Comments on: Does Photographer = Terrorist? http://www.nycphotorights.com Photographers are harassed daily.. Read the horror stories here Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:53:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: dees http://www.nycphotorights.com/does-photographer-terrorist/comment-page-1/#comment-6 dees Wed, 30 Jul 2008 05:59:19 +0000 http://nycphotorights.com/wordpress/?page_id=10#comment-6 maritime mobileDoes Photographer = Terrorist? maritime mobileDoes Photographer = Terrorist?

]]> By: Dees http://www.nycphotorights.com/does-photographer-terrorist/comment-page-1/#comment-5 Dees Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:39:35 +0000 http://nycphotorights.com/wordpress/?page_id=10#comment-5 maritime electricDoes Photographer = Terrorist? maritime electricDoes Photographer = Terrorist?

]]> By: admin http://www.nycphotorights.com/does-photographer-terrorist/comment-page-1/#comment-4 admin Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:26:08 +0000 http://nycphotorights.com/wordpress/?page_id=10#comment-4 What constitutes "uncommon interest"? It is a very subjective term left open to interpretation. What the authorities may consider "uncommon" may very well be common to a railfan. One person's artistic interest is another's "uncommon interest". Of course such a subjective definition leaves a lot of room for abuse on the part of authorities. Read the blog - examples abound! This isn't just about federal agents. Local police, state police, private security guards and ordinary citizens are all guilty in perpetuating the anti photographer attitude that has taken hold across the country. As an example police constantly stop photographers on the New York Subway - these stories do not make news because invariably most photographers back down and obey the illegal order to stop taking pictures without saying another word other than to report it on railfan sites and Flickr. It is what is not being reported in the major media that is of interest - the countless photographers who have missed shots because of illegal police interference in their work. The NYCLU is aware of the incidents and currently there is a lawsuit pending against the NYPD. The lawsuit would not be necessary if these incidents were not commonplace. As long as photography is not a crime, photographers should not be subjected to harassment for practicing a legal hobby or profession. What constitutes “uncommon interest”? It is a very subjective term left open to interpretation. What the authorities may consider “uncommon” may very well be common to a railfan. One person’s artistic interest is another’s “uncommon interest”. Of course such a subjective definition leaves a lot of room for abuse on the part of authorities.

Read the blog – examples abound! This isn’t just about federal agents. Local police, state police, private security guards and ordinary citizens are all guilty in perpetuating the anti photographer attitude that has taken hold across the country.

As an example police constantly stop photographers on the New York Subway – these stories do not make news because invariably most photographers back down and obey the illegal order to stop taking pictures without saying another word other than to report it on railfan sites and Flickr. It is what is not being reported in the major media that is of interest – the countless photographers who have missed shots because of illegal police interference in their work.

The NYCLU is aware of the incidents and currently there is a lawsuit pending against the NYPD. The lawsuit would not be necessary if these incidents were not commonplace.

As long as photography is not a crime, photographers should not be subjected to harassment for practicing a legal hobby or profession.

]]> By: Los Angeles Photographer http://www.nycphotorights.com/does-photographer-terrorist/comment-page-1/#comment-3 Los Angeles Photographer Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:38:55 +0000 http://nycphotorights.com/wordpress/?page_id=10#comment-3 I believe the key phrase there in the bold point was "uncommon interest." It would be quite difficult to prove a tourist taking a photo of the White House was doing it with malicious intent, unless they had other suspicious information on this person. You mentioned people getting surrounded by federal agents on a daily basis for taking innocent photographs. I'm wondering if you could give some examples via news articles documenting this. It's an interesting premise so I'd be very interested to read about these incidents as conventional media rarely prints much along these lines. Thanks kindly, John I believe the key phrase there in the bold point was “uncommon interest.” It would be quite difficult to prove a tourist taking a photo of the White House was doing it with malicious intent, unless they had other suspicious information on this person.

You mentioned people getting surrounded by federal agents on a daily basis for taking innocent photographs. I’m wondering if you could give some examples via news articles documenting this. It’s an interesting premise so I’d be very interested to read about these incidents as conventional media rarely prints much along these lines.

Thanks kindly,
John

]]> By: Daniel Craig http://www.nycphotorights.com/does-photographer-terrorist/comment-page-1/#comment-2 Daniel Craig Sun, 06 Jul 2008 04:03:22 +0000 http://nycphotorights.com/wordpress/?page_id=10#comment-2 Hello, I was looking around for a while searching for Patriot Act and I happened upon this site and your post regarding Does Photographer = Terrorist?, I will definitely this to my Patriot Act bookmarks! Hello, I was looking around for a while searching for Patriot Act and I happened upon this site and your post regarding Does Photographer = Terrorist?, I will definitely this to my Patriot Act bookmarks!

]]>