Red White and Blue

@Tia: Thank you. My grandmother emigrated from Italy and my brother married a woman from Naples, so it's nice to hear from the "old country."

@Ekaputra Tupamahu: Thank you.

@MadScientist: I think I'd merge your #2, #3, and #4 points into a single point about the psychology of control. Perhaps a part of this is that with so much else in life beyond our control there is an impulse to exert control wherever some remnant of it remains.

@dj.tigersprout: I agree 100% about the financial basis. However, I'd say that in this country we already have a police state. There are lots of signs --for instance, that we have the largest prison population in the world, twice that of a supposed authoritarian nation, China, that has about four times our population-- but I think it was made official by the recent court ruling that says our Furher can order ANYONE arrested, tortured even onto death, and imprisoned for life, all without trial. We have now scrapped the rule-of-law for the rule-of-men. The relevant fact in determining whether or not we're in a police state is not whether this power has been used yet, or how often, but that our political machinery has extended such unaccountable power to one man, and, practically speaking, his representatives. Now it's just a question of the extent and frequency with which this power will be used.

@Ondro: Thank you.

@Daryl: Thanks.

@danthro: Well, of course, that makes sense. Us peons are supposed to be controlled. And these are the same kinds of people who, when anyone questions such massive surveillance, always say you don't have anything to fear if you don't have anything to hide. Yet some photographer on the street doesn't have the power to take their kids away from them and the people with all the spy cameras do. And, in fact, they're using spy cameras to do just that in the UK.

And weird too is all this mythology about the "internet." The unreasoned fear that a photo is going to be posted on the internet. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people rationalize these reactions on the basis that a photo could be posted on the internet --as if a billion people are going to see it (not that it should matter any, since the photo is taken in a public place). In fact, one of the most popular bloggers on here, Ian Bramham, who is in the top ten of vfxy photobloggers worldwide, currently has 81 views on his most recent image. And since all of those people probably live a long way off, and a good number of those people live in other countries, they don't even pose any kind of realistic physical threat.

On the other hand, these same kinds of people will let photos of their kiddies be printed in the local paper, with names attached, and seen by 100's if not 1000's more people who are no more than a thirty minute drive away. I was reading a movie review by Roger Ebert today and he said: "Sometimes I think I am living in a nightmare. All about me, standards are collapsing, manners are evaporating, people show no respect for themselves." I would have expressed it differently, but I think he and I are both observing the same things.

@Sandy: Well, I'd think as a female you could get away with a lot more in that regard than a man can. Female motives are probably less suspect --after all, realistically, most of the threat is from men. Still, when my kids were young I had a camera with me all the time and I never hesitated to take a photo of children, even if my kids weren't in the shot. No one ever said a word to me about it. I don't do that now though --I try not to even point my camera in the general direction of children.

@gbe: Exactly! Yet this obvious fact seems to escape practically everyone. And then there is the fact that when it comes to the danger of other people, the people we know, and/or are related to, are much more likely to do us harm than a stranger.

@lisa v: There are child predators. It is a real problem, though I think it has been blown grossly out of proportion. The way to address the problem is through good judgment, common sense, and close parental supervision. And that's where a lot of the problem comes in: there are a lot of parents out there, especially in this country, who expect someone else to do their parenting for them. No stranger could ever have molested our children, unless he took them from us at gun point, because there was no time that our children were alone with someone other than me, my wife, or a trusted relative.

Still, the photo paranoia is absurd to the extreme because we're talking about photos of children who are in public and presumably attired in a publicly acceptable way. When my kids were young I always had a camera and I took photos of them and other children without the slightest hesitation. I don't do it know though, even when my wife is with me. And I wouldn't even ask permission to take a photo unless my wife was with me or I was acting in some official capacity --hired, say, to photograph a wedding. However, I do think a female should be less suspect in this regard than a male.

@Stewart Bywater: Thanks. I just wish I lived where I could take more of them. Suburbia is not that place.

@Persian King: Yeah, I was actually going to link to some other things I've come across in the last few days, but I can only take so much of this stuff. If I pay any attention to what's going on in the world I quickly so depressed that all I want to do is go home and have a few drinks and escape into a movie.

@Shawna Goodman: Thank you. I like taking these kinds of shots but don't get much opportunity for it.