No photographs allowed

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 08:44:37 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/12/2011 11:07 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:06:06 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 9/12/2011 11:23 AM, tony cooper wrote:

snip
I did make the point, though, that if someone asks me not to
photograph them I usually comply. Not always. If they ask with
attitude as this guy did, then it's another story.


Sorry Tony I misunderstood what you said.
Here in NY, especially in come of the ethnic neighborhoods some people
get really upset at the sight of anyone with a camera. Attitude or not,
I just don't think it's right to make someone uncomfortable, just for my
own pleasure.

I have a couple of series of shots I took at a wholesale farmer's
market where all of the subjects were Mexicans. These are people who
bring in fruit and vegetables and sell it people who run small
groceries and roadside stands.

I didn't ask anyone's permission, but I held up the camera and kinda
gestured that I was taking photos. There were a *lot* of wave-offs
that day, but some willing subjects.

I thought the wave-offs and turn-away-quicklies were about
undocumented people, but one stall owner explained the fear was that I
was from the state and photographing them making unreported income.

My favorites from those series a

http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/...4_tra6R-X3.jpg

Interesting shot. You have captured her exhaustion. There is something
bothering me about her skin tones. Did you try some color mapping?

No, I shot RAW, opened in Photoshop, adjusted Levels and
Shadows/Highlights, boosted Contrast, and saved as a .jpg. All global
adjustments, and my usual post-processing technique. I don't even
know how to do color mapping.

I suspect the skin appearance has something to do with the filtered
light from the tree (seen on the right of the image) that shades her.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Charles E. Hardwidge" wrote in message
...
"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"dadiOH" wrote in message
...

Regardless, if someone doesn't want there picture taken I think their
wishes should be respected. YMMV

Ture, but either lying or claiming something due to one's ignorance
doesn't help one's case.

Excuse the Buddhist in me stepping in: this is irrelevant. Mere words
and
laws whether true or not at just "stuff" without a causal link. They
are just words and laws - fresh air.

Can the Buddhist in you explain exactly what in my post you consider to
be irrelevant?

Peter, the "Charles E. Hardwidge" is a well-known troll, and best ignored.

Cheers,
David

On 9/13/2011 11:34 AM, David J Taylor wrote:

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Charles E. Hardwidge" wrote in message
...
"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"dadiOH" wrote in message
...

Regardless, if someone doesn't want there picture taken I think their
wishes should be respected. YMMV

Ture, but either lying or claiming something due to one's ignorance
doesn't help one's case.

Excuse the Buddhist in me stepping in: this is irrelevant. Mere words
and
laws whether true or not at just "stuff" without a causal link. They
are just words and laws - fresh air.

Can the Buddhist in you explain exactly what in my post you consider
to be irrelevant?

Peter, the "Charles E. Hardwidge" is a well-known troll, and best ignored.

Cheers,
David

For the most part his postings are not at all Zen.

OT A Buddhist walked up to a hot dag stand and to the vendor to "make me
one with everything."

--
Peter

On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:47:54 -0400, PeterN wrote:

On 9/13/2011 11:34 AM, David J Taylor wrote:

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Charles E. Hardwidge" wrote in message
...
"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"dadiOH" wrote in message
...

Regardless, if someone doesn't want there picture taken I think their
wishes should be respected. YMMV

Ture, but either lying or claiming something due to one's ignorance
doesn't help one's case.

Excuse the Buddhist in me stepping in: this is irrelevant. Mere words
and
laws whether true or not at just "stuff" without a causal link. They
are just words and laws - fresh air.

Can the Buddhist in you explain exactly what in my post you consider
to be irrelevant?

Peter, the "Charles E. Hardwidge" is a well-known troll, and best ignored.

Cheers,
David

For the most part his postings are not at all Zen.

OT A Buddhist walked up to a hot dag stand and to the vendor to "make me
one with everything."

"Woman aviator fly upside down she have crack-up"

On 9/12/2011 9:28 AM, Savageduck wrote:

Traditional & modified open carry is permitted in many states, and there
are usually clear rules to the way "Open carry" is implemented in each
of the states which allow it. In California for example, "open carry" is
permitted, but to remain within the law the gun has to be worn clearly
visible and UNLOADED.


California has just passed a bill outlawing open carry of all handguns,
even unloaded ones.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_18855788


Senate passes ban on open carry of unloaded guns
The Associated Press
Posted: 09/08/2011 06:14:42 PM PDT
Updated: 09/08/2011 06:14:48 PM PDT

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—The state Senate has approved a bill that would
prohibit openly carrying unloaded handguns in public, a practice that
has gained in popularity among some gun activists.

Democratic Sen. Kevin de Leon of Los Angeles says open-carry
demonstrations frighten onlookers and create confrontations with police
who must respond to complaints.

AB144 would make it a misdemeanor to carry an exposed gun in a public
place, street or vehicle, with exceptions for hunting and shooting events.

The bill was approved on a 21-18 vote Thursday, but returns to the
Assembly for a final vote on amendments. The measure was supported by
law enforcement groups, but opposed by Republican lawmakers.

Republican Sen. Joel Anderson of La Mesa says the bill risks turning
"law-abiding citizens into criminals."

--
Dale G Elhardt
Cypress Ca
I welcome change. But I prefer bills.
http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=7702

On 2011-09-13 10:13:29 -0700, the Legend of LAX said:

On 9/12/2011 9:28 AM, Savageduck wrote:

Traditional & modified open carry is permitted in many states, and there
are usually clear rules to the way "Open carry" is implemented in each
of the states which allow it. In California for example, "open carry" is
permitted, but to remain within the law the gun has to be worn clearly
visible and UNLOADED.


California has just passed a bill outlawing open carry of all handguns,
even unloaded ones.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_18855788


Senate passes ban on open carry of unloaded guns
The Associated Press
Posted: 09/08/2011 06:14:42 PM PDT
Updated: 09/08/2011 06:14:48 PM PDT

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—The state Senate has approved a bill that would
prohibit openly carrying unloaded handguns in public, a practice that
has gained in popularity among some gun activists.

Democratic Sen. Kevin de Leon of Los Angeles says open-carry
demonstrations frighten onlookers and create confrontations with police
who must respond to complaints.

AB144 would make it a misdemeanor to carry an exposed gun in a public
place, street or vehicle, with exceptions for hunting and shooting
events.

The bill was approved on a 21-18 vote Thursday, but returns to the
Assembly for a final vote on amendments. The measure was supported by
law enforcement groups, but opposed by Republican lawmakers.

Republican Sen. Joel Anderson of La Mesa says the bill risks turning
"law-abiding citizens into criminals."

Well I guess the times change once the final vote is returned.

That is certainly going to put a crimp on the gun toting denizens of
San Francisco Starbucks. Now the "open carry" laws in California are
going to resemble those in Florida.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

"David J Taylor" wrote in message
...

"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Charles E. Hardwidge" wrote in message
...
"Pete Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"dadiOH" wrote in message
...

Regardless, if someone doesn't want there picture taken I think their
wishes should be respected. YMMV

Ture, but either lying or claiming something due to one's ignorance
doesn't help one's case.

Excuse the Buddhist in me stepping in: this is irrelevant. Mere words and
laws whether true or not at just "stuff" without a causal link. They are
just words and laws - fresh air.

Can the Buddhist in you explain exactly what in my post you consider to be
irrelevant?

Peter, the "Charles E. Hardwidge" is a well-known troll, and best ignored.

Cheers,
David

Point taken. Guess I should have known that from my reading in this group.

Savageduck writes:

On 2011-09-12 22:11:21 -0700, David Dyer-Bennet said:

I don't have a Florida CCW; though I've signed people off as qualified
to get one (I was MN carry permit instructor for a while, and also got
Utah certification to teach a combined MN/UT/FL course; FL just lets me
sign off on a fairly general letter for out-of-state people applying for
an FL permit).

Unfortunately MN is one of the states without mutual CCW reciprocity
with Florida.

Yeah. Despite having taught for them, I haven't had a Florida or Utah
permit. I don't travel enough for it to be a big deal, and the places
I'm actually more interested in traveling it wouldn't help (CA, MA, IL,
NY). Well, maybe at least IL will get fixed. WI, my neighbor, is
getting fixed, though I haven't seen anything on reciprocity.

In California a gun on the hip, uncovered is consider open carry, but
must be unloaded. That has led to some of the strange scenes in San
Francisco Starbucks with groups of open carry protagonists sipping
coffee while wearing unloaded handguns.

That one I remember from local news.

There are some California Counties and municipalities which restrict
and forbid open carry. A stroll down Hollywood Boulevard with a
visible firearm on your hip would for example gain you the attention
of LA's finest.

It's a big state; the state preemption concept makes more sense in
smaller ones.

Personally as a retired LEO I have 50 state CCW privilege.

Nice for you :-) .

...and here we are ;-)
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/135613117

Ah, a 1911 person.

While I wouldn't advise you (though we could no doubt debate it
amusingly if we were both in the mood), I did advise students (who were
mostly not really that familiar with handling firearms) that a
single-action auto wasn't a very good choice for carry for most people.
I'm amazed at how many people seemed to have trouble with the
manual-of-arms for their weapon in the (extremely lenient) "timed"
shooting qualification we used. People pass just fine with a revolver
and a pile of loose cartridges (have to reload in the middle; required
even if your magazine is big), but people frequently screwed up just
handling a semi-auto. Strange to me; but my stress reactions don't run
that way, and I don't find tests stressful.

Nice 1911, and nice holster, anyway.

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...

Nice 1911, and nice holster, anyway.

It can't be a Real American Gun (TM) because it doesn't have "Made in China"
stamped on it. :-p

--
Charles E. Hardwidge

On 2011-09-13 13:17:42 -0700, David Dyer-Bennet said:

Savageduck writes:

On 2011-09-12 22:11:21 -0700, David Dyer-Bennet said:

I don't have a Florida CCW; though I've signed people off as qualified
to get one (I was MN carry permit instructor for a while, and also got
Utah certification to teach a combined MN/UT/FL course; FL just lets me
sign off on a fairly general letter for out-of-state people applying for
an FL permit).

Unfortunately MN is one of the states without mutual CCW reciprocity
with Florida.

Yeah. Despite having taught for them, I haven't had a Florida or Utah
permit. I don't travel enough for it to be a big deal, and the places
I'm actually more interested in traveling it wouldn't help (CA, MA, IL,
NY). Well, maybe at least IL will get fixed. WI, my neighbor, is
getting fixed, though I haven't seen anything on reciprocity.

In California a gun on the hip, uncovered is consider open carry, but
must be unloaded. That has led to some of the strange scenes in San
Francisco Starbucks with groups of open carry protagonists sipping
coffee while wearing unloaded handguns.

That one I remember from local news.

There are some California Counties and municipalities which restrict
and forbid open carry. A stroll down Hollywood Boulevard with a
visible firearm on your hip would for example gain you the attention
of LA's finest.

It's a big state; the state preemption concept makes more sense in
smaller ones.

Personally as a retired LEO I have 50 state CCW privilege.

Nice for you :-) .

...and here we are ;-)
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/image/135613117

Ah, a 1911 person.

While I wouldn't advise you (though we could no doubt debate it
amusingly if we were both in the mood), I did advise students (who were
mostly not really that familiar with handling firearms) that a
single-action auto wasn't a very good choice for carry for most people.
I'm amazed at how many people seemed to have trouble with the
manual-of-arms for their weapon in the (extremely lenient) "timed"
shooting qualification we used. People pass just fine with a revolver
and a pile of loose cartridges (have to reload in the middle; required
even if your magazine is big), but people frequently screwed up just
handling a semi-auto. Strange to me; but my stress reactions don't run
that way, and I don't find tests stressful.

Nice 1911, and nice holster, anyway.

Anybody who does not have a good training history with a 1911 is best
advised to steer clear for carry purposes.
It is definitely not safe for somebody unfamiliar with the concept of
carrying "cocked & locked". For those without the time and available
ammo to run the drills, a better option is undoubtably a DA revolver,
or DOA auto.
I have years of drills and thousands of rounds down range behind me
with many pistol types, including various 1911's.

We also had S&W M10's, & S&W 4006's as service handguns. Back in 1990 I
bought a Glock 23 which served very well, but I hate the trigger, It is
however an indestructible workhorse.
Now I have my Kimber and it is the best working carry pistol I have
ever owned. For qualifying I shoot with mags loaded with 6 rounds
requiring a reload at each station.
While still active I had to qualify quarterly, now as retired LEO I
only have an annual qualification.

I have other handguns which are purely target weapons, a Hi-Standard
Supermatic Trophy, S&W M41, S&W M52, & S&W K38 Masterpiece, all well
used.
Add to those a few other curiosities and my home maintains its own
little armory.

--
Regards,

Savageduck