<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Federal officers twice fail at intimidating photographer (videos)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/</link>
	<description>It's a First Amendment Right</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Jun 2011 02:03:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Drayke Larson</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19792</link>
		<dc:creator>Drayke Larson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19792</guid>
		<description>&quot;We do know that terrorists, domestic and foreign, often scout out their targets prior to an attack and these scouts often take video and pictures. This is a real threat. &quot;

There is extremely little evidence to support this claim.  If you have references, I would love to see the links please.

And this argument is ridiculous on its face.  We also know that many terrorists drive cars as evidenced by the many car bombs used around the world, or closer to home in the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing, so would you say that it&#039;s well within the rights of the police to stop and search anyone who drives?  We know that terrorists, foreign and domestic often drive cars prior to an attack.  Let&#039;s take it one further and say that We know that terrorists, foreign and domestic, often live in houses.  So it&#039;s perfectly okay for the police to search all homes, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;We do know that terrorists, domestic and foreign, often scout out their targets prior to an attack and these scouts often take video and pictures. This is a real threat. &#8221;</p>
<p>There is extremely little evidence to support this claim.  If you have references, I would love to see the links please.</p>
<p>And this argument is ridiculous on its face.  We also know that many terrorists drive cars as evidenced by the many car bombs used around the world, or closer to home in the Oklahoma Federal Building bombing, so would you say that it&#8217;s well within the rights of the police to stop and search anyone who drives?  We know that terrorists, foreign and domestic often drive cars prior to an attack.  Let&#8217;s take it one further and say that We know that terrorists, foreign and domestic, often live in houses.  So it&#8217;s perfectly okay for the police to search all homes, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BambiB</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19647</link>
		<dc:creator>BambiB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 20:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19647</guid>
		<description>Seems pretty clear to me that as soon as you ask, &quot;Is this a Terry Stop?&quot; the cops start to figure out that there&#039;s a rather large pile of goo into which you are inviting them to step.

To their credit, the cops in both cases declined the invitation.  In fact, I&#039;m surprised at the level of civility of the cops.  Certainly they had to be frustrated with such a smart-ass yanking their chain.

On the other hand, such video taping is an extremely valuable service in support of civil rights.  It clearly serves as a &quot;canary in the coal mine&quot;.

I wonder how the results would be different if, when challenged, you responded, &quot;I am doing nothing illegal and while not wishing to insult or offend you, I am busy and choose not to answer any more of your questions. Have a nice day.&quot;?

Without the warning &quot;Terry Stop&quot; language or questions about whether the conversation is official or &quot;casual&quot;, you become just another dumb American who chooses to ignore police banter.  Absent the warning (which is about the as subtle as bright color markings on poisonous creatures  in nature!) do the cops push the issue?  If you exhibited less knowledge about the law and your rights - would they go beyond legal actions to assault?  Battery?  Arrest?  Would they become hostile?

As for those who think that harassing photographers is legitimate in the name of &quot;security&quot; - consider that photographing with hidden equipment is easy, that software exists to stitch all the pix into a 3D model, and that if planning some sort of attack is the goal, it can be done, with or without photos whether or not cops harass innocent photographers.  &quot;Terrorism&quot; will be used to justify all manner of nonsense: From groping women at airports, to monitoring your spending habits, to monitoring every email and phone call you make.  Those dangerous to liberty are not the terrorists, but those who would have us believe they are &quot;saving&quot; us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems pretty clear to me that as soon as you ask, &#8220;Is this a Terry Stop?&#8221; the cops start to figure out that there&#8217;s a rather large pile of goo into which you are inviting them to step.</p>
<p>To their credit, the cops in both cases declined the invitation.  In fact, I&#8217;m surprised at the level of civility of the cops.  Certainly they had to be frustrated with such a smart-ass yanking their chain.</p>
<p>On the other hand, such video taping is an extremely valuable service in support of civil rights.  It clearly serves as a &#8220;canary in the coal mine&#8221;.</p>
<p>I wonder how the results would be different if, when challenged, you responded, &#8220;I am doing nothing illegal and while not wishing to insult or offend you, I am busy and choose not to answer any more of your questions. Have a nice day.&#8221;?</p>
<p>Without the warning &#8220;Terry Stop&#8221; language or questions about whether the conversation is official or &#8220;casual&#8221;, you become just another dumb American who chooses to ignore police banter.  Absent the warning (which is about the as subtle as bright color markings on poisonous creatures  in nature!) do the cops push the issue?  If you exhibited less knowledge about the law and your rights &#8211; would they go beyond legal actions to assault?  Battery?  Arrest?  Would they become hostile?</p>
<p>As for those who think that harassing photographers is legitimate in the name of &#8220;security&#8221; &#8211; consider that photographing with hidden equipment is easy, that software exists to stitch all the pix into a 3D model, and that if planning some sort of attack is the goal, it can be done, with or without photos whether or not cops harass innocent photographers.  &#8220;Terrorism&#8221; will be used to justify all manner of nonsense: From groping women at airports, to monitoring your spending habits, to monitoring every email and phone call you make.  Those dangerous to liberty are not the terrorists, but those who would have us believe they are &#8220;saving&#8221; us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19267</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:57:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19267</guid>
		<description>F***ing Sweet!

Keep up the good work, make them sweat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>F***ing Sweet!</p>
<p>Keep up the good work, make them sweat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joel Chandler</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19167</link>
		<dc:creator>Joel Chandler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:10:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19167</guid>
		<description>Was Martin Luther King correct when he wrote:

“We who in engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive.”

Or was he &quot;baiting&quot; the Alabama State Police that day as he walked on a public sidewalk across the Edmund Pettus Bridge?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Was Martin Luther King correct when he wrote:</p>
<p>“We who in engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive.”</p>
<p>Or was he &#8220;baiting&#8221; the Alabama State Police that day as he walked on a public sidewalk across the Edmund Pettus Bridge?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Hanawalt</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19161</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Hanawalt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:16:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19161</guid>
		<description>As a photographer I am annoyed by the baiting and challenging nature of what was done by the photographer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a photographer I am annoyed by the baiting and challenging nature of what was done by the photographer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: discarted</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19133</link>
		<dc:creator>discarted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:22:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19133</guid>
		<description>@edinmiami-

Who knows the law? Police
Who is in the best position to keep us safe? Police

These claims aren&#039;t true 100% of the time and it has been proven repeatedly through videos that keep appearing on the internet showcasing arrogant cops who do not know the law, or criminal cops violating the law.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@edinmiami-</p>
<p>Who knows the law? Police<br />
Who is in the best position to keep us safe? Police</p>
<p>These claims aren&#8217;t true 100% of the time and it has been proven repeatedly through videos that keep appearing on the internet showcasing arrogant cops who do not know the law, or criminal cops violating the law.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: discarted</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19132</link>
		<dc:creator>discarted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19132</guid>
		<description>@edinmiami

&quot;I agree that all we really need is a concise law which states simply and plainly that officers have the authority to briefly stop anyone they believe might be involved in criminal activity in the present or future.&quot;

i was detained by LA Count Sheriffs and accused of being a terrorist and in cahoots with al qaeda. the sheriffs also threatened to put me on the &quot;FBI&#039;s hit list&quot;. Would you like to know what the Sheriffs uncovered by detaining me for 25 minutes? Absolutely nothing! The only thing they accomplished was violating my rights and determining that I didn&#039;t have any warrants.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@edinmiami</p>
<p>&#8220;I agree that all we really need is a concise law which states simply and plainly that officers have the authority to briefly stop anyone they believe might be involved in criminal activity in the present or future.&#8221;</p>
<p>i was detained by LA Count Sheriffs and accused of being a terrorist and in cahoots with al qaeda. the sheriffs also threatened to put me on the &#8220;FBI&#8217;s hit list&#8221;. Would you like to know what the Sheriffs uncovered by detaining me for 25 minutes? Absolutely nothing! The only thing they accomplished was violating my rights and determining that I didn&#8217;t have any warrants.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: discarted</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19131</link>
		<dc:creator>discarted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:04:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19131</guid>
		<description>@ johnny law-

&quot;We do know that terrorists, domestic and foreign, often scout out their targets prior to an attack and these scouts often take video and pictures. &quot;

a lot of us on this site and in this country would like to see actual evidence supporting this claim</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ johnny law-</p>
<p>&#8220;We do know that terrorists, domestic and foreign, often scout out their targets prior to an attack and these scouts often take video and pictures. &#8221;</p>
<p>a lot of us on this site and in this country would like to see actual evidence supporting this claim</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michaelk42</title>
		<link>http://carlosmiller.com/2010/01/25/federal-officers-twice-fail-at-intimidating-photographer-videos/#comment-19104</link>
		<dc:creator>Michaelk42</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 22:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://carlosmiller.com/?p=9465#comment-19104</guid>
		<description>Well, Ariel and Torgeaux already took care of most of that.

Under your logic, shutting down Flickr and Google image searches would be more conducive to stopping terrorism... except I still don&#039;t see where photos were linked to any actual attacks.

If they can still just pull pictures of a site off the internet at any time, harassing random photographers is still a massive, stupid waste of time.
.-= Michaelk42´s last blog ..&lt;a href=&quot;http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/Pdrn/~3/cxlZAgSsymI/again-with-cluelessness.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Again with the cluelessness&lt;/a&gt; =-.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, Ariel and Torgeaux already took care of most of that.</p>
<p>Under your logic, shutting down Flickr and Google image searches would be more conducive to stopping terrorism&#8230; except I still don&#8217;t see where photos were linked to any actual attacks.</p>
<p>If they can still just pull pictures of a site off the internet at any time, harassing random photographers is still a massive, stupid waste of time.<br />
<span class="cluv"> Michaelk42´s last blog ..<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/Pdrn/~3/cxlZAgSsymI/again-with-cluelessness.html" rel="nofollow">Again with the cluelessness</a> <span class="heart_tip_box"><img class="heart_tip" alt="My ComLuv Profile" border="0" width="16" height="14" src="http://carlosmiller.com/wp-content/plugins/commentluv/images/littleheart.gif"/></span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

