4 ms·

We don't know what the security guard told the FBI. I'd be willing to bet that if a security guard bothers to report a 72 year old with a high-quality camera f

by dm2 12y ago

We don't know what the security guard told the FBI. I'd be willing to bet that if a security guard bothers to report a 72 year old with a high-quality camera for taking pictures of obvious artwork to the FBI that the guard exaggerated the encounter. I've heard of several of these FBI followups in the past ~10 years but the person being interviewed always said nothing but positive things about how professional and calm the FBI agents were. They didn't send a 30 person SWAT team like the DEA would or multiple agents to your door with exposed guns threatening you. Yes, I've personally seen multiple instances of the DEA raiding homes while I was in college, good peoples lives were ruined because "someone smelled marijuana at a party". It's the FBI's job to follow up on these types of instances. They were heavily criticized after 9/11 that they received tips but didn't properly follow up, now they follow up and everyone complains that they shouldn't bother anyone. Does anyone think the FBI would simply leave a card asking for a phone call if they really believed that person was any real threat? I'm just offering another possible perspective to the story that doesn't fit the mainstream "all law enforcement are bad" group-think going around. Think before jumping on the bandwagon guys. The security guard who over-reacted is the issue here, not the FBI. Yes, the Patriot Act needs to be revisited or even thrown out and the NSA needs to go back to having very strict limitations on sharing with other agencies and allied nations, but that's a different conversation.

tnorthcutt 12y ago
From the guidelines[0]: Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you. 0: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dm2 12y ago
  Reworded that sentence, thanks, I didn't know that was a possible issue, was a little ticked off after typing a long thoughtful response only to see it instantly down-voted before anyone could have possibly had a chance to read it.
uptown 12y ago
"It's the FBI's job to follow up on these types of instances." What kind of instances? Taking a photo? The author's exact point is that society should recalibrate itself such that anybody photographing a public piece of artwork shouldn't raise suspicions or trigger an FBI follow-up. It's the physical equivalent to the NSA's "collect-it-all" mentality. Targeted intelligence gathering is the appropriate approach in my opinion. And sometimes that means accepting that a 72 year old photographing a made-to-be-photographed statue isn't leading a sleeper cell.
- dm2 12y ago
  No, reports from a security guard is the kind of instance I am referring to. If the security guard had said "an older man wanted to take pictures of this art-work which happens to be a common natural-gas storage tank, he didn't appear to be a threat", then I can't imagine that the FBI would have wasted resources following up with more than a phone call.
- nemothekid 12y ago
  Thats a tough issue, what if he was a threat. What harm is in the FBI just following up? When a 6 year old calls 911 to chat with an officer, police still follow up to make sure that it was just a 6 year old and not a distress signal. If the officers were polite what harm is there in them following up and making sure?
  - kelnos 12y ago
    Instances of this have chilling effects. I don't want FBI agents showing up at my door, ever. I might think twice about photographing something in public for fear that someone might report me. That's messed up. You can play the "what if" game until the cows go home, and opinions will of course differ as to where the line of caution should be drawn, but IMO we're far far into the land of paranoia at this point.
  - pyre 12y ago
    It's a start down the 'report your neighbors for subversive ideas, comrade' path. What disincentive is there for security guards to not just "report everything, just in case?" How many people will decide not to photograph said art-piece because they might get a visit from the FBI? Is the answer to all this just some hand-wavy 'everything changed after 9/11?'
megablast 12y ago
So, after how many times of being fooled by "minimum wage security guard"s do the FBI start taking this into consideration in their investigations?
c_c_c 12y ago
What's the flip side to running down every lead though? Information overload that may (will?) miss more significant threats. Do they not have some sort of triage for this ?
- dm2 12y ago
  I'm sure the FBI understands the concept of prioritizing leads when/if they get overloaded. There are generally field offices in most major cities so I doubt they had to travel across the country or anything.
- jonnybgood 12y ago
  > Information overload that may (will?) miss more significant threats. Well, that's kinda the point of these follow-ups. How would the FBI know if something is or isn't a significant threat?
  - kelnos 12y ago
    Common sense? An 80+ year old man standing on public property taking a photograph of a famous piece of artwork isn't remotely a terrorist threat. Presumably the FBI could have even figured out that he's been a professional photographer for most of his life, and done a little research on their that would make it entirely obvious that there was nothing fishy going on there. And double shame on the security guards for even reporting him in the first place.
    - jonnybgood 12y ago
      > Common sense? An 80+ year old man standing on public property taking a photograph of a famous piece of artwork isn't remotely a terrorist threat. Presumably the FBI could have even figured out that he's been a professional photographer for most of his life, and done a little research on their that would make it entirely obvious that there was nothing fishy going on there. Everything you just said here is the point of a follow-up.
      - 12y ago
pyre 12y ago
> It's the FBI's job to follow up on these types of instances. What types of instances are these? "I saw someone photographing a monument" instances? Don't you think that our resources would be spread pretty thin if we were investigating all such instances? > They were heavily criticized after 9/11 that they received tips but didn't properly follow up They were criticized for not following up on "photography of landmarks is suspicious" tips?
baddox 12y ago
> It's the FBI's job to follow up on these types of instances. It's part of their job to sanely estimate the credibility of reports. If I can phone the FBI and say something that causes them to send an agent to track someone down (or worse, to sent a SWAT team), there's a serious problem with the way they are performing their job.
- dm2 12y ago
  When the FBI investigates someone from a tip that isn't very obviously a serious threat they do not treat the person being investigated like a criminal, that's half of what I wrote above. Many times if they want an extended chat they will even take the person out for coffee, just to get a feel of the situation and ask questions. http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visit-from-fbi.html http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visi... Yes, if an investigation is more serious then the FBI can be very intimidating, such as: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/whitehat-hacker-goes-too-far-gets-raided-by-fbi-tells-all/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/whitehat-hacker-g... I'm just saying that if the FBI did investigate me there is a reasonable chance they would act civil and objectively rather than abusing their power and using unnecessary force, and that's the way it should be.
  - zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 12y ago
    So, what do you expect would their reaction be if you refused their coffee? And would you even try to refuse? You see, having to explain what you do and why you do it is already a limitation of your freedom, and has chilling effects on society as a whole. If there is no indication I have done anything illegal, it's none of their business, I don't have to explain how I live my life and why, to anybody.
  - astrange 12y ago
    > http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visit-from-fbi.html http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visi... Disappointing lack of common sense from these commenters. The prior probability that someone has bugged your house isn't affected by their claiming to be an FBI agent and taking you out for coffee. That's because, if you secretly bug someone's house, it's a secret. They would be doing it either way. (Or not doing it, because what are you supposed to find exactly?)
jonah 12y ago
They had his name and address. I suspect they also found that he was a published photographer of the subject matter in question. Did no one think "oh, I see, he was just doing his work." and left it at that? No need to contact him.
- dm2 12y ago
  I would argue that we are not qualified to make that assumption but the FBI agents in question are. There could have easily been a small fact or incident in the past with the author of the article that raised a red-flag for the agents. There could be a policy that says ALL tips must be followed up on and contacted. I'm all for exposing and preventing abuses of power by law enforcement, but I see no evidence of that happening in this situation.
  - jonah 12y ago
    I would agree that we don't know the details in this particular case. OTOH, I think we hear about similar cases often enough to safely assume that at least a fair number of them wouldn't need to be taken as far if a little bit of common sense was utilized. (But maybe it's just that we don't hear about the ones where it was.)
    - dm2 12y ago
      There are crazy and evil people in the world who are determined to harm society and other innocent people, and part of the FBI's job is to help prevent this. The acceptable cost is debatable. If the FBI investigates 500,000 people and prevents a single instance similar to the photo below, is it worth it? http://11even.net/wp-content/uploads/World-Trade-Center-2002-Pulitzer-Prize-for-Breaking-News-Photography-by-Steve-Ludlum-New-York-Times-1.jpg http://11even.net/wp-content/uploads/World-Trade-Center-2002... There have been plenty of attacks stopped http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States There is always the possibility of something even worse happening. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_terrorism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_terrorism A notable incident from 2013: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-foils-plot-build-strange-ray-weapon-possibly/story?id=19440343 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-foils-plot-build-strange-... I'm sorry if this sounds like fear-mongering, these things do happen though.

by dm2 12y ago

tnorthcutt 12y ago

From the guidelines[0]: Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you. 0: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

dm2 12y ago
Reworded that sentence, thanks, I didn't know that was a possible issue, was a little ticked off after typing a long thoughtful response only to see it instantly down-voted before anyone could have possibly had a chance to read it.

uptown 12y ago

"It's the FBI's job to follow up on these types of instances." What kind of instances? Taking a photo? The author's exact point is that society should recalibrate itself such that anybody photographing a public piece of artwork shouldn't raise suspicions or trigger an FBI follow-up. It's the physical equivalent to the NSA's "collect-it-all" mentality. Targeted intelligence gathering is the appropriate approach in my opinion. And sometimes that means accepting that a 72 year old photographing a made-to-be-photographed statue isn't leading a sleeper cell.

dm2 12y ago
No, reports from a security guard is the kind of instance I am referring to. If the security guard had said "an older man wanted to take pictures of this art-work which happens to be a common natural-gas storage tank, he didn't appear to be a threat", then I can't imagine that the FBI would have wasted resources following up with more than a phone call.
nemothekid 12y ago
Thats a tough issue, what if he was a threat. What harm is in the FBI just following up? When a 6 year old calls 911 to chat with an officer, police still follow up to make sure that it was just a 6 year old and not a distress signal. If the officers were polite what harm is there in them following up and making sure?
- kelnos 12y ago
  Instances of this have chilling effects. I don't want FBI agents showing up at my door, ever. I might think twice about photographing something in public for fear that someone might report me. That's messed up. You can play the "what if" game until the cows go home, and opinions will of course differ as to where the line of caution should be drawn, but IMO we're far far into the land of paranoia at this point.
- pyre 12y ago
  It's a start down the 'report your neighbors for subversive ideas, comrade' path. What disincentive is there for security guards to not just "report everything, just in case?" How many people will decide not to photograph said art-piece because they might get a visit from the FBI? Is the answer to all this just some hand-wavy 'everything changed after 9/11?'

megablast 12y ago

So, after how many times of being fooled by "minimum wage security guard"s do the FBI start taking this into consideration in their investigations?

c_c_c 12y ago

What's the flip side to running down every lead though? Information overload that may (will?) miss more significant threats. Do they not have some sort of triage for this ?

dm2 12y ago
I'm sure the FBI understands the concept of prioritizing leads when/if they get overloaded. There are generally field offices in most major cities so I doubt they had to travel across the country or anything.
jonnybgood 12y ago
> Information overload that may (will?) miss more significant threats. Well, that's kinda the point of these follow-ups. How would the FBI know if something is or isn't a significant threat?
- kelnos 12y ago
  Common sense? An 80+ year old man standing on public property taking a photograph of a famous piece of artwork isn't remotely a terrorist threat. Presumably the FBI could have even figured out that he's been a professional photographer for most of his life, and done a little research on their that would make it entirely obvious that there was nothing fishy going on there. And double shame on the security guards for even reporting him in the first place.
  - jonnybgood 12y ago
    > Common sense? An 80+ year old man standing on public property taking a photograph of a famous piece of artwork isn't remotely a terrorist threat. Presumably the FBI could have even figured out that he's been a professional photographer for most of his life, and done a little research on their that would make it entirely obvious that there was nothing fishy going on there. Everything you just said here is the point of a follow-up.
    - 12y ago

pyre 12y ago

> It's the FBI's job to follow up on these types of instances. What types of instances are these? "I saw someone photographing a monument" instances? Don't you think that our resources would be spread pretty thin if we were investigating all such instances? > They were heavily criticized after 9/11 that they received tips but didn't properly follow up They were criticized for not following up on "photography of landmarks is suspicious" tips?

baddox 12y ago

> It's the FBI's job to follow up on these types of instances. It's part of their job to sanely estimate the credibility of reports. If I can phone the FBI and say something that causes them to send an agent to track someone down (or worse, to sent a SWAT team), there's a serious problem with the way they are performing their job.

dm2 12y ago
When the FBI investigates someone from a tip that isn't very obviously a serious threat they do not treat the person being investigated like a criminal, that's half of what I wrote above. Many times if they want an extended chat they will even take the person out for coffee, just to get a feel of the situation and ask questions. http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visit-from-fbi.html http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visi... Yes, if an investigation is more serious then the FBI can be very intimidating, such as: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/whitehat-hacker-goes-too-far-gets-raided-by-fbi-tells-all/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/whitehat-hacker-g... I'm just saying that if the FBI did investigate me there is a reasonable chance they would act civil and objectively rather than abusing their power and using unnecessary force, and that's the way it should be.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 12y ago
  So, what do you expect would their reaction be if you refused their coffee? And would you even try to refuse? You see, having to explain what you do and why you do it is already a limitation of your freedom, and has chilling effects on society as a whole. If there is no indication I have done anything illegal, it's none of their business, I don't have to explain how I live my life and why, to anybody.
- astrange 12y ago
  > http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visit-from-fbi.html http://www.banterant.com/2013/08/homes-for-hackers-gets-visi... Disappointing lack of common sense from these commenters. The prior probability that someone has bugged your house isn't affected by their claiming to be an FBI agent and taking you out for coffee. That's because, if you secretly bug someone's house, it's a secret. They would be doing it either way. (Or not doing it, because what are you supposed to find exactly?)

jonah 12y ago

They had his name and address. I suspect they also found that he was a published photographer of the subject matter in question. Did no one think "oh, I see, he was just doing his work." and left it at that? No need to contact him.

dm2 12y ago
I would argue that we are not qualified to make that assumption but the FBI agents in question are. There could have easily been a small fact or incident in the past with the author of the article that raised a red-flag for the agents. There could be a policy that says ALL tips must be followed up on and contacted. I'm all for exposing and preventing abuses of power by law enforcement, but I see no evidence of that happening in this situation.
- jonah 12y ago
  I would agree that we don't know the details in this particular case. OTOH, I think we hear about similar cases often enough to safely assume that at least a fair number of them wouldn't need to be taken as far if a little bit of common sense was utilized. (But maybe it's just that we don't hear about the ones where it was.)
  - dm2 12y ago
    There are crazy and evil people in the world who are determined to harm society and other innocent people, and part of the FBI's job is to help prevent this. The acceptable cost is debatable. If the FBI investigates 500,000 people and prevents a single instance similar to the photo below, is it worth it? http://11even.net/wp-content/uploads/World-Trade-Center-2002-Pulitzer-Prize-for-Breaking-News-Photography-by-Steve-Ludlum-New-York-Times-1.jpg http://11even.net/wp-content/uploads/World-Trade-Center-2002... There have been plenty of attacks stopped http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States There is always the possibility of something even worse happening. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_terrorism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_terrorism A notable incident from 2013: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-foils-plot-build-strange-ray-weapon-possibly/story?id=19440343 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fbi-foils-plot-build-strange-... I'm sorry if this sounds like fear-mongering, these things do happen though.