|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Amtrak- police-arrest- photographer
Dec 31 08 12:38 pm Link Rob Domaschuk wrote: I'm still waiting for someone to show what law he violated, specifically, in taking pictures in a public place from a public platform of a public train. Dec 31 08 12:38 pm Link We should all (photographers) organise a protest. Lets go to that platform with our cameras and snap away at the same time. Dec 31 08 12:40 pm Link Am I the only person bristling at the term "Amtrak police"?!? Dec 31 08 12:47 pm Link I have unique perspective on this and I am really interested in finding out the outcome of the case. Anyone know where to follow up on the outcome? I'm in California. Thanks! Happy NewYear by the way! Dec 31 08 12:52 pm Link Some of the discussion here is about what law he broke by photographing. He technically was not charged with violation of a law prohibiting photography. They rightfully or wrongly charged him with criminal trespass. Different can of worms. Albeit it may have been the only charge the pseudo-cops could think of AFTER they arrested him. Depends on what the prosecutor decides but it may never make it to trial. The guy still will be out lots of $s for legal advice and counsel unless ACLU or someone else steps up probono. I once was rousted on a public sidewalk trying to take a photo of an FDIC office. This was pre-911 by the way. Packed up my 4x5, tripod and gear and went on my way. Of course the boys in gray pants and blue sportcoats did copy down my ID information. Dec 31 08 12:53 pm Link Magnus Hedemark wrote: oxymoron Dec 31 08 12:55 pm Link 10X Images wrote: I do not think that it has worked it's way through the system yet...these can take as much as a year if they are in the federal system. Dec 31 08 12:55 pm Link Wet Ltd wrote: Dec 31 08 12:58 pm Link Yeah, figured as much! Thanks anyways. Dec 31 08 12:58 pm Link Howard Garcia wrote: Amendment I Dec 31 08 01:12 pm Link Dec 31 08 01:13 pm Link Ched wrote: I'm sorry, please point out where in this quotation does it clearly says that we are allowded to take pictures anywhere we want. Dec 31 08 01:34 pm Link penn station NY is a restricted military zone, it is not a public street or sidewalk, their is no right to shoot pictures there, unless you got a permit, or military escort! Dec 31 08 02:55 pm Link NJTtransit police were evidently arresting people who where taking pictures of trains from the publicly owned land near the train tracks. I heard they changed their procedures, so they will only arrest ya if your taking pictures from njt owned land Dec 31 08 03:02 pm Link Rebel Photo wrote: Maybe the guy should have read the rules posted on that site: Amtrak reminds the public and especially those who may photograph a train to stay out of danger. It is very important to stay away from tracks, moving trains, yards, railroad structures (such as bridges, trestles, towers and wires) and the railroad right-of-way. Photographers must not trespass on railroad property or on private property adjacent to the railroad. Instead, stay in public access areas, such as stations, sidewalks or parking lots. All participants agree to assume the risk of harm and release Amtrak from all liability for personal injury and loss of property. Photographers are reminded that railroad tracks, trestles, yards and equipment are private property and that trespassers are subject to arrest and fines. Some stations served by Amtrak trains require advance permission for photography. Always obey all local rules and laws. Dec 31 08 03:09 pm Link c_d_s wrote: Damn it, it's that silly reading stuff again problem! isn;t there someplace that could teach folks the importance of read?? Dec 31 08 03:19 pm Link Fernando Pacheco wrote: You and me both. Dec 31 08 04:01 pm Link Wet Ltd wrote: at all underground stations in melbourne there are signs everywhere that bans having a camera out taking photos... Dec 31 08 04:09 pm Link I was taking all the pictures I wanted in Tokyo in Sep, 08 in the subway system stations, I even have shots with the crew waving. Dec 31 08 04:16 pm Link Professional Photographers of America website has links to all the important issues about this. They deal in copyright as well as photographing in public www.ppa.com Dec 31 08 04:31 pm Link peter leverett wrote: Leave it to the Aussie's to know how to alert folks to restricted activities. Maybe I need to move in with my cousin down there. Dec 31 08 04:48 pm Link Its fun when you're telling a cop that what he thinks is a crime is not even close to any law on the books. And that he can only stick you with a bogus charge that will get thrown out. I.E. Harass you. They either realize you're right, or start repeating that its a crime in a LOUDER TONE OF VOICE, as if they talk louder they're going to be more "right". If you social engineer them and stroke their cop-ego, usually you don't get arrested. If you don't, he does what you say he can do.  Either way you have to stop what you're doing or they'll just keep bugging you. When cops talk to me about "confiscating" things, I say "oh, you mean THEFT? Thats a law isn't it? You just said you're going to steal my property?". Works EVERY time. I'm glad this guy stood up for his rights. I don't know if he was rude with the cop, or if he just ran into "that one" asshole cop out there that day. Neither cops nor private individuals or companies can make you delete pictures or film. You may get a tresspassing charge, although generally if asked to leave and you refuse you get a charge. If you just go you're not charged because you're not there when you "know you shouldnt be there". At least in my state thats how it is legally and practically. NYC has too many laws. I don't like going there because you never know when you'll be sitting in the park relaxing and all of a sudden you see a 40 foot wide wall of cops in riot gear with M-14s. Great photo... but damn, wtf? You get busted for taking it!  Dec 31 08 04:56 pm Link peter leverett wrote: I heard it was the same in England. Dec 31 08 05:02 pm Link I didn't read most of this but if you can see it you can take a photo of it. There is no law saying you can take a picture of anything you want: your law enforcers have to show you a law that says you can't. The truely stupid side of this is that the terrorist people have already photographed it and if they need new ones they would just go take some more. Cops will now buy this guy a whole bunch of new cameras! I am a law enforcer myself, I don't make up laws and I have had to tell a number of my fellow law enforcers time and again: you don't make up laws and if you do you are gonna have trouble. Dec 31 08 09:38 pm Link better add to this that if they want photos they will take them right under the nose of LE using things that don't even look like cameras. Dec 31 08 09:39 pm Link Howard Garcia wrote: Ask, and ye shall receive: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Dec 31 08 09:59 pm Link Dave Nicholson wrote: You should have returned the favor. IIRC, Law Enforcement officers must provide their photo id and/or badge number on demand. Dec 31 08 10:03 pm Link cameraman K wrote: ...sounds like a conspiracy to me... Dec 31 08 10:06 pm Link So it seems, that the marketing dept is guilty of violating Homeland Security laws. Get them arrested. Have a name from marketing ready to throw at the cops. Second, in the " old days of film ", photojournalists kept an extra roll of blank film, ready to hand over to authorities, by using a simple sleight-of-hand, ( well practiced ) so they can get away with it. Also, at the first sign of trouble, pull the good film card, from the camera, hide it in your sock & have the blank one, in place in the camera, then when they ask you to delete the images, just give them the empty card. Sometimes, the OLD tricks can work just as well now. Dec 31 08 10:11 pm Link Well, I guess, I've just been lucky. I shoot at the local train stations ALL the time as it has some fabulous architecture and it gets the most gorgous evening light. hmmmmmmm. Dec 31 08 10:13 pm Link Amazing story - especially the fact that the photos were Amtrak's idea! Dec 31 08 10:16 pm Link I know the feeling, my wife and I were out for our anniversary and driving across a bridge with a public walkway we saw some beautiful light's, so we stopped and walked out on the bridge and the next thing we knew we were surrounded by 6 cops and getting frisked and held till they completed a check on both of us, I didn't know the lights were a refinery, and then another time in VA at a state park I was taking some shots of the wifes cousin, again stopped and checked and told I needed a permit to shoot on the state lands.... so where can you take a dam picture anymore.....???? Dec 31 08 10:25 pm Link digital Artform wrote: Like I said above...I think it's a conspiracy: They put out a "contest" - but the whole idea is to make money from arresting amateurs who don't know the law. Dec 31 08 10:35 pm Link Joe Lisa wrote: And people (by that I mean photographers and models I know) wonder why I want to ONLY shoot in my own studio. Heck, I don't really even like stepping outside to take a shot -- I do, but I don't really like it. It's just safer to stay in your own space -- if it isn't any safer, don't burst my bubble. lol Dec 31 08 10:48 pm Link Jon Warren Photography wrote: Your bubble has been officially bursted. Dec 31 08 10:54 pm Link Question authority, or the authorities will be questioning you. I think we are getting to a point in this country where the only way you can protect your rights is to demand them. Dec 31 08 11:02 pm Link Roger Barnstead wrote: There have to be more than a few camera phones capable or recording 4 to 16gb of video (or even being programed to shoot 2mp or better stills every few seconds) while sitting in a belt holster and the "Photographer" is just walking around enjoying the archetecture. Dec 31 08 11:03 pm Link every minute spent messing with people who are not doing anything is time given to the people who are going to have them for lunch. They are dummies and yes it is all lookie see pigin Dec 31 08 11:09 pm Link Fernando Pacheco wrote: Amen brother! And then maybe we can get something done about this 2257 $hit . . . Dec 31 08 11:16 pm Link |
