Originally Posted by Firebug4

In most cases it is as simple as being in a public place. That being said a little bit of common sense needs to be used. Many poster here will say that TSA, LEO's and the government need to use more common sense. In some cases that is true. However, there also is very little common sense used on the opposite side of the argument in this forum. Photography is a legal activity. Photography can also be used in preparation for illegal activity as well and it doesn't matter how many images are found in the public domain someone who is planning a serious crime especially if it is an organized group does their own surveillance. This is has been found to be true in the past criminal cases and terrorist events.

People are free to take photos in a public place. LEO's are free to ask questions concerning that activity. People are free to not answer those questions. LEO's are free to gage peoples reactions to their questions. Based on those observations, training and experience LEO's are allowed to develop reasonable suspicion or not. If the officer develops reasonable suspicion the officer can detain the individual while he investigates the source generating his suspicion. The LEO is not obligated to inform you what that reasonable suspicion is nor will he in most cases. As long as the LEO is actively and constructively furthering that investigation the individual can be detain for a reasonable amount of time. The courts have not defined what is reasonable.

The common sense comes in that if you are taking photos for a fill in the blank legal reason (hobby, work related, article, school project) what ever just tell the officer what the reason is and everyone goes on with their day no fuss no muss. You don't have to do that of course and the officer has the added responsibility to figure out if you are flexing your rights or are you up to other nefarious activities. Depending upon your demeanor and a dozen other factors that build the totality of the circumstances the officer will use the tools that the legislature and the courts have given him to figure that out. Sometimes he will be successful sometimes he won't It is the LEO's job, sometimes it can be easy and sometimes in can be very difficult. The individual can add to the ease in which this is done or the individual can add to the difficulty. Personally, I don't care either way. I get paid to do the job regardless of how the individual acts. I and the vast majority LEO's know exactly what they can and cannot do. Are there exceptions to that? Yes, there are but they are not as prevalent as those here would like you to believe.

When there is controversy concerning an LEO's action, you, the public, usually only hear one side of the story. The LEO or government actor is 99% of the time restricted from publicly commenting. This is similar to a private corporation as well as the private corporation will be given advise from legal counsel to not comment. You can see that even in this forum as Pmocek will only comment in a limited manner concerning his arrest in ABQ. Yet, people in the forum expect the LEO and government to comment concerning every detail in every matter. It is just not going to happen nor should it.

FB

Originally Posted by Firebug4

My opinion is that you have a very good grasp on what the situation actually is.

FB