My second thought, though, was that he has a point. Later in the story, he quotes an officer as saying "if anyone shows a particular interest in something, we get suspicious." The reporter also says he pointed out that plenty of people in the area were using video cameras to record things without being stopped and questioned.
This should raise the question of why the reporter, jerk though he may be, was questioned by 10 officers for merely asking a question about an innocuous piece of equipment. Is this reporter an angel? No, but he behaved the way he did to make a point about the misuse of the Homeland Security tip line leading to useless paranoia and intrusive police behavior.
Of course we need to be more vigilant now, but does that really justify detaining and questioning citizens (with 10 officers, no less) for no more pretext than asking "curious questions?" It's clearly both excessive and a waste of law enforcement resources.
Being patriotic includes a lot of things, including questioning whether some post-9/11 law enforcement measures are ill-conceived. These may be trying times, but we shouldn't forget the importance of safeguarding are basic rights as citizens even as we do our best to ensure our security.
I think you're correct. The nature of our right's and liberties makes them easy to lose and tough to re-gain. As such, we should tread carefully in any area that may abridge them.
Funny. Those were my first two thoughts ... in reverse order.
I've registered with the NY Times because at least they are professional enough to permit FR to cite articles in full for discussion. The WP and LAT prohibit FR from using full articles.
Everybody wants information on people. I feel that police working security detail are more justified in asking for it than a newspaper.