and its nothing alot of times really be something.


It isn't normal to photograph buildings? You and Tim are both wacko.

[SteveD]

Carry a clipbaord and wear "nice" (a shirt with a collar tucked into some khakis for example) clothes. You can get *anywhere* if you carry a clipboard and look busy. Capitol building, secure areas of airports, office buildings, sporting events...

I used to go to sporting events by going to the loading docks (where the broadcast trucks were) and carrying a spool of coaxial cable, a clipbard and wearign a lanyard with 15 or so badges on it.
Only got stopped once, and when i explained exharsperatedly: "that J.R. needed this spool for camera 3 like 20 minutes ago... and I fucked up and brought the wrong one earlier... and this'll be my job. ok, can you take this to him, tell him the DH34 is misalligned and needs to be set at 2.35...."

Guard let me by
:previous: absolutely. that's my experience in nearly every commercial property I visit (not all, of course, but most).

[Chicago103]

Tim sounds like an ex-urban asshole who works downtown. He probably believes that there is nothing in Detroit that is beautiful or photo worthy, thus anyone taking photographs must be a terrorist!

Tim has to be vigilent because Detroit has a large Arabic and Muslim population so sooner or later they'll be up to no good. :rolleyes:

I think you hit the nail right on the head. Whenever I hear this kind of stuff or hear of security guards asking questions I want to just say to these security guards "If you dont want people taking pictures then you should have an ugly (but not too ugly) building that noone would take a picture of". You dont build these massive buildings with beautiful exteriors and interiors and expect people to not take pictures and/or gawk around. If life was just about getting to where I am going oblivious to beauty around me then whats the point of living?

The point you made about exurbanities also holds true to this point. In the exurbs people are not used to an environment where there is much to take pictures of, buildings are just commodities that keep the material culture moving out there. Where there is nothing but big box stores, strip malls, and auto-centric development of every kind its no wonder its suspicious to take pictures of buildings (sans for SSP type people to show its ugliness). So in turn when these people see others taking pictures of buildings downtown it is a foreign concept to them, that there would be anything photo worthy in downtown Detroit, and that anyone taking pictures in such a crime ridden city must be up to no good. I am guessing Tim is just someone with a pathetic life that is so boring that the skyline or anything in the city visually means nothing to him and was probably just downtown for business and the foremost thing on his mind was finding a parking spot and not getting shot by dirty Detroit residents.

When society stoups down to this paranoia I start to wonder what these people expect from us? Its like they expect life to be the boringest common denominator, we all must mind our own business and only be concerned about where we are going and unless its a mega tourist attraction and we are on vacation we shouldnt take the time to explore what is around us, we all just need to be little obidient work and consume zombies.

[Vtown420]

Leave it to Chicago103 to blame this on suburbanites. This is about paranoid people that need to get a life, and you don’t know where Tim lives.

I guess whenever I go to a new city, like Detroit, I should watch my back for completely stupid people like Tim. See, I have this hobby called photography, and I love skyscrapers and cities. So whenever I go somewhere new, I am going to have my camera in hand, if I’m driving or not. Also, with the Internet, terrorists don’t need to take pictures. I guess I should be thankful that this could never happen in my city, but I feel sorry for you guys who may have to deal with this nonsense.


I applaud him for what he was trying to do. If the photographer had turned out to be innocent, I'm sure the authorities would have let him go.

Ya think? Maybe we should just through him and all photographers in Guantanamo until they can be proven innocent.

[Cleveland Brown]

^ No Chicago103 is right, despite his usual musings on Applebees! Some Detroit suburbanites ARE EXTREMELY PARANOID and think NOTHING good comes from the city. Recently Detroit Police have received stolen car reports from suburbanites only to find that the idiots walked down the wrong street, where their cars were safe and intact. You know by them traveling to Detroit, they couldn't have misplaced the car, someone had to steal it :rolleyes: . A few years back a suburban firefighter SHOT AND KILLED AN UNARMED HOMELESS MAN who several witnesses stated simply asked for change.

I've known several Metro Detroiters who grew up in the suburbs that (1) have visited Detroit less than 5 times in their life and (2) can't understand why anyone wants to live in the city.

[BnaBreaker]

Leave it to Chicago103 to blame this on suburbanites. This is about paranoid people that need to get a life, and you don’t know where Tim lives.

Well if you'd actually stop and think for a second about what he is saying then it would make sense.

In a nutshell, in sprawl where there is little to no public realm to speak of, there is far less humanizing face to face contact with anyone who isn't just like you economically, ethnically or otherwise. Speaking in very general terms, this can, and often does, lead to an overall feeling of suspicion of these 'others'.

I don't feel like explaining it any further, but this should give you some idea. Nobody is saying that every suburbanite fits the bill here of course, but hopefully this helps you understand where he is coming from. Why else do you think suburbanites vote Republican in such large numbers? lol

[AZheat]

I find it hard to believe that a terrorist or someone with really serious intentions of causing harm would do such a half assed job of assessing a target that they would just drive around and take an occational snapshot from a moving vehicle. There have been a number of instances when people who were seriously checking out a potential target were observed and they themselves were carefully scrutinized. Professional terrorists need technical and reliable data concerning the construction, security, and vulnerbility of buildings. It must be very precise and useful. I can remember incidents in the Phillipines and also New York City when security personnel took videos of suspects who were obviously doing just that and it was very helpful for law enforcement. This guy Tim in the article probably meant well and I wouldn't criticize him for his efforts. I'm just afraid that there's probably millions of people like this who would overload our system with false alarms and make it easier for real terrorists who are careful and secretive to get away with whatever they are trying to accomplish.

[Vtown420]

Nobody is saying that every suburbanite fits the bill here of course, but hopefully this helps you understand where he is coming from.

The problem with Chicago103 is that he likes to lump all suburbanites into one category, when in reality people’s attitudes and the suburbs they live in vary greatly in every city. 95% of what Chicago103 says does not apply to 95% of my city or Los Angeles or any city that has dense and diverse neighborhoods throughout the urban area. Unlike Detroit you don’t say “I’m going to the city” because you are already there. It’s different, and unless you lived here you might not understand. Some of the densest parts of my city are in the suburbs. There isn’t always a clear cut difference between city and suburbs. In my suburb, much of which I consider urban, there is plenty of social interaction and diversity, and I have to deal with my share of crime, gangs, and graffiti. But it is probably not what you would consider urban, simply because of the built environment.

So maybe Chicago103 is right about there being paranoid suburbanites in Detroit. But that doesn’t mean they all are. Most people in my city have to deal with the same problems, and unless you’re in some stuck up area locked in a gated community in your huge McMansion, there is no reason you would be any more paranoid than someone close to downtown.

Stop generalizing and stop putting me into some right winged, religious, antisocial mindset simply because I like to drive and live on the edge of town. My city is much different than yours.

[Chicago Shawn]

Well if you'd actually stop and think for a second about what he is saying then it would make sense.

In a nutshell, in sprawl where there is little to no public realm to speak of, there is far less humanizing face to face contact with anyone who isn't just like you economically, ethnically or otherwise. Speaking in very general terms, this can, and often does, lead to an overall feeling of suspicion of these 'others'.

I don't feel like explaining it any further, but this should give you some idea. Nobody is saying that every suburbanite fits the bill here of course, but hopefully this helps you understand where he is coming from. Why else do you think suburbanites vote Republican in such large numbers? lol

Agreed. I was threatened with arrest by a mall cop at Woodfield in Scumburg because I was walking across the parking lot and snapping a picture, for a school project. I was not allowed to do so "on mall property", which includes everything nearby, all parking lots, green spaces, ring roads, ect. There is no public domian out there, and I was targeted because I was actually using my legs to move arround the "private property".

[cornholio]

What I find particularly frightening is that the article is grumbling about Homeland Security's lack of a "customer service hotline" rather than paranoid, imbred dipshits wanting to notify the authorities everytime ordinary citizens run around town with a camera.

Shows that homeland security is all bs designed for creating maximum paranoia. By having a capable hotline they would be expected to actualy act on over paranoid peoples asumptions, such as Tims, and ultimatly make them selfs look bad and at the same time hurt their goal of selling paranoia of the evil terrorists all around us wanting to blow up eveything and kill everyone to the people.

[dvstampa]

Shows that homeland security is all bs designed for creating maximum paranoia. By having a capable hotline they would be expected to actualy act on over paranoid peoples asumptions, such as Tims, and ultimatly make them selfs look bad and at the same time hurt their goal of selling paranoia of the evil terrorists all around us wanting to blow up eveything and kill everyone to the people.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. My wife is a Homeland Security officer in Intel and gets reports on photographers on an hourly basis. They also get threats reported on an hourly basis. This story is nothing new and will occure as long as there are threats out there.

I wonder if you'd be so quick to call people working in the WTC paranoid now that their buildings are gone?

Homeland Security does a very good job of taking all these reports and threats and deems them credible or bogus. As she tells me, if we knew how many threats the Golden Gate Bridge gets on a daily basis, we would never drive across it.

[wrab]

...I wonder if you'd be so quick to call people working in the WTC paranoid now that their buildings are gone?...

If memory serves, the WTC was taken down by aircraft, not dashcams. And how would reporting or restricting photographers from snapping photos of one of the most widely photographed tourist attractions on the planet have made one iota of difference in the outcome there?

In any case, it is all a bit ridiculous, considering that one can download precise satellite images of almost any spot on the globe for free and in under sixty seconds on Google Earth.

[dvstampa]

The point is not what could have been done... Noticing the expired visas of the hijackers would have helped. Searching apartments of the said hijackers with expired visas also could have done the trick.

The point now is vigilance. If someone wants to call the authorities on me as I take photos of the Bay Bridge, let them. I'm not gonna get all pissy and say I've lost some right that I won't even notice in the first place. If someone's vigilance stops some nutjob (terrorist or otherwise) from driving a van into the basement of one of our towers and hitting a detonate button, I'm fine with it.

You see, I take the same thoughts when it comes to flying as well. I have no problem if a TSA guard stereotypes me, pulls me aside, flags me, and/or searches my belongings. (It actually happened in San Juan). If their actions can make flying safer for myself and everyone around me, so be it!

If someone calls a Homeland Security hotline because of someone taking photos of a building, so be it! It's the world we live in today and if it saves lives, I'm all for it.

[CGII]

If memory serves, the WTC was taken down by aircraft, not dashcams. And how would reporting or restricting photographers from snapping photos of one of the most widely photographed tourist attractions on the planet have made one iota of difference in the outcome there?


If it weren't photographed that means the WTC wouldn't have had the recognition the hijackers wanted. They probably would've gone after Sears or something. SEE? STOPPING PHOTOGRAPHERS DOES STOP TERRORISM! :hyper:

[secondson]

Ya think? Maybe we should just through him and all photographers in Guantanamo until they can be proven innocent.

I think you're trying to take my comment to an unnecessary extreme. The government has obvious reasons for wanting to detain people at Guantanamo. I'm not saying I agree with it, but it's a far cry different than simply asking a photographer what his intentions are behind snapping pictures of a government building and asking him a few questions to determine if he's a threat or not. A genuine urban/skyscraper fan is NOT going to take a serious photo of a building hanging out their car window. For one thing, it's blatantly irresponsible to drive while taking pictures. That could be one thing that tipped off Tim to the possibility that something suspicious was taking place.

I already mentioned that Tim couldn't just easily ask the guy why he was taking pictures of government buildings. The guy was in a car, so Tim couldn't exactly strike up a conversation with him. I'm sure he feels like a patriotic citizen, however paranoid people may think he was. In his mind, I'm sure he felt the only right thing to do was to try and report something that looked suspicious to him. But who defines what "suspicious" really is? Is there a list somewhere which defines suspicious activity according to Homeland Security? Would someone standing outside a military base, snapping photos of jets on the runway, be considered suspicious - or merely a military buff? Would it be unreasonable to ask a few questions, to let the person know they are being observed doing something out of the ordinary? What about if I'm walking along a street next to a water plant, and then stop to look at it for a few moments while I'm holding a bottle in my hand that has a liquid in it which isn't readily identifiable? Is that a suspicious activity? Should I get upset if a cop asks me why I'm staring at a utility plant? How would someone know if I'm holding cyanide, or simply a bottle of milk? The government simply tells us to report suspicious activity. Perhaps there is more to what Tim saw that wasn't reported in the news story?

I maintain, the main point of the story was to show that Homeland Security isn't easily contacted by citizens when it should be. Somehow we have focused on making it about how paranoid Tim was at seeing a photographer snapping pictures of buildings, so we're really not discussing the true nature of the news story. Perhaps WE are the ones who are being irrational by making this story out to be something it clearly wasn't meant to be about?

[secondson]

The point is not what could have been done... Noticing the expired visas of the hijackers would have helped. Searching apartments of the said hijackers with expired visas also could have done the trick.

The point now is vigilance. If someone wants to call the authorities on me as I take photos of the Bay Bridge, let them. I'm not gonna get all pissy and say I've lost some right that I won't even notice in the first place. If someone's vigilance stops some nutjob (terrorist or otherwise) from driving a van into the basement of one of our towers and hitting a detonate button, I'm fine with it.

You see, I take the same thoughts when it comes to flying as well. I have no problem if a TSA guard stereotypes me, pulls me aside, flags me, and/or searches my belongings. (It actually happened in San Juan). If their actions can make flying safer for myself and everyone around me, so be it!

If someone calls a Homeland Security hotline because of someone taking photos of a building, so be it! It's the world we live in today and if it saves lives, I'm all for it.

Amen. Absolutely. I agree. Thanks for saying what I was trying to say otherwise.

[SD_Phil]

The problem with this kind of logic is that it is far too easy to take it to the extreme (as Tim has done in this case). Of course we need to be vigilant as a society. Terrorism is a horrible thing and stopping terrorist attacks should rightly be the priority of Homeland Security. I have two problems with the logic in the two above posts:

1. The logic behind"whatever makes us safer is good" is dangerous. A lot of things will, in at least some way, make "us" safer. We could require everyone to file a schedule with a local police department stating where they'll be and what they'll be doing that day. Deviations from that schedule would then be pursued (as well as those that fail to file schedules). We could allow law enforcement to track our every public and private move. That might make us safer but is it good? Is it practical? Is it smart? Hell no and the burden is on you to tell me why it would be worth the sacrifice. On a similar note I can see why extreme scrutiny of photographers would (to at least some people) make "us" safer. But it's a stupid policy and one we should do without. It reverses the presumption of innocence (making photographers guilty until proven harmless) and charges ordinary citizens with the ability to use law enforcement agencies to feed and exorcize their paranoia. That doesn't sound like a good system. Equally importantly,

2. It is an extraordinary waste of Homeland Security/police resources. Nobody reported the 9/11 hijackers, nobody reported shoe bomber Richard Reid, nobody reported (to my knowledge, I could be wrong) Tim McVeigh. Who has been reported? Innocent people stereotyped by paranoid assholes like Tim with no police or security training. I would much rather prefer that dvstampa's wife concentrate her efforts on actual intelligence work instead of irrelevant lead following. That would be better for all us and would stand a much better chance of actually making us safer. Following pointless and paranoid phone calls from assholes like Tim? Not making us safer and making us all far less free than we presume ourselves to be.

The point now is not vigilance. The point now is intelligent vigilance by qualified investigators (like dv's wife) following worthwhile intelligence leads. Naked vigilance brings out everything that is ugly in all of us. Let's avoid Tim's example.

[gripja]

If someone calls a Homeland Security hotline because of someone taking photos of a building, so be it! It's the world we live in today and if it saves lives, I'm all for it.

The point of the story was that Homeland Security was unavailable when Tim did try to contact them. I, for one, wouldn't even waste my time to call the Feds if I thought something was really wrong. I would call 911 or look for NYPD. The Feds are useless. What the hell is the phone number for Homeland security anyways? Is it a local number? 800 number? is it airtime free?? :shrug:

"Originally Posted by chi-townJay
you can ride and take pics all you want in chicago but if I see a MTF taking shots of federal government buildings then screw what you say that shit aint NORMAL what the hell are you people talking about,you want a picture of the fed building etc.then google it,walking around saying everythings cool and its nothing alot of times really be something."

LOL -- call the Homeland security hotline on me, for I took this picture -- a shot of 2 of NY's Federal buildings & I took it WHILE driving :cheers: (actually I was trying to get lightning but pull me over and question me please):

http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c182/gripja/downtownthunderclouds.jpg

U know what I fear more than photographers? Its them damn terrorists with photographic memories -- THATS who I'm afraid of.

EDIT: right on San Diego Phil

[BnaBreaker]

The point is not what could have been done... Noticing the expired visas of the hijackers would have helped. Searching apartments of the said hijackers with expired visas also could have done the trick.

The point now is vigilance. If someone wants to call the authorities on me as I take photos of the Bay Bridge, let them. I'm not gonna get all pissy and say I've lost some right that I won't even notice in the first place. If someone's vigilance stops some nutjob (terrorist or otherwise) from driving a van into the basement of one of our towers and hitting a detonate button, I'm fine with it.

You see, I take the same thoughts when it comes to flying as well. I have no problem if a TSA guard stereotypes me, pulls me aside, flags me, and/or searches my belongings. (It actually happened in San Juan). If their actions can make flying safer for myself and everyone around me, so be it!

If someone calls a Homeland Security hotline because of someone taking photos of a building, so be it! It's the world we live in today and if it saves lives, I'm all for it.


There is a massive difference between vigilance and outright paranoia. Whether we, as a society, are happy and free, or in severe danger, it does nothing but hurt the nation in the long run if everyone is running around afraid of what is around the corner, worried that anyone with a camera around their neck is just chomping at the bit to murder them and their family in cold blood.

People need to use common sense and simple discrescion regarding these types of matters. I will not allow people like 'Tim' to ruin everything we all love about this country, just because they don't get out much and are afraid of anyone who doesn't look, walk, talk, or act like they do.

[cornholio]

There is a massive difference between vigilance and outright paranoia. Whether we, as a society, are happy and free, or in severe danger, it does nothing but hurt the nation in the long run if everyone is running around afraid of what is around the corner, worried that anyone with a camera around their neck is just chomping at the bit to murder them and their family in cold blood.

People need to use common sense and simple discrescion regarding these types of matters. I will not allow people like 'Tim' to ruin everything we all love about this country, just because they don't get out much and are afraid of anyone who doesn't look, walk, talk, or act like they do.

well said.
sometimes I shake my head at how some Americans are paranoid, sad realy.
I mean theres a difference between someone taking a picture and someone having a ton of fertelizer in drums in their back yard, a van, wire and a making explosives for dummies book.

[Chicago Shawn]

There is a massive difference between vigilance and outright paranoia. Whether we, as a society, are happy and free, or in severe danger, it does nothing but hurt the nation in the long run if everyone is running around afraid of what is around the corner, worried that anyone with a camera around their neck is just chomping at the bit to murder them and their family in cold blood.

People need to use common sense and simple discrescion regarding these types of matters. I will not allow people like 'Tim' to ruin everything we all love about this country, just because they don't get out much and are afraid of anyone who doesn't look, walk, talk, or act like they do.

Bravo, you took the words right out of my mouth.

[MayDay]

Well said, SD_Phil. In homage to the theme of the thread: :D

http://www.clevelandskyscrapers.com/cleveland/federalcourthouseviaduct.jpg

http://www.clevelandskyscrapers.com/cleveland/stokesfed061606.jpg

http://www.clevelandskyscrapers.com/cleveland/fedbldg.jpg

http://www.clevelandskyscrapers.com/cleveland/justicecenterterminal.jpg

http://www.clevelandskyscrapers.com/cleveland/lausche.jpg

Boy, that felt good :haha:

[J. Will]

The only problems I've had is in lower-income neighbourhoods with people thinking that I'm photographing them specifically. One teenager even asked me if I was a cop.

[dvstampa]

The point I'm trying to make (possibly unsuccessfully) is that we can all keep taking our photos. People like Tim are a dime a dozen out there and the Department of Homeland Security has a system in place to weigh their credibility. Like I said, my wife is an Intel Officer with the Coast Guard (the largest division of DHS if you didn't know - so quit ripping on my wife's career.) and my wife jokes all the time about all the reports of people "taking photos of buildings and/or bridges" out here. They go through them and ignore the paranoid tourist reports.

And the truth is, these aren't new to society in our post-9/11 days. Remember the old guys who would call the cops anytime a group of kids gathered near a corner store? Happened to me quite a bit. Or how about the paranoid neighbor who called the police when she saw my friends and I walk into our fraternity house carrying a case of beer. We were all 21, and it was only one damn case...but she reported us for having "a party."

Paranoid people are everywhere and because one dude freaked because of a photographer isn't something for us to get paranoid about. As for this DHS number...god only knows about that. Hell, my wife couldn't tell you if it works or not.

[Tom_Green]

I think i shouldn`t wear this shirt during my visit in New York and take pics. :D
http://www.alternatees.com/images/shirts/iraq_002_full.jpg



If someone calls a Homeland Security hotline because of someone taking photos of a building, so be it! It's the world we live in today and if it saves lives, I'm all for it.
A quote from Counterstrike: Terrorists win!

[Trantor]

Most tourists are walking around taking pictures of major tourist sites - not ordinary buildings. And I don't think a serious urban/skyscraper fanatic would be taking pictures out of their car.


I already did all of that. Just like the driver Tim thought was suspicious. Here in Brazil. And I am not a terrorist.

Tim just sounds like an OCD dumbass. i was followed by a security guard (who was maybe also Atlanta PD, as it was on the back of his jacket) for 3 or 4 blocks, and into a McDonald's. all i was doing was taking pictures of buildings. some were at the base of one tower, when i ran into another guard there who told me no photography on the property...so i went to the sidewalk before walking to McDonald's and being followed by the other guard. they didn't ask me what i was taking pictures of, or if i had a business card, or anything...just followed me (i did look pretty sketchy as i didn't get much sleep and was sort of hungover.) i think they were just really bored on a sunday morning though.

-

did you asked them what law forbids taking pictures of buildings when you are in public space (streets, sidewalks, etc)???


I always carry my tripod with me when i take photographs, even in broad daylight. My tripod is all metal and very sturdy and quite heavy, so if anyone tries to start shit with me I can use it to fuck them up.

you mean to LITERALLY fuck them up?? Like... sticking the tripod on their asses??? :haha: :haha:



.

I think in the States it is illegal to photograph a bank, though. I remember being told that in New York City once.

well, if you shot a pic of NY skyline, you will probably photograph hundreds of bank buildings and highrises.

Where you draw the line of the distance from which you can photograph a bank? The exterior of buildings is available for EVERYONE to see. In fact, architects do them beautiful exactly beacuse of that. Thus, its idiotic to forbid people of photographing the exterior of buildings.

More... if a terrorist wanted, he could very well just walk around the building... take pics with mini gadgets instead of big cameras, etc. Or just look at it and report what he saw that was interesting.


you can ride and take pics all you want in chicago but if I see a MTF taking shots of federal government buildings then screw what you say that shit aint NORMAL what the hell are you people talking about,you want a picture of the fed building etc.then google it,walking around saying everythings cool and its nothing alot of times really be something.

Well, the terrorists can also google for the pictures... :koko: :koko: they dont need to risk taking pictures in front of the building...



Furthermore, what the hell is the use of an external photograph to a terrorist??? It will only get him a more permanent view of something he can view by himself without a camera. If they plan to explode a building, they would more likely be interested in the architectural and engineering drawings of the building, where they can find weak spots, base their attacks, etc!!



On the flip side of all of this, I do commercial real estate "due diligence" work for my livelihood, and I'm continually amazed at how I can walk into buildings (office buildings, hotels, retail buildings, warehouse buildings, etc), into back stock room areas, mechanical areas, electrical rooms, onto roofs, etc, all the while busily taking pictures, writing notes in my clipboard, and being observed by numerous people, who completely ignore me and never ask me if I'm supposed to be in the building or what I'm doing.


the kind of picture you take is actually the one that people should be suspicious about. Be suspicious about people taking pictures of buildings from the street, the same views available to millions of people who walk past these buildings every day is DUMB imho.

Your kinda of pic has much more vital information for an attack.

[Trantor]

sorry, when I noticed I had spanned the thread. I edited all the posts in just one.

[Trantor]

edited

[Trantor]

edited

[Trantor]

edited

[Trantor]

Carry a clipbaord and wear "nice" (a shirt with a collar tucked into some khakis for example) clothes. You can get *anywhere* if you carry a clipboard and look busy. Capitol building, secure areas of airports, office buildings, sporting events...

probably as long as you look WASP!! :)



anyway, I think we ALL missed the point of the article:

-taking pictures while driving is DANGEROUS and can lead to potentially fatal crashes. In many countries (dont know about USA) its forbidden to do such thing, as its forbidden to talk on cell phones while driving. Tim was just trying to avoid a car accident

:jester: :jester:

[Taller Better]

[QUOTE=Trantor;2534899]well, if you shot a pic of NY skyline, you will probably photograph hundreds of bank buildings and highrises.

Where you draw the line of the distance from which you can photograph a bank?
QUOTE]

I have no idea what causes silly laws like that, but I remember being told by a policeman in New York City in 1980 that it was illegal to photograph a bank building from the sidewalk (not from a mile away on top of the Empire State Building as you have suggested). Something to do with people casing the banks for a robbery.

[SteveD]

:previous: Hmmm. I photograph banks all the time from sidewalks immediately adjacent to them and I've never been questioned about it.

[Taller Better]

:previous: Hmmm. I photograph banks all the time from sidewalks immediately adjacent to them and I've never been questioned about it.

That is what I was told in New York City, by a policeman. I cannot check on that fact as I live in Canada, and we are free to photograph anything in public that we choose.