Odd thought, that: "I'd rather be in Dallas". Something like W. C. Fields' "I'd rather be in Philadelphia". Where would I rather be? Not good when there's no response. People should know where they'd rather be. How else are you going to buy a ticket? A one way ticket to the place I'd rather be, Mr. Conductor please: first class, second class, baggage class, doesn't matter to me.

Friday. I walked by the Federal Building today in Oakland with a camera in hand (over the shoulder, actually) and stumbled across a small demonstration protesting the actions of the FBI and the Oakland police in accusing Judi Bari, a woman who was maimed in a car explosion that was billed by the FBI as a botched "save the forests" terrorist act gone bad in 1990. She was a leader in the local Earth First! movement. The locals didn't like the local Earth First! movement. The FBI evidently didn't like the Earth First! movement either, and although they accused Bari of making the prematurely exploding bomb, they never filed charges and they dropped the case without further investigation. (They knew who done it, right, so why look for nonexistent perpetrators?)

Bari and Earth First! finally sued the FBI and the Oakland police in 1991 "under the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments for conspiracy, false arrest, unlawful search and seizure, interfering with their right to organize politically, and denying equal protection of the law in allowing the real assassins to go free". She wasn't making bombs, she had certainly received threats against her life before the assassination attempt (reporting them to the police) and the bomb was found to have been set under the floorboards of her car where a cut the trees assassin might most likely place it. This demonstration was an attempt to bring publicity to the trial which is finally in court after ten years of stalling by the government. Ten years.

As I was shooting, a young woman, short hair, face intimidatingly close, asked in an edged, but conversational tone, direct eye contact, studying my every reaction: "who did I work for?" I said I didn't work for a paper, that I was a freelancer ("may I have one of your business cards?") and no, I didn't have a card, I was an amateur and didn't sell my pictures.

She wanted to know why I'd shot her picture. I hadn't remembered shooting her picture, but I'm sure I had, probably within that last minute on automatic pilot shooting faces as I found them. Most people assume I'm with the media and I'm careful not to be too rude, so they don't really pay attention when they see I've shot their photograph. I do try to be civilized and if someone looks uncomfortable, I usually chicken out and look for another subject. But I keep on shooting.

Anyway, our faces twelve inches apart (probably more, but clearly at an "in your face" distance), she grilled me about who I was, who I shot pictures for (the CIA? the Feds? Oakland PD?) and I was answering, somewhat flustered, no, I was an amateur, I maintained a web site, this one, etc. etc.

This has happened before and it isn't an overly pleasant experience. It does, though, make me think about the ethical issues inherent in keeping this site. Legally, anyone is allowed to shoot people in public areas and put them up here on the web, just as a newspaper is allowed to publish the pictures of people they shoot in similarly public places, but legal is legal and legal isn't necessarily the same thing as ethical or polite or politically correct. Right doesn't imply nice.

I shot pictures at the 1998 San Francisco gay pride parade of a woman dressed in a military style jacket and cap, fishnet stockings, high heels, carrying a riding crop. She saw me shooting as she approached and gave me a proper dressing down, "who gave me permission to shoot her picture!!!", or words to that effect. In retrospect it should have been humorous, since I'd shot her as she was walking by me to do an interview with a waiting television crew, cameras humming. I mentioned it to a friend.

You're wondering why a woman tricked out in leather riding crop, military jacket and brass buttons is pushing your buttons? Hello? Is there anyone inside?

Ah.

And today? Well, this woman was young, clear eyed, intelligent, controlled, hostile and into pushing buttons herself and my shooting her picture had given her an excuse for an off the cuff workout. And, who knows, maybe I was some kind of police photographer pervert (with a web site), although I think the police would be into video and perverts, from what I've read, use little bitty cameras they can snake up women's dresses. More than a few people with video cameras at this particular demonstration. News photographers too. Or what looked to be news photographers. I asked her, if I were a photographer for The Chronicle, would it have been OK to shoot her picture?

"Yes".

But if I'm shooting them for myself, that's not OK?

"Right."

Well, as I said, not pleasant to have someone with skill attempt to push your buttons, but it does make you examine your own assumptions about what you're doing. A reality check. Not many people out there on the street shooting pictures and the ones you hear about, the ones who make the news, tend not to be overly nice. My hunch is this woman today is into intimidation the way I'm into photography and she was just using me to sharpen her skills in a little lunch time workout. I'll be curious, when I get the contact sheets, to see if I actually did shoot her picture. Be a kick if I hadn't and she knew it.

What are the ethics of taking pictures of people and putting them here? Legal, yes, but again, legal is only legal. Nothing is black and white and my choice is, I guess, to grow thicker skin. And get some business cards to pass out when asked. Only fair, I think. (They've been on the list, you know, the "I'm gonna do it, but never do it" list?) What would Weegee have done? Used a longer lens?