November 12th, 2009 | 
Author: Spewing the government lie that photographers are potential terrorists, CNN’s Rick Sanchez had this comment to make about the recent harassment of a photographer on the LA Metro system:
This — this is hard to watch. This guys, a guy who calls himself a photographers rights activist goes on to have a conversation, tells the officer that he’s out shooting the L.A. subway because he wants to, like he’s never heard of the London rail attacks, the Madrid train bombings, or the recent alleged plot against the subway system in New York City?
What does any of that have to do with photography? Is there any proof that photography played a role of any kind in those plots?
The fact is there IS NOT! According to an article in the Guardian:
The 9/11 terrorists didn’t photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn’t photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber didn’t photograph anything; neither did shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs aren’t being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. The IRA wasn’t known for its photography.
Rick Sanchez fails to address the issue that Deputy Gylfie LIED about the Metro photography policy. Photography is legal and all attempts to suppress it in any way should be challenged and exposed. We admire people like Discarted who are in the front lines of the battle to stop the harassment of photographers. So-called reporters like Rick Sanchez only act as enablers, allowing the government to continue its de-facto criminalization of photography.
Posted in Photography and the Law
Have a story to share that we did not cover? Want to discuss something in greater detail? Want to compare Nikon vs. Canon? Post it in our forum - all are welcome.
How stupid are you people? It’s not a war against photography, It’s a precaution against terrorists! This Shawn Nee guy just obviously wanted to start something, when he could have easily just answered the questions he was being asked Or he could have left and come back another time, when the Officers weren’t there,if he was that dead set to get his photos.Either way,He would have saved a lot of time. He just wanted a story to put out so he stretched this out as best he could, and tried to make the officers look like they were just picking on him.
We should be glad there are still Officers out there,(I’m sure few and far between)who care about the safety of people enough to perform the small and mundane task of questioning an arrogant photographer like Nee. And I praise them for their efforts. I wish there were more like them.
I just commented on CNN’s website about this. I think every photographer who disagrees with them should do the same.
Cops4us proves my point. He like many others are equating photography with terrorism. Why should a photographer “leave and come back” when he is NOT DOING ANYTHING ILLEGAL? How would Cops4us like it if he took a day off from work to do some photography and had half the day ruined by an overzealous cop enforcing a NONEXISTENT law. What if you don’t have another day?
PHOTOGRAPHY IS NOT A CRIME – The harassment MUST END!
What we need to find is either an article about a CNN news crew being hassled by police, or a CNN report of some other Television Crew being hassled by police. Then find some reporter willing to report on the inconsistency of CNN (CBS or Fox?).
Cops4us,
You represent what is worst about the modern American attitude’s toward liberty. The photographer was under no obligation to tell the cop ANYTHING! California law is pretty specific on when an officer can detain you. If you listen carefully the officer tells him he is being detained (thus he could not just “leave”). For an officer to detain someone they must have a reasonable suspicion that a crime has just taken place or is about to (see Terry v Ohio). Since taking photographs is not illegal or even against MTA policy there is no underlying “crime” to support this man’s detention and questioning.
What really troubles me in your response is that in spite of the known facts about photography not being linked to terrorism, you still make the assertion that questioning that photographer somehow made anyone safer. No, I would argue that in fact he WASTED time going after a guy with a camera instead of looking for “real” crimes.
I find it interesting that you feel it appropriate for the police to attempt to coerce a citizen into giving up constitutional freedoms by threatening to place them on the FBI “hit list”. Then chuckle about how every time he travels he will get hassled by agents of the government. Not that he has committed a crime, or that there is any evidence to suggest he committed a crime, but because he dared to invoke rights guaranteed all citizens by the constitution’s bill of rights. Smacks a little of Germany circa 1939.
In closing to paraphrase Ben Franklin; Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither!
Harrassing photographers does nothing to prevent terrorism. It only helps the terrorists spread fear.
Rick Sanchez, you are helping the terrorists win.