Pixiq

Well, this is great news. Let’s face it, the average person is unaware of the issue. I can only imagine that the general public will be, for the most part, sympathetic.

This just underscores the importance of a free and functioning media. The government can make up laws and ‘enforce’ them – if they can do it without drawing attention to themselves.

I think a lot of people consider the newspaper (particularly) as just a delivery mechanism for advertisements. Frankly, more and more editors and publishers seemingly think so, too.

But it’s what keeps our Bill of Rights intact.

The bottom line is that until citizens have a universal right to resist unlawful arrest, the court rulings will be meaningless. The problem is that many of the same people who denounce this police abuse are also the same liberals who fret about how any expansion of gun or self-defense rights would unleash a blood bath in the streets. The fact remains, though, that the police will simply not actually listen to the courts beforehand until the legislature and/or the courts actually make it so that if the police aggressively assault law-abiding photographers in defiance of clear court rulings, those same photographers can exercise (even in a limited capacity) self-defense against the police.
Mike T recently posted..Permanent identity theft

I’ll also point out for the liberals here that it used to be legal for most of this country’s existence to use force, including up to deadly force where necessary, against the police if they behaved like this. 50 years ago, if a police officer tried to aggressively place a photographer under arrest, it was perfectly legal for the photographer to slug the cop across the face because it was an unlawful arrest to simply detain someone for the act of photographing in public. If the cop then tried to tase or shoot the citizen, the citizen photographer could likewise respond with equal force and the police couldn’t say boo about it to the judge.
Mike T recently posted..Permanent identity theft

Though the First Amendment is clear as day, times have changed, especially after 9/11. In order to avoid further clashes between police and unsuspecting photographers, authorities must come up with a way to effectively address the issue. It’s a tough balancing act to uphold the law while effectively weeding out terrorists who have managed to blend seamlessly with the public.

No. That’s stupid. All these laws do nothing to “weed[] out terrorists who have managed to blend seamlessly with the public.”

Carlos, this is great stuff! I didn’t know you worked for the Tucson Citizen. I lived there for over a decade.

Anyway, you’re fight over this issue has helped to put the question of how important the constitution is to, not just for journalist or photographers, but every person in the country. This is the beginning of how technology is spreading so fast and so cheaply that the average citizen will have the same capacity for surveillance as the police today. To be equal with the Police is frightening to them because, as was seen with the lady who was tazed after calling the police, the police officer’s own statement sums up their entire position on the public. “I had to get control of the situation.”

They have an unyielding commitment to have ‘control’ over everything. Which overrides common sense, the law or the constitution they swore to protect.

You are exposing one of the last ‘hidden’ abuses of our country. The abuse of police and their entitlement to ‘control’ everyone at their discretion. Standing up to Police is tough and scary but that’s what it takes to make a cultural change. And that’s what your work is doing, making a cultural change.

This goes to the heart of America. In a world where almost everyone has the ability to video record or photograph, you have touched on an issue that, well, affects every person in this country. This is more than just about photography. This is about freedom and justice and why our country is special. You walk the walk with your head held high with dignity and respect. Thanks.

“In order to avoid further clashes between police and unsuspecting photographers, authorities must come up with a way to effectively address the issue.”

It’s easy: stop making up laws. That would be a great start, right there. Of course, the police are the primary people making the “issue” in the first place, so “addressing” it isn’t really the problem, now is it?

“It’s a tough balancing act to uphold the law while effectively weeding out terrorists who have managed to blend seamlessly with the public.”

I think the critical error here is assuming upholding the law and “weeding out terrorists” are two jobs one person should, or even could, be doing.
Michaelk42 recently posted..Unsurprisingly- Pogan gets no real punishment

I believe my camera is ‘terrorist repellant’ as there never have been any terrorist attacks while I’m carrying it. We should all take cameras everywhere we go, for it not only weeds out terrorists – it chases them away.

They caught a terrorist with a camera near a bridge.
Now my camera is considered a tool of terrorism.
They caught a terrorist with a bomb in his shoes.
Now I have to x-ray my shoes to get on a plane.
They caught a terrorist with a blog.
Now my internet could be monitored.
They caught a terrorist with a bomb in his underwear.
Now I must be x-rayed from head to toe to get on a plane.

I worry about the day when I have to fly nude following colonoscopy by the TSA while my electronics take a separate flight. That’ll be the day we rejoice at defeating terrorism.

Hey Carlos – Congrats on the growing coverage again. Come on, congress!

p.s. – “taken it upon herself to become the photographer right’s advocate for the Post”? Am I wrong in thinking that it should be “photographers’ rights”?

Classic, in the wake of the 9/11 the media feeds the publics paranoia about the “terrorists among us”, be vigilant, report your neighbour, buy our paper. At that time not many would have cared about a few photogs being hassled because the police were “protecting us”

Now that does not sell sop well they are bringing us stories about police abuse of the first amendment.

The media feed us what we want to hear and get us to buy their crap. Don’t get me wrong I think these stories are helping but watch them disappear faster than last nights curry if there is another attack.