Have You had a Rude Railfan-Railroader Experience?

[edblysard]

Actually, I learned a few things here also...which is why I visit this forum more than any other...the people here make it worth it.

Ed

[Anonymous]

This thread was great... very EDUCATIONAL[^]

[chad thomas]

Well I for one thought this was a great thread. I learned a few things. Especialy from the posts of Ed and Mark.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

I think the show is over.

Yep, it's time to shake hands and let the thread go to the second page.

Dear Mr. Hemphill,
To avoid any misunderstandings, I did not disagree with your posts.

Dear Ed,
I didn't mean to be purile, but when you're on the defending side of a topic approaching the critical mass for a forum fire, things can happen. I'm sorry if I offended you. I appreciate your concern.

I work on steam locomotives on weekends--just black, no white [:)][:D][8D]!

Dear Junctionfan,
Yep, Canda is much smarter than the US.

Dear James,
Thanks for being on my "team."

Dear LimitedClear and Dan,
No hard feelings, okay [:)]?
________________________________________________________

Back in the middle ages, people would fight in wars (Crusades, Britan vs. France, etc.) for no good reason. The wars were started for one, but thirty years later nobody could remember why. Here, we got in an argument over GCOR rules, and seven pages later, we were throwing posts back and forth over completely different things than on pages one and two.

In the end, we argued a lot (even tossed in a few bible verses) and, 135 posts later, are nowhere but where we started.

When I posted this topic 11 days ago, I didn't think it would be controversially debated like this. As a matter of fact, I didn't even think the railroaders would chime in all that much. It was mostly for the railfans.

The best advice now is no different than when we started. Use common sense, don't look for a fight, and leave if asked. If you were (you feel) in the right (like on public property), then use the newspapers or other media to your advantage--courts cost more than 37 cents!!!! The railfans in the Metra incident used the media, remained out of court, and were succesful.

Sincerely,
Daniel Parks

[:D][^][:I][:o)][8D][8)][:)][;)][:P][(-D][(-D][:-^]

[chad thomas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tarnett

If I am ever out shooting pictures along the railroad and someone tells me to get out of "their" spot because they are a "professional railfan", my response will be, "I'm a professional***kicker, wanna do some business?"!

T.

[:D] I resemble that remark [8D]

[richardy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates



If engineers had sufficiently loud horns at their disposal, they could simply blow their horns at these intrusive beligerants, and either make the leave , or go deaf..[:-,]

Yes, but then they probably would sue the railroad and win.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

The solution (as always) is that the trains need louder horns...[oX)]

If engineers had sufficiently loud horns at their disposal, they could simply blow their horns at these intrusive beligerants, and either make the leave , or go deaf..[:-,]

.....WHAT????......................................[;)]

[Anonymous]

The solution (as always) is that the trains need louder horns...[oX)]

If engineers had sufficiently loud horns at their disposal, they could simply blow their horns at these intrusive beligerants, and either make the leave , or go deaf..[:-,]

[tarnett]

If I am ever out shooting pictures along the railroad and someone tells me to get out of "their" spot because they are a "professional railfan", my response will be, "I'm a professional***kicker, wanna do some business?"!

T.

[Anonymous]

I think the show is over.

[chad thomas]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mark_W._Hemphill

James: To repeat my post from 13 October:

1. You generally have the right to take photographs while you're standing on public property of anything you can reasonably see from public property. Public property usually does not include parking lots (even of public venues), station platforms, or the like. Parks, streets, and sidewalks are public property.
2. Photographs used for journalistic or educational purposes or personal use DO NOT require the consent of the person being photographed. Photos used for commercial purposes (just about every other use in which money changes hands or a product is sold) DO require the consent of the person being photographed.
3. If someone says you cannot take photos from public property, feel free to escalate as far as you want.

Correct. Thanks for the clarification Mark...

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

WOW........the U.S really needs some tort law reform in terms of criteria to take action in court.

Not being an American so I have to ask you; don't you get sick of hearing of rediculous excuses to sue?

Define "ridiculous excuses to sue"...(?)

If you stand to be on the receiving end of a massive wadd of cash, just about any reason begins to look justifiable.

Actually there are what is known as the Yost Statute, that attempt to curb malicious prosecution, sueing just to make the defendant suffer... But there is a whopping gray area, who is to say that I haven't "suffered" at the hands of the person I'm intending to sue? usually only the courts can decide that.

The grand litmus is in the plaintiffs ability to demonstrate that they have been made a victim.

And yes, I get really sick of the entire philisophy of victimology. everyone is the victim, take a number and stand in line.

[exPalaceDog]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lone Byrd

only one time a csx train stopped not too far from I was standing a crew menber shouted out rudely "Put that camera down You can't be [censored] recording THIS train!" But i was not listening to the crew member that was rude and continued recording elsewhere.

Are you sure that the train was NOT carrying military or some other type of sensitive material?

Aren't railroads required to hold information on who ships or receives what in what amounts in confidence? Business do not want their competiters to know their business.

Any chance that the railroader was violating some rule?

Have fun

[edblysard]

James,
Read Mark's post carefully...
Because he put into a few words what we have all been saying.

Now, take a look through the grey....and apply a good dose of common sense.
You are looking for a black and white definition of what is and isn’t...which has been provided you.

But it is up to you to decide if what you are after is worth the fight.

Imagine an instance where both your and the railroader are certain you are right...you might be on public property, by your definition, and he might think not, then you have to decide if the end result is worth the hassle.

The two Metro photographers who were badly treated felt it was worth it to them, and in the end, the system proved them "right"...but it did cost them.
So, is the cost worth it to you?

By law there is a definition, or a set of boundaries, in real life, such boundaries are often ill defined or not defined at all, they are in the grey, so to speak, and left up to you to decide.

Which is why we have the courts in the first place, because each instance has to be looked at on the merits of that particular incident.

Almost no one has the right to stop you from taking photos, but the law does allow them to recoup damages if they can convince a jury or a judge you violated their "rights" in doing so.

I think what you are asking is for a clearly defined place to shot photos from, or someone to tell you that this spot is ok, that spot is not...good luck.

Read Marks post again....

I think you already have a good idea what is and what isn’t...

I also think your right; most of us would love to be on a magazine cover!

So shoot all the photos you want, and if someone tries to tell you can not, apply your common sense, decide if its a fight worth it to you, if it is, hunker down and get ready, if it isn’t, move to a better spot and shoot some more!

And read Marks post one more time!

Ed

[Junctionfan]

WOW........the U.S really needs some tort law reform in terms of criteria to take action in court.

Not being an American so I have to ask you; don't you get sick of hearing of rediculous excuses to sue?

[Anonymous]

only one time a csx train stopped not too far from I was standing a crew menber shouted out rudely "Put that camera down You can't be [censored] recording THIS train!" But i was not listening to the crew member that was rude and continued recording elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

I can still be sued for doing it..........................?????? Help me out here...........[%-)]

I could sue you for having red hair, even if you were bald.....

Whether I could collect anything remains to be seen, but I could cost you a fortune in attorney fees defending yourself.

[Junctionfan]

O.k so for so far, I am hearing some conflicted answers. Although there is no legal right to prevent non-commercial photographs of trains from public property, I can still be sued for doing it..........................?????? Help me out here...........[%-)]

[Anonymous]

I'ev been trying to figure out a way to jump into this. It came to me last night. Think of all the actors and actresses and musicians who try to protect their rights to privacy, either in their homes (photos of actresses topless lounging by their pool AT HOME taken with long distance cameras), or in public, when they're out trying to have dinner or go to a club. Supposedly there are even pictures of Princess Di dying in a car. I guess my point is to be really careful because you ARE taking pictures of someone who might not want you to take them. Respect them as a fellow human, not a railroader, or an actor, or a baseball player, or whatever.

I still think if you're trying to "buy" trouble, you'll find it.

Now, add to Ed's illustrious list of people who are trying to offer experienced advice, a slightly overweight special ed Engli***eacher.

Oh, NAR guy, asking Bergie to lock a thread like this... come on, we have these talks all the time. The last one on the mighty PC&N railroad died on it's own. This one will too.


mike

[Anonymous]

I am a locomotive engineer and you 'foamers' can take all the pictures you want. One bad apple does not spoil the whole bunch.

[dharmon]

Well put Ed....that was exactly the point.

Dan

[Anonymous]

So let me see if I get this straight now, as the gray area seems to be do I have a "right to take photos, or do the railroaders have a "right" to tell me not to. So If I am public property, usually there will be no problem since only a small minority of railroaders think that it is a problem to take pictures of there train, I am sure most would love to be driving the train that wins some photo contest. If someone, say a railroad worker, tells me I can't take pictures of the train from the public road that parallels the train yard. What should I do? Does he have the right to tell me not to? Should I phone the yardmaster, or someone and just make sure they don't have a beef then go take some more pictures. What about the police telling me, since they don't always represent the railroad’s want on the matter? Of course you should always be polite.

I am not trying to start an argument here, I was just under the impression from what I had read about the law, that you had the ability to take a picture of trains from public property, assuming the train tacks don't have any signs saying you can't. You couldn't sell a picture of a railroad worker without his approval, like a celebrity, assuming he was recognizable in the picture. It is not a matter of rights to take the picture, but who has the right to stop you. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, so I don't make any mistakes in the future.

[SealBook27]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

I failed to see that between the black and white of my then narrow and limited experiences that the world was really full of a lot, and I mean a lot, of gray.

Now, 30 years later, I have something I didn’t have as an 18 year old, the ability to see in gray, and to place myself in the position of another person, and try to see things as they would, whether I agree with them or not.



Ed

Many thanks Ed, and let me add a big AMEN. I've been trying to teach this to people most of my life.

I dearly wish I could remember who taught me this decades ago, but it proved to be a very valuable lesson in life. Recognizing the gray areas and seeing things from others points of view has enabled me to work with just about anyone.

[edblysard]

No Daniel,
You are perfectly entitled to have an opinion, in fact, encouraged to have one.

But it might be the fact that after several people, who have had a lot more experience than you, all of whom have gone out of their way to explain why your concept of "rights" is flawed, you still insist on rationalizing your stand and stating your opinion in a somewhat, well, immature manner.

Look at the post above, rather smart*ssed and a little self serving, isn’t it....

Heck, you had the former editor of Trains magazine, myself, and Limited clear all trying to help you, and you insisted in refusing to listen or acknowledge what we were saying.

Man, you got free advice from an attorney, and that’s a small miracle in itself!

I remember being a teenager, and at 18, I was bullet proof, immortal and absolutely certain on almost all things...the world was easy to manage; every thing was in black or white, good or bad, true or false.

If I had a "right" to do something, I was almost fanatical in defending that right, whether it was truly a right, or simply something I perceived as one.

And I was just as determined to stamp out the wrongs in the world and I was in defending the things I saw as right.

Things were either good, or not.

I failed to see that between the black and white of my then narrow and limited experiences that the world was really full of a lot, and I mean a lot, of gray.

Now, 30 years later, I have something I didn’t have as an 18 year old, the ability to see in gray, and to place myself in the position of another person, and try to see things as they would, whether I agree with them or not.

The ability to look at an issue, be it the right to take photos, or the right own a handgun, all the way to who will sit on the US Supreme Court, from both sides,
and then form an opinion, based not only on the black and white of the issue, but the vast gray area in-between, where most people really live, now lets me realize that, although I might feel strongly on a particular issue, and be certain that my opinion is correct and theirs is not, I can now understand why they hold that opinion, as opposed to just being certain they are wrong.

What all this boils down to is that, because some of us have had more experience than you, solely because we have managed to survive longer than you, not because older is smarter, but because the people who have been replying to you have managed, between them, to have run a nation wide magazine, be an attorney, locomotive engineer, work for their state attorney generals office, manage several business, own a few, one of them is now in charge of rebuilding the Iraq railway, one of them is a navy pilot and now in charge of teaching recon flying to "newbies", years and years of hard earned experience and knowledge between them all, lots of working in the gray area, and you insist in ignoring all of their experience and viewing this as a black and white issue...with you certain that you are the white knight, righteously defending the "right" you perceive, while the rest of us are the black knights, bent on denying you... the whole time, your knee deep in the gray, and unaware of it.

Hope you don’t press your concept of your right to take any photo you want from "public" property, because you will, at some point, find someone else just as certain as yourself that you are "wrong", and you will end up on the losing end of a very expensive civil lawsuit.

Look at it this way, none of us here "win" anything by convincing you that we are right and you are wrong...no one gets any points, makes any money, saves any lives or gets the girl...so why would we go through all this trouble to explain anything to you, unless we valued your presence here, and wanted to keep you out of trouble?

Might it be that some of us have already been there and done that, and wanted to save you the hassle of learning it the hard way?

Ed

[Anonymous]

I think I should re-title this thread "Have You had a Rude Forum Member-Forum Member Experience?"!!!![:D][:)][:-,][swg][:)][8D]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear
So think about that the next time you want to take a photo of a railroad employee.

LC

The amazing thing about this conversation is that the ones bellyaching the most defiantly are also the ones to have had unpleasant encounters with the railroads,

Coincidence? I suspect not... [;)]

and teens for the most part.....oh to be half as smart as I was then.....

As politely as possible,
So are you suggesting that James and I wait to state opinions for another 25 years, when we turn 40 and our opinions instantaneously become worthy? Better yet, since we're just "teenagers" are we even allowed to have opinions? I guess I should go check the penal code of California on "Opinions held by a Minor."

Sincerely,
Daniel Parks

[richardy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NARguy

OK. It's time to lock this one and move on. Bergie?

Relax, it's just a little inside fun between some of us. Now let's get back to the debate.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NARguy

OK. It's time to lock this one and move on. Bergie?

What? just a joke....[:I]