Passenger Trains > From "The Towers Fell Down" land: Cops vs.Cameras

Cops Versus Cameras
Darien (CT) Patch
by Jim Cameron
July 22, 2011
>
> The political season in Darien has begun on a note of controversy, with one candidate for first selectman alleging that police recently
> hassled him.
>
> That's right: Chris Noe is running again as an independent. And he's kick-started his campaign with some self-made videos shot around
> town. As Noe pans his camera over scenes of the Boat Club or the new Police Station, he ad libs about how he'd set things right.
>
> Well, no sooner had Noe finished one shoot downtown near the train station than Darien's finest showed up and — according to Noe's
> write-up — "detained" him for a half-hour after he refused to let them search his car.
>
> Is Chris Noe a terrorist? I think not. He might not get my vote, but I'll defend his right to take pictures in a public place.
>
> Darien Police Chief Duane Lovello, who grew up and went to school with Noe, said the videographer set off alarm bells (no, not
> literally) when he took pictures of the railroad bridge.
>
> Do we honestly think members of Al Qaeda are standing in broad daylight on the Post Road with a camera and tripod plotting attacks
> on Metro-North? Really?
>
> A couple of weeks ago, I was interviewed by WABC-TV while standing on the platform at Noroton Heights station. We were talking about the
> usual Metro-North problems when MTA Police pulled up in two squad cars.
>
> "You got a permit?" the MTA cop asked the reporter standing about 10 feet from his satellite truck.
>
> "Why does he need a permit?" I asked.
>
> "Because he's on Metro-North property," said the officer.
>
> "No, he isn't," I said. "This is CDOT property, not Metro-North's".
>
> "Well, he still needs a permit," insisted the officer, now asking for our IDs. The reporter demurred, telling me this happens to him all
> the time.
>
> "Officer … if he doesn't use the tripod, can he take pictures with his camera without a permit?" I asked.
>
> "Sure … that's OK," said the cop. Apparently it's the presence of a tripod that makes the video shoot a threat to our security.
>
> MTA officials should learn from Amtrak when it comes to rail fans and photos. These train lovers (or "foamers," as they're called by the
> railroads) used to get hassled by cops when they took pictures of trains and stations. Now, Amtrak sees them not as a terrorist threat
> but as allies. Who knows better what looks out of place than a rail fan? If they see something, they say something.
>
> In an era where ever cell phone is a camera — where HD video cameras can be concealed in a hat or miniaturized to the size of a shirt
> button — many police seem worried about people with tripods conducting journalism, promoting their candidacy, or just taking
> pictures of their home town.
>
> Amazing. I guess the terrorists have won.

In many eastern cities (DC especially) the presence of a tripod causes people to assume that the video is "production" (commercial, entertainment, etc.) rather than "editorial" (news). For "production" shooting, many locales do indeed require filming permits and evidence of liability insurance. Use a tripod and a large video camera in certain areas of Los Angeles (and especially Burbank) and you get the same reaction from a few cops and a lot of property owners. It has nothing to do with the threat of terrorism.

i'm tellin ya ... the TRIPOD IS GONNA BE THE END OF THIS COUNTRY ... YOU JUST WAIT AND SEE ... MARK MY WORDS

Back in the mid-80s when we lived in DC, a friend (sheriff's Lt. from home in CA attending the FBI national academy) and I were taking pix of the capitol at night. My friend was using a tripod when a Capitol Police officer came over and asked if we had tripod permits. We didn't, so he explained that they were needed because commercial photogs would set them up and try to get people to let him take their pic, for money, of course.
Anyway, the officer was very friendly and when he learned that my friend was a cop and I was an ex-cop, he took us into his office and issued us official U.S. Capitol Tripod Permits!! My friend posted his on his office wall in Bakersfield when he completed the academy...
It was actually a lot of fun and gave us another great story to tell.

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

The only true form of security is lack of knowledge, meaning if there is no knowledge that something exists therefore it is secure. I would guess that all this anti-photography is an attempt at that end, at least photographic knowledge.

Meanwhile as the Police Officer is speaking to the photographer, a car with a high resolution camera on top passes by on the road behind them, and a space satellite passes over hundreds of miles in the sky. All snapping billions of images accessible by anyone in the world within milliseconds.


What is the purpose of all of this anti personal and hobby related photography, really?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/23/11 22:05 by ats90mph.

A tripod on a passenger train platform is a tripping hazard. Banning tripods on platforms is a safety matter, not ant- photography.

ats90mph Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The only true form of security is lack of
> knowledge, meaning if there is no knowledge that
> something exists therefore it is secure. I would
> guess that all this anti-photography is an attempt
> at that end, at least photographic knowledge.
>
> Meanwhile as the Police Officer is speaking to the
> photographer, a car with a high resolution camera
> on top passes by on the road behind them, and a
> space satellite passes over hundreds of miles in
> the sky. All snapping billions of images
> accessible by anyone in the world within
> milliseconds.
>
>
> What is the purpose of all of this anti personal
> and hobby related photography, really?


Google's street view process has generated a lot of legal challenge as well. "Google cars" with cameras on the roof take 360 degree pictures down the block. Block after block, town after town. City after city, country after country.

It gives the police something to do, and a "homeland security anti terrorism" response which helps for seeking more grant money. Fewer tickets to motorists for driving 26 mph in a 25 mph zone

chuchubob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A tripod on a passenger train platform is a
> tripping hazard. Banning tripods on platforms is
> a safety matter, not anti- photography.


True, although during off-peak hours or on weekends when the trains only stop once per hour or so, a little common sense can apply, too.

"Common sense", no way. Too much legal liability in today's society of selfish and money-eager sue-happy idiots!
Jim



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/11 09:47 by WOPRJim.

chuchubob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A tripod on a passenger train platform is a
> tripping hazard. Banning tripods on platforms is
> a safety matter, not ant- photography.


Oh come on! That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. By that logic, so it someone with lots of luggage, a baby cart, or a wheelchair.

Ptolemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> chuchubob Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > A tripod on a passenger train platform is a
> > tripping hazard. Banning tripods on platforms
> is
> > a safety matter, not ant- photography.
>
>
> Oh come on! That's one of the most ridiculous
> things I've ever heard. By that logic, so it
> someone with lots of luggage, a baby cart, or a
> wheelchair.


The tripping hazard used to appear in the NYC Transit Authority's rules prohibiting photography, artist sketching, videotaping of crowds, etc. The general rules now say that no activity may inhibit or tend to inhibit the smooth flow of pedestrian etc traffic on the property. The set of general rules are also used to specify where dancers, musicians, etc may perform as they solicit funds inside the fare zone. Tripods are mentioned as a prohibited item:


>>Photography, filming or video recording in any facility or conveyance is permitted except that ancillary equipment such as lights, reflectors or tripods may not be used. Members of the press holding valid identification issued by the New York City Police Department are hereby authorized to use necessary ancillary equipment. All photographic activity must be conducted in accordance with the provisions of this Part.<<

Section 1050.9.3

http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/rules.htm

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ptolemy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > chuchubob Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > A tripod on a passenger train platform is a
> > > tripping hazard. Banning tripods on
> platforms
> > is
> > > a safety matter, not ant- photography.
> >
> >
> > Oh come on! That's one of the most ridiculous
> > things I've ever heard. By that logic, so it
> > someone with lots of luggage, a baby cart, or a
> > wheelchair.
>
>
> The tripping hazard used to appear in the NYC
> Transit Authority's rules prohibiting photography,
> artist sketching, videotaping of crowds, etc. The
> general rules now say that no activity may inhibit
> or tend to inhibit the smooth flow of pedestrian
> etc traffic on the property. The set of general
> rules are also used to specify where dancers,
> musicians, etc may perform as they solicit funds
> inside the fare zone. Tripods are mentioned as a
> prohibited item:
>
>
> >>Photography, filming or video recording in any
> facility or conveyance is permitted except that
> ancillary equipment such as lights, reflectors or
> tripods may not be used. Members of the press
> holding valid identification issued by the New
> York City Police Department are hereby authorized
> to use necessary ancillary equipment. All
> photographic activity must be conducted in
> accordance with the provisions of this Part.<<
>
> Section 1050.9.3
>
>
But I think we have to agree that 9-11 has given police authority to be officious about things unrelated to terrorism but in the name of terrorism. For example, a large Midwestern hotel I frequent started after 9-11 checking peoples' IDs who entered the lobby late at night, but everyone knew they were using 9-11 to solve a problem of homeless frequenting the lobby. But that was never stated: it was "to protect YOU from a terrorist assault" (as if a problematic ID proves you're a terrorist).

Ptolemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> But I think we have to agree that 9-11 has
> given police authority to be officious about
> things unrelated to terrorism but in the name of
> terrorism. For example, a large Midwestern hotel
> I frequent started after 9-11 checking peoples'
> IDs who entered the lobby late at night, but
> everyone knew they were using 9-11 to solve a
> problem of homeless frequenting the lobby. But
> that was never stated: it was "to protect YOU from
> a terrorist assault" (as if a problematic ID
> proves you're a terrorist).


i'll take an a somewhat officious state anyday to protect mine and the safety of all others in this country ... and yes some are overzealous but you're gonna have that anywhere ... over a lackadaisical security attitude that promotes anarchy by a group of people who state it plain and clear "KILL ALL AMERICANS" ... it's a no brainer to me ... let something happen due to a lack of security and you'll be the first one putting the dagger in the back of law enforcement and the governmet about how they weren't prepared for this type of thing when they should've known better

>
> i'll take an a somewhat officious state anyday to
> protect mine and the safety of all others in this
> country ... and yes some are overzealous but
> you're gonna have that anywhere ... over a
> lackadaisical security attitude that promotes
> anarchy by a group of people who state it plain
> and clear "KILL ALL AMERICANS" ... it's a no
> brainer to me ... let something happen due to a
> lack of security and you'll be the first one
> putting the dagger in the back of law enforcement
> and the governmet about how they weren't prepared
> for this type of thing when they should've known
> better

I wish we would devote as much effort to getting dangerous people off the roads, who kill tens of thousands a year.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/11 12:02 by Ptolemy.

Restricting stationary activities in a corridor or location that's designed for the movement of people doesn't seem like an outrageous infringement of individual rights to me. Subway or railroad platforms don't have the same legal rights as sidewalks, for example.

Tollways and express highways often set a minimum speed for vehicles, and ban horse drawn buggies to permit a safe operation for customers.

I don't see why I should have the right to plant a tripod and video camera at the bottom of the subway escalators at Lexington Avenue and 53rd street in rush hour, with a thousand people per minute streaming by in both directions. Just because I want to get a picture of the Lexington Avenue local train coming through.

Here's a summary of legal prohibitions from some US and overseas transportation authorities. Tripods are specifically mentioned in several.


http://www.nycsubway.org/faq/photopermits.html

Out_Of_Service Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i'm tellin ya ... the TRIPOD IS GONNA BE THE END
> OF THIS COUNTRY ... YOU JUST WAIT AND SEE ... MARK
> MY WORDS


Yeah, when you're paranoid about the terroists and all that crap!

ProAmtrak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Out_Of_Service Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > i'm tellin ya ... the TRIPOD IS GONNA BE THE
> END
> > OF THIS COUNTRY ... YOU JUST WAIT AND SEE ...
> MARK
> > MY WORDS
>
>
> Yeah, when you're paranoid about the terroists and
> all that crap!


yeah you're right ... we're nearing the 10 th anniversary of 911 but in your mind 911 never happened ... there was no bombing of the battle ship Cole ... there was no massacre in Texas on a military base ... there was no shoe bomber on a plane ... there wasn't a bombing attempt in NYC to blow up Times Square ... 5 men didn't try to infiltrate and bomb Fort Dix ... there wasn't a foiled bombing plot to kill people in Washington State ...WOW !!!!!! and that took me less than a minute to think of just them ...anybody else wanna share a few terrorist activities that this guy who lives in a bubble hasn't noticed in the past decade ...OH and BTW to keep this post on topic ... AL QAEDA'S plans to disrupt rail service on the 9-11-11



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/11 15:35 by Out_Of_Service.

> yeah you're right ... we're nearing the 10 th
> anniversary of 911 but in your mind 911 never
> happened ... there was no bombing of the battle
> ship Cole ... there was no massacre in Texas on a
> military base ... there was no shoe bomber on a
> plane ... there wasn't a bombing attempt in NYC to
> blow up Times Square ... 5 men didn't try to
> infiltrate and bomb Fort Dix ... there wasn't a
> foiled bombing plot to kill people in Washington
> State ...WOW !!!!!! and that took me less than a
> minute to think of just them ...anybody else wanna
> share a few terrorist activities that this guy who
> lives in a bubble hasn't noticed in the past
> decade

And how many tens of thousands more have been killed in traffic accidents, or random shootings like happened near Flagstaff and in Wisconsin yesterday? Terrorist deaths are a drop in the bucket compared to those: nearly half a million people have been killed in traffic accidents since 9/11. if we put the effort into stopping those that we put into being paranoid about terrorism, maybe many of those people would still be alive.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/11 15:42 by Ptolemy.

Ptolemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wish we would devote as much effort to getting
> dangerous people off the roads, who kill tens of
> thousands a year.


Ptolemy Wrote:
--------------------------------------------------
> And how many tens of thousands more have been
> killed in traffic accidents, or random shootings
> like happened near Flagstaff and in Wisconsin
> yesterday? Terrorist deaths are a drop in the
> bucket compared to those.


are you paranoid that your point isn't getting across ... that's twice in one thread and off topic since thread has to do with cameras terrorism and rail security not the nations stats on auto accidents ... wanna try for a hat trick with one more post on this OFF TOPIC topic

How about this? Is what we are doing going to deter to prevent future terrorist attacks, I will attempt to stay on topic and bring up suspicion of persons photographing transportation infrastructure from a public or semi public location. Is being suspicious of persons doing the above going to reduce or eliminate the potential of a future terrorist attack? Has it prevented a terrorist attack in the about ten years since 9/11 (a significant amount of time to form an answer to what works)? If being suspicious of persons that are taking pictures of trains from a public location has absolutely no effect, then we should stop doing it (being suspicious).