World Class Photographer has run in at DTD

[kaligal]

Not quite true. There are 24 states that currently have "stop and identify" laws where, if a police officer has suspicion that a person has committed or is about to commit a crime the police officer may request identification. Failure to produce identification could result in an arrest.

This is also know as a "Terry Stop", named after a court proceeding Terry v. Ohio. During a Terry Stop, a police officer may also conduct a search for weapons.

In case you are wondering, Florida is one of the 24 states that has a Terry Stop law. California does not.




__________________
Armand

It's the crime that is grounds for arrest and for the ID check. Not carrying ID is still not a crime nor grounds for arrest. In all 50 states.

 

[MM32830]

It's the crime that is grounds for arrest and for the ID check. Not carrying ID is still not a crime nor grounds for arrest. In all 50 states.

Semantics.

If you are in a place where you are stopped by a police officer because he/she suspected you were committing a crime, you better have ID on you if you are in one of the 24 states or you could be arrested.

And it isn't the crime that is grounds for arrest. A police officer only needs to suspect that you committed a crime. Failure to produce identification when requested by the officer is grounds for arrest, with no other evidence of any other crime being committed.



_________________
Armand

 

[DiRTyBuNNy]

Not quite true. There are 24 states that currently have "stop and identify" laws where, if a police officer has suspicion that a person has committed or is about to commit a crime the police officer may request identification. Failure to produce identification could result in an arrest.

This is also know as a "Terry Stop", named after a court proceeding Terry v. Ohio. During a Terry Stop, a police officer may also conduct a search for weapons.

In case you are wondering, Florida is one of the 24 states that has a Terry Stop law. California does not.




__________________
Armand

I guess if having a camera is an exigant circumstance then that ruling applies but then again Disney security are not police and therefore are not covered by Terry v. Ohio.

--DB

 

[MM32830]

I guess if having a camera is an exigant circumstance then that ruling applies but then again Disney security are not police and therefore are not covered by Terry v. Ohio.

--DB

True, but the story stated that Disney called in Orange County Sheriff and they are covered by Terry v. Ohio.




____________________
Armand

 

[Dsmurf16]

My parents were down there in late April and they said that secruity was very strong! More police seen and there were Police K-9 units as well at all parks including DTD!! I think that they must have gotten a threat or something because I have never seen it that bad. Just thought I would share

 

[Stacy's a freak]

incredible photos! I am definitely subscribing to his blog!!

 

[darrengs]

So let me see;

It appeared suspicious to Security/Police for someone to be taking extremely detailed photos at the number one tourist destination in the world.

Then when questioned the person did not have any ID on them.

However, once the persons ID was satisfactorily established they were allowed to go on their way.

Not sure I see the real problem here.

 

[disneyfan19712006]

Huh...I've heard of having rules about taking pictures of products for sale (displays in stores, specific items, etc), but never anything about taking pictures outside around the property. Go figure. Goes to show always through your license behind your key to the world card in your lanyard.

I take pictures in the stores when I am decding on what to buy. So I can remember what I saw and where. I have never had a problem with it. Pictures are taken outside by everyone do we need a photo patrol?