Olympus' Micro Four Thirds 75mm prime
Pentax K-30: a pretty package of a camera
Can you fix the focus on a blurry photo after the fact?
The birth of Mirrorless Cameras
The Joy Of Winning A Photo Contest
Choosing your first dSLR camera
New York City can be beautiful!
Choosing the Right Light Stand
Photojojo iPhone Telephoto Lens review — AudioCast
How To Buy Digital Photo Frames For An Exhibit - Part 2
Hey MAC users! A great source and an April Fool that is no joke
My week with Q
How To Become A Successful Photographer
"When the Wind Stopped" — poem with 4 photos
Creating The New Family Portrait
Tips for Textures 
Cast aways - saving those photographic memories
One Man Show: My 25 Years With Digital Photography
Studio, Flash, & Available Light — Three Books Reviewed
Portrait styling: dangerous pairings
Adobe Photoshop CS6 Product Managers Interview Audiocast
A gift of flowers: unfold your senses
On Set of "Love & Robots" the Film
No-Brainer Setup For A Digital Photo Frame Exhibit - Part 3
Exhibiting With Digital Photo Frames (DPF) Part 1
Planning “National Geographic” style photo travel
Find Inner Peace and Beauty at San Jose, California, Airport
Wilderness Travel 1 Rainforests – Essential Gear
Backlighting Basics
What Moves You?
FIGURES IN MOTION: Decades of Evolving Personal Imagery in Photography, Part 7
Lomography Store, Austin, Texas — GALLERY
GALLERY — Up to $1,000 Reward for Cattle Rustlers
25% off on photography eBooks
eyePhone: The eBook for iPhone Photographers
Interview with Harold Davis — Closeup Maestro of Flowers & Water Drops
Interview with Steve Caplin — Photoshop Digital Artist, Commercial Illustrator, & Author
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 3 of 3
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 2 Of 3
Easy technique to select, edit and sequence keywords for web
How much should you charge for a photograph?Man Arrested At FEMA Checkpoint After Video Recording Federal Guard
A conspiracy theorist who suspected that federal officers writing down license plate numbers in Colorado had something to do with the earthquake the previous day was arrested for refusing to provide identification.
It all started when Chris Geo, who runs the site Truth Frequency Radio, walked up to a guard shack leading to a FEMA warehouse with a video camera Wednesday.
The FEMA warehouse is next to a post officer where Geo had been told officers were writing down license plate numbers of people driving out of the parking lot.
Geo figured it had something to do with the earthquake that shook Colorado that measured 5.3 on the Richter scale.
But when Geo arrived, officers were not writing down license plate numbers.
Nevertheless, he approached the guard at the FEMA checkpoint and began asking questions.
The guard told him he was not allowed to video record the federal facility.
Geo refused to stop recording, so the guard called a Homeland Security officer who demanded identification.
Geo refused to provide it on the basis he was not committing a crime.
At 8:45 in the video, he asked if he was free to go. The officer said no and arrested him.
There is no federal law that requires citizens to provide identification when asked by a law enforcement officer.
And Colorado law states the following regarding the issue:
16-3-103. Stopping of suspect. (1) A peace officer may stop any person who he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime and may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions. A peace officer shall not require any person who is stopped pursuant to this section to produce or divulge such person's social security number. The stopping shall not constitute an arrest.
But all he was doing was video recording from outside the FEMA plant, which should not be enough to make the officer reasonably suspect he was committing a crime.
Geo was charged with "failure to comply with a federal officer."
Comments
He might be a whackjob but he has a case against them now..
The stop and identify statute did not give the officer they right to either DEMAND ID or arrest him for failing to provide it.
And the lack of federal law on filming, which even if there was one would have to be pretty limited, further assists him..
Cha-Ching!
I am getting sick and tired of hearing the "conspiracy theorist" cliche. Whenever someone tells someone something that it is disturbing they call the teller of the disturbing facts a "conspiracy theorist" without checking the facts. It's called "shooting the messenger".
He has a theory. It involves a conspiracy.
He's a conspiracy theorist.
He's also entitled to damages for violation of his civil rights, in my opinion.
It's not a theory if it's true.
Dictionary.com disagrees with you.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory
A theory is an analysis of facts. Gravity is a theory.
That a bunch of Muslims who can't fly airplanes and are still alive today, coordinated from a hovel half way around the world, and magically causing 3 buildings modern steel buildings to implode after hitting only 2 of them is also a *conspiracy theory* too, promulgated by the batshit crazy US government, only slightly more respectable that this nutcase.
and the police state continues...
and the police state continues...
At least you get it Jimmy. Carlos should be ashamed of himself for labeling him a "conspiracy theorist". Calling someone a "whack job" for wondering why these fat idiots are writing down license plates at a POST OFFICE is as disturbing as him getting arrested. The law was clearly posted on the video. I guess they were just "doing their job" or "following orders". The "Nuremberg Defense" didn't work for the Nazi's, did it?
First of all, there is no law against cops writing down your license plate number just as there is no law for me to videotape somebody's license plate number, including those on police cars.
Second of all, even if they were doing that, what would it have to do with the earthquake on the East Coast?
Third of all, this guy is conspiracy theorist. He even admits it on his site.
"Truth Frequency focuses more on the history of the occult and the deeper underlying conspiracy behind current events in an effort to predict the future by understanding the past."
http://truthfrequencyradio.com/the-hosts/
Unless he can provide a grain of evidence or at least some type of plausible explanation as to why the writing down of license plates in Colorado is connected to the earthquake on the East Coast, then his speculations are nothing but a theory. A conspiracy theory.
But there is no crime against that.
On the word "conspiracy:" There are many conspiracy theories that have turned out true. People are charged with conspiracy and sent to jail. The government has an official conspiracy theory about 9-11.
I have nothing against conspiracy theorists, even if this fellow's conspiracy theories seem to have no basis in reality. At worst, he's great independent, authentic entertainment for radio. I'd rather listen to him than say, dumber shit like Rush or Beck, or National Pentagon Radio, or a fundamentalist preacher who thinks his gOD has conspired with sssssatan (could it be?) to roast my ass in hell.
If the security guards and cops were *smart,* they'd take every opportunity a camera is pointed at them to demonstrate their professionalism and courtesy. Pretty soon, there would be no youtube videos of jackboot thugs.
I guess they're motive is to teach us lessons. We're learning. It's not quite what they think.
*their (dang)
I stand by my statement, in my view your are a whackjob if you take then position that taking down license plates had something to do with the earthquake that shook the eastern seaboard more than 1,700 miles away.
Sorry, but that isn't an unreasonable perspective.
I also stand by my statement that regardless of whether he was a whackjob or not, they violated both the law AND his rights. So while I view his theories as crazy that doesn't mean he enjoys ANY fewer rights.
You guys do realize that Colorado had an earthquake the same day?
It didn't get reported as much because the media considers NYC and DC as the center of the universe.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/24/us/24earthquake.html
Nope, didn't know that..
I might rescind my whackjob comment if you can rationalize how writing down plate numbers might be related..
But my overall point continues to be whackjob or not, he had the right to refuse to provide ID because he had no legal obligation to provide it, stop and identify statutes are bound by supreme court precedent. SCOTUS has taken a fairly simple perspective and given a "bright-line" ruling on this. For a stop and identify statute to be invoked there must be probable cause that a crime has occured, is occuring, or will occur. This is true regardless of the wording of the statute, this precedent cannot be overcome by anything less than a new SCOTUS case or a constitutional amendment. The even go on to say that the wording of some states laws that include the requirement that you explain what you are doing somewhere are unconstitutional violations of your 5th amendment rights, so thats out.
About the only thing the haven't taken a hard line on is whether you can be required to produce an ID or if simply stating your true name is sufficient, they have said something similar along the lines of a simple statement sufficing, and because you are not legally obligated to carry any id unless you are driving this would be a hard sell. "Papers please!" wouldn't go over well with most people..
And in my view regardless of your politics the law applies to everyone the same and if it doesn't then somebody better be punished for that lapse in judgement.
You ought to look up controlling precedent on stop and identify law, its fascinating.
I wonder if they'll try to shift the goalposts and say they were concerned about his mental stability for his bizarre theory.
I'm done with this site.
Bye bye..
Thumbs up for not having to read anymore of your crap.
I second the motion, so carried unanimously.
Go ahead and leave. DHS already wrote down your IP. :)
They have taken down everyone's IP that have commented here, pro or con. They will consider all that have taken part here to be trouble in the future and from there all of us will get to see one of these FEMA camps from the inside.
Notice a pattern with these ID issues?
First the R word. Refuse
"Are you refusing?"
This is an attempt to erase the line between actions you are compelled to take and not compelled to take.
A correct answer to "Are you refusing?" could be "I am not Constitutionally compelled to show ID under these circumstances, I am not OFFERING to show ID under these circumstances."
This reinstates the line.
Remember for an order to be lawful it must be based in law/statuatory authority.
If there were a law(that was constitutional) compelling you to show physical ID and you refused you could be arrested for violating that law, end of story, but since there isn't, notice how it shifts/s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-s to some kind of obstructing or interefering. Some of these laws require intent which must be proven beyond reasonable doubt but even if the particular law didn't require intent how can someone be obstructing or interfereing with a legal process when there is no law requiring them to show ID. I see many people getting duped by this.
This person had his civil/constitutional rights violated and should seriously consider a lawsuit using the Civil Rights Attorney Fees Award Act to pay the lawyers fee.
I'll have to look for the case but I seem to remember the supreme court taking the position that obstruction by not producing ID isn't constitutional. And that words alone CANNOT be obstruction.. I'll have to find it.
What I do know is that NO MATTER WHAT the stop and identify law says on the books, the supreme court HAS said that probably cause MUST exist for it to be triggered and that simply stating your true name should be enough to satisfy the requirement to identify. You are NOT required to carry ID..
Stop and identify requires reasonable suspicion a crime has been committed, which is a slightly lower standard than probable cause. Otherwise, you're quite right.
You are correct. You do not have to produce physical ID. That Supreme Court Case was Hiibel vs. Nevada and Terry vs.Ohio was for the detainment issue.
But my point was,derailing to interfereing/obstruction is a trick. If there were a valid law requiring you to produce ID and you refused you could be arrested for that law.
And what is ID? This man was standing around and asked for a drivers license? Absurd.
It's pretty difficult to produce a physical ID if you aren't carrying any. More people should do that. There is no law that says one must carry government-issued ID when out in public.
I would argue that it is not up to the people to change their behavior it is up to the executive branch to realize that people do not have to produce physical ID and stop misusing obstruction or interfereing. That is as ridiculous as issuing a speeding summons to a legally parked car.
People arrested should consider suing using the Civil Rights Attorney Fees Award Act. The government pays the lawyer. This spares the citizen the burden of coming up with legal fees.
Yes, and the disclose your identity when being legally detained and there is a state law requiring it, is satisfied by verbally stating your name. Producing physical ID is not required. At the federal level, at this time there is no federal law requiring one to disclose their identity when being legally detained.
Disclose your identity does not compel one to produce physical ID.
"there is no federal law requiring one to disclose their identity when being legally detained."
Perhaps, but nothing said you can't remain in detention until identity is determined
??
If there is no law requiring an individual to disclose their identity they can not be detained for the purpose of determining their identity.???? With photography at the federal level a private citizen generally has to merely state that they are a private citizen and not media or commercial. A detention is generally taken to mean have the individual remain where they are and not be moved or locked up as in an arrest.
If someone is jailed in the detention mode for not disclosing their name when they are not required to by law they have the Civil Righys Attorneys Fees Award Act available to them.
This is just another example of what the founders warned us about, the executive taking more and more power and not operating within their defined statuatory empowerment. The founders fully expected the executive branch to become tyrannical. What you described was the raw abuse of power by making a detention what is was not intended to be.
Consentual stop?? What is a consentual stop?
How can a person be stopped and free to go at the same time?
It's a good thing that officer wasn't talking to you when he asked, "Have you heard of the Supreme Court?" I'm sure you could have put him in his proper place. He didn't sound to sure of himself when he said it anyway.
"Sorry Officer, I don't carry my papers unless I am driving or applying for a passport. I can give you my name."
Carlos, there was an earthquake in Colorado late Monday night, this is the earthquake he's referring to. Please revise your article to reflect this.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/2011/usc0005idz/
I hate to say it but this is what makes people angry- when uninformed people bash so-called 'conspiracy theorists' while having no idea what they're talking about.
Hate to be so negative with my first post here but...
OK, Will, that's cool. That makes a little more sense.
And I will update the story.
But he is still a conspiracy theorist because what did writing down license plate numbers have to do with the Colorado earthquake?
And I based that assertion after reading through his site.
Yeah I saw your comment about him calling himself a conspiracy theorist on his own site and in general do not think you used that term inappropriately. The tone of the article just felt a little unfair to me; although I can see how, not knowing about the CO quake, he would seem a little crazy.
It seems to me he went there expecting an illegal checkpoint and when he didn't find one he felt like he had to confront them about something.
Perhaps there is some truth in those so called conspiracies.
below are some links... if anyone has a different perspective I would surely be interested in hearing them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FScxpltsqMg&feature=sharehttp://saynotoco...
/2011/08/busted-media-caught-showing-fake.htmlhttp:
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsv0hGx2LLQ&feature=sharehttp://presscore.ca/2011/?p=4009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeVtoA8IuEk&feature=share
Carlos, why aren't you reporting the Tiawanda Moore acquittal?
Because it's a conspiracy on my part to cover up the truth.
Or maybe I just have gotten to it yet.
Well if you HAVE gotten to it and yet aren't reporting it then there definitely is a conspiracy. Then again I think it takes more than one person to have a conspiracy.
You may be right about it taking more than one to have a conspiracy, but it only takes one person to theorize about a conspiracy, and that person would be called, say it with me now....Conspiracy theorist.
I like him. He kept his cool even after the illegal demand and illegal arrest.
Because he knew he just won the cop lottery.
Here's another issue I have. If you're going to identify yourself as a journalist or as media, then state your name and company from the beginning.
That's just professionalism.
Too many of these citizen journalists and activist journalists and conspiracy theorist journalists end up discrediting themselves by playing the game of refusing to identify themselves.
You don't don't have to show them your identification but hand them a business card.
If you don't have business cards, get some made.
You can even go as far as making a press pass with your name, picture and name of website on it.
There is no law that gives journalists more rights than citizens, but there are certain ethical guidelines that a journalist must abide by.
Too many people who have never spent a day in journalism school or a day in a newsroom are claiming to be journalists but acting like total assholes.
I'm not saying this guy acted like an asshole. He was a lot more professional than a lot of other self-proclaimed journalists out there.
But to just walk up to guard and claim your "media" doesn't give you a red carpet.
Walk up to him, tell him your name, the name of your site and have a business card handy.
Then if they want to start acting like idiots, it's on them, not you.
But to just walk up to guard and claim your "media" doesn't give you a red carpet.
I agree. I think you mean "you're", not "your", however.
Yes, and that was another thing I was going to say. If you're going to claim you're a journalist, then know the difference between "your" and "you're".
Or at least hope your readers know the difference so they can point out your error and tell you that you're wrong.
Ok so he goes to a federal gate and asks a security guard a ridiculous question. He repeatedly states that he is there to ask questions. When the security guard informs him someone is going to arrive to answer his questions. this fuctart starts asking if he has to stay to answer them. He is a complete and total moron in my opinion.
The officer is incompetent in my opinion. He should not be on duty if he is having a allergic reaction and is swelled up like Violate Beauregard, blueberry girl in willy wonka. HE should have gotten medical attention before he Illegally detained this person who in my opinion is a Retarded individual.
WE have serious problems in this country and when the Press acts like children the people easily dismiss what could be the truth. I do not think the first amendment applies only to the press, however if someone is going to take on serious issues, he had better be Ethical and conduct himself like and adult. Not like a spoiled angry teenager. IF this man is going to accuse people of crimes he should have some Evidence, not half assed conspiracy mythology.
Please Ignore my misuse of there or their, I am not a journalist and I dont give a crap.
In case I'm ever stopped in Colorado, if I provide my name and then ask if I'm free to go and am told "no" I will need to repeat my name in order to comply with the statute? Does that also apply if I had provided my ID and it was returned before I asked if I could leave?
removing accidental double post
Post new comment