Property – who is the owner of the property on which a viewer/photographer is located? And has permission been granted by the owner to the viewer/photographer to be there doing what s/he is doing? With the existence of government owned property the principle becomes distorted, since in fact taxpayers are the owning group. (I did not see that the taker of the video tape left the city government owned sidewalk and entered onto the federal court property.) In a proper society – one in which only privately owned or non-owned property exists (no “Commons), the presence of a person on owned property and what s/he would not be allowed to do would be up to the owner, and agreement prior to entering would be the practice. This would be the case of egress property too – roads and sidewalks being a common type now. Those who did not like some restriction of use by the property owner(s) would seek other locations for their activity, and the limitations of one property owner would provide incentive for other owners of the same or similar types to be more lenient and thereby obtain new clientele. Continuing to restrict ideas to inside the current government model society is a great limitation.

Harassment – this word means different things to different people and is often used without clarification. It would be better to simply state what a person did or said, rather than to label that action/statement as “harassment”. S/he stated that person “X” was violating the law, “You’re not supposed to videotape any federal court building.” [I]f I catch you videotaping the building again you will be arrested by the Phoenix Police Department.” I would classify these as typical government enforcement agent verbiage, often done to see if the other person can be incited to a violent action that is an immediate cause for them to react physically – and with all the legalized force they have at hand.

While some would make a distinction between law enforcement agents and federal/state guards of government property, they are the same in principle. The only practical difference is in the type of weapons they are authorized to carry with which to carry out their directives. I encourage that everyone keep in mind that while Congress in the US passes federal laws (state legislators for state laws), the enforcing is done by individual agents in the executive branch department given that authority by Congress (or the State Legislature of the individual state). Without the enforcing agents, the Laws/Mandates/Edicts are meaningless! This is a universal truism anywhere in the world. The enforcers are the key! Negative Social Preferencing by large numbers of people is the best solution for gradually eliminating the model of society as ruler/ruled – http://selfsip.org/solutions/Social_Preferencing.html Appropriating, assimilating, thinking over, comprehending and integrating (more than simply understanding and accepting) the principles upon which it lies will promote the usage of Social Preferencing – the ultimate effector of social order.

I have some comments that should help clear things up:

1. Voice of Reason is correct. I asked if I was being detained solely because the guard told me “not yet” when I asked if I was free to leave, and I am not sure if he is a sworn officer or not. Out of an abundance of caution, I stayed put and kept asking until he answered my question. Why risk a TASERing or worse?

2. As to answering their other questions, I was a private citizen engaged in lawful behavior on public property. Would it have been more polite of me to answer their questions when they were barked at me? Of course. Was I required to by law? Certainly not. In fact, the 5th Amendment guarantees my right to not say anything at all. I was doing just fine and having a great morning all by myself; it was they who were interrupting me.

3. I never felt that they were physically blocking me from leaving; I doubt that even they would be that dumb. Besides, if you notice, I didn’t leave until I was good and ready. I walked up and down that sidewalk 3 more times before I left (I didn’t tape the entire thing) without a peep from the guards. In fact, the two guards at the other end certainly didn’t feel threatened by my presence, judging by the one’s asking about the type of equipment I had.

4. I have consulted with two attorneys that specialize in this sort of case, and both have assured me that I am on solid legal grounds. In fact, one lawyer pointed me to the following case, in which a person was detained even worse than I was for the exact same behavior. The Tacoma, WA Police Department was subsequently forced to give the photog a formal letter of apology:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMDW4Fszj2U

5. jones is correct, in my opinion, that the guards were free to threaten me with calling the police all they want, and that’s no crime. However, I am free as well to ignore their empty threats all day long if I wish, and so I did. I do believe that I was unlawfully detained because of the guard’s “not yet” statement, though, which is the basis of the formal complaint I will be making very soon.

It will be very interesting, should I return and film some more (Am I? not sure yet, honestly; i’ve got other things to do) just what the Phoenix police would charge me with should they be called. I can tell you this; if I am approached by them, I will behave in the exact same manner, no more and no less, which is all that is required of me. It’s up to the police to articulate reasonable suspicion that I’m committing a crime in order to justify a detainment, and I’m not going to help them out, however inadvertently or mistakenly. The best course of action is to say nothing and let them make a bad arrest if they’re going to; at that point, nothing I say is going to prevent a ride to jail anyway.

By the way, I’m not a photographer. I can barely operate my entry-level digital camera. I am merely passionate about freedom and fairness issues, and Carlos’s reporting of the harassment of the other people in Phoenix began to irritate me. That’s really why I went down there – to see if the allegations were true.

They are, as we can plainly see.

I hope this helps to clear some things up.

It should say “click to edit.”

Thanks. I’m new at this. Not an issue for the current message, but for future reference, how is that done, or point me to an FAQ if you like.