On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:16 PM, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Walters" > Subject: Re: OT: Speaking of Photographers rights... > > > > "trabpled"?? > > > > Is the QR spokesman serious? "We've had people take photos of luggage > > lockers and that worries me". Do terrorists really not know what > > luggage lockers look like? > > I can think of several people on this list who would surprise me not at all > to show a picture of > a luggage locker under the label "art" or "street photography". > Interesting thought, but if the terrorists know that they will be harrassed > if seen skulking > around carrying a big camera, would they not disguise themselves as ordinary > families on > vacation or some such, and use a less auspicious camera? > I know, I would, were I a terrorist. > > I mean really, just because they have anger management issues doesn't mean > they are stupid.
Actually, I ~have~ taken photos of luggage lockers... ;-) What I can't believe is this guy's statement about using "common sense" then going on to say, "If you have a family with little kids at the train station taking photographs you would feel a little bit easier than one man with a professional looking camera taking photos." Is he saying that terrorists use "professional looking cameras"? Does he think they wouldn't use a point and shoot or maybe a phone camera (they look just a bit less conspicuous than a big honking Canon EOS or Nikon D3 (or whatever their latest DSLR is called). No, his statement is just ludicrous! What they're doing has nothing to do with terrorism, it has to do with discriminating against people with nice cameras (I'm being serious here!) and it's about control. They're idiots. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
