Philadelphia student arrested for taking pictures of cops

[Luke_Y]

yeah well actually Phil knows a lot more than you do,

More about what? The actual incident in question? Life in general? Photography? The weather in Philly? While its entirely possible that he knows more about the rest of those things, I missed where he shared some inside knowledge of the incident in question beyond having recently taken the same photography class. Perhaps he knows the student in question?

also while he may not know everything to try and just level the playing field by blowing it up is an unconvincing argument.

that is to say you dont get to play this card during an argument:

I was not trying to argue... just discuss. This is a discussion right?

oh, and on a general note it is the responsibility of the people to investigate and illegal acts by the police (and government, and military).

Confused, are you saying that is what the college student was engaged in, or what you are doing?

I was just trying to point out that there are other possibilities for the situation that resulted in his arrest, not trying to make a solid argument for the police.

 

[Jobin]

Every photo I take of an officer is usually followed with a smile and I have never had a problem.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Hey folks, don't get me involved in your debate. All I know are the specifics of the assignment and that there is quite the buzz going around the journalism school right now about this. I know a decent amount about the law pertaining to media here in town and while I don't think the student deserved to be roughed up, I worked as law enforcement with the Navy for a while after 9/11/2001. I completely understand the stress of the job and that there is another side of the story.

Phil Forrest

 

[Luke_Y]

Luke_Y, you are 100% correct that none of us was there, and don't know exactly what happened. From that standpoint, no one should ever comment about anything they were not a direct witness to.

...

Randy

Randy, not at all my standpoint. Comments, discussion, and debate are what it's about. But, being closed to other possibilities, perspectives, or opinions doesn't make for very effective discussion.

 

[zauhar]

Randy, not at all my standpoint. Comments, discussion, and debate are what it's about. But, being closed to other possibilities, perspectives, or opinions doesn't make for very effective discussion.

Yes, you are right about that. But I think that most of us who are taking the kid's side are motivated by prior experience. There are not many college students who would get up a cop's grill just for a school assignment, but we have all met cops and security guards who are remarkably "testy". Just see the nightmare that Helen Hill reported on RFF recently.

Randy

 

[Luke_Y]

I suppose I will go ahead and clarify my view/opinion as it appears to have touched a nerve with some.

I accept and acknowledge that there are jerk police officers with power and control issues, and that this may be one example of that (I stated this in my initial post). I also accept that there are college students and photographers with chips on their shoulders and issues with authority, and that this may be an example of that.

I believe that in this country, more often than not, when someone is arrested they are indeed responsible for the actions that resulted in their arrest. I believe that persons arrested, more often than not, try to paint their situation in the best possible light. I believe that the media in general, more often than not, paints law enforcement in the worst possible light.

It has been my life experience that on numerous occasions I have found many people in general, let alone college students, to have less than ideally developed social and decision making skills, and terrible situational awareness. It has NOT been my life experience, nor anyone of personal acquaintance, to have on numerous occasions, my civil rights violated by police officers.

Considering the above, when presented with the scant bit of information on this incident; The only quote from someone actually involved being:

"I was within my rights. I wasn't doing anything wrong. The officer began pushing and shoving me," "I told him, 'I'm just taking a photo. I'm a photojournalism student.' He got angry. And he just grabbed me and took me to the ground. He kept saying, 'Shut up. Stop resisting.' "

I personally can't understand the general assumption that those are the facts, the only facts that matter, there couldn't be more to it, and the police are thugs who intentionally violated his civil rights.

That my suggestion there may be more to it elicits more of a response than some of the open bigotry and hatemongering in the last few pages baffles me...

 

[anthony_semone]

Luke,

it's called "arm chair commando-ing" Of course, all these commenters were on the scene, or presumed that their "scene" was the same as this scene. For better or worse, it will go to a judicial hearing. The allegations will be heard, such as they are, and the Judge will rule at the preliminary hearing if there is any ground to go forward. Gosh, that doesn't make for a lot of news does it

 

[redisburning]

well my problem was your indulgence in a hypothetical.

that you tried to paint the kid as having done something to deserve it didn't really bother me. lots of people think that way, I don't, but you're free to think that way.

accusing people of being bigots and hatemongers, given that no one personally insulted you or said anything bigotted or hateful, is pretty classless though.

 

[Luke_Y]

Yes, you are right about that. But I think that most of us who are taking the kid's side are motivated by prior experience. There are not many college students who would get up a cop's grill just for a school assignment, but we have all met cops and security guards who are remarkably "testy". Just see the nightmare that Helen Hill reported on RFF recently.

Randy

Randy, I certainly understand that. I have meet them as well. Just never had my civil rights violated by them.

I read the thread about Helen's unfortunate incident. While I feel that there must have been some misunderstanding on either her part or the officers part I am inclined to weigh her account much more heavily and give more "benefit of doubt" if you will to her, as it's first hand information being communicated in open discussion by the person involved. Somehow different than what we have here...

There was a good bit of bias, bigotry, and hatemongering in that thread as well, but not on her part. There was a bit of balance too, and her participation I did not post as I felt I had nothing to add to the discussion.

I will not likely be drawn into another discussion on this topic either. I don't know how I let myself this time. :bang:

Lets talk about photography and cameras

 

[Snacks]

If we don't talk about this kind of thing, there may be a lot less photography to talk about.

 

[Luke_Y]

...
accusing people of being bigots and hatemongers, given that no one personally insulted you or said anything bigotted or hateful, is pretty classless though.

LOL, you poor thing.

big·ot·ry   [big-uh-tree]
noun, plural -ries.
1.
stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

hate·mon·ger   [heyt-muhng-ger, -mong-] Show IPA
noun
a person who kindles hatred, enmity, or prejudice in others.

en·mi·ty   [en-mi-tee] Show IPA
noun, plural -ties.
a feeling or condition of hostility; hatred; ill will; animosity; antagonism.

No, none of that in this thread.

Apparently there was a violation of the world-wide, universal, statute about "annoying a policeman".

...Mike

You said it. I am going to assume the young man in question was not very intimidating - that is why the cop took the opportunity to blow off some steam and brutalize him.

Randy

This is one thing I'll never understand about cops: Why so many of those who enforce the law think they're above the law, and think they have the right to act like Gestapo, just because they can (I've been subjected to this myself while photoging--and I wasn't even taking pictures of cops). Too many clowns let the fact of having a gun and a badge go to their heads. ...

In response to a post that compared police to NAZI Gestapo

amen, sir ...

Here's how you do this...
When photographing a police officer performing any of his duties stay across the street (if you can) and use a telephoto lens...do nothing that the office can interpret as Interfering with his duties...
If he approaches you asking you to stop or anything else...place you camera somewhere safe, lay on the ground and put your hands behind your back or straight out
If you hear the words "Stop Resisting" being shouted by the officer be prepared to get a whooping...it's a way for them to justify extreme force just in case someone is filming the event...
Now, I'm not anti-cop...just don't give them a reason to use excessive force on you...
...

This violation of a young photographer's rights is offensive I agree ... but lets not forget about all the non photographers who receive similar treatment from our law enforcers that never gets reported or noticed!

No, I'm not...what I am saying is that he did things that allowed the officer to act in a fashion that he could justify to his superiors and they would back him up...
Using a tele from across the street...the officer cannot say you were interfering...you are nowhere near the action but can still photograph it.
Any kind of resistance will open the door for the officer to use force that he deems necessary to subdue you...yelling for you to Stop Resisting gives him the means to get away with it when the cameras are rolling...

Why is it that we constantly hear about police officers having a problem with people taking their picture while on duty but you never hear firefighters beating up photographers...both are civil servants...both are high risk/stressful jobs...both are there to serve and protect...

In my humble experience, people with guns always feel they are above the law. Now, to the most interesting part: I have only had good experiences with soldiers. These guys are trained to respect civilians as much as they are trained to shoot the ennemy in a battle field. Unfortunately cops are the exact opposite. Any civilian is a potential ennemy. But the worst cops of all are traffic police, these are the frustrated guys who carry guns but never use them, and are laughed about in police stations. I think 99% of the reported cases are done by these guys with the inferiority complex.

I don't think there are many folks on here who are interested in discussing other possibilities or hypotheticals, whatever you want to call them. ...

IDK, much of that appears to fit the definitions above. Would a better/softer word be BIAS?

bi·as   [bahy-uhs] noun, adjective, adverb, verb, bi·ased, bi·as·ing or ( especially British ) bi·assed, bi·as·sing.
noun

2.
a particular tendency or inclination, especially one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.

Tell me would someone reading this thread gather that the police receive as fair a shake as the next guy? Would they take away the impression that this group has an open mind?

 

[Phil_F_NM]

All you sea lawyers shush!
People get taken in by the ease of a forum's shielding a person who makes any offensive comment. Then civility goes out the window. Bigotry and hatemongering, whatever. How about sarcasm? Can't we have some of that? All of you need to grow a bit of a thicker skin and if you appreciate the free flow of opinions keep talking. So that goes for people who start throwing around words like bigotry and hatemonger as well. Stretching the definitions thereof just a bit aren't we? You all wouldn't behave like this if you were sitting around a table with a nice beverage in your hand, so why do it here?
This back and forth is load of crap. You're ALL right, ok?
As for the topic at hand, I'll talk to the student probably on Friday. And by the way, I live with the teaching assistant of that class so I've heard a bit more but haven't weighed in because I don't feel like arguing.

Phil Forrest

 

[Jack Conrad]

That my suggestion there may be more to it elicits more of a response than some of the open bigotry and hatemongering in the last few pages baffles me...

Bias, bigotry and hatemongering... phhttt. Lol...
What you got against college students? You been rippin on em bad.
Are you anti-youth?

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Are you a Navy man, Phil?

Yup.
A hitch as a weather guesser and the second as a combat photographer.

Phil Forrest

 

[paulfish4570]

luke, you haven't started a single thread here at RFF during your two months as a member, and this thread is the only one on which you have posted. is this thread really that compelling?

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I was a Seabee with NMCB-4. Deployed under 1 MARDIV as a component of 1st MAR ENG Group.
I love the corpsmen, one and all! Doing amazing work.

Phil Forrest

 

[Luke_Y]

It isn't for the police to receive a fair shake, they hold an office and are, or should be, held to a higher standard while on duty. To clarify, a police officer should be expected to maintain his/her professional bearing in instances where we might not expect a private citizen to do so. Say, your average photojournalism student, for instance.

George, while I definitely agree with you that "a police officer should be expected to maintain his/her professional bearing in instances where we might not expect a private citizen to do so. Say, your average photojournalism student, for instance." I believe that an officer deserves as fair and unbiased consideration as anyone else. We don't have any evidence or that said officer lost his professional bearing. Nor do we that the student did.

To pull the "bigotry card", if you'll excuse the expression, suggests to me that you feel that the law enforcement community is somehow being persecuted in this thread, I find that laughable.
I can only point to my previous quotes and point out that you yourself said "I don't think there are many folks on here who are interested in discussing other possibilities or hypotheticals, whatever you want to call them. ..."

...Stretching the definitions thereof just a bit aren't we? You all wouldn't behave like this if you were sitting around a table with a nice beverage in your hand, so why do it here?...
Phil Forrest
Thats the thing. I'm not angry, or personally offended. And, I would sit around discussing these issues in a rational manner with friends over a beverage. When we do, it's just discussion and debate, no one gets in a twist... I don't know that the words are that strong in regard to the quotes I highlighted. I'm not calling the person a bigot or hatemonger (I don't know them well enough to know), just pointing out that their words reflect that attitude. If the words have that much impact...

...
What you got against college students? You been rippin on em bad.
Are you anti-youth?

Jack, no not anti-youth. Didn't intend to come off that way, but can see how it could be inferred. Just that the person in question was a college student. I will try to do better.

 

[Luke_Y]

luke, you haven't started a single thread here at RFF during your two months as a member, and this thread is the only one on which you have posted. is this thread really that compelling?

Paul, that's not entirely true. But, it has now taken up 10 of my whole 25 posts. I have been a long time lurker before joining.

I take your point though, and will try and leave the discussion to like minds.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

OK Luke, here's an analogy regarding the bigot and hatemonger references.
Back in the spring of 2005 I had just come back from Iraq. I got to serve with the finest human beings ever to walk the planet, in my opinion. We had our issues and disagreements but when the rubber met the road we were all ready and willing to put ourselves in danger for another. I read an article in a local weekly that used the phrase "the wholesale rape and murder of Iraqi women [et al.]... by US forces." Being an angry recent combat vet, I emailed the author who had no proof of even being in Iraq as his story claimed he was.
Later that year I was giving a talk and showing some photos and I met the guy. Mind you, I think the freedom of speech is one of the most important rights we have in this country. I'm a journalist and so was this guy but it took a lot of military bearing and strength to not beat the ever-loving crap out of him. Had it been amongst one of my less politically correct friends from my squad or one of my Marine buddies, I doubt the offending journalist would have left anything but feet first.
What I'm saying is that the application of broad terms like bigot and hatemonger do exactly what you are supposedly complaining about. They polarize and breed contempt. While you say you didn't call anyone a bigot or hatemonger you did, in as much by broadly applying the terms to the discussion.
No need to be passive aggressive either. This is a forum but throwing around polarizing words is just a nudge from trolling.

Phil Forrest

 

[Luke_Y]

You can be as non-committal as you like, Luke but when you assert that members here have used words that reflect the attitude of a bigoted hatemonger, I will be offended and I will expect an explanation. Thus far, your justification has been weak and more than a little wishy-washy, in my opinion. Perhaps you might consider either retracting or provide something that reflects a little more fortitude.

George, with regard to your posting, the only thing I highlighted was

I don't think there are many folks on here who are interested in discussing other possibilities...

As an example of words that indicate bias or bigotry with regard to this situation. Intolerance of others viewpoint or opinion defines two of these words. Not hatemongering in your particular instance. I'm sorry that it offended you.

But, I am not "non-committal" in this viewpoint. The rest of the stuff I highlighted? To me, fits all the definitions I posted. I wouldn't characterize my posts as wishy-washy. I posted direct quotes with the implied invitation for those persons to debate the highlighted words in those quotes. You have. I'd especially like the NAZI reference to be defended and debated.