Pulled over while roadgeeking

[formulanone]

Darn it, DeaconG...the Mk. 1 should be all the credentials one should ever need! I'm down in the 1100D-lot.

[DeaconG]

Darn it, DeaconG...the Mk. 1 should be all the credentials one should ever need! I'm down in the 1100D-lot.

It does whatever I need it to do and I don't have upgradeitis! My 50D and 5D II aren't going anywhere.

[iBallasticwolf2]

Darn it, DeaconG...the Mk. 1 should be all the credentials one should ever need! I'm down in the 1100D-lot.

It does whatever I want!

FTFY

[DeaconG]

Darn it, DeaconG...the Mk. 1 should be all the credentials one should ever need! I'm down in the 1100D-lot.

It does whatever I want!

FTFY

[dfwmapper]

Taking a fucking picture isn't "suspicious behavior." It's just taking a picture.

That depends on the context of the picture taking. If you're pulled over on the side of the highway and hanging around a bunch of signs, there is a concern that you might be there to vandalize or steal the signs. If a cop pulls over and asks what you're doing, that's OK, as long as "I like to take pictures of neat signs to show my friends on the Internet" is an acceptable answer and you don't get told to leave or stop doing it or whatever.

[Rothman]

If you're pulled over on the side of the highway and hanging around a bunch of signs, there is a concern that you might be there to vandalize or steal the signs.

It makes no sense to take a picture of a sign that you're going to steal later.  There's no reason to take a picture of something that'll be hanging in your home soon enough.

Also, it's kind of hard to cut down a sign with a camera.

Yeah, I'm a member of the "taking pictures is harmless" camp.

[jakeroot]

If you're pulled over on the side of the highway and hanging around a bunch of signs, there is a concern that you might be there to vandalize or steal the signs.

It makes no sense to take a picture of a sign that you're going to steal later.  There's no reason to take a picture of something that'll be hanging in your home soon enough.

Also, it's kind of hard to cut down a sign with a camera.

Yeah, I'm a member of the "taking pictures is harmless" camp.

You can't take everything at face-value. Hence why we have police in the first place.

Also, taking a photo of something you're going to steal makes a lot of sense. It helps you plan the heist (understanding the surrounding environment is helpful beforehand).

[Rothman]

Casing a sign beforehand, like casing a convenience store?



In this case, one really is innocent until proven guilty.  The suspicion is unwarranted and there's more important things the cop should do besides bother a guy taking pictures of a road sign.

[kkt]

If you're pulled over on the side of the highway and hanging around a bunch of signs, there is a concern that you might be there to vandalize or steal the signs.

It makes no sense to take a picture of a sign that you're going to steal later.  There's no reason to take a picture of something that'll be hanging in your home soon enough.

Also, it's kind of hard to cut down a sign with a camera.

Yeah, I'm a member of the "taking pictures is harmless" camp.

You're being logical.  In the minds of many police officers, that makes you a suspicious character.

[Rothman]

If you're pulled over on the side of the highway and hanging around a bunch of signs, there is a concern that you might be there to vandalize or steal the signs.

It makes no sense to take a picture of a sign that you're going to steal later.  There's no reason to take a picture of something that'll be hanging in your home soon enough.

Also, it's kind of hard to cut down a sign with a camera.

Yeah, I'm a member of the "taking pictures is harmless" camp.

You're being logical.  In the minds of many police officers, that makes you a suspicious character.

Whoa.  You're right.

[jakeroot]

Casing a sign beforehand, like casing a convenience store? ... The suspicion is unwarranted and there's more important things the cop should do besides bother a guy taking pictures of a road sign.

Why not? Reconnaissance is necessary before any sort of crime. Ideally, you stop crimes before they happen, hence police inquiries.

In this case, one really is innocent until proven guilty

No one is being labelled guilty of a crime, here. The police are simply interested in your behavior, given the odd nature of it. Perhaps you don't consider it odd, but most people I've met do find roadgeeking strange. It's just how it is.

[corco]

So note the license plate and move on. If the sign is stolen shortly thereafter, that person becomes the prime suspect.

No reason to interrogate a person not doing anything illegal. If life is at stake it's okay to ask what's up, but when the worst case scenario is a stolen sign that's not acceptable.

[Rothman]

So note the license plate and move on. If the sign is stolen shortly thereafter, that person becomes the prime suspect.

No reason to interrogate a person not doing anything illegal.

^This.  Bugging someone about taking a picture of a sign or airplane just seems unnecessary.

[jakeroot]

So note the license plate and move on. If the sign is stolen shortly thereafter, that person becomes the prime suspect. ... No reason to interrogate a person not doing anything illegal.

That's perfectly reasonable to me. But odd behavior is odd ... police are in the right to ask questions. It's their job.

If life is at stake it's okay to ask what's up, but when the worst case scenario is a stolen sign that's not acceptable.

How would you know beforehand which was going to happen? Someone could be planning on blowing up a sign*. You never know.

*I know that sounds absolutely ludicrous, and I would agree with that, but police and investigators alike are trained to recognize even the most benign situations as potential crimes (post-9/11). I know it sucks, but it's just the way it is.

[iBallasticwolf2]

If life is at stake it's okay to ask what's up, but when the worst case scenario is a stolen sign that's not acceptable.

How would you know beforehand which was going to happen? Someone could be planning on blowing up a sign*. You never know.

You have a point but I don't think people would decide to blow up a sign.

[vdeane]

If life is at stake it's okay to ask what's up, but when the worst case scenario is a stolen sign that's not acceptable.

How would you know beforehand which was going to happen? Someone could be planning on blowing up a sign*. You never know.

You have a point but I don't think people would decide to blow up a sign.

But blowing up a sign could be the most destructive thing a terrorist could ever do.  Here's how:
-Terrorist puts bomb on sign.
-Terrorist looks at bomb on sign.
-Non-roadgeeks feel that if you've seen one sign, you've seen them all.  Since their is a 99.99% chance the terrorist is not a roadgeek, the bomb is now on every sign in existance.
-The bomb goes off, it goes off on every sign in existance, creating a multi-flashpoint explosion apocalypse.

[iBallasticwolf2]

But blowing up a sign could be the most destructive thing a terrorist could ever do.  Here's how:
-Terrorist puts bomb on sign.
-Terrorist looks at bomb on sign.
-Non-roadgeeks feel that if you've seen one sign, you've seen them all.  Since their is a 99.99% chance the terrorist is not a roadgeek, the bomb is now on every sign in existance.
-The bomb goes off, it goes off on every sign in existance, creating a multi-flashpoint explosion apocalypse.

[jakeroot]

But blowing up a sign could be the most destructive thing a terrorist could ever do.  Here's how:
-Terrorist puts bomb on sign.
-Terrorist looks at bomb on sign.
-Non-roadgeeks feel that if you've seen one sign, you've seen them all.  Since their is a 99.99% chance the terrorist is not a roadgeek, the bomb is now on every sign in existance.
-The bomb goes off, it goes off on every sign in existance, creating a multi-flashpoint explosion apocalypse.

"not sure if serious"

Either way, it wraps back to the original discussion. Valerie demonstrates how a sign could very easily become a lethal weapon, despite you and Rothman's conclusions that signs are not dangerous. The fact is, they could be very dangerous, and police have the right to keep the travelling motorists safe by investigating odd behavior related to the given roadway.

[Zeffy]

Either way, it wraps back to the original discussion. Valerie demonstrates how a sign could very easily become a lethal weapon, despite you and Rothman's conclusions that signs are not dangerous. The fact is, they could be very dangerous, and police have the right to keep the travelling motorists safe by investigating odd behavior related to the given roadway.

I mean, strapping a bomb to anything (or the ground, even) pretty much turns it into a deadly weapon. However, I respect most police officers, and them questioning activity that is a bit odd is fine by me.

[Rothman]

But blowing up a sign could be the most destructive thing a terrorist could ever do.  Here's how:
-Terrorist puts bomb on sign.
-Terrorist looks at bomb on sign.
-Non-roadgeeks feel that if you've seen one sign, you've seen them all.  Since their is a 99.99% chance the terrorist is not a roadgeek, the bomb is now on every sign in existance.
-The bomb goes off, it goes off on every sign in existance, creating a multi-flashpoint explosion apocalypse.

"not sure if serious"

Either way, it wraps back to the original discussion. Valerie demonstrates how a sign could very easily become a lethal weapon, despite you and Rothman's conclusions that signs are not dangerous.

Your sarcasm detector is malfunctioning.

[jakeroot]

Your sarcasm detector is malfunctioning.

Nothing says "I was wrong" quite like "I was being sarcastic".

People take pictures of literally everything.

Except road signs. What we, as roadgeeks do, is strange and odd. Things that are strange and odd are indicative of suspicious activity.

[Rothman]

Except road signs. What we, as roadgeeks do, is strange and odd. Things that are strange and odd are indicative of suspicious activity.

Acting strangely or oddly is not necessarily indicative of someone participating in illegal activity.  Taking a picture of a sign may be strange or odd, but it's not indicative of anything illegal and is therefore, not something to warrant serious suspicion of nefarious behavior.

[D-Dey65]

You have a point but I don't think people would decide to blow up a sign.

Really? Because I'm all for blowing up ISIS signs in Iraq and Syria.

[bugo]

Why the fuck would you make a bomb out of a sign? An effective bomb will contain shrapnel, in order to cause maximum damage.

[jakeroot]

Why the fuck would you make a bomb out of a sign? An effective bomb will contain shrapnel, in order to cause maximum damage.

You would have to be absolutely fucking mental, but people make bombs out of all sorts of things these days. Lots of times, they aren't necessarily looking for complete utter destruction, just a little here and there. Just enough to kill some people and panic the rest.

I hope the FBI doesn't watch this page.