Thread: The Gentle folks of Utah
03-09-2012, 11:48 AM #1
The Gentle folks of Utah
Has anybody heard or commented on this:
More photography banned | fotoLibra Blog
Canon 7D, Canon EOS 450D, Canon EF 100-300 f5.6, Canon EF 50 f1.4; Canon Speedlite 430 EX11, Fuji FinePix F40 Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC and Mamiya ZE-2 35-70mm F3.5-4.5 Macro and a brand new Canon EFS 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM; EF 70-200 f2.8L USM; Canon EF 24-70 2.8L.
03-09-2012, 01:05 PM #2
Utah Legislature HB0187
28 76-6-112. Agricultural operation interference -- Penalties.
29 (1) As used in this section, "agricultural operation" means the commercial production
30 of crops, orchards, aquaculture, livestock, poultry, livestock products, or poultry products, and
31 the facilities, equipment, or property used to facilitate the commercial production.
32 (2) A person is guilty of agricultural operation interference if the person, without
33 consent from the owner of the operation, or the owner's agent, knowingly or intentionally
34 records an image of, or sound from, the operation:
35 (a) while the person is on the property where the agricultural operation is located; or
36 (b) by leaving a recording device on the property where the agricultural operation is
38 (3) A person who commits agricultural operation interference is guilty of:
39 (a) for a first offense, a class A misdemeanor; or
40 (b) for a subsequent offense, a felony of the third degree.
Why shouldn't someone demand 'justice' if someone is sneaking on their privately owned property to take photos or bugging them with sound recording device? The author failed to mention the bill in it's entirety, and just goes off on his own rant about inhumane crap and unethical treatment of animals.
You have the right to your own personal property. If someone comes on my property trying to take photos of let's say...my son, you bet your butt I will want them prosecuted for trespassing and taking photos without my permission.
I'm not saying I agree with the inhumane treatment of animals. In fact I think it's quite wrong, thus why I buy meat from farmers locally.But someone has the right to keep their 'castle' private regardless of what goes on there.
This is something people who live outside the US do not understand. It's not a nationwide thing, it's at the state level. People like this author are prejudice towards this country as a whole because of state level laws being passed.
I just absolutely love the dig at Americans at the end
03-09-2012, 01:20 PM #3
Just another skirmish in the age old battle between public knowledge and private property...and as usual both sides are sort of right. No easy answers.
All I can say is I am all for not abusing animals, but find someone literally on the other side of the globe being that dismissive and self-righteous about a community protecting their main source of industry a bit much to take. Issues like these can not be broken down into five paragraph columns. Look at whaling...protecting whales seems like a no brainer until you speak with the Newfoundland fishing folk who are forced onto welfare because they can't whale as they have done for countless generations. No easy answers.
Trust me, I know...I live in a place where every week someone else feels they know who is right and who is wrong and therefore has an easy answer for our troubles and the right to impose it on both sides. No easy answers.
03-09-2012, 01:24 PM #4•
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
Yes, the blog linked in the original post was a little flawed in regards to accuracy of facts. Re-quoted for emphasis:
(2) A person is guilty of agricultural operation interference if the person, without
consent from the owner of the operation, or the owner's agent, knowingly or intentionally
records an image of, or sound from, the operation:
(a) while the person is on the property where the agricultural operation is located; or
(b) by leaving a recording device on the property where the agricultural operation is
As the law reads, you can't go onto private property and take photos/video or record sound without the owner's permission. It's not a suppression of "rights".
03-09-2012, 01:58 PM #5dPS Forum Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
So let me get this straight:
The guy has never been to Utah.
The guy doesnt know the reason for the law.
So he decides hes going to guess at the reason, and then decry loss of freedom without even having a clue of why the law is being passed. No credibility in my book.
03-09-2012, 03:06 PM #6
03-09-2012, 03:19 PM #7
TBH.. If someone came onto my property and started taking pictures without my permission, I'd get pretty pissed off.. So this is really just a trespass law no different to any other.. Can't say I blame them..
By the way, neither of the two laws he quoted exist.
Yup.. This is yet another example of someone talking out of their ass without bothering to check the facts.
03-09-2012, 03:32 PM #8
It's really not that bad. Aside from the huge political divide that's going on right now, it's a great place to live.
I'm pretty sure there are shitty people on every continent that can be swept up in to some stereotype that makes the countries look bad.
03-09-2012, 04:05 PM #9
03-09-2012, 04:15 PM #10