5 ms·

Then the military ought to choose a better location, somewhere a civilian with a good camera can't take such compromising photos.

scrum-treats 3y ago
so... time travel back to pre-2020s?
downvotetruth 3y ago
Alaska tundra would probably be the best spot given the absence of people, cloud cover, ice as runway, and cold for engine efficiency. Would be interesting to know how many mountain tops would need to be closed to stop the ground cameras for 51.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
ethanbond 3y ago
Sure! Til then I’m 100% fine with them going after people who blatantly break a completely reasonable law.
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago
  They are not breaking any laws though. If you film stuff from public space, you are not breaking any law. The onus is on the government to secure their stuff, not punish people taking photos from public lands.
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    It is quite obviously completely illegal, and you can look at the search warrant (indicating a judge agreed there was probable cause) for the specific laws. I copy/pasted a few below for you. Whether all or some of those laws are constitutional and will stand up in court can change year by year. I strongly, strongly suspect that no judge is going to strike down the government's ability to restrict people from collecting and disseminating information on secret military installations. It is objectively true that these installations, their secrecy (and this one installation and its secrecy in particular) have been instrumental to the federal government's ability to carry out its obligations over the past several decades. 18 USC 795: It's illegal to photograph or sketch secret military installations (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/795 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/795) 18 USC 796: It's illegal to use an aircraft to photograph secret military installations (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/796 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/796) 18 USC 797: It's illegal to disseminate photographs of secret military installations (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/797 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/797) Arresting people for openly breaking the law is a perfectly valid component of "securing their stuff." In fact that is precisely how almost everything in our society is actually secured: by threat of law.
    - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
      I stand corrected. 18 USC 796 I can understand, but 18 USC 795 and 18 USC 797 surprise me. I would have thought such laws were restricted to military personnel. Civilians sketching or photographing from public space I would have thought would be legal.
      - ethanbond 3y ago
        Not even a country with such strong protections as the US would legalize spying on their secret military installations…
        PrimeMcFly 3y ago
        There is a difference in 'spying', and taking photos from a public viewpoint though. It's not really spying if it's done completely out in the open. The same way you can't 'spy' on police or other government buildings by filming them from public view, something explicitly allowed.
        ethanbond 3y ago
        You can’t spy on police and government buildings because they’re not sensitive. They are largely meant to operate in the public eye. Some weapon development programs aren’t (thus they are secret). Please note: If you pull up to the gates of CIA with a zoom lens and start taking photos of their doors and windows, you will also have a very bad time, despite the fact that both inside and outside the gates are public land.
        PrimeMcFly 3y ago
        My point is I don't think it should be illegal to openly photograph anything visible from public land. It should be the government's responsibility to secure and hide their land without criminalizing interested members of the public from taking photos and observing what they are doing. It's the equivalent of sunbathing naked on your front lawn and getting angry that someone is taking photos.

scrum-treats 3y ago

so... time travel back to pre-2020s?

downvotetruth 3y ago

Alaska tundra would probably be the best spot given the absence of people, cloud cover, ice as runway, and cold for engine efficiency. Would be interesting to know how many mountain tops would need to be closed to stop the ground cameras for 51.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

ethanbond 3y ago

Sure! Til then I’m 100% fine with them going after people who blatantly break a completely reasonable law.

PrimeMcFly 3y ago
They are not breaking any laws though. If you film stuff from public space, you are not breaking any law. The onus is on the government to secure their stuff, not punish people taking photos from public lands.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  It is quite obviously completely illegal, and you can look at the search warrant (indicating a judge agreed there was probable cause) for the specific laws. I copy/pasted a few below for you. Whether all or some of those laws are constitutional and will stand up in court can change year by year. I strongly, strongly suspect that no judge is going to strike down the government's ability to restrict people from collecting and disseminating information on secret military installations. It is objectively true that these installations, their secrecy (and this one installation and its secrecy in particular) have been instrumental to the federal government's ability to carry out its obligations over the past several decades. 18 USC 795: It's illegal to photograph or sketch secret military installations (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/795 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/795) 18 USC 796: It's illegal to use an aircraft to photograph secret military installations (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/796 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/796) 18 USC 797: It's illegal to disseminate photographs of secret military installations (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/797 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/797) Arresting people for openly breaking the law is a perfectly valid component of "securing their stuff." In fact that is precisely how almost everything in our society is actually secured: by threat of law.
  - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
    I stand corrected. 18 USC 796 I can understand, but 18 USC 795 and 18 USC 797 surprise me. I would have thought such laws were restricted to military personnel. Civilians sketching or photographing from public space I would have thought would be legal.
    - ethanbond 3y ago
      Not even a country with such strong protections as the US would legalize spying on their secret military installations…
      - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
        There is a difference in 'spying', and taking photos from a public viewpoint though. It's not really spying if it's done completely out in the open. The same way you can't 'spy' on police or other government buildings by filming them from public view, something explicitly allowed.
        ethanbond 3y ago
        You can’t spy on police and government buildings because they’re not sensitive. They are largely meant to operate in the public eye. Some weapon development programs aren’t (thus they are secret). Please note: If you pull up to the gates of CIA with a zoom lens and start taking photos of their doors and windows, you will also have a very bad time, despite the fact that both inside and outside the gates are public land.
        PrimeMcFly 3y ago
        My point is I don't think it should be illegal to openly photograph anything visible from public land. It should be the government's responsibility to secure and hide their land without criminalizing interested members of the public from taking photos and observing what they are doing. It's the equivalent of sunbathing naked on your front lawn and getting angry that someone is taking photos.