Originally Posted by
jkhuggins
Again, IMHO, you're quite wrong. Choosing to exercise your constitutional rights, even knowing that you might be harassed for it, is not reason to criticize the OP for provoking the situation. We shouldn't blame victims.
But I suspect that we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
Fair enough. Sensible suggestion. Question of perspective. We agree to disagree.
Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
What did the photographer do that was suspicious?
Taking the stance you seem to be taking would also make any other person minding their own business suspicious.
If I sat outside of a TSA checkpoint and watched the going ons for an extended period of time would that raise the red flag in your opinion?
What is different between the two circumstances?
I'll take a shot but bear in mind the best person to ask is the one with the suspicion but at a guess( having read what appears to have happened) and having to draw on experience in my own country (UK)
Airports here are not public places in the accepted sense. They are restricted places in that entry to Terminal Buildings etc is restricted to passengers (and their friends / family), staff, those with legitimate business as authorised by the airport operator or lawful authority. This restriction is created by civil laws and enforcement is further under Govt legislation. I think persons also have to obey signage (under the bye laws) and instructions from airport officers (whatever that means). Those taking part in nuisance activities and petty crimes are subject to banning orders (I believe)
I am guessing the way airports operate in the US may not a million miles away from these principles
In this case the OP had already finished his legitimate business and did not appear to fall into any category group such as passenger (or friend etc), staff and thererfore stood out as an anomaly. He was therefore challenged by those there employed in the security function. His motivations for his presence and behavoir were unclear and he did not co-operate to enable clearance of any doubt about whether he was an innocent or not. The rest is history. The scenario could have unfolded many ways but he chose his own path in deciding the manner that he would intercat.