Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,955   Posts: 1,586,017   Online: 680
      
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 92
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    41
    Bingo!
    The rules of restrictions are designed to apply to sites of security risk. Military bases, air strips, prison etc etc.
    Now the rules are being applied at will and no one is standing up, and so slowly, the grip tightens.

    The Canadian Prime Minister's advance team often uses the RCMP and "security rules" to restrict photographers from shooting in positions they feel are not flattering to the PM.

    That is censorship!
    As close as we have come here in the Great White North to Stalin's way of dealing with the media.



    Quote Originally Posted by Barry S View Post
    The Homeland Security Act is here and the Patriot Act is here. Neither bill contains *any* reference to photography. There are no laws I've ever seen or heard of aside from some *very* narrow restrictions that may apply to selected military or Department of Energy installations, and people with a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g.,behind the curtain of their home).

  2. #72
    bobwysiwyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI U.S.A.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,559
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Allen in Montreal View Post
    Bingo!

    The Canadian Prime Minister's advance team often uses the RCMP and "security rules" to restrict photographers from shooting in positions they feel are not flattering to the PM.
    Can't speak to the PM's popularity, but could those same photo op positions be construed as good sniper vantage points?
    WYSIWYG - At least that's my goal.

    Portfolio-http://apug.org/forums/portfolios.php?u=25518

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianShaw View Post
    Unbelievable!
    Yes, unbelievable that anyone would stand for instant law-making by people who are supposed (by oath and law) to enforce the LAW, NOT MANUFACTURE VARIANTS of it, for whatever reason.

    Its been quoted many, many times since 9/11, but it bears repetition ad nauseam, because some people JUST DON'T GET IT;

    "The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. " Ben Franklin

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Kino View Post
    "The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. " Ben Franklin
    Ummm... we fundamentally don't disagree, but when does running into one or two a-holes who misinterpret the law, or don't know the law as well as you think they should, or mistakenly enforce the law incorrectly become "trading freedom for security"? I don't htink that's what Old Wise Ben had in mind.

    It is easy to find those a-holes, by the way, especially if one baits them. Personally speaking, I've only been questioned once in 30 years of photography... and it was a "righteous bust" since I willfully and knowingly trespassed onto private property. (I smiled, explained myself, and they smiled and said "have a nice day; please don't do it again". It all worked out without incident, or any post-incident 'venting' on a photography/civil-rights forum.)

    Have a nice day, sir or madame.

  5. #75

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,188
    Here in NYC there are weird signs popping up in certain public places like the road way just before the TriBoro bridge. It says you can't take picture of the bridge. WHY? I was told it's concidered private property belonging to the Bridge n Tunnel Authority. ummmmm..

    Right after 9/11 I was downtown near the site of teh towers. I was snapping off a few frames of the area n I was told by an soldier with a rifle that I wasn't allowd to take any pictures. When I asked why, I got a rifle in my face n told to keep moving.

    A few months later I went back to the site with my camera n as I took some shots down an alley where trucks were hauling out dirt with cranes in the background, I was told by a cop not to take any pictures by order of the Mayor (Rudy). Of course I'm a wise guy n asked why... I was told it's concidered a crime scene and urged to move on or get arrested. I moved on as I keept shooting n another cop stoped me n told me to get accross the street if I wanted to take pictures. But of course you can't see anything from there unless you climb a light pole which I did. Again the cop came accross the street n gave me my last warning to move on or I'm taking a ride. I was tempted to take the ride but I had another appointment with my lawyer.

    When I saw my lawyer n asked if they can do that, he told me with the Patriot Act they can do anything they want including beating the crap out of you n get away with it. The problem with the new Patriot act was it was a new set of balls for law inforcement n were tryin em out.

    Now back to my bridge signs. Are they legal? What is the law? I'm still confused about photography in NYC. I shoot anyway n if I get stopped I do some stealth shots form the hip but hauling an RB67 is hardly stealth.
    Anyone can make a Digital print, but only a photographer can make a photograph.

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianShaw View Post
    Ummm... we fundamentally don't disagree, but when does running into one or two a-holes who misinterpret the law, or don't know the law as well as you think they should, or mistakenly enforce the law incorrectly become "trading freedom for security"? I don't htink that's what Old Wise Ben had in mind....


    Have a nice day, sir or madame.
    Glad to hear we mostly agree, but I think that is EXACTLY what Mr. Franklin had in mind, fundamentally.

    His statement speaks to the vigilance required to protect rights from creeping obliteration.

    Those who poo-poo or call paranoid those who speak out against minor infractions of our rights, should carefully reconsider their position on the slippery-slope of compliance.

    I would rather be a free asshole than a polite prisoner.

    And a truly fine day, right back at you.

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by bobwysiwyg View Post
    Can't speak to the PM's popularity, but could those same photo op positions be construed as good sniper vantage points?
    He was about to give a speech that, as usual, spoke down to the people, I was trying to shoot him through the teleprompter to show the words as he read them. PR did not like that idea and asked RCMP to remove me due to security risks, they said no, I was not a risk and I shot.

    Fast forward 2 months or so, the RCMP no longer say no to the PR team!!

    It was a closed room and we were all cleared on the way into the room, ZERO risk, 100 percent Stalinism.

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    41
    As a photojournalist who gets hassled every single working day of my life by some asshole who thinks he is the Enforcer, Judge, Jury and Jail Keeper all wrapped up into one, I can not tell you how happy I am that people are starting to speak out!



    "The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. " Ben Franklin

    ^^^^^ This Gentleman was a very wise man!

  9. #79

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Kino View Post
    Those who poo-poo or call paranoid those who speak out against minor infractions of our rights, should carefully reconsider their position on the slippery-slope of compliance.
    I'll certainly be giving that more thought in the future.

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    965
    Images
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by paul ron View Post
    Now back to my bridge signs. Are they legal? What is the law? I'm still confused about photography in NYC. I shoot anyway n if I get stopped I do some stealth shots form the hip but hauling an RB67 is hardly stealth.
    The Triborough is controlled by the MTA, which has had it's own problems with trying to restrict photography on the subway. The ACLU has pushed back on that, with some success, though the official transit rules still say "1050.6 (c)(5) No person shall use media devices such as films, slides or videotapes." The bridge & Tunnel rules don't mention photography explicitly, just say they you have to obey posted signs and the orders of officers. The MTA is a "public-benefit authority," which means that it has a certain amount of corporate autonomy from the chartering state, but isn't "private" in the usual sense of the word either. They're corporate entities owned by the state, but separate from the state government.

    Which means, I think, if you want to challenge the tunnel sign, you'd have to be willing to sacrifice yourself as a test case.

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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