City sued over limits on photography (article from today's (NJ) Bergen Record)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Bob, Jan 11, 2006.

  1. Bob

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Photographs are powerful. People taking photographs are part of the Free
    Press. Evil, freedom-hating regimes like the one we currently suffer under
    have everything to fear from a free press. Oceania has always been at war
    with Eurasia.
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jan 11, 2006
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Bob

    Don Guest

    The bizarre thing about all of this is that if I was planning an attach of
    some sort on a New York street there are many web sights where I can
    download up to date sat photographs, mapping details, architecture details
    and so on and so on. I wouldn't have to show myself to get a fairly average
    shot. Not many terrorists are likely to be professional photogs (you never
    know though, think of some of Dianne A's photos). I would also assume that
    the so called sensitive sights are carefully monitored by cameras and I
    don't wish to get caught so far better to do my recon by computer and then
    surveil the area w/o a camera. Cheeze, I can do most of my research using
    US government sites and never leave Oz.

    Welcome to democracy.

    Don from Down Under.
     
    Don, Jan 11, 2006
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Bob

    imodan Guest

    The ycan also be quite ill-informed. I dropped-off my wife outside of a


    Jesus I hate assholes like you. What exactly about the sign do you not
    comprehend and why don't you think that it shouldn't apply to you? When
    I lived in London, you'd get people parking in bus lanes in the
    morning, (but they put their hazzard lights on so I guess that makes it
    fine) and then they would go and use the teller machine and get back
    in. They would look upon it as no big deal after all it was only a few
    minutes. In reality they just banked up the traffic and made hundreds
    of people a few minutes more late to work, but hey it's ok cause THEY
    were ok.

    When you pull up to a shopping centre and see 4 disabled parking spaces
    out of say 6 free - do you just decide to make a judgement call about
    how many disabled people are likely to come into the shopping centre by
    the time you finish your shopping?
     
    imodan, Jan 12, 2006
    #43
  4. Quite a judgmental one aren't you, not to mention crass. You don't know
    what the situation is, you'd probably be apologetic about the tone you've
    taken if you did. I won't bore you the details but there is a disabled
    person involved here.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Jan 12, 2006
    #44
  5. Bob

    Rich Guest


    Just for the practical side of the argument, lets say they figured
    some terrorists would be videotaping a city, it's buildings, etc.
    So, they decide to enact the ordinance requiring permits. It keeps
    the terrorists from taping ( would a terrorist cell member risk their
    mission by taping were such an ordinance in place?).
    So, they decide to rescind the ordinance because photographers
    complained about having to get a permit. Then, a building gets blwon
    up.
    Turns out, the criminals actually were taping it prior to the act.
    So, was the loss of life worth not inconveniencing a few
    videographers? Or, is it practical to say, "We know such abuse of the
    freedom might produce such a result and we accept it to prevent
    videographers from having to obtain permits. We are willing to trade
    lives for this freedom."
    -Rich
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Jan 12, 2006
    #45
  6. I'm pretty special, you're right about that.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Jan 12, 2006
    #46
  7. Not so on Long Island, the cops will bankrupt both Suffolk and Nassau
    Counties down the road. Years into the future when there are thousands upon
    thousands that are retired and collecting pensions while we still have to
    pay those that are on the job is going to drive more and more people out of
    state.
     
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Jan 12, 2006
    #47
  8. Bob

    eawckyegcy Guest

    No. GTA:LCS reports I am merely a "Hatchetman(2719)".
     
    eawckyegcy, Jan 12, 2006
    #48
  9. Bob

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    That's not practical.

    Let's say they figured some terrorists would be speaking their minds.
    So they decide to enact the ordinance requiring permits to speak their
    minds. See?

    They always talk about "post-9/11" when trying to fool us about this
    kind of thing. I must have missed the part where the terrorists threw
    a camera at the World Trade Center and it came tumbling down. I must
    have missed the part where the terrorists wouldn't have known about the
    building if only we'd been more vigilant about photography. I must have
    missed the part where there was anything, at all, that the local police
    could have done to prevent it from happening.
    A lone person shooting with a handheld camera does not require a permit
    to film in New York City. These stories give no indication of why this
    person's application was denied, but I'd be willing to bet that it was
    either lack of liability insurance, or lack of following INS procedures
    due to not being a US citizen or resident. The permits aren't even
    issued by the police department.
    Yes, it is.
     
    Jeremy Nixon, Jan 12, 2006
    #49
  10. Bob

    Roger Guest

    Which would have been one of the few areas in the country where they
    were required. Rarely has any city required a permit to film *unless*
    the filming would prove to be a distraction, or involve a number of
    people

    Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
    (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
    www.rogerhalstead.com
     
    Roger, Jan 12, 2006
    #50
  11. Bob

    Paul Rubin Guest

    It's also not clear that in the absence of such distraction, whether
    the city even has the authority to require such a permit. That would
    be one reason why the ACLU is suing.
     
    Paul Rubin, Jan 12, 2006
    #51
  12. Bob

    Bill Funk Guest

    No. Somehow, I've not managed to do that.
    I wonder why? :)
     
    Bill Funk, Jan 12, 2006
    #52
  13. Bob

    Bill Funk Guest

    Maybe not.
    But they are going to try like hell to make sure it doesn't happen
    again because of something they didn't do.
    And I like that!
     
    Bill Funk, Jan 12, 2006
    #53
  14. Bob

    Bill Funk Guest

    Possibly. I know that I don't know the full reasons for the need for
    permits.
    Do you? or are you just going on your opinion?
     
    Bill Funk, Jan 12, 2006
    #54
  15. Bob

    Bill Funk Guest

    No, the cameras are *not* used for commercial purposes.
    The banks are commercial, but the use of the cameras isn't.
    If you are employed, and take pictures, does that make you a
    professional photographer? Only if your employment is as a
    photographer.
     
    Bill Funk, Jan 12, 2006
    #55
  16. Per railfan:
    Doesn't matter. The same mind set that confiscates toenail clippers while air
    cargo in the same plane goes completely unchecked has to do *something* in that
    area. CYA all the way...

    Some wacko puts explosives in a shoe, and now we all have to take our shoes off
    and walk through the foot fungi and planar wart sheddings of the thousand or so
    people before us.

    I'm waiting to see what they do after the first Bra Bomber....
     
    (PeteCresswell), Jan 12, 2006
    #56
  17. Bob

    Eric B. Guest

    Are they preventing terrorists from buying Fodor's guides too? A terrorist
    anywhere in the world can just go to nyc.gov and click on the visitor guide
    and get photos of all sorts of potential targets. Thinking you can deter
    terrorism by stopping photography in the big cities is just retarded logic.

    Eric B.
     
    Eric B., Jan 12, 2006
    #57
  18. Bob

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Really? My city, Orlando Florida, requires a permit. See:
    http://www.filmorlando.com/Filming in Orlando/permitting.shtml

    A documentary or film using a hand-held camera and no production
    equipment does not, but we don't know from the post what the NYC
    incident involved in production equipment.

    What's your city. Let's see if they are "rare".
     
    Tony Cooper, Jan 12, 2006
    #58
  19. Bob

    ASAAR Guest

    They've put out some feelers but so far there's been no support
    for that. Probably Ashcroft's legacy.
     
    ASAAR, Jan 12, 2006
    #59
  20. Bob

    ASAAR Guest

    Professional courtesy? :)
     
    ASAAR, Jan 12, 2006
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.