Man attacked for taking pics in public in Toronto.

[elkhunter11]

THIS IS CANADA

Unfortunately it isn't the same Canada that I was born in over 50 years ago. Back then, immigrants actually made an effort to be Canadians, and to fit into our society, whereas now, most of them try to make Canadians conform to the customs of the country that they came from.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Nomad

Menzies also had a Syrian couple witness the whole incident who went up to the policeman to verify everthing Menzies said was true and still would not charge her. I don't think this one is over yet.

Exactly...this is a typical shoulder season post...perfect to inflame...but not all information is likely in. We have a one sided view of what happened. The cops have the fuller story. Now if an assault took place...the cops would not let it go. If she whacked at the camera maybe she bumped him. Gezz...now we are playing the speculation game...well...it has been played well so far. I think it was Colonel Mustard...in the closet...with a spatula. There...conviction based upon quality information.

[New Hunter Okotoks]

What if the guy was by himself and taking pictures of children at a playground? Apparently there is no law being broken,but I know that I would react if it happened where I take my kids.

Why would the guy feel the need to photograph people with his beloved camera. Why not take photos of trees and flowers that don't mind having their picture taken? How would you feel if some stranger was pointing a camera at you and your family and taking pics?

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by New Hunter Okotoks

How would you feel if some stranger was pointing a camera at you and your family and taking pics?

Well there was a bus load of Japanese tourists in Longview that now have a picture of me trying to shove a broom handle up a horse's arse that was crushing my fingers as it sat on the stocktrailer's rear gate. And I didn't zhit my panties over it. Which as I see it, is only a small portion of the adoption process.




.

[HunterDave]

I think that it was a setup from the word GO! If I was sitting there with my wife and kid(s) minding my own business and some freak started taking pictures of us I'd be up asking WT? he was doing as well! Have a look at the pictures that the guy took. They aren't of a flower with the family in the background or anything like that, they were pictures of someone's family! Now why would someone do that? The fella taking the pictures was out to cause a problem by invading someone's privacy and he got the reaction that he was hoping for.

This isn't about race or religion to me at all and if I was sitting with my family minding my business and someone started snapping pictures of us for no particular reason he'd probably get slapped up the side of the head AND I'd probably take his camera too because I didn't know what he was going to do with the pictures of my family. Who wouldn't do that?

I think that the police did the right thing............the guy with the camera got in someone's face to provoke them and he got the reaction that he was looking for and then pulled the "poor me" routine. This story is going nowhere with anyone that can see through the BS.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by New Hunter Okotoks

What if the guy was by himself and taking pictures of children at a playground? Apparently there is no law being broken,but I know that I would react if it happened where I take my kids.

Why would the guy feel the need to photograph people with his beloved camera. Why not take photos of trees and flowers that don't mind having their picture taken? How would you feel if some stranger was pointing a camera at you and your family and taking pics?

There was a guy at the Lethbridge airshow a few years ago snapping shots of women's chest when ever they bent over or someone was not looking. He was about to eat the camera in reverse until the wife stopped me.

Anyone taking pictures of my wife and kids while we are just doing family stuff is very creepy unless they show media credentials and ask permission to put in on line or in the paper. That photo looked pretty much centered on the people...not the area.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by New Hunter Okotoks

What if the guy was by himself and taking pictures of children at a playground? Apparently there is no law being broken,but I know that I would react if it happened where I take my kids.

Why would the guy feel the need to photograph people with his beloved camera. Why not take photos of trees and flowers that don't mind having their picture taken? How would you feel if some stranger was pointing a camera at you and your family and taking pics?

EXACTLY NHO!!! My feeling as well..........I was typing when you posted.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I think that it was a setup from the word GO! If I was sitting there with my wife and kid(s) minding my own business and some freak started taking pictures of us I'd be up asking WT? he was doing as well! Have a look at the pictures that the guy took. They aren't of a flower with the family in the background or anything like that, they were pictures of someone's family! Now why would someone do that? The fella taking the pictures was out to cause a problem by invading someone's privacy and he got the reaction that he was hoping for.

This isn't about race or religion to me at all and if I was sitting with my family minding my business and someone started snapping pictures of us for no particular reason he'd probably get slapped up the side of the head AND I'd probably take his camera too because I didn't know what he was going to do with the pictures of my family. Who wouldn't do that?

I think that the police did the right thing............the guy with the camera got in someone's face to provoke them and he got the reaction that he was looking for and then pulled the "poor me" routine. This story is going nowhere with anyone that can see through the BS.

Gezz Dave...I am scared...once again I am in full agreement. This is a great post by the way... I love it. People need to reflect some on what is going on.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by New Hunter Okotoks

What if the guy was by himself and taking pictures of children at a playground? Apparently there is no law being broken,but I know that I would react if it happened where I take my kids.

Why would the guy feel the need to photograph people with his beloved camera. Why not take photos of trees and flowers that don't mind having their picture taken? How would you feel if some stranger was pointing a camera at you and your family and taking pics?

I'll join NHO in being a bit of a "devil's advocate". It seems pretty obvious that this political commentator fellow was likely there intentionally stirring the pot with these people. They reacted probably just about how he was hoping, save for maybe he wanted some minor injury he could grandstand around with. He's got his axe he enjoys grinding and he was grinding away when he brought about this incident. I'll agree the assault was totally out of line; but I'll have to admit if some paparazzi wanna be was annoying the hell out of me I'd probably give them a photo op before their camera got tossed under a bus.

[Ryry4]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I think that it was a setup from the word GO! If I was sitting there with my wife and kid(s) minding my own business and some freak started taking pictures of us I'd be up asking WT? he was doing as well! Have a look at the pictures that the guy took. They aren't of a flower with the family in the background or anything like that, they were pictures of someone's family! Now why would someone do that? The fella taking the pictures was out to cause a problem by invading someone's privacy and he got the reaction that he was hoping for.

This isn't about race or religion to me at all and if I was sitting with my family minding my business and someone started snapping pictures of us for no particular reason he'd probably get slapped up the side of the head AND I'd probably take his camera too because I didn't know what he was going to do with the pictures of my family. Who wouldn't do that?

I think that the police did the right thing............the guy with the camera got in someone's face to provoke them and he got the reaction that he was looking for and then pulled the "poor me" routine. This story is going nowhere with anyone that can see through the BS.

So the paparazzi is fair game now? Good because I'd love to see some celebs knock a few of them into next week.

[elkhunter11]

I'll agree the assault was totally out of line

And that is what really matters in this situation.

[Kanonfodder]

If there was a Po Po camera at the scene there just may be some video..either way he can lay charges on his own by swearing out a complaint...

[pogo]

Charges? Doesn't matter. Our courts will bu**er it up anyways.

[Ken07AOVette]

So, everyone grab a camera, and start taking pictures of every 'cloaked' woman you see, either they will snap and go back to the desert, or eventually realize that the little magic box is not stealing their souls.

[Big Daddy Badger]

http://www.islam101.com/women/hijabfaq.

The hajib is cultural preference...not a religious requirement.
Photographing Muslims is tolerated by some and shunned by others especially where women are concerned. But again that is largely cultural and not religious and how can anyone expect to know which side of the argument any particular Muslim might fall?
For instance...I see similarly clad women on TV all the time seeking out the camera to shout about some injustice they've suffered at the hands of the devil west...the hated USA or Jews.

In Canada...public means just that...you can photograph record etc anything that is done in a public place or that is made public.

The guy had no reason to expect that a couple people in the crowd would object so strongly and there was no requirement to ask permission to take random pics in a public place.

I wonder if she would have been so quick to lash out at a Muslim man.... especially a conservative Muslim man or a male member of her family.
Seriously, if she'd done that to male from her homeland and been subject to sharia law... she'd have been lashed... or beaten in public.

Seems some people are run of the mill Canadians when it suits them and victims of religious oppression when it doesn't. After all it seems to be OK to be filmed if you are engaged in blaming the west for your problems...

Islam is an extremist interpretation within the Muslim community...not the religion itself. Islamists made unwelcome by their own actions in their home (Muslim) countries...fled to the west claiming religious persecution beginning about 40 years ago.. Muslim countries warned the west that this would result in no end of trouble for us and advised us not to welcome them but we knew better.

40 years later...Islam has usurped the the religion and thanked the west for saving them by.... demanding we turn our countries into the ones they fled and through terrorism.

We've had Muslims in Canada since the mid-1800s but we only started to have problems AFTER the Islamists showed up.
Now main stream Muslims that are old enough to remember the rise of Islamists...fear the same problems here that also drove them from their homelands.

Her claims that he violated her religious beliefs are a sham designed to exploit our fears of being seen as intolerant. The problem with letting it slide is that sometimes when you turn the other cheek...it gets slapped to.

The only difference between her actions and those of any extremist of any belief structure is perhaps the scale of the violence.
She assaulted the man and should be treated like any other violent and anti-social offender unless criminal assault is now somehow protected under the veil of religious freedom to.

[FrostyinHell]

For those of you talking about taking pictures of things other than people in Toronto, good luck. You can't take a picture of anything in Toronto without there being at least a few people in the photo. I can't speak for the guys intent (taking a picture of the women or just general snapshots) but I can tell you that regardless of his intent the act was lawful. The woman's actions were illegal and cannot be justified in any rational court of law. The rest of the world (Australia, the Scandanavian countries, U.S. etc) is clamping down on the spread of Islamism, not because of a fear of a different religion but because of the culture that comes along with their religion. Let's be honest and call a spade a spade. The way that most arabs view us Westerners, we are godless heathens and undeserving of anything that we have worked for. I find it funny that they had civilization long before we did but it is us that have our "stuff" together and can live in relative piece. We as Canadians need to be more vocal about our politicians and law enforement community backing down to other religions and cultures. This is Canada, it may not be the same Canada that Elkhunter was born into but if more of us get vocal about this crap, we may be able to swing things back in the right direction.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by gitrdun

You'd find that out real quick had she struck me. I'd smoke her in the little target zone dead center of the chin. Then, she have a good reason to cover her ugly mug.




.

LMAO

[DarkAisling]

In all honesty, if I caught someone taking photos of me in public s/he would get a heck of a blast. It is one thing to be caught in a photo where you're not the subject, it is a completely different thing to be the unwitting subject of a photo. In this case, it looks like the lady in question may have been just that.

That doesn't mean I approve of her tactics, however.

I've worked with many photographers in my time, and there is an etiquette to follow. While it may be perfectly within one's legal rights to take photos of people without their consent or knowledge, it is downright rude. Perhaps a sense of entitlement is found in the box with a new camera?

[JEHL75]

I didnt know somebody elses religion can dictate to me where i can or cant take pictures in public. Especially in a tourist area like Young and Dundas. As far as I knew Canada was a democracy not a religious police state. As for the police reaction, assault is assault. Grab some nuts. Man, Woman, burka or not the reaction by the police should be the same.
Thats my rant.

[gitrdun]

I will concede that there should be some form of etiquette when photographing people as a subject. Purposely taking pictures of ladie's breasts when bending over (as described in a previous post) is a whole different kettle of fish, and in this case would be deserving of physical intervention. Willfully targeting someone could also be taken offensively. However, it doesn't justify the woman's assaulting action. Many photographers capture images of people to blow them up and display these in black & white to describe urban life, we've all seen them. And perhaps this wasn't Menzoid's intention. Still doesn't justify being assaulted.

To put it plain and simple: Here in this country it is constitutionaly not illegal to take pictures of anything or anyone, unless in a secured environment where actually posted. But, it is illegal to assault someone and furthermore, it is legal to defend yourself using reasonable force. Someone could perhaps then describe to me why a farmer who is being robbed of his fuel can get charged with assault when dealing with the perpretators.?

In my mind, the woman's action was religiously motivated. The cop's INaction was motivated by a lack of cahonies. And if the masses continue with this lackedasical attitude, then we might as well let all of them move here and we can move to where they immigrated from.




.

[DarkAisling]

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Many photographers capture images of people to blow them up and display these in black & white to describe urban life, we've all seen them.

Yes, BUT (and this is a big one) in the event a photo is to be displayed publicly, a model release AND compensation is required. I think the only exception to this rule is with news organizations.

One of the photographers I used to schlep gear for was big into "urban life" photography. In the event he caught someone in an image, I needed to chase that person down, explain that s/he had been caught on film, convince her/him to sign a model release, and provide compensation in the form of a Polariod snap shot. With the homeless and down-and-out, they were usually given a couple of bucks in addition to the Polaroid.

If the photo is for personal use, and will not be publicly displayed (digital or print), then compensation and a model release are not required.

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Still doesn't justify being assaulted.

I agree 100%. And, I think the woman in question should have been charged with assault.

[gitrdun]

From what I read in the news article Shelley, the photographer (whether it was his intention or not) wasn't given opportune time to offer compensation. She simply lunged at him.




.

[huffy]

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Well being that I'm now on my 4th Sleeman's in a frosted glass, I'm gonna have to opt out or the devil on my left shoulder is gonna remove the filter and speak my mind, and I'll get sent to the corner.....again





.

Hilarious!

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by FrostyinHell

For those of you talking about taking pictures of things other than people in Toronto, good luck. You can't take a picture of anything in Toronto without there being at least a few people in the photo. I can't speak for the guys intent (taking a picture of the women or just general snapshots) but I can tell you that regardless of his intent the act was lawful. The woman's actions were illegal and cannot be justified in any rational court of law. The rest of the world (Australia, the Scandanavian countries, U.S. etc) is clamping down on the spread of Islamism, not because of a fear of a different religion but because of the culture that comes along with their religion. Let's be honest and call a spade a spade. The way that most arabs view us Westerners, we are godless heathens and undeserving of anything that we have worked for. I find it funny that they had civilization long before we did but it is us that have our "stuff" together and can live in relative piece. We as Canadians need to be more vocal about our politicians and law enforement community backing down to other religions and cultures. This is Canada, it may not be the same Canada that Elkhunter was born into but if more of us get vocal about this crap, we may be able to swing things back in the right direction.

Here here.

I'm tired of people coming here and thanking us for our hospitality by attacking our culture and trying to turn Canada into the place they fled.
Doesn't matter where they came from either.

Most people are just happy to be here and try to get on with the rest of us... others bring their old hatreds and agendas.

[DarkAisling]

Originally Posted by gitrdun

From what I read in the news article Shelley, the photographer (whether it was his intention or not) wasn't given opportune time to offer compensation. She simply lunged at him.

He may not have needed to offer compensation: depending on what his intended use of the photos was. If he was just playing with his camera to test it out he does need to offer compensation (as long as the photos remain private).

But, common courtesy dictates that if you're pointing a camera directly at someone and taking his/her photo from a close distance that you ask for permission first. From looking at the photos, that appears to be what happened here. It looks like they were almost directly beside her in a food court.

It is different when you're shooting candid shots from a distance away. The photographer isn't in the proximity to ask, and the knowledge of the photographers existence would blow the shot. There were occasions when I chased people for blocks and onto busses to get a release signed and offer compensation.

But, like I said before, if someone points a camera directly at me s/he is in for a heck of a blast. Would I hit the photographer? No. I guarantee you that it would be one heck of a scene, however.

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by DarkAisling

But, like I said before, if someone points a camera directly at me s/he is in for a heck of a blast. Would I hit the photographer? No. I guarantee you that it would be one heck of a scene, however.

Somehow I do believe that, and I'd be willing to pay you compensation to witness that and up it a bit if you let me video the event....hahahah!





.

[gregc]

Originally Posted by 600twin

Skin flute

ya, but i bet you always go flat in the middle of a piece

[jimbo1]

i cant honestly say how i really feel about the group of people who attacked this guy as i would be banned but needless to say she should have been charged but as we all know they can do as they like laws dont apply to them

[WZHunter]

I was in Norther Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan) in 2008 for work, and was checking out my companies future drilling site. While we were there in the middle of the desert, a muslim women, all decked out in her Burka (while it was 48 degrees celcius), approached with her mule to retrieve some water from her watering hole. I was really fascinated with the whole situation and I wanted to take her picture. We had some local security with us so I asked him to ask her if it was ok to take her picture. He mentioned to me I probably wasn't going to be a problem. But, before I took her picture she removed her headgear and was pleased to be in my pictures.

So, I guess the point of my story is I was right in there in a muslim back yard, the birthplace of Islam, and taking a picture of a muslim women in Burka was not a problem at all. But in Toronto this is forbidden? Give me a break. We need to deal with the problem muslims appropriately.

[great white whaler]

Toronto i lived there once upon a time never had no problems and the sex was great "o)