rdale
EF5
Just wait til you find out that someone used a lightbar to bust through the roadblock outside this house
- Status
Just wait til you find out that someone used a lightbar to bust through the roadblock outside this house
Jesse Risley
Staff member
You have to also remember that some chasers are working as independent video stringers, with the express purpose of filming and selling video to media outlets that were not and will not be able to document the same events at a given moment in time. This may not make one a member of a bona fide media outlet (i.e., CNN reporter), but then again it's also not simply a group of rubberneckers just getting video for the thrill of capitalizing on someone else's misery.
When I filmed some footage of the Sara Lee turkey farm that took a direct hit west of Fonda, IA on Saturday night, I had a conversation with the facility owner before asking if I could take some film of the aftermath, and he was perfectly okay with that. However, I fully agree that it's in everyone's best interest, for obvious reasons, to always ask permission before entering private property to film damage footage.
Marcus Hicks
EF2
There was no getting past those wires. They were 3 to 4' off the ground. There was no going around them. No one had lightbars flashing at that scene either. This thing is going off the rails with speculation. But again, that was the purpose of this thread anyhow.
Just a quick question.... do those of you who view yourselves as the "Storm Police"; do you have special plastic badges and handcuffs that you use to identify yourselves when you enforce these type of violations? Where would one get these items? Dollar General or another specialty outlet like that?
Rob H
EF5
I used these on the chaser near Mapleton with the annoying disco strobe lights installed in their car's tail lights. Hazards are more than enough, and I had to lay down the law as a licensed and registered chaser. The feedback I received was "Accomplished restraint fairly well, while doing so in a fun and flirty manner. Tickled."
This is just a witch hunt. I have yet to see any negative comments here I'd be willing to take to heart. Some of these thread participants really need to chase a while to truly understand the situations we are in out there. Anymore, freshman & sophomore chasers are the voice of this community out of shear number. I think sitting back and watching how things work and getting a few years under their belts would help them not only understand, but make those of us who have been around the block eventually pay attention to what they have to say.
And yes, many of us are in a role of freelance journalist when it comes to documenting the storm and it's impact. If I'm pointing my camera at a damaged home, I will expect YOU to assume I have made the proper contact to do so, not run to ST like and scream "Disrespect".
And yes, many of us are in a role of freelance journalist when it comes to documenting the storm and it's impact. If I'm pointing my camera at a damaged home, I will expect YOU to assume I have made the proper contact to do so, not run to ST like and scream "Disrespect".
Joshua Nall
EF4
How about someone you've never seen coming up into your yard and then on up on your doorstep of your damaged house, looking around a taking pictures. I think that is the point of the original post. You know, not everyone would just step over something of value and move on, and how are the locals to know what type character they posses.
This whole concept of chasers entering hard hit areas to "help" bugs me. Sometimes I think it's just used as an excuse to be there. On the other hand, there are some folks that can be of real assistance to injured people. What most of us would be best at probably is packing a chainsaw and helping clear streets. When I see a lot of that going on, then that would help me to decide that it's a good thing.
Jeremy Den Hartog
Since you and I have had our disagreements in the past I'm not surprised to see you reply to this thread in a negative way (not to mention once again someone who has failed to even read the thread before commenting). This was no 'witch hunt' as you say. I simply posted a concern that I had where I knew for a fact that proper permission was not granted (yes Marcus made an attempt - which is more then I originally thought when I started this thread). Apparently I have to say this again - I didn't know who the person even was when I originally started the thread and really I didn't care. I just wanted them to know it seemed very disrespectful and unsafe (downed power lines/gas leak by the house) to go onto someones property to film/photograph damage without permission (again as it turns out he felt he had proper permission by asking the person who he felt was in charge).
As far as me 'assuming' a person has permission - that would normally be the case. However, if you had actually read the thread you would have known the homeowner was with us in our vehicle at all times and had expressed concern with strangers approaching his home when he realized that is what happened. Nobody besides family and friends spoke to the homeowner so I don't have to assume anything. Again, Marcus thought he was doing the right thing by asking who he thought was in charge for permission (he probably didn't even know the homeowner was there). It turns out the issue was more to do with communication then anything in this case. Not nearly as big of a deal as this thread has turned into. For that, I'm very sorry to you Marcus for what this thread has become.
Mods, please lock or delete this thread.
I'll address this as my home was hit on 5/10/10 by a satellite to the F4 that affected east Moore and did damage all the way to Choctaw. I was chasing, my wife was home and took shelter. She said within minutes of being hit, there were people everywhere willing to help. People who were not our neighbors. We live in a private gated community; concerned individuals made it a point to get in and ensure residents are okay. It's called being a good samaritan.
After the event we had a lot of people driving by snapping pictures. Oddly enough, I didn't mind it all that much. They didn't have a right to do it as our neighborhood is 100% private property, even the roads. Still though, it was not personal, it's property; property that would be fixed and back to new with time.
If you are a chaser, you are a also potentially a first responder to not only storm victims, but your chase partner(s). You should be responsible and carry a first aid kit and take a yearly CPR course.
I DID read the thread. I do not recall any issue you and I have had in the past but I can certainly help you into that situation if you like. The offense you have taken to my post says a lot.
I'm not sure this thread has run its course but understand why you would like it to be closed with your less than stellar reply to my comments being the final entry.
Perhaps a thread about disrespectful posts can be our next thread on ST?
Jeremy Den Hartog
I agree with you 100% here. All 4 of us chasing that day are first aid/CPR certified and my wife will likely be taking 'first responder' training this fall. In fact, this is why the homeowner was with us in our vehicle. My wife had taken his vital signs tended to injuries, etc with the first aid kit we had with us.
Rob H
EF5
I can understand this criticism if you drive out of your way to come and gawk, but you can't paint things with such a broad brush. There were probably half a dozen cars within a mile of the south side of town when it was hit, and with that type of damage I'm sure all of them were expecting to find severely injured, or dead, people upon driving into town. If you're close enough where you'll beat the EMS by several minutes, you're actually being irresponsible by just driving past, in my opinion. I know several chasers (that were on the south side of town and saw the damage immediately after it happened) did this on Saturday night, but that's on their consciences and it doesn't affect me at all. I also don't claim to know their circumstances, so I'm not passing judgment.
edit: Trust me, this was my first time seeing anything like this and I desperately wanted an excuse to *not* be there. It's a very sickening feeling driving into a town damaged like that, if you haven't experienced it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jeremy Den Hartog
I apologize Steve for having a short fuze. Your right, I jumped on your back immediately mainly because I've been dealing with 'nonsense' posts since I originally made this post of people trying to claim I'm trying to be the 'storm chaser police' (which I'm not) and that I should just 'mind my own business' when these people obviously hadn't read the thread.
Sorry, I meant no disrespect...just the last line of your post rubbed me the wrong way and I thought it was directed at me. Re-reading your post I realize it probably was not.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dan Robinson
EF5
This link is always worth a repost:
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
This issue highlights the flipside of what a lot of us as photographers deal with. We often are harassed for taking photos in places we have every right to - public roads, rights-of-way, city streets, buildings, parks, etc. Knowing your rights as a photographer will help you during these confrontations. But there's a flipside to the photographer's right, which means there are places we can't take or publish photos without permission. Private property is one. The overlying issue, as others have noted, is one of trespass, not photography. Only the property owner has the right to authorize a photographer to enter the property and take photographs. Secondarily is the issue of publishing or using commercially (on or offline in a non-news context) photographs of private property or identifiable people aquired without permission and a written release from the *owner*, whether the images were shot on public or private land. Publishing any such images (other than for news reporting) is an actionable infringement if the property owner chooses to pursue it. For instance, Allstate can't drive by your house, snap a photo, then use it in a national ad campaign for homeowner's insurance. They would need a release from you. If not, you could sue them, and you would win.
News photographers have to be meticulous about these issues on the scenes of crimes, disasters, accidents and fires. No scene is a free-for-all. Not just due to the legal liability, but due to the fact that respect and cooperation with everyone goes a long way in future working relationships with authorities and residents. For example, police and fire crews can restrict access to everyone within a perimeter of a fire or accident, but a photog with good rapport may be allowed access to get the shots he needs - again, from a public right-of-way (no one can authorize a photographer to trespass on private property except the owner).
The NPPA code of ethics and the b-roll.net forum are good places to get a feel for the day-to-day operations of a photographer and the dos and don'ts of the job. Most are common sense and courtesy, but some of them may not be as intuitive as you'd think. We all make mistakes, but live and learn.
Again, I'm not an attorney, only someone who has dealt with the ins and outs of freelance photography for many years. (Seek out professional counsel if you need advice on your individual case.)
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
This issue highlights the flipside of what a lot of us as photographers deal with. We often are harassed for taking photos in places we have every right to - public roads, rights-of-way, city streets, buildings, parks, etc. Knowing your rights as a photographer will help you during these confrontations. But there's a flipside to the photographer's right, which means there are places we can't take or publish photos without permission. Private property is one. The overlying issue, as others have noted, is one of trespass, not photography. Only the property owner has the right to authorize a photographer to enter the property and take photographs. Secondarily is the issue of publishing or using commercially (on or offline in a non-news context) photographs of private property or identifiable people aquired without permission and a written release from the *owner*, whether the images were shot on public or private land. Publishing any such images (other than for news reporting) is an actionable infringement if the property owner chooses to pursue it. For instance, Allstate can't drive by your house, snap a photo, then use it in a national ad campaign for homeowner's insurance. They would need a release from you. If not, you could sue them, and you would win.
News photographers have to be meticulous about these issues on the scenes of crimes, disasters, accidents and fires. No scene is a free-for-all. Not just due to the legal liability, but due to the fact that respect and cooperation with everyone goes a long way in future working relationships with authorities and residents. For example, police and fire crews can restrict access to everyone within a perimeter of a fire or accident, but a photog with good rapport may be allowed access to get the shots he needs - again, from a public right-of-way (no one can authorize a photographer to trespass on private property except the owner).
The NPPA code of ethics and the b-roll.net forum are good places to get a feel for the day-to-day operations of a photographer and the dos and don'ts of the job. Most are common sense and courtesy, but some of them may not be as intuitive as you'd think. We all make mistakes, but live and learn.
Again, I'm not an attorney, only someone who has dealt with the ins and outs of freelance photography for many years. (Seek out professional counsel if you need advice on your individual case.)
Last edited by a moderator:
Keith Hosman
EF1
I've already commented on my thoughts about taking pictures on private property so I'll not revisit that.
I personally believe anyone chasing should have CPR/First Aid training and carry at least a basic first aid kit, if nothing else than for those in your chase group.
Remember shock by itself is a life threatening situation, and a person can go into shock w/o having any real injuries, just a traumatic experience can cause a person to go into shock. If you are there first, any treatment no matter how minimal is better than none. The most important thing one can do even if not trained is to call 911 to get help on the way.
- Status
Similar threads
