[Leica] Well, this is a huge step backward!

[robertbaron1 at gmail.com (Robert Baron)]

I'll say it does.

--Bob

(No, I won't go there.  Ladies on the list.)


==On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Jeffery Smith <jsmith342 at 
gmail.com>wrote:

> I suppose that has merit. But $2.5 million bond seems a bit stiff.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeffery
> ______________________
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> www.400tx.com
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 29, 2012, at 9:01 AM, B. D. Colen wrote:
>
> > A cell phone camera is a camera. A mall is private property, and while
> on that private property you are entirely at the mercy of the property
> owner and his/her/its rules. It may not seem right, but this is not the
> same thing as police or security guard harassment in a public place. Just
> saying.
> > Typed with big fingers on tiny keys
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeffery Smith <jsmith342 at gmail.com>
> > Sender: lug-bounces+bd=bdcolenphoto.com at leica-users.org
> > Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 07:38:31
> > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org><lug at leica-users.org>
> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> > Subject: [Leica] Well, this is a huge step backward!
> >
> > I guy is taking pictures with his cell phone in the mall, and ends up in
> jail.
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/6s6x7a5
> >
> > Voyeurism?while they are shopping?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jeffery
> > ______________________
> > Jeffery Smith
> > New Orleans, LA
> > www.400tx.com
> >
> >
>