Skip to toolbar

11-16-11 – You Can’t Fight City Hall

Forums Forums Farktography General Chat This week’s contest 11-16-11 – You Can’t Fight City Hall

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 115 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2454
    Elsinore
    Keymaster

    Photos of government buildings; including but not limited to City Hall, State Capitol, National Capitol, Department buildings, Fire Department, Sewer and Water, whatever… as long as it’s owned by a government or has some government purpose.

    Theme suggestion kudos go to Yugoboy!

    #41772
    aspidites
    Participant

    Oooooo this should be fun…Got taken down to the station for taking pics of the federal building downtown. Guess I can go for a repeat offender with the statehouse 😈

    #41773
    gambitsgirl
    Participant

    Over/Under on how many of us get arrested and pounded down taking photos of city buildings? 😀

    #41774
    fluffybunny
    Participant

    Can we have a badge or decoder ring or press credentials or something issued by Farktography?

    “It’s OK. I’m with the press.”

    #41775
    Yugoboy
    Participant

    Can we have a badge or decoder ring or press credentials or something issued by Farktography?

    “It’s OK. I’m with the press.”

    Funny… we had this discussion not long ago. It’s possible to get press credentials from some police departments as a “blogger” journalist.

    Or, you could just print out this page and have it with you.

    #41776
    fluffybunny
    Participant

    Yeah, I do carry printouts. Mostly to remind me what the contest is.

    I also carry this guys summary, but again mostly for me. I can’t imagine whipping it out in response to a LEOs questions would go over well.

    http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

    #41777
    Pope_Larry_II
    Participant

    I can’t say I’ve ever been hassled taking pictures of any buidlings, public or private, and I’ve taken a lot of pictures of buildings (mostly for work).

    #41778
    Kestrana
    Participant

    fluffybunny that’s an excellent guide we’ve referenced here before. I’d encourage anyone who is concerned about taking photos in public (especially in an urban non-tourist setting) to be familiar with it although I hope no one gets hassled for Farktography themes.

    #41779
    fluffybunny
    Participant

    I had two squad cars dispatched to investigate me while I was using a parking garage to get some elevation. They just asked me to stop and were otherwise reasonable. It was private property so I was in the wrong. It was also not long after 9/11 so there was that. That experience inspired me to acquire a little knowledge in the area just as a CYA.

    #41780
    oddmind
    Participant

    I was “inside” the Federal Building in Hilo, Hawaii, taking pictures of the awesome old doors, banisters, etc. Security came over and told me (nicely) that photography wasn’t allowed “inside,” but that I could take pictures from the street if I wished. I put “inside” in quotes, because the hallways of the Hilo Federal Building only have walls on three sides, the fourth being open to the courtyard, which is itself open to the street. I walked out to the street, and took some of the same photos, although with the lens zoomed out more. Security agreed with me that it was a silly rule.

    #41781
    Farktographer
    Participant

    One thing I’m happy about with shooting in the UK – total rights to photograph things so long as you’re on public ground. Still, I’d rather not have the cops called on me if I can avoid it 😉

    #41782
    Kestrana
    Participant

    You actually do have the same rights in the U.S. but if you’re on government or privately owned property, they have the right to limit or prohibit photography. I think the confusion is dual-sided; people sometimes don’t realize that publicly accessible places like a train station or museum does have the right to limit photography inside but many low-level security and law enforcement officials don’t realize you can’t make a law to prevent photography of things like bridges because they are in the public domain, nor is there any legal right to confiscate film/sd cards/delete photos.

    The .pdf fluffybunny linked makes a great point about how photography hasn’t been involved in any modern terrorism acts, nor would it have helped them, and with the proliferation of high quality cell phone cameras anyone who did want to take photos of something for nefarious purposes would be unlikely to drag around the attention grabbing DSLR and 400mm L glass.

    #41783
    Yoyo
    Participant

    The .pdf fluffybunny linked makes a great point about how photography hasn’t been involved in any modern terrorism acts, nor would it have helped them, and with the proliferation of high quality cell phone cameras anyone who did want to take photos of something for nefarious purposes would be unlikely to drag around the attention grabbing DSLR and 400mm L glass.

    Shah Massoud (aka Shir Panjshir) would disagree about the photography/terrorism link if two Al Qaida operatives didn’t assassinate him on 9/9/01 with a bomb disguised as a video-camera while they pretended to be journalists seeking an interview.

    Regarding law enforcement type personnel, they probably don’t know that they’re not allowed to confiscate images or videos. And we’ve got the guns. (I was investigating officer into an incident where a US soldier received a video tape from a local TV station cameraman.)

    #41784
    SilverStag
    Participant
    #41785
    Kestrana
    Participant

    Disguising a bomb as a camera is not exactly the same as having a terrorist taking pictures of a bridge with a dslr in order to determine how to blow it up, which is the reasoning that’s been used to stop people like us from practicing photography in perfectly legal ways.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 115 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.