See more art by Randy Lewis here.
DNR doesn't mean DNR
The Journal of General Internal Medicine reported that in October 2012, a 59-year-old man with diabetes, vascular disease, hypertension and high cholesterol was admitted to the hospital for a below-the-knee amputation due to chronic non-healing wounds of his lower extremity. A physical examination revealed a "DNR" tattoo on his chest. Reviewing this, the patient indicated he would want resuscitative efforts initiated in the event of a cardiac or respiratory arrest. Asked why his tattoo conflicted with his wishes to be resuscitated, he said he had lost at poker while drunk in earlier years; the loser had to tattoo "DNR" across his chest.
Smile and say cheese for the drone
A reader sent a picture of a drone buzzing over Takapuna beach, suggesting it was owned by a voyeur. A photographer responds: Yes, there is a great way to protect your privacy: find somewhere private. Public places are not private places. The clue is in the name. There could be many reasons for the drone flying that day, none of which were about being a voyeur. Maybe it was the start of a beach-safety programme to spot stingrays, sharks, jellyfish or other such potential dangers. Maybe it was a council-funded aerial demography survey. Or just maybe it was an early Christmas present being tested out in a safe and public environment. If the buzzing is unnecessarily annoying, or if it is flying over people or harassing or endangering them, then fair enough, that is an actionable complaint. But if it is the thought that you are being photographed or videoed in a public place then, of course, you can have no reasonable expectation of privacy when you're in public. People, buildings, children, elderly, police officers and anything and anyone else that can be seen in public can be photographed. It's a right. After all, the person complaining used that same inalienable right to photograph that drone.
