[csa]

I don't feel bad for him, the photo wasn't going to be used anyway.

Sorry; but I do feel sorry for him, as no one deserves to be attacked, and their equipment destroyed!

[MikeD]

I can't even comprehend why someone would spend the time arguing this. I see no other point for you to continue your comments other than to derail this post to make the post about you. That is what it feels like, and I find it very odd.

Back to what the post is about - to the op again, very sorry this happened to your nephew and I hope they find the attackers.

I think everyone is sorry it happened. I think some feel they have some sort of god given right to photograph anyone any time under any circumstances- it's free speech after all . Maybe the woman was morning the loss of a loved one you don't know what her circumstances were.. I also see no difference in your posts than Murfy's except you have a different view point you take the paparazzi side. Getting beat up isn't right, nor is his refusal to honor her request. If someone wants to be left alone, leave them alone, don't take their picture. Most people love to have their picture taken so move on make someone happy.

[bakerking31]

I can't even comprehend why someone would spend the time arguing this. I see no other point for you to continue your comments other than to derail this post to make the post about you. That is what it feels like, and I find it very odd.

Back to what the post is about - to the op again, very sorry this happened to your nephew and I hope they find the attackers.

Interesting deflection. Nothing I've said is about me, it's about the article which was linked to. If you do not like my view on it that's fine.

I spend time arguing this because it makes the whole photography community look bad when people don't show each other respect. In this case, neither side showed any respect for the others wishes and it ended in violence.


For what it's worth. I hope they find the people responsible. I don't think they acted appropriately and they should be prosecuted.

[bxf]

So if I go to Oakland and start yelling racist comments and get beat up, would you be surprised when no one defends me?

This is not the same. Such an action is inherently and intentionally offensive. Taking photos in a public place is not.

With some people demonstrating opinions so different from those of others, I sometimes wonder how it is that there is only one human species...

[monochrome]

The reaction of these people is reminiscent of a remote, indigenous tribe. Once it was discovered that a photograph reproduces one's image, which was thought akin to stealing one's soul, the story goes, the photographer was executed.

I suppose it isn't called 'taking' a photograph for nothing.

[Kerrowdown]

Press Photographer attacked in So California

I truly hope that the suspects are apprehended and that highest possible charges and sentences are applied to them.

Irrespective of the situation, one cannot tolerate such violent behaviour towards another.

[Murfy]

I spend time arguing this because it makes the whole photography community look bad when people don't show each other respect. In this case, neither side showed any respect for the others wishes and it ended in violence.


For what it's worth. I hope they find the people responsible. I don't think they acted appropriately and they should be prosecuted.

I understand the your second paragraph and am willing to see both sides, however bringing it up in the post of a family member I still feel is not the appropriate time. I think this discussion could have merit, if it was made in a new post, or in a class (maybe in a college or local community college) or topic of conversation that didn't start about a family member getting attacked. There is a time and place for things, and more people would be apt to see both sides if it didn't come off as victim blaming because of where it was posted.

If you do not like my view on it that's fine.

I reread this a few times - are you giving me permission to disagree with you? Isn't not agreeing with people kind of a given in life?

[UncleVanya]

Food for thought:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-love-and-war/201311/why-do-we-blame-victims

[crewl1]

I posted this to stimulate the discussion and also as a warning that there are those out there who believe violence is a justified response.
I practice street photography on occasion and have deleted photos when requested.
Thank you to those who posted get well wishes.
David wears his credentials when working.
The equipment is owned by his employer.
If you would like to see some of his work follow this link and use the images tab.
Let me google that for you
(Sorry about the link used it I didn't know how to save the images search result on my phone)

[jawsy]

Thank you to those who posted get well wishes.

I genuinely hope he gets back to work and can put this behind him. Assaulting people who are simply doing their job sickens me, irrespective as to what their career path is. It's a disgusting attack on a person's livelihood and sense of well being.

[Murfy]

I posted this to stimulate the discussion and also as a warning that there are those out there who believe violence is a justified response.
I practice street photography on occasion and have deleted photos when requested.
Thank you to those who posted get well wishes.
David wears his credentials when working.
The equipment is owned by his employer.
If you would like to see some of his work follow this link and use the images tab.
Let me google that for you
(Sorry about the link used it I didn't know how to save the images search result on my phone)

Your link shows a follow up article Daily Press editor announces reward in photographer assault case - News - VVdailypress.com - Victorville, CA
Glad to see there is a reward being offered, and it's being offered by the editor himself.

[DeadJohn]

So if I go to Oakland and start yelling racist comments and get beat up, would you be surprised when no one defends me?

Both are examples of free speech ... In both cases the person didn't break the law.

There was more than once where the photographer could have ended the incident and he choose to push the issue with the wrong people. I don't feel bad for him, the photo wasn't going to be used anyway. If I was his boss I would have fired him for this. A photo of a person feeding a duck isn't worth bad press

You are advocating that it's okay to beat people up for doing something that annoys you. I cant tell whether you are trolling, merely inarticulate, or a felon.

[bakerking31]

You are advocating that it's okay to beat people up for doing something that annoys you. I cant tell whether you are trolling, merely inarticulate, or a felon.

I am glad you are inarticulate enough you must resort to calling me a felon. I never said what the two people did was ok, in fact I condoned their actions.

Actually that quote was making the point that just because you can do something doesn't always mean you should. What is a legal right doesn't make you invincible. Sometimes people should take some responsibility for their part in conflicts. In this case the photographer could have easily deescalated the situation numerous times but instead he added to the problem. Its not 100% his fault, not even 10%, and he had the full legal right to do what he did. Just like in my example I would have the full legal right to go to Oakland and yell racist comments, both have the potential for consequences by those who are willing to break the law.

[UncleVanya]

... in fact I condoned their actions.

I hope this is a typo. Condoned means to accept, allow or approve...
I think you meant condemned which is to express complete disapproval of. If that's what you meant - I don't think you have actually done that. I think you have legitimized it to a degree while expressing some disapproval. I don't think you have completely disapproved which would remove the blame the victim component. Expressing that the victim had fault in this takes away from any disapproval you express. It removes some of the blame and sets up a victim shaming.

[csa]

I hope this is a typo. Condoned means to accept, allow or approve...
I think you meant condemned which is to express complete disapproval of. If that's what you meant - I don't think you have actually done that. I think you have legitimized it to a degree while expressing some disapproval. I don't think you have completely disapproved which would remove the blame the victim component. Expressing that the victim had fault in this takes away from any disapproval you express. It removes some of the blame and sets up a victim shaming.

Plus 1.

Yes, condoned:verb: condone; 3rd person present: condones; past tense: condoned; past participle: condoned; gerund or present participle: condoning

1. accept and allow (behavior that is considered morally wrong or offensive) to continue.