Comments on: It’s time for a photo protest against the Miami Metrorail

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 15:32:08 +0000

I would come but, I live in Canada, however this might just be worth coming down for.

At least up here if they get the idea that you actually know the law, the transit cops will back down.

By: stretch

stretch — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:29:30 +0000

Joaquin, it’s called “freedom of expression,” and it is protected by the First Amendment, as is “freedom of the press” and “freedom of religion.”

By: Joaquin Vagellos

Joaquin Vagellos — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:28:47 +0000

Where in the constitution does it protect one’s right to film or take pictures?
The 1st amendment speaks about freedom of the press, but this guy was not from the press covering a story.
If , for some reason you get off taking pictures of a transportation facility. Go to the airport , walk around all day taking pictures of the place, and see what will happen to you.

By: Duane Kerzic

Duane Kerzic — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:35:18 +0000

You have to remember that fully half the populatoin is below average. Does it surprise you that Wackenhut hires from those that are below average?

By: johnl

johnl — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:47:39 +0000

> sed “s:incredulously:incredibly:”

Never ask permission. A thoughtful guard, when asked permission, is going to try to recall under what circumstances he’s authorized to grant permission. So he’s always going to answer “no”.

By: Fascist Nation

Fascist Nation — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 01:05:19 +0000

Of course the real irony is that he was specifically taking pictures of the terminal’s superstructure.

By: Carlos Miller

Carlos Miller — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:18:40 +0000

I remember that one, Ricky.

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/04/14/federal-reserve-security-guards-force-videographers-off-public-property/

By: Ricky Rodriguez

Ricky Rodriguez — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:44:12 +0000

Regardless of what your personal opinion is on Alex Jones, He is a STRONG ally in the fight to defend our right to photograph and videotape. Check this link out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VzdxDg_eH4

By: pod

pod — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:33:56 +0000

I just don’t understand where precisely it says private individuals have the authority to enforce law and order on public land. Maybe I’m weird like this, but when it’s public property, I’d rather have sworn law enforcement officials (hopefully with an understanding of the law), than rent-a-cops with toy guns (are they even allowed to draw them?) who really don’t accomplish much.

If you can afford to build a public utility, and get a contract with a private security company, you can afford to swear in a few more *real* cops to protect the asset. I’m of mixed opinions of LEOs (some good, some bad), but I’d rather have someone protecting the Metrobus/Rail/Mover who can actually do something about it, than a private citizen who has a little slip of paper saying they can openly carry.

The proof is basically that if they detain you, they have to call a real cop to do the dirty work.

The Wackenhut contract is up soon, why not just replace them with a few MDPD officers? Doral just became a city and is getting their own police department, so the MDPD that used to be tasked with protecting Doral could cover at least the Metrorail and Mover. Yes, real cops with real guns, not Academy dropouts with little Third World revolvers.