Article of interest for anybody who likes to photograph trains and railroads

Well that sucks.

Glad I didn't setup the tripod on the bridge pointing at the tower in the local yard. I figured my biggest worry would be some truck flying by and the wind knocking everything over.

Nonsense. Utter nonsense. Nothing good can possibly emerge from all that suspicion and paranoia. Not even increased security. It amazes me how easy it is to use fear as a pretext to attack freedom. This article is one of the scariest things I've ever read. Serious.

Just keeps gettin' better, don't it? At least now all the real terrorists know to go out and buy sweatshirts with Ol' 97 under a full head of steam...

It's particularly scary for me. Photography, and especially rail photography, is one of the few joys I have in life. It's a hobby that doesn't harm anyone or anything, and I find it very therapeutic -- it really helps to keep post-traumatic stress disorder at bay. And now I have to worry about getting arrested because of it.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety".

-Ben Franklin

Makes retiring to Canada look better every day . . .

I heard an interview with a trainspotter on NPR today. Who was held and interrogated by the police. He didn't seem too upset that he was detained for several hours and "interviewed", as he put it by the police. I thought that was the worst part. It's bad enough that our Constitutional (4th Amendment) rights are being violated; what's worse is people who just go along with it!

My interest is in harbor and shipping operations. 40 years ago my father and I used to visit the piers in Boston, especially the old Commonwealth and "Army Base" piers and watch the ships unload. Ever since then I've been enamoured of the workaday ships - freighters, coastal tankers, tugs, barges, etc. I always like to visit and photograph the waterfront and watch the ships, and, of course, take pictures. I haven't had much opportunity to pursue this hobby in the last year because of other demands on my time, but now I'm worried about what will happen when I do.

We must not lose sight of WHAT we are defending in our war on terrorism - it is not just our lives, it it our LIBERTY.

Many of you might find this interesting. http://uscode.house.gov/title_18.htm Check Chapter 37. Read the whole thing, many of the foamers don't.

Unfortunately, as with photographers, folks with an interest and passion in any field, are easily enticed into sharing quite a bit of information. So while a simple hobbyist's knowledge of scheduling, signals, maintenance, dispatch and control radio frequencies, and equipment tracing may simply fill a niche interest in a hobby, sharing that information may not be as innocuous as sharing bird spottings to assist folks in adding to a life list. Do we think that all of the cropdusters that shared information on their profession were aware of the potential problems? Of course not. Can we learn from past weaknesses?

When a complete stranger can simply ask about, "Where is that bridge on page && of some book?" and get not only a detailed location, road turn-offs, tips on evading security, scheduling details for common trains, and ways to determine arrival times (and sun angles), then perhaps it is time to consider a certain added caution might be appropriate. Adding suggestions of other critical locations and crowded or remote yet vital heavy traffic locations that might be "a better target" is reckless in the extreme. but ask a simply disguised question and you will get all the information you need about a particular location or train.

Since even the terrorist groups aren't shy about their intentions (not are they necessarily accurate in their targeting), the idea that rails might be a tempting target shouldn't be ignored. The excuse (and the validation/information) that "the information is available at xxx, yyy or zzz anyway" is equally artless. I'd suggest that many folks think of trains more as an impediment to their driving than a hazard but when you think a little more deeply about what trains carry, the speed and weight of many trains, it's pretty easy to see just what dangers may be involved. If you glance at the cargos (and you'll have to do your own research on how to tell just how to identify hazardous cargos), you'll appreciate some caution as well.

How much terror are we bringing upon the country by taking pictures. What a stupid bit of nonsence all this is. I really hate to see this and other losses in the freedoms we are suposed to enjoy as Americans. A police state? To an extent it is and it is rapidly becoming more so. Our children and theirs will never know the freedoms we used to enjoy. I feel a sadness.

I can't remember the last time a railroad bridge was attacked by terrorists anywhere in the world. It was probably by the French resistance against nazi convoys during WWII. Modern terrorists will sometimes plant a bomb in a passenger train, but that does not require any knowledge of the technical stuff the railfans like so much.

One must be really paranoid and ill informed to think that a terrorist will attack some bridge somewhere in the country: no impact, no symbolic value, little media coverage, little chance to kill many people. The average McDonald in any downtown area is a MUCH better target - and they frequently are in some countries. Yet, are fast food customers searched when they enter the restaurant? Does the police arrest loiters in McDonalds? Of course not.

The real value of harassing railfans, or photographers, or any other special interest group, is to make them believe the enemy is near. Just like the communists in the 50's, the terrorists are everywhere and you must really watch what you say because it could fall in enemy ears. This current "war on terrorism" stuff is just as absurd as mccarthism. The menace - real, but moderate - is blown to ridiculous proportions to make people obedient and receptive to any crazy military initiative.

I can't believe some people are falling for such tactics of another age.

Shows that ignorance is bliss for some folks. They don't search people around Balinese nightclubs either. Fortunately Americans were the target. I'm sure all the dead Australians and their families can appreciate that. As to terrorists bombing trains: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/s/w_asia/108220.stm

Of course that's on the Indian subcontinent and events in that area have little relevance to the United States or Europe.

Oh, if you are really looking for a sabotaged train and bridge, try October, 1995. Arizona. The same processes that would be useful to fanning could be put to much more serious use by someone bent on sabotage or making a spectacular political statement. Sharing the "tricks of the trade" among friends and acquaintances may be fine. Sharing with strangers on the internet?

The IRA used to regularly place bombs on the Dublin-Belfast line, usually causing disruption rather than death. About the only advantage the USA has is that most of its rail is freight, not passengers, which makes it a less attractive target to terrorists looking to make a single big newsworthy event.

Making someone sign a piece of paper saying they will never go back to a public place sounds like overstepping the mark, and unconstitutional to boot. Enhanced vigilance and asking people what they're doing seems only sensible - it's really a question of how and when, not if.

Try hanging round a silo farm in the midwest if you want to see real paranoia in action. Those guys just have no sense of humour.

So short of burning every map out there how exactly do you keep this info secret? The fact is I know where both local rail yards are. I know many rail bridges. I've driven over/under them for years. Guess what only a very foolish terrorist would setup next to a rail line with a notebook. There are countless offices for rent overlooking raillines all over the country. Do we board all those windows up? Do we burn all those schoolbooks asking Johnny if train A leaves at 1am when it will be someplace else?

All harrasing honest people does is make it easier for terrorists. They don't want a bunch of people out there with cameras keeping an eye on them. They'd much rather a few overworked cops got the job.

There is a recent case of 12 British 'plane-spotting tourists who were arrested in Greece and charged with spying. Finally they were acquitted but not until after twelve months of worry and huge lawyers' fees. It seems that the Greeks do not train-spot or 'plane-spot and cannot understand anybody who does. Who needs terrorists to attack our liberties when officialdom is ready to do it for them!

"Of course that's on the Indian subcontinent and events in that area have little relevance to the United States or Europe." You seriously underestimate the compassion of Americans and European people. Private citizens in the US and Europe rush in with tons of aid anytime a disaster strikes the Indian subcontinent. Why do they do this? Compassion.

Somewhat more on topic...It would be trivial for anyone to commit a terrorist act on trains in the US. Details regarding trains, schedules, etc. are not necessary. I don't understand why it is hard for folks to understand that terrorism is easy. Any reasonably bright person can figure out how to kill many people at once and get away with it. You can't stop hateful people from doing this. The answer is to help them get beyond their hate by education, etc.

No, I understand compassion completely. BTW, the idea that remote events have no relevance to the US or Europe is obvious sarcasm. India and Pakistan have been on the verge of war several times, extremists in Bali killed a significant number of people hoping to pick off a few Americans, etc.

What I don't understand is the seemingly universal attitude, especially among photographers, that terrorism is either not a problem or is somebody else's problem. The idea that trespassing and detailing methods of avoiding security and insisting on being allowed to distract security officers is somehow appropriate becuase one has a camera is ludicrous. I know, you might be there to get the next prize winning shot of the aftermath.

So short of burning every map out there how exactly do you keep this info secret?

Don't give the authorities any ideas.

The bottom line is that terrorists could target ANYTHING. So telling people that they can't photograph certain things, e.g., harbors and planes, is ludicrous. Would preventing tourists from photographing the WTC or Pentagon, or say, Logan Airport, have prevented those attacks?

That the authorities here are so panicky and clueless that they would resort to grasping at straws this way is FAR scarier than Al Quaeda!

Craig: Even though your comment was sarcasm, it was crap because it reinforced a largely undeserved stereotype. Nobody needs this.

I hadn't heard that Americans were the target of the Bali attack? How did you learn this?

The real point is that chasing away railfans because they might be aiding terrorists is stupid beyond belief. Do you really think that terrorists need information like this is kills Americans? If killing Americans is the goal, don't you think they are smart enough to park a truck of Oklahoma City exposives next to rain trestle and blow it up when an Amtrak train is crossing it? Can't you see how easy it is to kill people? Let's say you don't like this method. Then acquire 20 varmit rifles at a gun show and give them to 20 crazies and have them pick off folks in 20 different cities. Look at the havoc in Washington DC. The media detailed the killers methods to the point that it could be reproduced by any pyscho with decent vision, a car, and $500.

Can't you see that we can't stop these attacks without becoming a police state?

Part of the above post should have read "information like this to kill Americans?"

The point I've been making about attacks on trains is that the railroad it self, or the bridges, are seldom the target. A destroyed bridge is no cause of panic. Usually, the target is a passenger train and organizing such an attack is no rocket science. You board the train with a bomb; you get down at some station, "forgetting" your packages behind; you're already far when the bomb explodes. The only part that requires some think is actually getting or making the bomb.

Chris and Peter are right. Killing a lot of people is very easy if you really want to. Sweeping "security" measures like the one described above are extremely unlikely to catch or even to bother actual terrorists. They are a real bother to lots of people who don't deserve it, though.

Security guards are becomeing a real nuisance and it seems there's one behind each tree, nowadays. Ever noticed how they bar you access to lots of place where you could go a few years ago. Freedom of movement has suffred a lot in the last 20 years, mostly for insurrance and liability reasons, I suspect. I hate it when insurrance companies ultimately decide what my rights ought to be.

Hi,

I live currently in Israel. I can go take photos of railroad if I want; if I want to take photo at the station, I will have to show my bag at the entrance, and it is best for me to say I want to take photos. Yes obviously, from the (too abundant) info I read in the papers, obviously terrorists take information before doing their horrors: lots have been caught so, before the attack. My opinion is to cooperate with the police force and to explain what you do: it cannot hurt.

Regards,

Olivier.

The last time there was a war in Afghanistan the US did "burn every map out there." I was organising a trip to northern Pakistan at the time, and the 1:250000 series that covers the World mysteriously developed holes in its coverage that just happened to coincide with all the places relevant to the Afghan war. How very odd.

I agree with those who say posession of a camera doesn't entitle you to do whatever you want. I also agree with those who say harassing railfans isn't going to solve anything.

It is very hard to tell from declassified information if the US has been extraordinarily successful or extraordinarily lucky in combating domestic terrorism prior to Oklahoma. Either way, the front line law enforcement and security folk have no experience of dealing with a terrorist threat, and no real feel for what is appropriate and what is effective. I'm certainly not saying that the British Special Branch or the German and Italian anti-terrorist police are models of ublemished probity, but instincts and reactions that are deeply ingrained in, say, a Belfast policeman will take a lot of time and training to instill into your average mid-west railway guard.

I am a strong supporter of civil liberties, and I think the USA is currently creating counterproductive embarrassments at least on the level of the Japanese internments of WWII and the idiotic CIA campaign against Castro. But that doesn't mean nothing has changed.

Phillipe, you are too absolutist. Even suicidal terrorists want to beleive that their plan will work, and evading surveillance on the way to the scene of the crime is an essential part of that. One thing that was learned in combating the Red Brigades, the IRA and others is that constant, low-level surveillance does work surprisingly well, especially if people know they are being watched. Yes, you need to find a balance, but not doing anything different isn't it.

Agreed. Most of the objections to surveillance and questioning as being not effective tools seems to be based on the idea that the terrorists always possess James Bondish skills and coolth.

That "No battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy" is what's driving this. The object is to increase the probability of contact wherever possible. That doesn't bode well for the survival of the out of shape, talent, and practice mall security guard who actually manages to blunder into a clue, but with some luck the noise will alert some people who know which end the bullets emerge from.

And no, I don't enjoy the gummint peering over my shoulder or being hassled at all.

Sigh.

"What's next? obtaining a signed release-form from each engine?"

Actually, the railroads did allow you to do that in the old days. You could sign a release and they'd let you wander around in yards, shops, etc. and take pictures of whatever you want. Those days are long gone.

Most railfans would LOVE to be able to sign a release form!

In recent months, three amatuer photographers were detained in the Philadelphia area. Two, working together, were photographing a sunset over a local oil refinery. They were held for hours and not allowed to phone anyone. No where is it written that you can't take photos of refineries. They were released, obtained legal counsel, and had a quick settlement with the City of Philadelphia and our police department.

Another young guy liked to take photos of police cars. Well, I guess they're on the list of forbidden subjects too. He was held and questioned, and finally released. In his case, he was of Middle Eastern origin, so that seemed to arouse suspiscion (somewhat understandable in today's political climate).

Looks like this age of terrorism is killing our freedom to photograph anything that may be considered sensitive. This is sad. What are we to do, go to the local police station and ask for a list of subjects that are now off limits?

The washington post is the worst newspaper ever.

Sometime ago they published a completely lie about the elections in Brazil (my country), and suggested some untrue relationships between the president and terrorism groups.

Don't read it.

"Another young guy liked to take photos of police cars. Well, I guess they're on the list of forbidden subjects too."

I wonder if school buses are forbidden now as well. I know a lot of people (some of them school bus drivers, others who just like school buses and buses in general) who love to photograph school buses. Never caused any problems in the past, but now...

Darn, I just shot a roll of a Intercoastal Waterway tug boat readying a group of barges for transport. Hope the FBI don't catch on that the barges were 'empty' of the rocks they were loaded with....

:) in NW Florida

It's easier to harass citizens than to find terrorists. Your tax dollars at work. (Please note that Grlmo. El Busho has not yet found the Al Queda leadership.)

I blame it all on PBS. Just this morning they had this show making old trains look cool. How could they? Right now an impressionable young child is asking daddy to go see the trains. PBS is brainwashing them.

BTW some nice old B&W pictures of trains.

To Chris Hawkins (USA, Ohio). Re targeting americans in Bali Bombing.

This was supposedly something that one of the suspects said was the aim of bombing the nightclub. Is it true? I am not sure. I never put absolute faith in the media. Anyway, I believe that the same person didn't seem to mind killing other nationalities (such as Australian, as I am).

As for the rest of the discussion, don't break the law, If you do trespass, expect to be rightfully arrested. If you don't trespass and are arrested, make sure you kick up a stink about it.

Finally, aren't we all used to being under constant surveillance in shopping malls etc anyway? there are video cameras everywhere. So long as they stay out of my home, I am OK.

The news media have broadcast discussions of the intentions of the Bali murderers. Here's one article which discusses targeting Americans. http://asia.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/11/12/bali.investigation/ Given that the issues wracking the Indian subcontinent, driving it to the brink of nuclear war on several occasions, can't be separated from the issues that are driving sectarian and political violence in other parts of Asia, the Middle East and indeed, most of the world, hypersensitivity to satire seems misplaced at best. The whole point is you can't ignore terrorism nor expect that it is solely the province of some distant land. Asserting that trains and terror or sabotage are the stuff of World War II movies shows is not funny and can't be excused out of innocence.

Photographers were up in arms over the weak excuses and evasions offered by a photographer who found damaging a national treasure to be acceptable behavior in that it met his photographic objectives. Why? Some clearly out of outrage over the callous behavior but many over the expectations that the vast majority of photographers might expect tightened restrictions on access, working groups, tours, etc.

The articles that sparked these howls of anguish about restrictions on railfanning were pretty one-sided and did little to present the issues from the viewpoint of security concerns or the railroads. When one considers the nature of many of the materials carried by trains (and other shipping methods) and the potential environmental impacts (including injuries and deaths) from a catastrophic release in a population center, or the economic impacts that might be incurred from severing a major rail line or several lines, it hardly seems unreasonable that security measures are being stepped up.

Casual security and an apparent inability to connect multiple small indicators seems to have led to the 9/11 attacks being possible. That more attention is being paid to trespassers around railroads and other sensitive industries shouldn't be surprising. Railfans can be eccentric, I know, I am a fan. But my background also includes time overseas with the military and working in classified defense industries. I know what kind of information can be useful, and the kinds of methods used to exploit vulnerable individuals and industries. Ralfans complain of drawing the attention of law enforcement and railroad security. What's strange is that they seem so surprised. Railroads are vulnerable. Sitting adjacent to a rail facility, and often this involves trespassing, even if innocuous and not dangerous, gathering information on schedules, recording cryptic information, using scanners and timetables, trading information with others and often to strangers over the internet is suspicious. When you consider that fan sites give definitive directions to remote locations, frequencies and the like, give suggestions on how to avoid security, how to dress and act to blend in or reduce the potential for scrutiny, it's a little hard to be sympathetic.

Those paranoids do a better job than Osama ever could. How many people gave their lives so others could benefit from freedom and liberty? Now everything is being turned back. Have those sacrifices been in vain?

"You seriously underestimate the compassion of Americans and European people. Private citizens in the US and Europe rush in with tons of aid anytime a disaster strikes the Indian subcontinent. Why do they do this? Compassion."

European Nations contribute an average of 9 to 17 times more per capita than the US. Foreign Aid is not by any means the strongest point in American politics.

The overall point I’m trying to make is that hassling rail fans is unproductive. Our law enforcement personnel should be directed toward interviewing young and middle-aged people of Arab decent. This is politically incorrect, but the current crop of terrorists are coming from this population group and peaceful Arabs may be quite willing to help the authorities. Hassling white, Asian, and black rail fans doesn’t make any sense at all. Let me be clear that I realize that 99+% of Arabs living in the US are peaceful law abiding citizens who are as disgusted by the acts of the terrorists as non-Arabs. Perhaps more so.

Regarding the interviews, I’m not talking about the John Ashcroft style of holding uncharged people in jail for months at a time. I’m talking about one mandatory 2-hour maximum interview in which the interviewee has legal counsel present. If nothing of interest is found, the person walks away and doesn’t have to come back unless subsequent evidence makes it appropriate.

Craig: I concede that Americans were a target (perhaps the primary target) of the Bali bombing. I agree that trespassers should be arrested. Also, giving tips on how to avoid railroad security or scrutiny and giving detailed information on the internet regarding rail operations is stupid, perhaps criminally stupid. None of this is the point. The point is chasing off rail fans is wrongheaded. I am unaware that anyone asserted that trains are not subject to terrorist attacks. They certainly are. The point is that you can’t stop an attack. As a Ph.D. chemist currently working in industry I do have a great deal of knowledge regarding the types of materials carried by rail. I understand in detail the damage that blowing up a train carrying these materials could cause. However, you don’t need advanced knowledge to target the most damaging trains. The contents are often printed on the side of the railcars for safety reasons and information regarding toxicity is readily available.

If trains were eliminated at potential terrorist targets, you still can’t stop terrorists. (I realize this you can’t eliminate trains as targets.) Tractor-trailers carry the same materials as trains and travel on high traffic interstates through or around major cities. Again, the contents are often described on the sides of the trailers for safety reasons. It would be a trivial matter to blow them up during rush hour.

Roberto: Please cite a reference to substantiate your remark regarding per capita charity. I’m not saying you are wrong, I just want documentation.

Chris,

The top 17:1 can be found in this CNN interview with Jimmy Carter. http://www-cgi.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/11/15/carter.interview/

("For every time an American gives a dollar, a citizen of Norway gives $17," he said.").

Actually the same interview says something around 4:1 (European country:US) in average. I don't know from where I had the "9:1". Anyway, if we weight each country's gross domestic product this number would be even more impressive.

Chris, I agree with you entirely about how harassing railfans can only be counterproductive. It's sad the FBI and other law enforcement types didn't discreetly try to enlist their help instead. If you wanted to create an army of watchers with an acute sense for anything unusual it's hard to think of a more appropriate crew.

MI5/MI6 is thought to have more than one anorac for issue to staff should it be neccessary to conduct surveillance on a station platform :-)

I can't agree with you about your proposal to round up and interview people of Arab descent - although I believe you entirely when you say you are not racist. Were the flight instructors who trained the 9/11 bombers of arab descent? Concentrating resources on the cliches only makes it easier for the terrorists to evade detection. True security is an attitude, not an imposition.

If you are not comfortable answering questions about why you are there and what you are doing then don't do it. I for one am more than willing to explain to any law enforcement official my reasons for being wherever I am. The U.S. has become a haven for spoiled brats that feel like they don't have to answer to anyone for anything. Terrorists are not the brightest bulbs in the box, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out that several have been stopped prior to their terrorist acts when the were observing their targets. I welcome the increased security. The constant arguement that it is approaching Macarthyism or Naziism is equally as much a scare tactic.

Because we can't regulate information about McDonalds restaurants does not mean that we should allow the same unfettered access to harbors and train stations and airports and nuclear power plants. Instead of throwing in the towel and giving up everything, lets stop what we can.

Please, do not ask, I will not supply any info as to location, time of day, etc.

I do not have a problem with being asked or even searched by police if I seem somewhat suspiciuos. But there is a limit to all this madness. terrorism is real, and I have come to accept that. But now we are being asked to hide in fear because there MAY be an attack looming. How many of our liberties will be taken away before we say no more. Not long ago the talk of someone living out in the desert with a bomb shelter in their basement seemed ridiculous, now some peple are asking if there is a three bedroom model. If you want to talk terrorism in America just look at the front page of your local newspaper. It just has a different name, crime.

Rolando: Thanks for the reference. Ouch! We need to do better.

“If you are not comfortable answering questions about why you are there and what you are doing then don't do it. I for one am more than willing to explain to any law enforcement official my reasons for being wherever I am. The U.S. has become a haven for spoiled brats that feel like they don't have to answer to anyone for anything.” – Scott Bulger

Scott: No one is complaining about law enforcement asking who you are and why you are there. BTW.. if you live in the US, feel free to leave this “haven for spoiled brats.” You may also wish to read the Amendment IV of the US Constitution. Here it is...

“Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Scott: Now contrast Amendment IV with the behavior below from the article linked at the top of the page. “Over the next five hours, Whitenight -- who works for the police department in nearby Arlington, Tex. -- identified himself to the officers. Then he identified himself to the officers' supervisor, then a detective from a terrorism task force, then the FBI. They seized his trainspotter's notebook and grilled him about every mark and note in it. They searched his car and took photos of it, inside and out. Finally, he had to sign a form agreeing never to return to the location known as Tower 55.”

To my way of thinking, to hold an employee of a police department and grill him for 5 hours because he was taking notes on trains is an unreasonable seizure of him. Does your interpretation of Amendment IV differ from mine? Do you think Amendment IV should be suspended in this time of struggle? These freedoms are one of the things that make America a great nation. I will vigorous fight any and all who try to deprive me of the rights set forth in the Constitution. Will you? Rolling over and allowing governmental officials to take our rights from us is very unpatriotic.

Roberto: I apologize for mispelling your name.

I guess it boils down to the interpretation of the word "unreasonable". Don't you think the founding fathers used such an ambigous word so that it could be interpreted differently based on the times and the situation? or did they just not know where to draw the line?

Yes, I am an American, born and raised here, served my country in the military, and I am not leaving. he entire like it or leave it argument is very 6th grade. Work from within for change. I don't believe in the "slipery slope" theory.

Scott: Do you think it was appropriate to hold the railfan for 5 hours?

Yes, if that is how long it took to satisfy the authorities.

I actually believe that, under current law, they could have held him for 24 hours if they wanted too.

Hello!!! T his guy worked for the police. And I suppose you think it was OK to make him sign a form agreeing never to return to the location known as Tower 55.Sounds to me like you’ve never gotten past the blind obedience to authority BS that you learned in the military. And that my fellow American is very 6th grade thinking!

(PS. I do understand the military's policy on when you don't have to obey an order.)

What does it matter who he worked for? Police don't break the law? Sounds to me like that is the whole crux of your arguement, that we can't trust the authorities.

So he signs the agreement not to go back, how does that hurt him? How does taking photos of the inside and outside of his car scar him for life? How does asking him about the notes in his little book upset the balance of power? If it bothers him that much I am sure he can challenge it in court and some card carrying member of the ACLU will represent him pro bono. You see, thats the difference, we can challenge it in court. He might even find a judge that will agree with him, but I wouldn't count on it nowadays.

My opinion has nothing to do with blind obedience military BS, (spoken like a true complainer) and everything to do ith a healthy respect that the people we choose to lead our country do so with quite a bit more information than the average citizen has at their disposal, and the absolute knowledge that much more is really happening than the public is made aware of or needs to know.

I don't have a problem with the fact that he was questioned... but I find it a bit odd that the cop felt the need to call his supervisor, and the supervisor called the terrorism task force, and the terrorism task force called the FBI. Isn't that taking it a little too far?

Despite the fact that the whole thing is "in the interest of national security," I'd be pretty irritated if I had been detained for 5 hours. Probably not irritated enough to go to court, but very irritated nonetheless. Now, if they had handcuffed him and taken him to jail and held him while they searched his house and ran background checks, I think that would be worth going to court.

Frankly, I would just feel a whole hell of a lot safer if the law enforcement officials spent their time monitoring the rail yards after dark, looking for people who might actually be attempting to tamper with a rail car, rather than focusing their energy on railfans who just sit on the sidelines taking pictures in broad daylight. There are SO MANY pictures of rail equipment, bridges, yards, stations, etc. on the internet that I'm not sure if a terrorist would even NEED to go and do his own photography.

*So he signs the agreement not to go back, how does that hurt him?*

surely you are kidding?

"So he signs the agreement not to go back, how does that hurt him?"

It hurts him because it was his favorite place to enjoy a hobby that doesn't harm anyone or anything. I'd be devastated if I was told that I could never return to my favorite railfanning areas. I abide by the rule of "Take only pictures, leave only footprints." I don't do anything to endanger myself or anyone else. I want to combat terrorism just as much as anybody else does, but if it gets to the point where the only thing I can do is lock myself in my basement and watch old train videos, freedom becomes a moot point.

No, I'm not kidding. How does it really hurt him? So he can't go back there again. Oh my goodness. Get the crying towels. There surely are many other train yards around that he can go to. Chances are there was a very good reason for him not going back again, maybe they transport dangerous chemicals, nuclear waste, military material....who knows. You don't need to be doing it intentionally to assist a terrorist, and the public does not need to be privy to every little detail.

I think freedom lies much more in being able to get on a plane with your children and take them to Disneyland without being flown into an office building. No one wants to be locked in their basements, but sacrifices will need to be made. The number one job of government is to protect the public, not provide them with hobbies.

"I think freedom lies much more in being able to get on a plane with your children and take them to Disneyland without being flown into an office building."

Fair enough. I'm sure you won't mind when the Disneyland security guards strip-search your wife and children before allowing them into the facility. All in the name of safety, of course.

(Of course, the above scenario only applies if you appear to be of Middle Eastern descent; if your family is white, you're all set.)

A strip search...hmmm, let me think about that. How about instead we go with the least intrusive act that still provides the safety we want. I have no problem with passing through metal detectors, having my bags searched, I'll even take of my shoes...big deal, and my family and I are all caucasion.

Scott: Your failure to grasp the importance of enforcing the 4th amendment is bizarre. Do you recall the quote from Ben Franklin that Keith posted earlier? I suppose Franklin was one of the “spoiled brats” you mentioned.

“How about instead we go with the least intrusive act that still provides the safety we want.” Finally we agree. Do you really believe that story in the link is an example of behavior that is not intrusive and provides the safety we want? If so, you have no common sense.

Of course not, anyone who doesn't agree with Chris must have no common sense. I should have realized that earlier.

Please enlighten me - define "unreasonable" as it pertains to our discussion.

BTW, Franklin was a drunk.