What we have here is a Failure to Understand the 1st Amendment

[Skybird]

Star Trek IV, set in the era of the cold war. Chekov in 80s San Francisco asks with strong Russian accent where the American nuclear warships are located.

With some good will you can see why I consider this non-debate closed.

Oh, and Octobre: refineries are wonderful targets for terror strikes. I live close to a channel with a small earth gas storage site, and the pipes and tanks are located within stone-throw's reach from a simpel wire fence I could get over within seconds. 52°01'08N/7°40'00E See the treeline south-east of the perimeter? That is a public way for pedestrians. A low wirefence there, and plenty of pipes and valves three meters behidn the wire. Almost no cameras. Never saw any security guards. No security measures worth the name. I would just need to ride there with a bike, throw a phosphor grenade, and ride on, with the whole place going ablaze. Or a Panzerfaust with an high incendiary warhead. The main gate - is just a wooden bar and a small cabin nearby. You need no car to get through. Ther eis no barrier worth the name. And thousands of gas cylinders stored right behind the gate, not even a wall or a roof, and then the big round tanks you see in the background.

Whenever I pass there, I am stunned by the lack of security there. It is not just an invitation - it is a desperate call for terrorists: "strike here, please".

Evben if the refinbery would see some secureity, photographing the perimeter certainly is a potentially criitcla security breach. Like photographing a chemical plant as well. Or a Fertilizer factory. Or whatever. You know what? Go to your local bank and start shooting opictures there, and inside. You will be surprised how fast security will approach you.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Star Trek IV, set in the era of the cold war. Chekov in 80s San Francisco asks with strong Russian accent where the American nuclear warships are located.

With some good will you can see why I consider this non-debate closed.

Oh, and Octobre: refineries are wonderful targets for terror strikes. I live close to a channel with a small earth gas storage site, and the pipes and tanks are located within stone-throw's reach from a simpel wire fence I could get over within seconds. 52°01'08N/7°40'00E See the treeline south-east of the perimeter? That is a public way for pedestrians. A low wirefence there, and plenty of pipes and valves three meters behidn the wire. Almost no cameras. Never saw any security guards. No security measures worth the name. I would just need to ride there with a bike, throw a phosphor grenade, and ride on, with the whole place going ablaze. Or a Panzerfaust with an high incendiary warhead. The main gate - is just a wooden bar and a small cabin nearby. You need no car to get through. Ther eis no barrier worth the name. And thousands of gas cylinders stored right behind the gate, not even a wall or a roof, and then the big round tanks you see in the background.

Whenever I pass there, I am stunned by the lack of security there. It is not just an invitation - it is a desperate call for terrorists: "strike here, please".

Evben if the refinbery would see some secureity, photographing the perimeter certainly is a potentially criitcla security breach. Like photographing a chemical plant as well. Or a Fertilizer factory. Or whatever. You know what? Go to your local bank and start shooting opictures there, and inside. You will be surprised how fast security will approach you.

Thanks Sky! Got your point now.

[Oberon]

I love that film.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I love that film.

I'm in no way a fan of ST (quite contrary, I think it's overrated POS), but even
I was stunned by that movie. No, not in a good way.

[Penguin]

If you all agree that taking pictures of industry installations should be restricted/forbidden, the question is:
Is Skybird's post illegal?
He gave coordinates, an exact and vivid description of the installation, even a security assessment. What is the difference to a photo?

[razark]

Originally Posted by Penguin

If you all agree that taking pictures of industry installations should be restricted/forbidden, the question is:
Is Skybird's post illegal?
He gave coordinates, an exact and vivid description of the installation, even a security assessment. What is the difference to a photo?

Well, a picture is worth 1000 words. The relevant part of his post was only 198 words. Therefore, it should only be 19.8% illegal.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by razark

Well, a picture is worth 1000 words. The relevant part of his post was only 198 words. Therefore, it should only be 19.8% illegal.

good one!
So we put one leg of him into prison?