I missed a great opportunity today…

Nice one MHP. I think you mean "ass" rather than any word that needs to be censored...
If you assume it makes an ass out of u and me.

The famous Pulitzer prize photo of the people falling from the fire escape was one of those. But it was good it was shown, because they re-evaluated the standards for fire escapes, because it shouldn't have broken like that.

There's actually a huge ethics thing behind all of it. And there is a fine line.

StewartR, maybe you feel I am being harsh - but I am talking as someone who has ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED this.

I dont care about all the other posters talk about ethics.

Unless they have been in the same position they can only surmise what it feels like. And it is totally degrading. I did not want to be in the newspapers, I did not want the world to see me lying prone on a stretcher being given oxygen, I did not want my family pictured ashen faced with worry. Its not in the public interest - its ghoulish.

Talking about what the word "assume" can be taken to mean - irrelevant, totally irrelevant. And probably posted by people who really have nothing to say, so they just write the first thing that comes into their head.

If you want to carry your camera to shoot unmissable events such as a sunset or an A-list celeb at the fish counter in your local Tesco, fine. But you talked about togging an RTA. So that is how this thread developed.

So I stand by my initial comment. Sorry if I still sound harsh but I feel very VERY strongly about this.

In cases like this talking to yourself is the only help.
That way you are always right.

Guess I'll talk to myself then. Then at least I wont have to listen to vacuous comments like that.

Still I wish you the best of health for the rest of your days, and if the worst happens I hope that the people around you at the time have higher moral standards than some of you appear to.

Come on Gary, give us a break. Obviously you've had an extremely unpleasant experience, and I've got to respect that. But I repeat - just because you were on the wrong end of a lens wielded by somebody who was "ghoulish" doesn't make every photographer into a ghoul.

What I said about the situation was:

Of course the ethics of situations like this can be delicate. But we have to draw the line somewhere, unless we want to restrict all our newspapers to feel-good stories only. I'm quite happy to debate where that line should be, and I'm quite willing to learn from the experiences that people on this forum choose to share. We can all learn in that way.

Gary good on you for standing up for what you feel so strong about. However remember we are all equaly entitled to our veiws. We dont need to attack or be attacked. Put downs serve no usefullness to anyone.

I am inclined to agree with Gary on this, and I guess next time we come across some sort of human tragity ask yourself hw would you feel if it was you and your family been posted all over the papers for others to look at. Then all the comments you will get from people.

Remember reporters and photographers and not the most liked people. Just watch the news. See how the photographers get in peoples faces. If they did that to me they wouldnt last 5sec

Get yourself a P&S camera that is small enough to take anywhere. Where I am in the USA, car crashes are not often published in the newspaper. Would you want a picture of your wreck for everyone to see??

Crash scene ok, traffic pileup ok, emergency vehicle lights ok, injured person on stretcher not ok. That's my simple boudaries. Not because those shots should not be done - but I dont care to capture an injured person who in 99.99% of the cases wont like me for it.