Re: news article concerning photographing in public spaces

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 09/15/02-10:35:16 PM Z


On Sun, 15 Sep 2002, Tom Hawkins wrote:

> Listmembers,
>
> The following article appeared in today's New York Times.
>
> We live in sad times.
>
> Tom Hawkins

I read the article and could only shake my head -- talk about the
bureaucratic "mind" -- yeah, an oxymoron. As if the plans for those
bridges weren't in a million archives, photographs, books, blueprints,
websites, libraries, and assorted other sources and documents. As if any
terrorist cells hadn't already photographed them to a farethewell...
It's simply a rule as sure as the sun rises in the east -- if something
bad happens, men in suits will pass a law about it. Law can be utterly
witless, useless and empty, as this one, doesn't matter, they're
*responding*, and as we know, in politics it's the gesture that counts.

For another example -- couple of years ago there was a highrise fire &
folks had trouble finding their way out & down. Now every building over
(as I recall it's) two stories & 3 units has to deliver an *exit plan* to
every tenant every year, and tenant must post it on the inside of their
exit door. If they don't -- off with their/our heads.

This house has one stairway, one outside door, no elevator -- no matter.
Exit "plan" has to be devised and delivered annually.

In any event & however, friend of mine photographed the Brooklyn Bridge
about two weeks ago. Didn't get arrested or film confiscated. Guess she
was lucky. (And the photographs were great -- a real fluffy-cloud day!)

Judy

>
> Words of Warning: Don't Shoot
>
> September 15, 2002
> By JAYSON BLAIR
>
>
>
> LOOSE lips sink ships. So do loose lenses.
>
> Since the Sept. 11 attacks last year, New York's
> Metropolitan Transportation Authority has been confiscating
> the film from anyone caught taking pictures at the
> Verrazano-Narrows, the Queens-Midtown Tunnel and other
> bridges and tunnels.
>
> Tom Kelly, an M.T.A. spokesman, said a ban on taking
> pictures has long been in place, but was enforced only
> after the attacks. Mr. Kelly said he does not "even want to
> get into the reasons why we don't want people to do it."
> One can assume, though, it has to do with terrorism, since,
> after the attacks, the agency began installing signs that
> read "Use of Cameras Prohibited. Strictly Enforced,"
> confiscating cameras and in one case, at the Triborough
> Bridge, detained an art history professor for taking
> pictures for his class.
>
> New York is not alone. In San Francisco, California Highway
> Patrol officers have stopped dozens of people photographing
> while on or near the Golden Gate Bridge.
>
> Harvey W. Kushner, a terrorism consultant and professor at
> C.W. Post University, said that, while anyone can still
> take pictures of bridges and tunnels from nearby vantage
> points, there are important structural details that can
> only be gleaned from taking pictures close up.
>
> "I can understand why my friends in the A.C.L.U. and other
> groups rail against what I am advocating, but we live in a
> different time and the Constitution is not a suicide pact,"
> he said.
>
>
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/15/weekinreview/15BLAI.html?ex=1033111557&ei
> 1&en=fe5b621f57a8cec7
>
>
>
>
>


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/02-03:47:09 PM Z CST