Photographers legal rights (Page 12): Future readers are likely to have read my prior posts.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

ToBoldlyGo wrote:

For gods sake. Are you looking for an argument? I am not talking about law. Law is not the be all and end all. If you read my comments earlier in the post, you would understand this is what I'm saying. It's about being a decent human being, not just about what's in the law books. Get it now?

Future readers are likely to have read my prior posts.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

David Taylor wrote:

I am not going to reread anything. You cannot confer a right of privacy where none exists, irrespective of any earlier posts. I do not wish to be argumentative, however clarity is important for any future readers.

Well, folks do have a right to an EXPECTATION of privacy. And, it all comes down to your interpretation of the word expectation. And in a court of law the law is what the judge says it is, and, their interpretation of expectation. This came from a Yale law professor. And, yes, you can argue with me all you like, but, it will not change what the professor said to me.

David Taylor

billnikon wrote:

Well, folks do have a right to an EXPECTATION of privacy. And, it all comes down to your interpretation of the word expectation. And in a court of law the law is what the judge says it is, and, their interpretation of expectation. This came from a Yale law professor. And, yes, you can argue with me all you like, but, it will not change what the professor said to me.

People expect many things to which they are not entitled. Thank goodness it will have no effect in the UK in any case.

David Taylor

ToBoldlyGo wrote:

For gods sake. Are you looking for an argument? I am not talking about law. Law is not the be all and end all. If you read my comments earlier in the post, you would understand this is what I'm saying. It's about being a decent human being, not just about what's in the law books. Get it now?

I did not mention law. You should accept that you can not confer rights where they do not exist, despite your views.

David Taylor

ToBoldlyGo wrote:

Future readers are likely to have read my prior posts.

Hopefully they will exercise careful judgement in doing so before relying on the content.

David Taylor

ToBoldlyGo wrote:

For gods sake. Are you looking for an argument? I am not talking about law. Law is not the be all and end all. If you read my comments earlier in the post, you would understand this is what I'm saying. It's about being a decent human being, not just about what's in the law books. Get it now?

Capital G for God. Apostrophe before the s.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

David Taylor wrote:

Capital G for God. Apostrophe before the s.

Clearly looking for an argument. My phrasing is idiomatic, and not governed by the normal rules. I will stop feeding the troll.

David Taylor

How rude of you to descend to name calling.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

David Taylor wrote:

How rude of you to descend to name calling.

Unfortunately this happens when a post runs too long like this one. Folks let their emotions get in the way of the original intention of the post and it descends into mediocracy. And it is too bad when folks turn to name calling, but it is also common here. Best just to ignore it and move on.

David Taylor

billnikon wrote:

Unfortunately this happens when a post runs too long like this one. Folks let their emotions get in the way of the original intention of the post and it descends into mediocracy. And it is too bad when folks turn to name calling, but it is also common here. Best just to ignore it and move on.

Thanks, will do.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

dennis2146 wrote:

I take it then that you are retracting your commen... (show quote)

Cheese and rice man! How do you think police officers deal with shiny objects in other countries?

tdekany Loc: Oregon

dennis2146 wrote:

Got killing to do. Dennis

Lol! Is that a Fraudian slip? Once a cop, always a cop?

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

billnikon wrote:

Unfortunately this happens when a post runs too long like this one. Folks let their emotions get in the way of the original intention of the post and it descends into mediocracy. And it is too bad when folks turn to name calling, but it is also common here. Best just to ignore it and move on.

He's clearly just here to argue. But yes, emotions are in the way, and people are assuming rather than reading. As to the original intent of the post, my opinions stand. I've tried not to veer from the topic.

David Taylor

ToBoldlyGo wrote:

He's clearly just here to argue. But yes, emotions are in the way, and people are assuming rather than reading. As to the original intent of the post, my opinions stand. I've tried not to veer from the topic.

Your opinions are flawed.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

David Taylor wrote:

Your opinions are flawed.

The initial post is flawed.