Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,276   Posts: 1,534,800   Online: 815
      
Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 92
  1. #61

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    what is the point of this thread ?
    Carlos Miller seems to be trying to make a name for himself by stirring up trouble:

    http://carlosmiller.com/2009/02/13/h...aphers-rights/

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    105

    Federal Buildings

    While the Federal Reserve may be a special case as a quasi-public-private entity, I have had been stopped from photographing the Boston Federal Court House. This relatively new building is considered a modern gem, and was featured in various magazines and newspapers when it opened. Some time later, I was in Boston and told that I could not include the building in any photos, even from a considerable distance. One guard watched me for the entire time I was taking pictures in the area, apparently to make certain that I didn't photograph the forbidden building. Of course when I got back to my hotel room, I was able to Google the building and find the satelite photos of it as well as the architectural photos that appeared at the time of the building's opening.

    That is what I find galling and ridiculous (as well as scary) - that the regs (if they exist) are not uniformly applied. What is the difference between a view in a magazine and one that I take? What is the point of prohibiting a casual photo, when I can download a detailed satellite picture that seems accurate down to three feet? Not to mention that anyone with a cellphone can "talk" and photograph while walking by. It seems like a page from a old Mission Impossible TV show about an unnamed eastern European nation.

  3. #63

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,730
    I find it particularly appalling that photographers on APUG characterize those who practice and insist on their 1st Amendment Constitutional Rights as "trouble makers " and "law breakers".

    Just how do you defeat those who rob you of your rights IF you don't call attention to the practice OR challenge the authorities?

    YOUR methods are a sure-fire way to lose EVERY right through timid conformity and avoidance of conflict.

    Yes, lets keep re-enforcing the misconception that digital point-and-shoot is somehow "lawful" and anything larger than a deck of cards or that smacks of "professional" is born of a terrorist; I'll eventually see you in Jail too.

    Unbelievable.
    Last edited by Kino; 02-27-2009 at 09:06 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #64

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    965
    Images
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by KenR View Post
    It seems like a page from a old Mission Impossible TV show about an unnamed eastern European nation.
    Vulgaria.

  5. #65

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,125
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    1
    7 pages of this because he didn't get a permit ??

  6. #66
    Barry S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    DC Metro
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,252
    Images
    31
    John-- Regardless of whether the Federal Reserve is considered to be on Federal or private property--the question is why you would need any sort of permit to photograph while on public property. Everything I've seen supports the fact that no permit or permission is required. Come to Washington and we'll go out shooting, but it's filled with Federal buildings. The idea of trying to get 40 permits just to take a walk with our cameras is silly.

  7. #67
    FotoAvril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1
    I wouldn't argue with someone with a badge. They may know a law...or think they know of a law...or be bluffing and calling it a rule. But, if you try to argue with them they'll find something to book you for even if it's something simple like impeding foot traffic. In any case, you'd likely be in for a big hassle.

  8. #68

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,028
    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    7 pages of this because he didn't get a permit ??
    Unbelievable!

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry S View Post
    John-- Regardless of whether the Federal Reserve is considered to be on Federal or private property--the question is why you would need any sort of permit to photograph while on public property. Everything I've seen supports the fact that no permit or permission is required. Come to Washington and we'll go out shooting, but it's filled with Federal buildings. The idea of trying to get 40 permits just to take a walk with our cameras is silly.
    Agreed. Especially in this case. The fact is.. the "Federal Reserve" is about as federal as Federal Express.

  10. #70
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,780
    Quote Originally Posted by FotoAvril View Post
    I wouldn't argue with someone with a badge. They may know a law...or think they know of a law...or be bluffing and calling it a rule. But, if you try to argue with them they'll find something to book you for even if it's something simple like impeding foot traffic. In any case, you'd likely be in for a big hassle.
    I would, and have, and would again. Badges are worth about 10 cents these days. I'd also look forward to the lawsuit. The last guy in NY got upwards of $30,000 for being hassled by the transit cops. If the guy is on a public sidewalk he has every right to be there. God people are pussies these days.(not you in particular FotoAvril)



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin