evan_goulet Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 <a href="http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=70207">WUSA 9Article</a><P>A secret service officer demanded a Minnesota man delete photosfrom his digital camera that showed Secret Service security checkpoints outsidethe ballpark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rnt Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 It would have been interesting to see what would have happened had the man refused the demand. I'm not sure I would have the courage to refuse a Secret Service request... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelyoung Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 "They" came to my house to see my photos of a big tall building. "They" got told "no." Smiles all around. Thank you very much. (I have rarely been so nervous in my adult life) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akajohndoe Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 The article says they "asked" not "demanded", and goes on to make the point that "ask" is the operative word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rnt Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 One common definition of 'demand' is to "request urgently and forcefully" which sounds like what was done... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evan_goulet Posted April 2, 2008 Author Share Posted April 2, 2008 <i>The article says they "asked" not "demanded", and goes on to make the point that "ask" is the operative word.</i><P>Actually if you read the article carefully, you would have seen this line: "<I>Butler said the officer demanded he delete any pictures that showed the security checkpoints set up to screen fans for the visit by President George Bush.</i>" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelchristensen Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 I found it interesting to read the response from the Secret Service spokesman who said " (agents) have the authority to ask .. (not to photograph)" ... that such is the "discretion" .. of the (agent) That statement speaks volumes about civil liberty. Clearly, the photographer was not in violation of any US law by taking pictures of the checkpoint .. Police have lots of authority to "request" .. and much limited authority to demand.. not unlike a policeman asking for consent to search .. if consent is asked is not the same as "forced compliance" under penalty of arrest. In this situation the spokesman was giving only tacit approaval of the discretion used by the Secret Service agent ... of course, all of this does not mean they can't ruin your fun .. and needlessly detain you and make inquires about you .. and put you on the "list" of people to be watched. Only you can decide if the effort is worth the trouble. Sounds like the Secret Service needs to have a better policy of dealing with such situations. I don't believe any agent of our government is so simple-minded to believe that the "bad guys" resort to such tactics as collecting intelligence information by posing as a someone standing out in public and taking a photograph. Of course, there are some fairly stupid "bad guys" out there! The bad guys get their intell information and photography usually by much more covert ways. Another point to mention is that the Secret Service is perhaps the more assertive of law enforcement professionals .. if you'd have seriously posed a threat .. you'd be ordered to delete your photos/surrender your camera from the prone position on the pavement with a gun pointed at you! Obviously, such was not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_ Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 All the secret service needs is "stealth" checkpoints. We, the USA, can hide an entire jet bomber from radar, so making a "non-visible" phone booth should be a snap. [Almost like spending $$$$$s to research how much water could be on Mars, the planet.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akajohndoe Posted April 2, 2008 Share Posted April 2, 2008 Probably a good time to post the rules, as they used to be ... http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14528res20040730.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan_c._reyes Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 makes me wonder if the Secret Service (SS) have ever heard of image recovery software?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sknowles Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 Interesting, but it also makes me wonder if something had happened about that same time and place, what would be the first thing the law enforcement agencies, including the Secret Service, want of the event and scene? Images. And if they knew this photographer had some, they would be asking for copies instead of asking to delete them at the time. When will they realize trying to restrict photography is shooting yourself in the proverbial foot. When will they realize freedom (to photograph) is more enpowering for both them and citizens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
profhlynnjones Posted April 3, 2008 Share Posted April 3, 2008 Remember a Republican US Attorney told a SF photographer that the 4th Ammendment (Search & Seasure) is no longer operative! So much for our constitution. I'm old enough to know about the constitution. Lynn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landrum Kelly Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 "I'm old enough to know about the constitution." Yes, but is George Bush? Still, if one were taking pictures of their security checkpoints, whether inadvertently or not, I would quickly back off. --Lannie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank.schifano Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 "Yes, but is George Bush?" I think he's old enough to know about the Constitution. I also think he doesn't give a crap about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloopjohne Posted April 9, 2008 Share Posted April 9, 2008 Juan sez: "..makes me wonder if the Secret Service (SS) have ever heard of image recovery software?!?..." Ssshh! Don't give 'em any ideas! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_knight Posted April 11, 2008 Share Posted April 11, 2008 Whether you like Bush or whoever is elected this coming election I don't see changes coming in homeland security. There will be alot of posturing saying they did make changes and gave back our rights! Bottom line even before Bush the Secret Service still operated with act now and let the lawyers take care of the fall out. Pretty much how a military operates and this is why our military does not have the right to police the citizens of the US Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benradvanyi Posted April 25, 2008 Share Posted April 25, 2008 I know that this could probibly get the guy in a lot of trouble if the photos got out, but couldn't the photographer just do a recovery of the memory card and get all the photos that he deleted? I find it funny that people think that once you delete a photo from your camera/memory card that they think it is gone forever. Anyone have input on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now