I called the cops on a guy (possibly) taking pics of me today

[heavenlyboy34]

That explains it all. You should have 'lightning bolted' the MF.

wtf? Is this a meme I've never heard of?

 

[Okie RP fan]

Hey, I would have been very weirded out as well and would have probably asked what he was doing, myself... I would have asked for him to scroll through his camera roll if he offered.

 

[Petar]

That explains it all. You should have 'lightning bolted' the MF.

LARP tends to offer deep insight into most facets of human understanding.

The hot terror ticket these days is the homegrown variety and they're looking for any example to justify their relevance so look out

The police have not interpreted this incident as being related to terrorism.

Hey, I would have been very weirded out as well and would have probably asked what he was doing, myself... I would have asked for him to scroll through his camera roll if he offered.

I asked him if he was taking my pic, why the camera sound kept going off on his phone, and why it was pointed at me.

He said I could look at the pics on his camera, and when I asked him if he was taking pics at our current location, then he just looked at me blankly.

This absense of a complete explination is what made me feel like he was lying, which is when I told him that he could leave or that I was gonna call the cops.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Photographing someone against their will could be considered disorderly conduct.

Uh, nope. Everyone/thing in public is fair game for photographers. Sorry. You won't find a single legal expert who disagrees with me either.

 

[TheTexan]

The police have not interpreted this incident as being related to terrorism.

I'm sure they didn't interpret the Patricia Cook incident as being related to terrorism either.

I'm sure the person who reported her as being suspicious felt that getting the cops involved was a good idea, as well.

 

[pcgame]

..

 

[Petar]

Uh, nope. Everyone/thing in public is fair game for photographers. Sorry. You won't find a single legal expert who disagrees with me either.

There are many ways that taking a photo in public can (and should) land you in the back of a squad car.

For example, go find someone on the street and just follow them around with a camera, ignoring all of their plees to leave them the fuck alone.

When the police show up and also tell you to leave them the fuck alone, then clearly explain to them that you have no intention of following their lawful orders as officers of the peace.

See what kind of charges that will (and should) land you.

I'm sure they didn't interpret the Patricia Cook incident as being related to terrorism either.

I'm sure the person who reported her as being suspicious felt that getting the cops involved was a good idea, as well.

I'm sorry, who is Patricia Cook, and what was her problem?

Was she some grungy motherfucker who figured she could just pull up her car next to a stranger and start snapping photos of them?

Did someone report her behavior to the police who then investigated in a responsible/respectful manner?

Ok, good then.

If someone asked me if I was doing something and it was something that I definitely wasn't doing, I'd also give a blank stare.

I also wouldn't explain anything. No one has to explain anything to anyone.

If you are going to go park next to a stranger while pointing your iphone camera at him, then you should also be prepared to explain what is going on if your iphone is repeatedly making the camera sound in that instance.

How are we supposed to have a civilized society without police involvement if people refuse to behave in a civilized manner?

 

[heavenlyboy34]

There are many ways that taking a photo in public can (and should) land you in the back of a squad car.

For example, go find someone on the street and just follow them around with a camera, ignoring all of their plees to leave them the fuck alone.

When the police show up and also tell you to leave them the fuck alone, then clearly explain to them that you have no intention of following their lawful orders as officers of the peace.

See what kind of charges that will (and should) land you.

"Officers of the peace"? LOL!!! Good one, mundane. And no, it's lawful to follow people around with a camera in public. Newspeople do it routinely. Maybe not the smartest thing, but lawful. For the time being, stupidity and unwise behavior are still legal.

 

[Petar]

"Officers of the peace"? LOL!!! Good one, mundane. And no, it's lawful to follow people around with a camera in public. Newspeople do it routinely. Maybe not the smartest thing, but lawful. For the time being, stupidity and unwise behavior are still legal.

Newspeople don't typically harass random strangers with cameras, and I encourage you to go thoroughly test all of your legal theories yourself.

I can however inform you that the police were in fact interested in investigating the incident that I did report.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Newspeople don't typically harass random strangers with cameras, and I encourage you to go thoroughly test all of your legal theories yourself.

Ever watch the news? They film strangers all the time. Sometimes they do "man on the street" features. The issue at hand is not "harassment"-it's filming in general. Harassment is a different kettle of fish. And my "legal theories" don't need testing. They've already been tested in the judicial system. But good luck trying to sue someone for taking pics of you in public. Tell us your attorney's reaction when you inquire about it too, plz.

 

[Petar]

Ever watch the news? They film strangers all the time. Sometimes they do "man on the street" features. The issue at hand is not "harassment"-it's filming in general. Harassment is a different kettle of fish. And my "legal theories" don't need testing. They've already been tested in the judicial system. But good luck trying to sue someone for taking pics of you in public. Tell us your attorney's reaction when you inquire about it too, plz.

There is a big difference between a reporter doing man-on-the-street interviews, and some grungy weirdo parking next to random strangers in order to covertly snap their photograph.

The average police officer would be intelligent enough to understand the difference, so why is it so hard for you to wrap your mind around?

 

[phill4paul]

wtf? Is this a meme I've never heard of?

If you have to ask....Yes. Yes it is.

LARP tends to offer deep insight into most facets of human understanding.

LARP tends to offer deep insight into why the majority believe they should have a government that comes to their defence when their fairy tales don't work out.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

There is a big difference between a reporter doing man-on-the-street interviews, and some grungy weirdo parking next to random strangers in order to covertly snap their photograph.

Not to the legal system. You and I might not like it, but our subjective opinions alone cannot change the law.

 

[Petar]

Not to the legal system. You and I might not like it, but our subjective opinions alone cannot change the law.

Maybe you should just start sitting around playgrounds and snapping photos of children so that you can find out how "subjective" the law considers camera based harassment.

LARP tends to offer deep insight into why the majority believe they should have a government that comes to their defence when their fairy tales don't work out.

Are you referring to my dream of one day becoming a princess?

Please say it is not so.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Maybe you should just start sitting around playgrounds and snapping photos of children so that you can find out how "subjective" the law considers camera based harassment.

WTF? 1) A school playground isn't public property when school is in session. 2) If you really wanted to, it's perfectly legal to stand outside the fence and snap pictures of the playground. Will people be suspicious of you? Maybe. But it's not a legal offense. I challenge you to find a court decision to support your position. It doesn't exist-and the issue has been to the courts at every level.

 

[Petar]

WTF? 1) A school playground isn't public property when school is in session. 2) If you really wanted to, it's perfectly legal to stand outside the fence and snap pictures of the playground. Will people be suspicious of you? Maybe. But it's not a legal offense. I challenge you to find a court decision to support your position. It doesn't exist-and the issue has been to the courts at every level.

Yeah, we disagree.

I think that if you sit by a public playground and take photos of children, then you are very likely to incur some kind of criminal charges such as "disorderly conduct" as a result.

My personal opinion is that what happened with my own incident could have resulted in similar charges for the guy who may have been perving my photo.

It's ok, we don't have to agree.

I do see your burden of proof point, maybe I will find some case for you some day, but I doubt it.

Not much of a legal researcher here...

 

[kylejack]

Photographing someone against their will could be considered disorderly conduct.

I've explained my reasons for calling the police a few times, why don't you tell me what you would have done.

No, photography is not disorderly conduct, even without your consent. You're in a public place and are photographed hundreds of times a day by surveillance cameras that you never consented to. He can't use your likeness in commercial advertising without your consent, but he's still free to take your picture.

What would I have done? Gone about my business. Who cares if some nerd has a photo of me sitting in my car in public?

 

[kylejack]

Yeah, we disagree.

I think that if you sit by a public playground and take photos of children, then you are very likely to incur some kind of criminal charges such as "disorderly conduct" as a result.

Yeah, because disorderly conduct is the charge cops like to slap on whoever they please. But it's not illegal, and the charge won't stick. There are laws criminalizing sex offenders being near parks or schools, but everyone else is free to take pictures in public parks, yes even of children.

Did all the parents of these children consent to this picture being taken? Doesn't matter. There's nothing criminal about taking it.

Photography Is Not A Crime

 

[kylejack]

There is a big difference between a reporter doing man-on-the-street interviews, and some grungy weirdo parking next to random strangers in order to covertly snap their photograph.

Not according to the law. The law affords us all the right to freedom of speech and expression, and does not draw a distinction between reporter and civilian.

The average police officer would be intelligent enough to understand the difference, so why is it so hard for you to wrap your mind around?

Because you are wrong. Reporters do not have more rights than bloggers or non-reporters. About the only difference is that reporters sometimes have shield laws protecting them from revealing their sources.

 

[kylejack]

There are many ways that taking a photo in public can (and should) land you in the back of a squad car.

There's only one camera-based crime in common use in public places: Upskirt type photos. Those are illegal.

For example, go find someone on the street and just follow them around with a camera, ignoring all of their plees to leave them the fuck alone.

Following someone constantly is an offense of stalking, regardless of camera. You were not stalked, however.