Coweta Fayette Real Estate & Newnan Homes for sale blog by Richard Weisser of Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate Metro Brokers

Richard, I live near DC and we all have to adjust to Homeland Security Influence on the public. . but it seems that you just had a impetuous rookie sheriff enjoying his newly appointed power on people. 

A classic example of putting someone in a power position who should not be there. Some people just shuld not have that kind of control.

Richard, wow, I am close to speechless. And I am thinking that Macon, GA is not a hotbed of terrorist actitivy. I, like you, would have been do damn angry. I hope you are making a call, questioning why you were not allowed to stand on a public sidewalk and take photos.

Google provides enough photos that should keep that sherrif busy enough.

The answer to your questio is YES.  We have become a police state.  Americans expressing their political opinions are roughed up by political thugs, demeaned by partisans and citizens taking photos of public buildings are considered ptoential terrorists.

The answer is YES.

Richard it is paranoia about security I agree...they are just doing their job.

King George and Price Cheney turned it into a police state after 9/11, and it's not going to get any better. Big Brother has been here for many years now, but the King and Prince certainly took it to another level.

Richard - I do hope this was just a rockie mistake and glad your bubble didn't burst. Your professionalism really showed and I must applaud you.

Fernando...

I understand the need for security, and had I been approached in a friendly manner he would have quickly discovered that I was not a threat. THX!

Rick..

I know that he was just being overzealous, but when he didn't back down I got really annoyed! Thanks.

Andrea...

Great minds think alike. I had inserted the line "someone better investigate "Google" but the post was getting too long so I thought that I would leave that conclusion up to sharp readers like you! ;)

Last year when I was taking pictures of our county building I had the sneaking suspicion that I was being watched.

I was.  (By 2 sheriff deputies)

They didn't stop me (I was across the street on public property) but they did watch as I got back into my car and drove away.  It made me feel creepy, as if *I* was doing something wrong.

I'm beginning to really feel disgusted about the liberties that we have lost.

In a way you understand the concern but at the same time you were indeed in a public place and unless there was a huge sign posted that said no photos the sheriff may have gone  a bit overboard.  When I went to our local courthouse recently I had to go back to my car and drop off my cell phone and camera as they were not allowed inside a very different scenario.

Wow Richard.  I am sorry this happened to you.  If you weren't so fair skinned, I'd say it was profiling.  Lol at Russel's King George comment.  I agree with him!

Lenn...

Well there you have it. I hope that all those that read this really take it to heart. Thanks as always.

Gary...

I agree ...but the assumption should be that i am not a terrorist and had he approached me in a friendly manner I would have completely explained what I was doing without hesitation. And he should NOT have asked for my IDThx.

Jessica...

Yes it has. BTW I came back through Griffin and thought about you! Thanks for the great comment ...if I was with client things might have been different!

Richard, while I think that the officer should have handled the situation entirely differently, I'll bet anything that it has to do with post 911 policies.  You should have been allowed to take the picture.  I completely don't understand.  You were well within your rights while standing on a public sidewalk.  Besides, with Google maps, isn't it kind of pointless to think that some guy on the sidewalk is going to take a picture of something he can't already get to anyways?  Geez!

I was stopped taking photos at an outside mall on Monday.  That is private property.  I was stopped by the mall security manager who was very nice and polite.   I was just using the pathetic camera on my cell phone. 

I wanted to ask if Google Earth, MSN Streetview weren't better tools but did not.  It is their policy.  He was just doing his job.

I got a great photo of his back before he approached me.   

He made a comment about they couldn't just restrict the terrorists from taking photos so they had to restrict everyone. Sure enough IT is in the malls code of conduct. 

One of our malls was "a terrorist target"  I remember it as being this particular mall.  I was trying to find something about that online and could not. 

I had a number of photos of the mall on my blogs. I edited photos pixelated and posts Monday night.

Edit 8/3/9 I found it it is against the rules to take photos at Polaris...  Mea Culpa!

We are paranoid.

Hi Richard:

About a month from now, it's going to be funny!

"Who do you work for"....

You should have taken a picture of the officer :)

Russel...

I was appalled at the usurpation of rights after 9-11. However, my first incident like this was in 1996, at the Atlanta Olympic Games!

Petra...

I was with a client, so I complied. Now I wish I had done more but thanks for the support!

Kris...

It does make you feel creepy, doesn't it? Wow!

Richard,

Sounds like to officer had a power issue.  Sometimes I think alot of their power goes straight to their head.  You handled the situation really well.  It ashame that since 9/11 a different approach has been taken as far as homeland security, I think they are too extreme in some cases and in other are far too lax.  This story sounds like a rookie with a power moment. 

Cindy...

I was looking for a sign banning photos and there was none. The point was how the situation was handled. With the proliferation of digital cameras it seems pointless to try to prevent photos anyway. Thanks for the comment.

Bob...

Exactly ... it's pointless! But had he been nice about it, I would have been OK. THX.

Maureen...

Now they can prevent you from taking photos on mall property, but not from a public area outside of mall property. That's an important distinction! Thanks.

Richard,

It is truly a sad day for society when something like this happens. We are getting further down that slippery slope which is the erosion of our civil liberties.

Rich

Susan...

Russel is a very funny guy! And I knew that if you were there you would have given him "what-fer!" lol and thanks.

Toula...

I don't know, it happened to me at the 1996 Olympics and I still hold a grudge! lol

April...

All of the communist countries have great security ... well, there you have it! Thanks for the good comment.

Don't have to worry about terrorist targets when you live in a small small town. Have a son who is halfway thru GW in DC and when he runs by the White House there are times when the folks with the ear plugs, dark glasses and a hidden holster will stop and question or direct to run somewhere else. Not always but depends on the Secret Service person and what else is happening in DC. Heighten security caused by some other incident sometimes the problem of timing. Your deputy sheriff may have just had a morning briefing on an earlier event and you stumbled in with your Brownie Hawkeye at the wrong time. It's what you don't know that would scare you...with your cell phone your where abouts are know now, any time, your emails could be monitored. Don't you see the related topic adds on the right hand side of gmail that pop up with a buzz word you used? Makes you wonder who else is collecting, reading, forming a profile on you.

Richard: your response and self control are to be commended. Response not reaction is the key

Richard said:  "Now they can prevent you from taking photos on mall property, but not from a public area outside of mall property. That's an important distinction!"

He and I discussed that.

The way this mall is sited and the kind of photographer I am a picture from the street is NOT going to be very interesting at all.  I am not going to get a big honking camera with a big honking lens to take a photo of  the new fountain at the mall long distance. Or the new sculpture at the mall. Or the performers at the courtyard.  Now I had their permission but I think I still pixelated their photo because it is against mall policy to photograph in the mall. 

I looked to Google images to see if I was the only dork who had been oblivious to the rules.   Looks like people mostly do take a photo of the signs at the mall entrance when they want to represent the mall on the Internet... 

I talked to security at one of the other local malls to see if they had a similar policy.  It is not on their website but the security person said it is on the signs at their mall.  He said  I can take photos of my kids in their fountain... no one else's kids (I knew that)  but I can not take a photo of their fountain without kids. I have no kid so I guess I can not take a photo of their fountain.  I have one on one of my blogs... somewhere... a picture of their fountain.

Yes Richard our civil rights are being slowly eroded in the guise of higher homeland security. I would have been outraged had I been approached as you were by this sheriff.

We are not becoming...we are.  Time to wake up America that is for sure.  I applaud your ability to hold your tongue...I do not think I could have done so.

It's sad to think that I probably wouldn't have been able to hold my tongue as well.  In that, I to applaud you.  I am a photo buff, especially court houses and old barns.  Guess "Barney Fife" would've ended up taking me to jail!  :)

One word- preposterous!

Richard - I find it somewhat of an anomaly that, in what is one of the freeest countries in the world, we have such ridiculus restrictions yet if I travel overseas, I can take pictures almost anywhere. This is a case of P.C. gone overboard so that we all are now suspect. Glad that you didn't get detained any longer.

I take a lot of pictures, also. I have not, fortunately, been stopped by any law enforcement.

Richard, me thinks someone has a Little Hitler complex!! What a disgrace, so sorry you were subject to such abuse!

Talk about ego. He had no legal right whatsoever to detain you even for a second. I do find it funny however that he couldn't understand working for yourself and recording a survey, but he can get elected...

Wow! Did this guy have a chip or what?

That is really scary! Are we not allowed to take pictures of the Supreme Court building in DC then?

We have a nuclear power plant in our area and one day I was previewing houses way out in the country and came upon it. I stopped, got out of the car, and took a picture. (it was still quite a ways in, barbed wire fences around, security gates, etc). My friend was sure that they had a picture of me taking the picture, my car, license number, etc.  That was a few years back and I only had a film camera. Don't know what ever happen to those pictures.

Recently my twin grandsons, age 6, were about to fly back to Ohio. I was trying hard to get a photo of them in line going through the process. The TVA guy saw what I was doing and moved out of the way just a moment before another line opened and closed the shot. A deputy saw me and called me behind the public line only to say "get the kids but not their (TVA) equipment". I thanked him and got the shots. Security is very tight at Myrtle Beach International, but not stupid.

Yes, as mentioned above, GWB and congress tightened things up considerably after the US was ATTACKED. It must have worked since we have not been attacked since on our soil. I wonder why the poster did not mention obama wants the govt to have the ability to kill people by with holding medical procedures. It seems a little problem here and there is certainly less of a concern than if some clerk is going to decide Aunt Mary is too old to receive a pace maker. There are many other personal privacy concerns in obama's desire to turn the US into a socialist state than GW ever dreamed of.

Some very wise advice for anyone when dealing with the police: Answer questions with yes sir/ma'am or no sir/ma'am and comply to every command they give you. Be polite. Do not give them a reason to esculate any situation into a bad thing for you. Keep your hands where they can see them and make no sudden movements. It may suck, but that is life.

But I cannot believe you missed a great chance to talk with someone about real estate. Somebody asked who you work for and you missed the chance to start a discussion about real estate.

Richard - Our civil liberties have always been in jeopardy , but the majority was unaware. It is only now with the easy flow of information on the Internet that these small stories become BIG news exposing our vulnerability.

My husband works at the Pentagon as a "Security Specialist" and the level of security warnings can change hourly unbeknown est to the public. It just seems as if you were in the wrong place at the wrong time , with an over zealous sheriff on duty. It's not personal , its their job.

Richard, did you by any chance get his name and badge number? I would have reported him late to the Chief of Police.

Richard, I think you handled the situation with poise and that the sheriff's demeanor was confrontational. That's the thing that gets me the most is that some officers of the law forget who they work for, speaking of "who do you work for!"

If we live in a police state as some assert here, who created this police state? I think we can all go back to the gun laws for this country which are out-of-control. Other civilized countries monitor guns in a more sane way. When you have most all the law officers throughout the country wearing bullet proof vests as part of their uniform, than something is desperately wrong! We as a nation have helped to create this insanity.

WOW - this is a tough one.  I can't imagination how upsetting it was for you.  It's a personal affront, intrusive and humiliating.

Unfortunately, the other side of it is the fact that as I recall,  in the evidence seized  when Tim Mcveigh was arrested, they retrieved a series of photos of the Murrah Building - probabaly taken by him a couple of weeks before he blew it up. 

I don't know the right balance between protecting us and honoring our liberties. I am according to most people I know, a flaming liberal - but maybe a little less today than I was a few years ago.

OMG are we over parinoid or what? Some times police over react .

Brother Richard - My thinking goes like this - it takes about two seconds to grab a quick snap or two with a camera.  If you indeed are a terrorist, one incident of stopping you is not going to prevent you from you goal of collecting data for your nefarious plans.  This is the failure of security.  "If I can't do it now, I can do it later" is the criminal mind.  Criminals with cruel intentions don't usually give up because they couldn't get a photo - they just keep trying.  Sorry to hear you had to be viewed as someone who might have had a plot or scheme going on and you weren't allowed to take the photo.  That guy doesn't know what he stopped - your photos are always quality and I'm sure the courthouse would look spectacular.

I got pulled over for speeding yesterday and yelled at by the officer...only to just get a warning.

Richard,

The country as a whole is running scared because of terriorism. Maybe you should have asked to talk to his boss or to the sheriff.

I read in the Montreal Gazette yesterday that they have removed the sign saying "United States of America" at the border crossing at Mesena, NY because they feel it was a security threat and made the border crossing a target for terrorists.  I also heard today that they are passing a bill that allows the government to search our telephones and computers for possible threats against security.  Let's talk about Big Brother watching us.  This is crazy.  But, don't blame me, I didn't vote for him. 

While

 some of the 'big brother-esque" things seem to have gone overboard think what would have happened had the Clinton administration paid attention to the warnings of the FBI. Maybe 9/11 wouldn't have happended.

I live near DC and we go there often for different events. I think it is a shame that terrorists are still allowed into this country, that we haven't tightened our borders, that for fear of 'racial profiling" white women are stopped more so than suspicious acting middle eastern men(who are the majority of terrorists). But in this wonderfully politically correct world that has been forced upon us that is the way things are.

I hate it but I think it is better than the way people live in the Middle East wth constant terrorist activities, bombings and the like.

It sounds to me like you ran into an over zealous sheriff doing his job.  I think just because you wear a badge doesn't prevent you from being scared of what could happen.

Even in Oklahoma ity, the city where the biggest act of domestic terrorism occured this hasn't happened. What is happening in Oklahoma is that every Mexican-American is being profiled as potential illegal aliens. I hope the polarization and paranoia of the post 911 world will abate

Maybe the situation wasn't handled "perfect", but I am glad some people at least try to pay attention.  I did find it ironic that you complain about your rights being violated while standing on a public sidewalk taking pictures of a public place, but then you go over the same line and think it is ok to copywrite photos of public places you took?

If this is the land of the free and public domain should remain public, and free speach is supposed to be both "free" and a "right", why the "copywright"?

Richard... You probably did exactly the right thing to walk away, and are probably lucky that you didn't write this post from the Bibb County Hospital.  Hope you got Bubba's shield number and reported his behavior to the Sheriff's office.  My bet is this guy doesn't know from "terrorism," and was just feeling his Wheaties!

Sounds like someone was taking his duties a bit too seriously here.  I can see Sheriff Beuford T Justice in my mind right now.  But it is a shame that we are prevented from something as simple as a photo and others can walk into places with guns and kill people without being noticed before it happens.

Oh but could it also be a case of a power tripping deputy?  Because they have a badge and are on a power trip you are best to just move on. Or end up in jail guilty until proven innocent. Harassed while taking photos? That's nuts. Maybe he didn't have his dough-nuts.

Jim...

It's apples and oranges ... the two subjects have nothing in common. If YOU were to sit for a photographer, even though the photo is of YOU, the photographer still owns the image.

I own the image because I went to the time, trouble and expense to get to these places, and I photographed them in my own artistic style. Copyright law is on my side so it's a moot point anyway. but rest assured, I spend a lot of time on my photos, and the are my work, and I own all of the rights to them.

You were not asked to share the expense of my art.

Likewise, I think that government building are owned by the public, and are fair game for photographers in the digital world. and I did participate in the expense with tax dollars.

Jim Paulson wrote

"I did find it ironic that you complain about your rights being violated while standing on a public sidewalk taking pictures of a public place, but then you go over the same line and think it is ok to copywrite photos of public places you took?

If this is the land of the free and public domain should remain public, and free speach is supposed to be both "free" and a "right", why the "copywright"?"

Why would taking a photo of something public make the rights of the photographer any different? 

If Richard set up an easel and painted a picture of the building would that  / should that  image become public with rights for all to use?  Why? 

Am I missing something?

He has the copyright to his photos whether or not he watermarks it on them.

Lots of comments on here...You handled it well - better than I would have taken it.  Sounds like the guy on the court house beat was not "road qualified" so that is why he patrolled the sidewalks! Was he short? Perhaps a bit of a Napoleon thing? I have lots of respect for law enforcement officers as my son is one but...

Maureen...

Great minds think alike! Thanks for being a witness for the defense! BTW I still have trouble adapting to your new profile pic!

I have mixed feelings on this. I am glad that someone is watching. How would you feel if someday an attack was carried out there? While he could have conducted his business with more courtesy for a taxpayer, he was doing his job. You reacted as many of us true Americans would, I know I would if treated like that. His training was lacking, to say the least. It's a different world but we must maintain our rights.

Richard, the officer was so wrong. He probably thought he was doing his job too. He really needs some education.

Sadly I think it's going to only get worse.  It all started long ago, and won't end with the curren administration.  We all need to be up in arms, so thanks for the post!

Geez.  I don't know what Jim Paulson is complaining about.  He still owns his share of the public building. 

Now he wants a piece of your photo too?

In a world where there are no property rights, none of us will own anything and the state will own everything, including the rights to photo the state or county buildings. 

Not very appealing to me.

Richard,

It is a shame that the officer was not more polite. While it has never crossed my mind to wonder if you were a terrorist, I do understand and support the restrictions. Photos you take and post online could be used by a sniper or terrorist - my bet is that they don't particularly respect copyrights...

Yes, in the interest of protecting others, I waive my right to photograph government buildings.

Why are you and that camera always causing trouble. And for the last time I will explain to you that you look look a terrorist my friend. It is sad that we have become paranoid in this manner, it seems that even a simple pic from a guy on a public sidewalk is means for an altercation.

Featured in M.A.N.C.R.O.W. CONGRATS!

Susan Madigan wrote: "If you weren't so fair skinned, I'd say it was profiling." That was interesting, to say the least.

When I read this, three or four times, I must have missed where your "rights" were violated...you were asked a question regarding your activities that you found to be offensive, but being asked a question, or being informed that courthouse rules don't permit picture-taking on the grounds doesn't necessarily constitute a violation of rights...

And I definitely missed where you were "detained"....

It seems that school is going to be in session, three weeks early for me....

I take that back....it wouldn't be worth the time or effort

It now appears that, not only is this a violation of the 1st Amendment, but also a violation of 5 U.S.C. § 552a of the U.S. Code:

“maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity.”

www.conservativeforchange.com

Richard - Were you wearing your sombrero? If so that may have tipped him to your snappy actions.

WOW - Lots of good comments here. I agree with Matt - if somebody wants a picture of whatever they will find a way to get the picture. I also agree that when a police officers "talks" to you always say yes sir/yes mam, etc and keep your hands where they can see them. ~Rita

And though it was none of his business, I told him that my associate and I were "recording a survey."

I have to disagree with your statement above.  I firmly believe that when it comes to an officer of the law, that they have the right to ask questions and you are obligated to answer them.  The way the world is today is the reason for this type of behavior.  Not excusing it but 20+ years ago he might have tipped his hat to you and started a friendly chat.

Now, do I think he was being kind of a jerk?  Probably.  But given his job and the level of stress, I think then tend to be that way and most don't even realize they are being that way.  And that opinion comes from having many friends and clients that are police officers.

I would try and find out why he thinks photos of a public building are off limits to photos as I really don't understand that one.  Bottom line is that I was always taught to respect the law and always yes sir, yes ma'am every time and trust me when I say that giving that type of respect has allowed me to drive off with a friendly warning rather than a ticket so it does pay to be polite.

I can easily see how the very same thing could happen to me. 10 years ago the police did not have a presence at our county administration office (it's not the court house). Tell the county to put a sign out front, no cameras, and no a hundred other things.

Wow, that's terrible. How can they prohibit you from taking pictures of a public courthouse. Maybe it would be worth a call to the mayor or a state representative.

You are correct in your frustration, but I can't help wonder if things would have gone differently if you would have simply said "I'm a Realtor taking some photos to post on my blog.  Doesn't that scaffolding cast some interesting shadows?"

Richard

A lot of people have died in wars, defending you right to take those pictures.

It seems like a rather sad situation.

Brian

We like your Country to visit, but the old saying "Home Sweet Home" is truer and truer.

O Canada

I find it comical that there are pictures from every angle of everything in the world on the internet, but a resident cannot photograph the local courthouse for their blog!  Ridiculous...Maybe the answer to who do you work for is...the FBI...lol!!!

This is unbelievable.. What is the world coming to that you  can't take a photo of a court house. This is bollowing the lines of Burger King. Maybe they think you will disclose secrets.

I can't even begin to tell you how many civil rights are being violated by the City of Beaverton Police Dept.  AMAZING.  In my personal opinion, and citing the FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, I'm stating: They should all be time-warped back to the 1930's to Nazi Germany -- they'd make very good SS brown-shirts.  They missed their calling.

The problem is . . . when you give someone a badge (a license to be a jerk) they become one.

Oops . . . did I say that!

YES!

YES I DID!

And since you CAN'T READ minds, and since you don't know what answers would make the guy get off his "stress" level . . . afterall, he's just doing his job . . . you are not innocent until proven guilty.  AND anything you say WILL be used against you.  

Like Richard Pryor said, "I'm JUST pulling out my wallet" (don't shoot, in other words!)

REDNECK jackass!  I would have gotten his badge #, name, and filed a FOrmal Complaint for sure!

That is, unless your friend you were with was an illegal alien!  :)  JUst kidding..

However, this was/is terrible!  Was he flying a confederate flag on the radio antenna of his car??

D

The good thing is that you are still allowed to write/blog about these incidents - which are not unusual. The citizens of the United States of America are allowing our freedoms to be taken away from us. Seat belts, smoking, taking pictures - these are all small things but they are conditioning us to accept, without question, the right of OUR government to control our actions.

Safety is the reason given but I prefer my freedom - with all the personal risks inherent in freedom.

The people who are given power (badges and guns) to "protect" us, are not keeping us safer than we were before we began giving up our freedoms. These bureaucrats do not think nor are they possessed with above average powers of reasoning and deduction; they only know how to follow orders.

Our quiet acceptance of Homeland Security is the scariest, most dangerous development that I have witnessed in my lifetime. We need to be paying attention but we aren't. We need to remember how other malevolent dictatorships throughout history were started and make sure that it doesn't happen here.

Please call your local chapter of the ACLU and report this incidence. My guess is that the Sherriff is a Barney-Fife wanna-be, but this should truly be reported. Check www.aclu.org for a chapter near by.

I tried to read all the comments to make sure I wasn't making a similar observation:

It's ironic that at a time when cities across America are installing traffic light cameras to take photos of the unwitting public, a citizen is harassed for taking photos of a public building that his tax dollars paid for!

Yes we are losing our rights in our own country and most folks don't care. That cop needs to go take his public skills class over again.

Wow. Definitely a shocking story. We are in the business of trust, we must as a country realize that there isn't a terrorist behind every bush,(no pun intended) and that we are going to be fine! There certainly must be a common sense approach to security, a heightened awareness for sure, but not a hyperawareness based on fear. We must look for the positive in people and this deputy, I hope, is the exception, rather than the rule. There are so many great police officers and rather than focus on the few, let's focus on the many. That being said, we must also report those that are exposing this silliness of terrorism. Our threat is more from within, (I cite Pittsburgh) than from 'foreign' sources. We need to learn to get along and support people rather than tear them down.

I was going to respond, but I'm afraid my comment would get 'flagged' and sent to the White House. 

Wowaweewa.

We live in a new world. 

I agree with Janna, Richard.  You may have begun things on the wrong foot with your flippant answer.

The police are under extreme pressure to be on guard and the officer's demeanor is part of his training.  He didn't know what you were doing, and let's face it seeing a guy with a case taking photos of scaffolding might be a little suspicious....  I'd bet he was trying to rattle you a little to see if you started sweating, like a customs official.

Per Mark, above... polite, responsible answers are best.

Sounds like Barney Fife needed something to do that day! I'm reading a book on post communist Russia, written by a local that lived there for a while - this entire scene literally resembles a chapter in her book - nice.

Phil...

Sounds like you are describing communist China instead of the United States.

The officer's premise was incorrect, therefore his question was inappropriate.

He was not entitled to an answer to an inappropriate question, and my answer was not "flippant,: it was honest. After I answered honestly he refused to accept my answer.

We do NOT live in a police state. I am NOT obliged to offer anything, even if I was breaking the law, which I was not. I was exercising my first amendment rights, which, by the way, are lawful.

It is not up to me to defuse a situation that was instigated by an officer sworn to "serve and protect."

If the Bibb County Sheriff's Department would like to respond, they are free to do so. I will publish their response here.

Richard:  The fault I find in your scenario is not in the fact that the officer asked you the questions that he did ... for obvious reasons the security of our government buildings (and others) is of grave concern.  No, the fault I find lies in the demeanor, method, and tone of voice in which he asked. 

He could have found out what he needed to know by using a different approach or tone.  This is what needs to be stressed and taught to those in power.  Ask your questions and obtain your proof... if it keeps me safe, I'm all for it.  Just accomplish your task or goal through respectful and mannerly means.  It's possible to do ... 

Gene

I get this stuff quite often since part of my job includes driving slowly around neighborhoods taking pictures of houses. I do get the occasional stop from the police. I usually just give them one of my business cards and ask how long its been since their house was appraised.

I am definately with Mark in post #35. This could have been a great opportunity to change the subject to something real estate related. For all you know, he may have known someone looking to buy or sell. And you never know how far a smile and a handshake can go!

I would never have imagined something like that happening.  I guess I am "insulated" in my corner of the world (Northwest Mississippi).  I wrote a blog on the Tate County MS courthouse as it was recently renovated.  Before I took pictures, I went to the Chancery Clerk and asked if it was ok.  He was happy that I was writing about it because he is so proud of the renovations.  They are used to seeing me at the courthouse doing research and the clerk lives around the corner from me.

Richard, Whenever I'm out of my house, I feel the presence of our police state. I can get ticketed by a camera if I run a red light (not that I ever would!). Getting stopped for a minor traffic violation can be a devastating experience. I can get fined by a camera if I pass through a tollgate too fast or fail to pay. I am being watched by a camera whenever I enter or leave a supermarket or chain store. There are security cameras posted at major intersections of major cities. In England, they're proposing to install TV screens with cameras into private homes in order to detect bad parental behavior against children. Does this sound like Orwell's 1984?

My Gosh Richard! This is unbelievable! I try to ask first before I take pictures of anything so as to not be misinterpreted...I wonder what they would have said if you had asked first and mentioned you work in real estate...Just curious.

Richard - This is getting interesting. I would have been a little hot about being asked not to photo a public building.....as I am a Real Estate Agent....many times that is part of my job. BTW tell me you weren't wearing your Sombrero....just curious

It shows how misguided our past policy has become and continues.  Even the semantics and strategy shift is now underway, long overdue, but I doubt it will make much of a change on the homeland.  So sad that law abiding citizens have their phones tapped by the NSA, the NSA listened in on private military personnel phone calls and the list goes on.  We should direct our finite resources where they really count.

This Officer wanted to assert his authority and you were just a victim of that. What a tool.

To all...

I just think that we take for granted our right to move freely in public places. I am most surprised by the comments that think that the police have the right to stop you anywhere, at any time and ask you any question that they wish.

They have no more or less rights to do so than any other citizen, but there is a difference.

The officer's questions are posed "under color of law."

Were his questions illegal? No.

Did I have to answer them? No.

Did he have the right to detain me? The right, yes, but he lacked probable cause to do so.

Could I have turned around and walked away? We'll never know, because I could have been arrested "under color of law" at the whim of the officer. Since I had not done anything illegal I probably would eventually prevail but at great expense of time and effort.

The point of all of this is that we all take photos every day. We are in the public eye. We frequently visit county buildings during the course of our business.

We should demand that those sworn to "protect and serve" and ARE PAID WITH OUR TAX dollars should do so with courtesy and compassion.

Richard - regarding your response to Phil, I have been to PRC many times, taken a lot of pictures. I also know many others that have traveled there extensively. I have never known anyone to even be questioned when taking pictures of public or private buildings. Of course, I never tried to take pictures of any military installation....

RW,

I am thinking that someone was flexing their muscles.  But nonetheless it makes for a sad day when we can't even take pictures of our public buildings.

Mike...

Well there you have it. I could have taken the photo if I were in China! Wow, now my head IS spinning! Thanks for the insight.

I was in D.C. recently and was among the hundreds who took pictures of the White House, I am glad that I was not treated similarly.

I wish I could say I was surprised but I'm really not. Hope you enjoyed the rest of your day despite the incident.

Hi Richard.

Fortunately not all law enforcement officers are that way. One of my best friends is in law enforcement but does not abuse his power.

Unfortunately some do and really I am not at all surprised. For others at AR who are native to America they know how it feels to be "attacked" and their civil rights infringed upon typically since they were/are born. Then there are gun owners who are strong proponents of the second amendment. They have had their rights infringed upon and they continue to infringe on their rights. Some law enforcement officers stop those who are black/Muslim/purple/orange/etc. The list goes on. For others... it may come as a shock... but for others not so much probably because it "hasn't happened to them"... yet. Only when it happens to them is when they are "shocked" when they have an experience with  a police state.

That is why I like it when people protest. It is those who don't... that is troubling.

I am just glad that they did not haul you to jail.

Richard, you have your opinion and I have mine.  Fewer 911 situations is the goal of the police and I'm with them.   What's yours?

I am thinking that if you weren't with a customer you might have "explored" this issue with the security person.  I bet he felt like he did a good job and will continue or even increase this type of activity.  it is a good example of assumtions being made that are fairly easily cleared up with good old communication.  Of course this is my perspective, not having been the innocent person with the camera being confronted.

Amazing....

We should however be grateful that they are.....what if there was some crazy killer or terrorist out there?? We'd want the security guards to be ever present on someone like that for sure..... How are they to know who the good guys are??

Good to know they are doing there job.

Patricia Aulson

That is amazing. I once was thrown out of a shoe store, after being hired by a mall's owners to photograph all the stores inside. THe shoe store was the only one who objected and the manager demanded my camera! I refused!!! I told her the mall had hired me and I named the mall owner and the manager by name. She came at me as if she was going to hit me.

The irony is I actually was shopping for shoes, too. So i walked to the end of the mall and purchase like 10 pairs of shoes (no kidding--they were on sale) from a competitor. The funny thing is then I walked BACK to the original store and held up  the bags like Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman, and said to the manager, BIG MISTAKE.

Sorry for your story today, Rich.

Richard...I feel for what you have gone through. It is sad that some feel the need to flex the muscles like that.  It even sadder that the officer didn't recognize you as one of the top Realtors in the area!!!    In some little part of me, I feel good about what had happened to you in that someone thought that you looked strange enough in that situation to take the time and check you out.  Sounds like he went a bit over board, but maybe somthing happeed that he was told he was to lax and was trying to make up for it. 

It is a fine line in which our protectors walk at times.  Because of some things I have been involved with in law enforcement I can understand both sides.   

The thing that does bother me is that once he found out who you were, you woeren't allowed to take pictures.  Now that REALLY bothers me!

Richard in today's world you need to toughen up. When you write what the officer asked and your answers you are trying to instigate something with those answer. Only a moron would not know why he was asking those questions and your answers are flippant and not trying to mitigate the situation. So pull your pantyhose out of your butt because your lucky I wasn't the officer, I would have tased you for stupidity. Kind of like shock treatmeant.

Don't you think you could have explained a little better what you were doing and defused the situation. A police officer is under a lot of stress any time they approach anyone. He was doing his job and you added little based on your own description to alleviate any tension. So, don't cry your right were violated when you caused it. Grow up and act like a professional.

Office I am here to file documents in a real estate transaction and I was admiring the view and wanted to take a photograph. Would his reaction been different? We will won't know because you have an agenda to make you the hero and him the villain. Get over it and delete this crap! You caused your own grief and he was just doing what I want him to do, protect our buildings and citizens.

I would have walked away and taken the picture from a distance.  I'm one of the people that don't take orders well.

I too would follow Russ' plan. I'm a non-conformist...

Gene

Call the President and inform him of what occurred.  Maybe he will invite the two of you to have a beer at the White House.

I think it's horrible and you should send an outraged letter to your senator & reps because your rights have been violated. How about a call to the local newspaper?  Does this stuff happen to them all the time?  If it does, it's got to stop. 

Just to be clear, I think you should drive back up there and try to take a photo.  If the same outcome happens, then it was not profiling. hahahaha

that is some tough words being put out by Gary S.  Do you know each other?

This is unbelievable!  I cannot imagine what possessed them to act this way.

My husband used to be legally blind (before lasik.)  One time we were driving our Eclipse Spyder (convertible and snappy little sports car) with our kids in the back visiting folks in Nebraska.  Mike got pulled over because the speed limit suddenly dropped 10 MPH (unfamiliar with this area and an obvious revenue stream for Sarpy County.)

My husband was nothing but polite and answered questions respectfully.  They asked him OVER AND OVER "What are you doing here and where are you staying."  They ended up searching our car and completely overstepping authority with my kids in the back seat watching how police can get a little out of line sometimes.

You see, my husband's eyes were permanently dialated from his condition and he looks like he is from south of the border.  You know, automatically assume the guy is a drug trafficker.

I lost faith back then.  That was about 10 years ago.  All they could come up with was a speeding ticket for going 8 mph over the speed limit (he began decellerating when he saw the new speed limit sign)

Welcome to our brave new world!

Richard - That is the craziest thing I have heard all day. Now you have me wondering if I could take a picture of my courthouse.

Angelia, you call that tough! I don't know Richard but I am familiar with him. You see when real discrimination occurs, or a violation of civil rights occurs, I would champion the cause. I am as right wing as they make them. However, when you bring it on because you will not comply of answer a question directly and honestly, than you have a right under our civil and criminal procedure. You can say I refuse to answer that question and seek legal council.

You see Richard did non of this but instead choose to exercise his bravado. Not civil rights but look I am more right than you. Now under the constitution he had rights that he chose not to exercise but instead wanted to confront the officer to prove he knew more than he did. In any court Richard would loose his case based on just what he has said today.

Rights are not something we should take lightly and I feel they are being eroded with things that are happening but this is a poor example of what is the real problem. Richard choose the wrong target and the wrong example because it does not work. Little known to Richard the officer had the right to ask every question he did. Richard who professes to be so in tune with his rights failed to exercise his right to object but tantalized the officer with partial answers that would have only promoted further inquiry by the officer. So Richard and those that have joined his band wagon, answer me this, at what point did Richard exercise his rights? If he did not, at what point were they violated?

You see, any attorney that almost made it through law school would make mince meat of Richard with the argument that he gave. It is great rhetoric but lack the substance of a great argument based on the law. It in my opinion, although probably based on life experience, was meant to be a great blog and one that invoked sympathy.

So, although I seem hard on Richard, I wanted to be hard on his message. When you dilute the real tragedies of civil rights violations with self cause problems you have lost some meaning. If that makes me bad, I plead guilty and ask for no forgiveness.

However, facts are facts and please tell me where I have changed something to suit my position.

Angelia, I would love to have a beer with anyone!

Actually, Russell #67, he can ask the question, but we don't have to answer... it is his job, according to the Constitution to prove that we are doing something illegal. 

It would be an interesting court case...  Freedom of expression (as mandated by the Constitution) v. percieved security threat.  I know that if I was on the jury it would be a slam dunk.

An officer can ask questions to determine the facts. You do have a civil right to not answer any of the questions. It is based on the Miranda law. However, when you choose to continue to answer questions the officer has the right to continue to ask. If at some point he feels that further questions will jeopardize you he is instructed to read you the Miranda rights.

This never happened in Richards case, what Richard choose to do was be evasive in his answers for some reason only he knows.

Is there a reason to protect our government buildings from assault?  You and I both know there is because there is an enemy that would love another 911. Pictures are essential in the planning, so I find the indignation hard to understand.

I, myself seek no popularity on this sight because I have found it to be a lemming site, one in which a lot of the people follow the guy with the most post. I always thought that wasn't that smart since he could be wrong. Just as I could in this case, but I am not.

So, if you believe as you write, believe it and stand by it, I do and I will.

Read it as you like and maybe I'll see you some day in court.

Well I can say that since this was a courthouse you were taking pictures and being elusive when asked questions by the officer, he had a right to ask further questions and had you been a little more respectful, you might have found out what was going on.

I went to my local courthouse about 4 months ago and walked into the doors as usual to check taxes on a new listing and there were police everywhere at every door. I was a little taken back when I was checked for weapons, but found out when I got into the Treasurers office, that there was a trial going on and a death threat had been called in. They were there for a reason. I then appreciated their presence.

Dick, you have no idea what was going on at that courthouse at that time, but I can tell you that the officer was probably doing his job, which is why you pay him. So consider it a good thing.

Next time, try to be a little more amiable and not so defensive because chances are you didn't see the big picture. It wasn't personal. Your rights are intact.

So now you know how the typical black male feels. What you need to learn is what most blacks already know and that is when approached by the police it's always "yes sir, yes sir"

Richard:

This is a sad commentary on where are country is headed.  I hope you feel better after having vented.  Steam would have been coming out of my ears if this had happened to me.

Phil...

My agenda is that the rights and freedoms of citizens of the United States of America which they hold UNDER LAW are not usurped or truncated by civil servants who choose to act under "color of law" with no legal justification for doing so.

You apparently are willing to give up your civil rights because you live in fear. I choose not to be afraid and I do not wish to give up any of my rights or freedoms.

Gary S...

Your arguments lost any intellectual merit when you chose to make personal attacks against me, which by the way, are prohibited on ActiveRain.

You made a fool out of yourself, my readers know me better and they know that I engage in provocative topics to encourage discussion, I just wish that you could have seen it as a chance to debate instead of degenerating into name calling. That's petty and quite frankly, you didn't come out looking too good.

BTW If you had actually read my responses you would have seen that I acknowedged most of your points BEFORE you wrote your comment ...

Like the police officer, you jumped to a conclusion that was wrong, and then attempted to cover it by "breaking the rules" on AR.

Also...

I'm still trying to determine where the idea came up that I was elusive??? I answered every question honestly and politely?

I do work for myself ... I am an artist ... the photos are branded under my name ... when I was asked who I work for I said that I worked for myself which was honest and factual. I own CowetaFayetteNews.com and CowetaFayetteInfo.com.

How in God's name is that elusive or flippant? Should I have lied?

When asked what I was doing there I said that we were recording a survey ... which was factual.

How is that elusive or flippant???

To clear up the matter I said that we were there on county business, which was not only factual, but it established a "legal purpose" for me being there.

Now for crying out loud, what SHOULD have I said??? I answered every question honestly and factually and somehow that is being elusive or flippant.

Remember, I was NOT in the courthouse. I was on a public sidewalk. I established a legal purpose for being there. All the officer had to do was look

What I didn't add to the post was that I told the officer that I understood that he was just doing his job and I extended my hand in friendship and he chose not to shake it. I left it out because I felt that it was infammatory, but since I'm being portrayed as the bad gut here it's worth mentioning.

Richard, you live in a dream world. First I never attacked anything other that what you said. You may feel that your n=message is some gift but I think it is nothing but you selling Richard.

If you don't like that or A/R  does not like that than ban me.

Just like you I have the right to express my opinion even when it disagrees with yours. My personal attack that you reference is one that states that you are proactive in your attack of the officer. I am sure you find that distasteful because it is the truth. Are you telling me that you could not have been more responsive or are you saying, I don't have to be!

You see in either case Richard, you are wrong. You are not that intelligent on the law and I am sorry if that sounds like a put down but what it is, is fact. If A/R has a problem or you do, than delete this. However since you consider yourself so briefed in the law, on which specific law do you you claim you civil rights were compromised? I would love to hear this, since you have convinced so meant that it happened!

For someone to claim that a law has been violated, especially by a protector of the law, than you have researched it and have the ammo to back up your claim.

You see Richard I see you as an Instigator rather than a moderator. You don't agree but unless you show me the facts than I can not support your conclusions since I am not a drown or a lemming!

Richard, I may turn out to be your favorite person because I can lead your in the right direction. My goal is to confront what I disagree with but not to antagonize. Work with me and take it as an opposing oppinion.

Richard: Wow, this is like the Nixon era... I probably would have gotten locked up cuz I would of said, "up yours!" Like Russ, I think I would have walked a way, then from across the street I'd take the picture anyhow!

the world we live in will never be the same after 9/11/01

Wow. . I re-checked this blog and I'm amazed at the responses. . you can tell who listens to Hannity and Rush in our community

Gary S...

So when you use words like "moron" to describe me and "lemmings" to describe my readers that was not meant as personal?

I suggest you reread your comments.

More...

And things are not always as obvious as they see, as all assumed that 9-11 security was the reason the officer approached me. But there are other possibilities.

As I mentioned, the courthouse was covered with scaffolding. Could it be something related to the construction project???

Inferior materials?

Undocumented workers?

Violations of OSHA safety requirements?

Improper building techniques?

The purview of "elusive and flippant" is a two-way street. I an surprised that many are holding me to a higher standard as a free citizen performing a legal act than an armed officer who should have handled the situatiin better.

I missed the L word.... 

Lemmings

Last time Lemmings was invoked all heLL broke Loose here.

Wow !  Holy moly.  That is one heck of a story.  This happened to us recently as well and I could not understand it.  Am trying to remember where it was when we were taking photos (for the same reason for our blog) and was told not to.  Too early to remember : ) .  Am wondering if that security guard was just doing a power play or if that is in fact the policy.

I find it quite a contradiction that someone who holds himself in such high esteem would use such an intellectualy dishonest phrase such as "only a moron would....". It is an insidiously subtle (ok, maybe blatant) attack on any intelligent debate clearly showing that the commentors mind is closed. And to use terms like flippant, get your pantyhose out of your butt, I would have tased you for stupity and claim they are not personal is lying not only to the readers but to himself.

And what is that Hannity Limbaugh reference all about?

We are not a facist society (at least not yet, I hope).

Richard - I wish I could say this was an isolated incident however I was stopped last year as well standing on public property while taking pictures of our Chamber of Commerce and our courthouse that is considered " historical " because of it's crab orchard stone. I was interrogated right there on the sidewalk and finally just agreed to disagree and not take anymore pictures. Sad part, I pay my taxes to stand on that sidewalk, I pay my taxes to keep the very buildings up and running that I was trying to photograph. None of it seems to matter. As a resident in that very county nothing mattered.

Richard, I came back to see what went on after I left yesterday.  I am very sorry that you were attacked.  I am also sorry that my comment, meant to be light hearted since we are both Italian and you are so much fairer skinned than I, offended someone.  I heartily apologize for that.  It was not my intention. 

In reading all of the comments, in regards to the person who seems to want to write his own post on the subject, but is taking the easy way out by commenting on your post, I wonder how someone with only 3700 odd points can be a rainmaker?  I thought you had to have over 100,000 points.  Doesn't it seem like it's always the people with almost no points and almost no associations and probably almost no friends, who always seem to try to start the most trouble? 

Susan isn't it 10k points for a RainMaker? and that applied to those of us who were members b4 some date in February? February 16, 2009 at 8:00 AM Pacific time, I think? 

People who join now can become a Rainmaker  w/ no points... or very few points.    

Mike...

I can't really add anything to that! Thanks for jumping into the fray!

Melissa...

Wow, I never realized that this was so pervasive! Thanks for sharing that.

Susan...

I understood EXACTLY what you meant! It's an Italian thing lol!

To all...

Now this is frightening:

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005zOm

I think that we still need to be welcoming and open-minded, we don't want to be exclusive. As I mentioned, I welcome disagreement. Heck, that's why we're here ''' to brainstorm with others!

Richard:  The politics of fear is only getting worse.  It's pathetic that your local law enforcement has taken such a hard stance.  Let's face it.  There are bad people in the world, but eroding civil liberties is not the way to stop them.  Quite frankly, when it comes to someone willing to die to promote their terrorist agenda, it's a frightening thought, but there really is no stopping them or preventing them from doing it.

Richard - I read through your post twice and most of the comments above, including the super-offensive stuff from Gary, which I felt was out of left field and utterly unwarranted.  Interestingly, the last time I saw the word "lemmings" bandied about on AR, that person WAS banned from the network, although that had other underlying tones when it happened.

After reading your post the second time, I wondered if I would have responded any differently to the officer, and I don't think I would have.  You didn't say anything untrue, offensive, or in a manner to instigate anything with him.

The fact that he didn't know what "recording a survey" meant in the context of the county courthouse doesn't really surprise me, but I guess it made things more confusing for him, since he is apparently being paid to be suspicious (which is not all bad, I suppose). 

Sorry you had to put up with this nonsense, both from the officer and within the comments of your post.  I hope you have a great weekend, my friend.

Chris Ann...

Exactly ... caution is one thing, overkill is another! Thanks, my news celebrity friend!

Jason...

I have since heard from a lot of Rainers and co-workers that read my post that they have had similar experiences in their areas.

Interestingly, Mike Saunders said that he took photos of anything he wanted to in the people's Republic of China.

Now THAT is something to think about!

I think you did nothing wrong. Unless there is a law against taking pictures of public buildings, and in this day and age when there's a law against just about everything, he had no probable cause to harass you. Well---now that I think of it, you do look like a pretty menacing fella...JK!

I'm with Mike S #136....What's with the Hannity and Rush comment.... :-|

Gene

Wow--you touched off some nerves here, Richard. Keep snapping!

I don't see where you were disrespectful.

I am always an advocate for personal rights, but the protection of the people is so important. It is a hard line to draw and you are stuck in the middle. I always fall on the side of protection of the people. You never know who is out there doing what your were doing, but for an evil purpose.

Richard,

I hate to say it, but you may have let your rights be violated by not sticking up for them.  Police have the right and duty to look into suspicious behavior, although in this case, his suspicions may not have been reasonable.  When he asked who do you work for, why not respond "My name is Richard Weisser with ERA United Realty in Newnan, GA.  Is there a local ordinance against taking pictures of the courthouse?"  If the answer is "no" then "why can I NOT take a picture of the courthouse?"  This may have upset him more and I understand why you would not want to get into it at that point in time.  Maybe a call or letter to the Sheriff would help clarify why the deputy did this.

Richard & AR members;

Having seen many different opinions about this blog I decided to ask a client who happens to be an OKC Police officer about this and here is his reply.  It makes you stop and think about how much things have changed since 9-11 and how different things are.  Guess what?  That's just the way it is.  It's our duty as good American citizens to respect the law and be understanding at why law enforcement officials do some of the things they do.  Yes some tend to go overboard but truthfully we're all having to go overboard one way or another and don't look for things to change much.  Here's his response:

Well for starters this guys civil rights were not violated and he wasn't illegally detained.

1. A police officer doesn't need probable cause to temporarily detain a citizen. In Terry vs. Ohio it was ruled a police officer, having reasonable suspicion, can temporarily detain a citizen if he/she can reasonable articulate that a crime is or is about to take place. After Sept. 11 a police officer can easily articulate that photographing public building is reasonable suspicion. Police receive training to recognize and identify terrorist behavior and unfortunately photographing buildings is one sign of terrorist behavior in the planning stages of a terrorist attack.

The officer did have a legal basis to detain that person. I observed 2 males in downtown OKC videotaping the tall buildings in downtown OKC about 2 months ago. The passenger was hanging out the window, while the car was parked, with a video camera. I conducted a traffic stop and detained both of them long enough to get their story and to take down their information. I completed a report and forwarded it to our criminal intelligence unit. Both of the men were from NYC and one of them was of Arabic decent.

To answer this guys questions:

Have we become so paranoid that we have
> forfeited our civil
> rights  and have turned over unlimited
> authority to armed police?  Police do not have unlimited authority but we are the front line of defense when it comes to recognizing terrorist activity.

Is taking a photograph of a public building a suspicious
> act?  After Sept. 11, YES. It's the new world we live in...sorry. Most officers exercise discretion when it comes to who they stop and question and that might explain why everyone isn't be stopped in Washington D.C. who has cameras and photographing public buildings.

My best advice to anyone who finds themselves in the same situation as this guy is try to understand the officers point of view. He has no idea who you are, he is charged with protecting people, he/she receives many hours of training in recognizing and identifying terrorist activity, and his/her only objective is to protect people including you. Try not to become angry. Simply answer his/her questions truthfully and if your story makes sense nothing will come of it.

Sorry guys, when they let congress and Bush overreact and push through the Patriot Act, you gave up many of the rights hundreds of thousands have died to protect. Wiretapping and searches done without a court order. Come on, how many minutes does it take to get a judge to say YES or NO to a wiretap?  Sorry, there are almost no circumstances where seconds count. I almost find hit hilarious that we are taking away the rights of our citizens and they are the very same rights that we were claiming that Russia and other countries did not have. I can remember tourists being detained in the 70's for taking a picture of some government building in Moscow. Surprise, now it is happening here. Who knows how many secret files there are that were created in the past 8 years, all in the name of fighting terrorism. As they say, give up your freedoms for a little safety and you deserve neither your freedom nor the safety. Oh, and please, do not tell me if I am doing nothing wrong I have nothing to worry about. Using a public bathroom stall is not illegal, but I would hate to think that some security guard was taping me using it. Are we still the home of the brave like we were taught in elementary school? I hope so. Otherwise I do not think we are the US that our forefathers and mothers wanted us to be. I find it sad that we have fallen to this level. I think our police have better things to do than harrass innocent citizens from taking pictures of a courthouse in a small southern city. Guess you should be grateful that you were not taken into the basement and waterboarded for critical information you possessed. If they did take your name down, my guess is that it might even now be on a watch list on some computer somewhere. Scary isn't it! Bet the next time you get an extra search before boarding a plane your mind will go back to this incident and make you wonder. Tons of cargo come into the country unchecked, but we are preoocupied with x-raying grandmothers and pressuring real estate agents. Boy, I sure feel safer.

Maureen:  I wondered if anyone would notice the use of the infamous "L" word.  Yes... all hell surely DID break loose then, didn't it ?  I noticed it... and chuckled when you brought it up.  With you being from Columbus, and me from Cleveland, mebbe we Ohioans just have a special perceptive talent ?

Russell...

Terry V, Ohio was not about the right to stop and search, but whether or not the exclusionary rule applied to evidence uncovered while frisking a suspect.

The police may not take action just because they are suspicious, but only in the detainment is "warranted:

"... in justifying the particular intrusion the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant the intrusion."

What I find interesting is that your police officer friend thinks that taking a photo which is a LEGAL act would WARRANT AN ARREST???? The court specifically applied the "arrest" test in this case.

Under which law???

The Patriot act doesn't even mention photography.

So you haven't changed my mind about ANYTHING. The office could not have been suspicious that I was engaging in an ILLEGAL act because I was not doing anything illegal.

Under the very case cited, applying the tests written in the opinion of the majority of Supreme Court Justices, the "intrusion" was not warranted.

It frightens me that the police do not understand the law that they are charged with enforcing.

Did you read Mike Saunders comment about freely taking photos in the People's Republic of China?

Richard:  Ya gotta admit... you DO look a little on the "subversive" side.  So, I'm not surprised you were stopped and questioned... LOL.

Seriously, the major efforts at dismantling of our Constitution were "cheered" by the Bush/Cheney administration shortly after 9-11.  It was used as an excuse for the government, and their new baby... the "Department of Homeland Security"... to put into place many, many "interventions..." the great majority of which removed protections put in place to insure our Constitutional freedoms.  

It was pushed then, and conservatives were doing the pushing.  My thought is this.  If anyone who "blindly" was in favor of the Patriot Act when it was passed... complains now... they lost their right to complain when they backed that horrible law.  they got what they wanted.  Now, just because it suits their current political purposes... they complain.

By the way... Rainer Carol Smith from North Carolina has written a blog post that follows up on this post.  You all might want to take a peek at what is being said there.

Eric...

The reason that I didn't tell the officer that I worked for ERA United Realty is because it would have been a lie. I was not working for them, or as their agent while taking photographs. To indicate that I was working for them at the time was both factually untrue and unnecessary as it was not germane to the conversation.

The officer rejected my honest and factual answer without cause ... in my opinion he asked a stupid question and painted himself into a corner because he became aware that he was dangerous close to breaking the law, so he tried to "create" a reasonable suspicion.

What would you think if an officer stopped your wife on the street and asked her if she were married and where was her husband?

According to what I'm reading here a police officer should be able to stop any person any time and ask then anything.

Well Russell since addressed AR Member I will respond with--- what did you expect a fellow officer to say, that his cohort was wrong?

Probable cause, reasonable suspicion, semantics unless you're a criminal defense attorney. Once the officer discovered Richard was NOT a threat, was NOT engaging in terrorist activity was NOT a terrorist and had a legitimate reason to be there the officer should have backed off and allowed an American citizen go about his business. We hear about this types of harassment all the time and this appears to be just another example.

Your client said "that a crime is about to take place". If that's the criteria and by that definition Richard was in fact illegally detained . Maybe those many hours of training simply were not enough for that guy... :-)

I disagree about the Patriot Act. It streamlined police power already enumerated in current laws. It did however empower (due to 911) law enforcement to act when they normally would not have prior to 911 but that is not a direct result of the Act itself, more so the attack and mindset afterward. Here's a simple challenge to anyone who thinks the Patriot Act took away your rights...Name a case where an American citizen actually proved in a court of law that their civil rights were violated under the Patriot Act.

Gene

John...

I'm glad they didn't confiscate my equipment. And you're right, we lost a lot of rights with the passing of the Patriot Act.

Gene...

Good point! lol

BYW, Check out Carol Smith's post:

Your Rights as an American ::: Soon you won't have any!

She's really got it going on!

Hi Richard~ There are good and bad in every profession, but he probably was just doing what he perceived as his job.    I would have been exasperated if that happened to me.  I just never thought anythingabout taking photos around town, or even at the courthouse! 

Richard,

I was not trying to change anyone's mind but I thought it would be interesting to get another point of view.  I saw things wrong with both sides of what happened and I think this is a great topic for discussion just like it is here.

Gene:  The officer involved was no cohort of my client.  My client has in fact been a witness to the mis-treatment of another officer towards an alleged criminal and that officer was later fired so you don't need to assume that they stick together because they don't.  Jumping to conclusions is part of what went wrong here was it not?

I personally would have handled the whole situation differently and would hope for a different and better outcome.  Who knows what would have happened.  If I ever find myself in Richard's situation, I will let everyone know how it turned out.  Chances are we may be in a similar situation in our life at some point in the future.

The previous government is who I blame, at least partly for where this country is at this very point and I don't see the current government as one that will do much better.  We must have mortgaged our country too many times to count.

Vickie...

Well, I know how good cops are SUPPOSED to act because we have good cops here in Newnan! So maybe I'm spoiled a little bit!

Vickie...

Well, I know how good cops are SUPPOSED to act because we have good cops here in Newnan! So maybe I'm spoiled a little bit!

Ok, so I have to start my lesson early, I see....

Richard, you said: I was exercising my first amendment rights, which, by the way, are lawful.

Which one? Assembly? Were you petitioning the government for a redress of grievances? Or was it that you were practicing a religion? It could not have been the press, as you are not a journalist. I suspect that you were under the impression that your "right" to take a picture of the courthouse fell under the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment. Hmmmm.

Why are we so convinced that "rights" are absolute, with no restraints whatsoever? If you were yelling that the judges inside were flaming idiots incapable of rendering a just verdict and this had happened, you might have had a case. But you weren't. You wanted to take a picture of a building (that you said was having work done on it - i.e. the scaffolding), and you were asked who you work for - as you were, after all, about to take a picture of a public building under renovation. Your response was interesting. You said "I work for myself" - so, you are a broker? Just reading what your response was, I got the very distinct impression that, in so many words, you were telling the sherrif "None of your business"...which is why the question got repeated.

I'll continue the civics lesson latter...it is a whole post in and of itself. But I will address one other problem that I see here.

Gary S. said: Only a moron would not know why he was asking those questions and your answers are flippant and not trying to mitigate the situation.

Now, I'm trying to figure out when he personally called you, Richard Weisser, a moron. He didn't. What he did do was point out that you should have known better than to respond the way that you did.

Now, I will also say this: that his characterization of many AR members as mindless rodents was a bit of a broad stroke, which you and I most certainly are not. But seriously, have you tallied the number of people who have criticized your actions versus the ones who hopped on your bandwagon? It may have been a genralization that was not nice, but considering the responses you got, it might have been a little more than accurate...not the mindless rodent part, but rather the fact that too many people tend to agree with something without looking at all of the facts...sort of reminds me of the last time I had a conversation with you regarding the circumstances that lead to the founding of the Republic...

On June 27, 2002 U.S. Congressman Ron Paul said in the House of Representatives:

"...'Is America a Police State?' My answer is: 'Maybe not yet, but it is fast approaching.'"

Richard, I do owe you an apology. Some of my remarks in the previous post were made in anger and I was out of line. At the time I felt they were either point on or somewhat humorous. In my re-read, some were neither.  I am not as eloquent in my writing as Mr. Walton but his summation is accurate and I wish I could have said it that well!

As to my lemming comment, it was not meant as a totality of all messages but it seemed to me, when you have someone like yourself that has a flair for writing, that people just fall in line and never question. I don't frequent this site often but I actually thought of that as an honest appraisal of what I was witnessing. I am also sorry if that offended people. It was never my intent.

Since I only had one side of this to judge, I believe in my heart that you were wrong and the officer was right and doing what we pay him to do. So, I do not apologize for my position, just my inept delivery of my message. Even old people like me learn from their mistakes.

Perhaps a young man like you can also learn that tolerance is a blessing that you can share. We face some difficult times and the rights we once had are in flux right now. Being vocal and at the same time civil (a lesson I have learned) may mean it is easier to preserve these rights and gain the support to make it happen. 

Again, if I have offended anyone, it was not my intentions, however, to those that I did, I am sorry!

William

Not a journalist? How can you say that? I have been one for over thirty years. My work was even used by the President of the United States for an important speech about education.

http://cowetafayettenews.com

http://cowetafayetteinfo.com

http://smokyphotos.com

http://northgeorgiaphotos.com

I have had my work published in hundreds of books and magazines. I have also done pro bono work for non-profits like the National Parks Conservation association. I have worked tirelessly without compensation to protect our national parks. Here a report I collaborated on:

http://www.npca.org/stateoftheparks/smokies/smokies.pdf

I have used my eye and my camera for the public good for a long time, so yes, I detest the fact that in a so called free country, that would make me a suspected terrorist.

That's what inflames my passion!

Gary...

 I thank you kindly for your explanations and for your apology. I really do respect your right to disagree, and you have made some excellent points! I look forward to more debating in the future!

And one last thought for now ....

The "presumption of guilt" is what guiles me the most. He did not assume that I was taking a photo for a legitimate purpose.

He should have started the interrogation with:

"May I ask why you are taking a photo of the courthouse?"

Richard, what guiles you may be the thing that protects me and my family. Have you ever considered this?

 Officers are trained and understand what in today's world constitutes a threat. I live in Florida and we trained the bomber in 911. Today it is more difficult to get training in the type aircraft that was flown. That is an infringement on our rights as you have portrayed them.

One of the things that were discovered in the files of terrorist was photographs of the buildings that they destroyed. Do you really find it that alarming that an officer might ask what you are doing? 

You write like an intelligent person but the conclusions you arrive at are less than that! I am having a great deal of difficulty understanding why it is so hard to understand why someone would ask you why you are taking photo's of a government building. I seem to remember the WTC and the Pentagon and seeing the photo's that they used. 

So is it so beyond belief that someone that is delegated to protect ask what you are doing? Is it also more correct to answer them where you state what you were doing, maybe similar to what you described when you spelled it out in your Blog. 

You see what Mr. Walton and I have seen is a dissimilar description given to the authorities and what you posted. Had you explained it as you did here, you may not have had a problem.

So, I don't see it as a civil rights infraction but you trying to exert or deny some power you perceive you have. The truth is that power is with the people that it protects. I a most would say that if my family was protected v/s Richard being able to take a picture, which would you, choose?  Do you really think it would be a hard decision? 

So when you frame your argument, you made it a civil rights thing. Yet I have yet to hear which of your rights were violated. I also think that question was asked by William. So, I will ask it again, what civil rights do you think was violated by the officer and why? 

I have tried to keep this dialog calm and reflective and trust that we can debate this. You see Richard, I am in my mid 60's and when I was married we had two waiting rooms. One for Blacks and one for Whites. That was a civil rights violation, although at that time it was not. 

I do understand rights and what we may surrender and what is good and bad is really perception. I am interested in all perceptions.

Love the photos you are able to share.  I was trying to remember for what our courthouse looked like...  We have some gorgeous old courthouses in some of the outlying counties but Columbus is a big city....  our present court house is is a high rise.    Your photos remind me of the movie 'Back to the Future'  I am not sure if the building with the broken clock was their county courthouse or their city hall.  I would assume security at city hall would be as vigilant in some cases as on a county level?  Or maybe not.  All relative?

If I may add a link that I think pertains: If the Bibb County GA  courthouse is not able to be photographed because of the danger today of terrorism is the future  Franklin County Courthouse  too exposed by showing these images on the internet?

Gary...

Sorry .... I disagree.

What you are saying is that you accept the police state as a matter or survival.

I do not.

I want more for my family. I want them to live in a Constitutional Republic that allows citizens to learn to fly airplanes, to take photographs, and to do what every they wish within the confines of the law.

Can you see the insanity here? We made it harder for law abiding citizens of the United States of America to fly airplanes but have made it illegal to profile FOREIGN NATIONALS from belligerent nations that are enemies of the United States.

That is what I am talking about. Let's release the known terrorists at Guantanamo Bay and instead accost US citizens taking documentary photos of county courthouses that have with NO CRIMINAL record.

I don't want to live with fear and suspicion. I am very sorry that your are a fearful person. You may choose to be afraid. But do not seek to protect me, please. I am not afraid of anything other than losing the freedoms that I enjoy and living under the tyranny of a police state.

The OVERREACTION to 9-11 has been misdirected.

Why do we seek to punish law abiding citizens for the criminal acts of others?

I just spent 20 minutes reading all the comments here.

I am conservative, and hated the forming of HomeLand Security.

I want to raise and leave my kids a Constitutional Republic to live in too.

I had no idea you were a such a writer outside of blogging.

Gary S. - Based on the amount of points you have here on the AR Platform and your lack of blogging I can only assume you have not fully educated yourself with this platform and it's terms and conditions. I would suggest that you read them carefully as I can point out several violations within your comments.

First, let me explain Active Rain in a nutshell. Active Rain is a place for networking, to grow a readership for both agents alike as well as consumers. Anything you SAY and DO will be held against you. Whether a lost referral from Agents here who read such disturbing comments or the consumer you fail to engage. This, AR, as a business portal can make or break you, me, anyone. The fact that you disagree with what Richard has stated in his article is your poragotive however does it make you feel better to belittle, call names or degrade ? Everyone has the right to disagree. You do, I do and so does Richard. Richard chose to write about this because it bothered him. Just because he did not respond to the officer or the situation as you would have does not make him wrong. Just because you disagree does not make you right !

I have been on Active Rain for a long time. I have grown my referral network and my business because of it. We all have the right to disagree and we can do that tactfully, professionally and ethically. There is no excuse for grown men and women to resort to abusive acts such as name calling. I would think you were better than that. I wonder how your Broker would feel about the way you are representing his office within your comments ? Suffice to say I am certain he would not appreciate it.

I do not agree with your comments but yet I have not referred to you as a " moron " nor have I told you to go and put on your " big boy panties " nor have I told you to go clean up all the broken glass around you from " living in that glass house ".

Remember : Your professionalism WILL undoubtedly shine through here. We are not defined by what we have in our life or our level of education. What defines us is how we act or react to any situation that comes into our lives.

We can be book smart and recite our constitution backward and forward but that does not make us " life smart ".

Melissa, I don't think there is any need to berate Gary AFTER he has published a sincere public appology, accepted by Richard.  Doing so begs a response and can start the process again.

Gary has his personality, Richard his, I mine.  Warts and all.

~ WARNING ~ .02 ~ BLONDE OPINION ~  ;)

Gary is the broker and owner of several VERY successful RE companies. He has strong opinions obviously. But I have known him for 3 years and I would trust NO ONE more to care for my referral clients. Gary has performed acts of kindness and generosity that I have witnessed -- that would blow your mind if you knew. 

As this is a public post, I think there may be those who would want to read my side. (Apologies if I am wrong and Richard, as this is your post you are quite welcome to delete me if I overstep here)

TO THE PUBLIC: The amount of time one has spent on a blog site has NO bearing WHATSOEVER on their professionalism or competency as RE practitioners. There are brilliant writers on blog sites such as this one and several others who couldn't practice RE out of a paper bag. Many self-appoint as 'Specialist' or 'Coach' 'Moderator' or 'Guru'. Many have developed big followings. I commend the tenacity and discipline to come here every day and do that.

But 10M angels will not get you into heaven - and 10M devils will not damn you if your works - NOT YOUR WORDS - deem otherwise.

I base these statements on the personal experience of making referrals and ending up with disappointed clients.

I agree there is a diplomatic way to communicate on public forums.

However if we read through all the comments what Gary was doing WAS expressing his personality. Good bad ugly whatever.

Just like Richard was. I suspect if you got those two together they would become great friends.

This is a flat medium and there will ALWAYS be misunderstanding.

When we open our posts to comments there is a risk that people will disagree passionately and strongly.

It is what it is. I wouldn't let it ruin my day.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My experience with situation such as Richard experienced:

When I was 23 years old and DJ at a club in Orange County CA, it was St Patrick's Day and I had the flu. Went home early from my shift. Had had, during the evening while there, 2 styrofoam cups of green beer - probably about 6 oz total.

It was raining and I veered over a yellow line a bit. Got pulled over and asked if I'd been drinking.

(NOTE: whenever you say you just had 2 beers you will not be believed by any cop)

Copped diva attitude. (told cop he was obviously rookie on power trip) DUHHHH

Got taken in for DUI.

Did not blow sufficiently into breathalyzer to be charged.

However, was detained in drunk tank for several hours.

Were the cops buttheads? YES

Was I helpful by asserting myself? NO

Lesson learned: Choose battles!  :)

PRAJNA ~ NAMASTE

And thanks for all the fish! (wink) (smile)

Phil...

At this time and for the record I am extending total amnesty to all who have commented! lol, and thanks for jumping back in to the former fray!

Candice...

You should post that as a seperate blog, I think that you should get the 200 points!

But here's the difference between your story and mine ... I wasn't doing anything illegal and I didn't cop an attitude. I answered calmly and honestly to questions that seemed illogical and unnessary.

The other thing is that my defenders aren't doing so because of my points ... they are doing so beciuse I have written over 800 posts on this platform About one out of ten is featured, and I think that says a lot about the quality of the offerings.

So they have come to know me through my writings. I have spoken to many of them personally. And they know that I am accomplished.

Thanks for the comment!

Richard ~ Your comment in your post about needing a rest brought me back here. Yikes! I last read the post some 150 comments back so missed the brouhaha. 

And then I've spent most of the afternoon reading that *superb* set of comments on the photo.net site that you linked to in your comment above.  Wow - that's an impressive bunch that comments on that site.  It is all scary stuff. My mind is reeling. It's very disheartening that this is going on - and that so many think it is ok.  I've found myself recently thinking that the Constitution and Bill of Rights could never be written or approved in our country today. Sad.

Liz

Richard, I did not know that you were a journalist...or are you saying that because you have written something that was used by the press or that was published in a magazine or local newspaper that that gives you the designation of journalist?

I digress. I do want to say that I usually find your posts enlightening, entertianing, informative, and refreshing...but this one and one other that I've already alluded to I did take umbrage with (forgive me, it's the history teacher/historian in me).

I think someone (Ron Parise, I think it was) who neatly summed up a little of why some people might have been incredulous at your claim of having your rights violated (which, btw, you still haven't answered my questions on that score). Do I see things in this regard getting any better for anyone? No, but we can all work toward making things better one person at a time...

William...

I wrote a long answer but I just deleted it because it's pointless. You are just like the officer. Although I demonstrated my credentials you refuse to recognize them

And your reference to Ron's comment clearly indicates what you think this is all about.

Sorry, but I believe that civil rights are universal. Apparently you do not agree.

It's said to see our civil liberties being violated and I hope that if you did not file a complaint against that Sheriff that you do so. Actions like his should not be tolerated.

Richard,

You clearly misunderstood the point of my statements.

Your cerdentials not withstanding, you presented a story, the tone of which did not necessarily convey to me that there was due respect given to the sherriff.

I do understand your aggravation whith what happened...and no, I do not think that civil rights only belong to certain people...but as I stated earlier, rights are not absolute.

But the question still remains unanswered as to what rights you felt were violated by the sherriff in the exercise of his duties and when were you detained? - those were not so clear in the narrative you described.

Furthermore, in your narrative, you explained that you were at the courthouse with a client to record a survey...I assume (maybe wrongfully?) that you were assisting this client as a real estate agent, not as a journalist.

Have you taken notice of how many people have not agreed or sided with you in this? Your responses to those of us who have not necessarily sympathized with you, and the broad stroke with which you have just painetd me, speaks volumes...not that we all don't see your side of the matter, but apparently, you refuse to see ours...again, that speaks volumes....

A final note. Maybe if this incident was so egregious, then your first course, or final course, of action should be to follow the suggestions of Chris Bonata, the comment before my final response. Unless the whole point of this exercise was to make you feel justified...which the overwhelming majority has vouched for you on that score.

Richard,  I have to agree with your points and the posts of many of the ActiveRain participants.  What is really scarry and the root of the problem, the number of posters who think you were in the wrong and the Sheriff was just doing his job.

Like someone posted earlier - The Communist Countries have great security.