Police came over to me

davespics

I live in the NYC area...I went this morning to take sope pictures at the Tapanzee bridge. An officer came over and told me to stop taking pictures of the bridge....luckily I got a couple of nice shots in...

davespics

davespics wrote:

I live in the NYC area...I went this morning to take sope pictures at the Tapanzee bridge. An officer came over and told me to stop taking pictures of the bridge....luckily I got a couple of nice shots in...

Sorry, I'm having a hard time posting pics

http://davespics.smugmug.com/gallery/1538990/1/125593173#128813312-L-LB

http://davespics.smugmug.com/gallery/1538990/1/125593173#128819684-L-LB

Art Scott

Good photos....Did the copper give ya ah reason for the desist order???

firedancing4life

Art Scott wrote:

Good photos....Did the copper give ya ah reason for the desist order???

yeah...don't put up with that!

Andy

davespics wrote:

Sorry, I'm having a hard time posting pics

http://davespics.smugmug.com/gallery/1538990/1/125593173#128813312-L-LB

Dave, use the "share" button above your photos in the gallery - gets you a link like this:

http://davespics.smugmug.com/photos/128813312-L-1.jpg

Skippy

davespics wrote:

I live in the NYC area...I went this morning to take sope pictures at the Tapanzee bridge. An officer came over and told me to stop taking pictures of the bridge....luckily I got a couple of nice shots in...

Hope you dont mind I fixed it so your images would appear.
You are doing it wrong, but I will post you a PM and show you how okay

The shots look great..... love that second one
Thanks for sharing....... Skippy
.

Chief

Nice photos Dave!

As far as the encounter you had, it's just an increased awareness of crtical infrastructure and transportation routes, along with those showing a particular interest in them.

At least in our area, as long as we can determine the good faith intent of the artist and they are not in a restricted spot, it would not be a problem.

Richard

BeachBill

davespics wrote:

I live in the NYC area...I went this morning to take sope pictures at the Tapanzee bridge. An officer came over and told me to stop taking pictures of the bridge....luckily I got a couple of nice shots in...

Welcome to the post-911 world. See this page for a JPGMAG issue on the subject and also note the "Get Informed:" links near the bottom of the page.

Rhuarc

After hearing about all this stuff I'm printing outa few of those know your photography rights papers to keep in my camera bag. I think I'll get that guys book as well, the legal handbook for photographers. Should be an informative read.

Jeroen

You can't take a photo of some bridge? Where do you live? Russia?
So much for "the land of the free"...

thebigsky

I hope you told him to get lost.

Charlie

davespics

Update to my story

thebigsky wrote:

I hope you told him to get lost.

Charlie

There was a little I left out of the story because I wanted to keep the focus (no pun intended) on the pictures....

The police officer was no joke. I think he wanted me to be just a tad un-respectful so he could write me a ticket. A couple of other things he said were that if the Coast Guard pulled up they would arrest me and he also had to point out that he was a muslim...not sure what that had to do with anything...

Since I wanted to keep taking pictures, and it was a nice morning, I packed my bag and moved on. It was not worth fighting.

kkart

davespics wrote:

There was a little I left out of the story because I wanted to keep the focus (no pun intended) on the pictures....

The police officer was no joke. I think he wanted me to be just a tad un-respectful so he could write me a ticket. A couple of other things he said were that if the Coast Guard pulled up they would arrest me and he also had to point out that he was a muslim...not sure what that had to do with anything...

Since I wanted to keep taking pictures, and it was a nice morning, I packed my bag and moved on. It was not worth fighting.

Oh but it IS worth fighting, especially when they are totally and completely in the wrong like this. Were you ON public property? If you were, there is NOTHING they can do about it at all, not a thing. I would have gone down to the PD and filed a complaint with the Watch Commander and also make sure that they KNOW the laws before trying to enforce something which does NOT exist. Next time---take THIS with you:

The Photographer's Right

A Downloadable Flyer Explaining Your Rights When Stopped or Confronted for Photography


"The Photographer’s Right is a downloadable guide that is loosely based on the Bust Card and the Know Your Rights pamphlet that used to be available on the ACLU website. It may be downloaded and printed out using Adobe Acrobat Reader. You may make copies and carry them your wallet, pocket, or camera bag to give you quick access to your rights and obligations concerning confrontations over photography. You may distribute the guide to others, provided that such distribution is not done for commercial gain and credit is given to the author"

lcavalie

kkart,

Would be really great t have that document but it looks like your link is not working.
Any way to fix that ?

Thanks

L

pahl

Nice photos, but I would like to see the one of the cop.

kkart

lcavalie wrote:

kkart,

Would be really great t have that document but it looks like your link is not working.
Any way to fix that ?

Thanks

L

Fixed!

Photog

It's crazy but you have to pick your battles sometimes.

Photogs have been dealing with this in DC prior to 9/11 (tripod permits).

Some people get stopped in small towns for photographing little police departments and so on.

Crazy times.

evoryware

Hmm interesting position...
I remember once my boss and three other managers show up with no keys to open the store. All the employees are locked outside. I go to take a picture for giggles later. He says, "I hope you didn't take a picture of that. I don't think you are that stupid." Not happy with his implication that I could possibly be "stupid", I say I didn't think 4 managers would be stupid enough to come to the store without keys to open it.

Frustrated and knowing it's private property I'm standing on, I go across the street and take the picture. Not his property anymore. In fact the street divides two towns. He's fired now, not as a result of my picture, but because of other stupid acts. Anyway....

Well, on the George Washington and Triborough Bridge, you see signs with the effect of:

Following the September 11th attacks on New York and Washington, the government has prohibited people from taking photographs and videos on the premises of the bridge due to the fear that terrorist groups might study any potential photographs and videos in order to plot a terrorist attack on the bridge.

So you can't take pictures while driving on, walking on, or biking on the premises of those two bridges. They allow us rights of usage to cross the bridge property, but not to take pictures off of it - or of it - while on it. I haven't seen a sign like that heading to the Tappan Zee.
Fair game I would say especially if you aren't on it.
I would hope that this is soon overturned as this rule was also held in New York City Subways but was eventually lifted (I think because civil rights groups were challenging it's constitutionality...)

http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2005/05/subway.html

Knowing it was lifted, I took a picture in the subway for one of the challenges, "Waiting".
I can sort of tell where you were standing when you took those pictures and there's a mix of private and public property, if I'm correct. A few months ago not knowing the rules, I would have stopped taking pics. Knowing the rules, I would have challenged him on it while continuing to take pics. Knowing the area I'd say maybe it was South Nyack police jurisdiction and you may have been on someone's private property - "tresspassing", and not a coast guard issue. I have pictures of all the bridges from the Tappan Zee south to the Brooklyn Bridge. I have no plans to stop taking them. In fact, now I sort of want to go to Nyack and try it out. :photo

"Land of the free and home of the brave"
I'm glad you didn't get rid of the pictures you did get!

Art Scott

Actually all the post 911 fears of photogs is really moot...why???? simply because there have been sites for years (especially since the popularity of GPS units)...where all you had to do was put in a city or address and EUREKA...there is the place you want to see with GPS coordinates showing up...this work real well for any city in the USA...not so good for central Europe (at least not in the Czech Republic as I have playing with it this weekend, trying to find towns that I had visited in 2003) .....now if they want to be a afraid of someone...... they should be showing fear of the person with a GPS ...as with that info they can see exactly what they want to destroy and even twist and turn the landscape to see how the land actually lies.....{or is it lays?} and those damg anooyting cell phone cameras........so far I haven't been run off the grounds surrounding BOEING, SPIRIT OR THE AFB HERE when photoing from the street and I do carry a GPS (bright yellow ETREX) AND A DIGITAL MICRO RECORDER....I have started carrying the recorder since I was hasseled in a small town by a true red neck of a cop....now it is with me all the time just in case and I have a battery powered electric(sp) mic so the recoder is in a pocket with vox activation and mic is usually hidden a bit on my collar or some other inconspicious place.

But in all realism a small digital recorder can be the theing that saves your tail if challenged by the "authorities".......it can prove how you were treated especially if you ask simple questions like so #### is your badge number, what preceint are you from and his/her name....now be sure to write all this down also that takes away from any suspicion of a recoder being used......do not tell them you are going to report them...just do it.

evoryware

Art Scott wrote:

Actually all the post 911 fears of photogs is really moot...why???? simply because there have been sites for years (especially since the popularity of GPS units)...where all you had to do was put in a city or address and EUREKA...there is the place you want to see with GPS coordinates showing up...

Living in Manhattan, I personally can't go to long a day without thinking about this. But the same government that says "move on... get back to normal" says, "but no pics of the Tappan Zee Bridge"?
All you have to do is google image search or even better, google earth and zoom a location.
It's not the camera taking pictures of the bridge I'm worried about. If anything it was cameras that helped us "catch the orchestrators" of 9-11 and Oklahoma City.

TylerW

I was in Barcelona last year at the olympic stadium, and the security there were all to eager to prevent me from taking photos. The stadium was under construction and they didn't want my photos to represent the stadium in its present 'work in progress' state. They insisted in confiscating my camera, and I refused. I wasn't familiar with the local laws regarding photography, so I jsut wanted to settle with little altercation. I capped up my camera and put it away and told them I was leaving. They followed me all the way to the taxi stand inisiting that I surrender my camera.

Made me really glad that the word "no" means the same in both english and spanish.

Flyinggina

Art Scott wrote:

I do carry a GPS (bright yellow ETREX) AND A DIGITAL MICRO RECORDER....I have started carrying the recorder since I was hasseled in a small town by a true red neck of a cop....now it is with me all the time just in case and I have a battery powered electric(sp) mic so the recoder is in a pocket with vox activation and mic is usually hidden a bit on my collar or some other inconspicious place.

But in all realism a small digital recorder can be the theing that saves your tail if challenged by the "authorities".......it can prove how you were treated especially if you ask simple questions like so #### is your badge number, what preceint are you from and his/her name....now be sure to write all this down also that takes away from any suspicion of a recoder being used......do not tell them you are going to report them...just do it.

Recording a conversation without the knowledge and consent of the other party or parties to the conversation is a criminal offense in Massachusetts. I don't know about any other states, but you should check whatever state you are in if you think you may be recording a conversation clandestinely.

Virginia

thebigsky

It's always reassuring to know that the authorities, with their usual air of breathtaking stupidity pander precisely to the terrorist's desires by affecting your life by eroding your civil liberties and rights.

I'm afraid that my wife and I won't be travelling again to the States in the forseeable future given the verbal grilling and lack of welcome we received on our last visit.

Charlie

evoryware

TylerW wrote:

I was in Barcelona last year at the olympic stadium, and the security there were all to eager to prevent me from taking photos. The stadium was under construction and they didn't want my photos to represent the stadium in its present 'work in progress' state. They insisted in confiscating my camera, and I refused. I wasn't familiar with the local laws regarding photography, so I jsut wanted to settle with little altercation. I capped up my camera and put it away and told them I was leaving. They followed me all the way to the taxi stand inisiting that I surrender my camera.

Made me really glad that the word "no" means the same in both english and spanish.

In the U.S. you never have to surrender your camera or delete pictures taken.

Art Scott

Flyinggina wrote:

Recording a conversation without the knowledge and consent of the other party or parties to the conversation is a criminal offense in Massachusetts. I don't know about any other states, but you should check whatever state you are in if you think you may be recording a conversation clandestinely.

Virginia

I might be wrong..but I think the only time a recorded conversation is illegal is if it is a phone recording and comes under FCC rules and applies in every state......but if used as i stated then you are using it for note taking in the first place..so it would not be illegal....since they aretalking to you there is no suggestion of privacy either as anyone could be standing there listening......

wxwax

Flyinggina wrote:

Recording a conversation without the knowledge and consent of the other party or parties to the conversation is a criminal offense in Massachusetts. I don't know about any other states, but you should check whatever state you are in if you think you may be recording a conversation clandestinely.

Virginia

I think that's true of telephone conversations in many, if not most, states.

Not so sure about a street conversation. I think how you use the sound, becomes the issue there.

Art Scott

wxwax wrote:

I think you are wrong. I think Flyinggina's dead on.

Well it has goten me several appologies in more than one state and the advice to do this was given to me by a US District Judge.....when driving I have it on the passenger seat and if stopped I always hit record and turn off the radio before rolling down my window....but I have never been to Mass. so don't know their local laws....and as I said I could be wrong....so now I guess I could be wrong and lucky also.....

Flyinggina

I just checked the Massachusetts statute (ch. 727, second 99 of the MGL) and the law applies to both telephone conversations and "oral communications" other than radio. Without looking at the case law, that sure sounds to me like it would cover recording a conversation with a trooper or other person giving you grief unless he gives permission. Guess it is a good idea to be careful in Massachusetts. It would be awfully annoying to find yourself charged with a crime when all you were doing is documenting inappropriate behavior by officials.

Virginia

moose135

Unfortunately this is one more over-reaction by authorities in our modern post-9/11 world. In NYC, there are signs on the bridges (Throggs Neck, Whitestone, etc.) saying photography is prohibited, although I've only seen them on the roadside as you drive on the bridges. I don't know that you are prohibited from photographing the bridges from the ground or a boat.

The problem is, many times the police will tell you photography is prohibited, simply to get you to move. I do a lot of aviation photography, often taking pictures around JFK and LaGuardia in NYC, and I've had numerous encounters with local law enforcement. Usually, they stop by because someone saw us and called to report us (at times I'm alone, but I've been out with groups as large as 10-12) and they have to check it out. The initial reaction from the police has ranged from "So you must be the suspicious guy taking pictures" said with laugh, to being told that "Since 9/11, it's illegal to take pictures of aircraft". By knowing my rights, and politely and professionally asserting those rights, I can usually get the officer to agree that I'm not doing anything wrong. Once or twice, following the conversation, I have been asked politely to leave where I was shooting from, and did, but usually the officer continues his patrol, and I keep shooting.

And as mentioned above, in the US, it takes a court order to make you surrender your camera, a police officer can't confiscate it or force you to delete your pictures. And that "law" about taking photos in the NYC subways? It was proposed several years ago, and although never enacted, the NYPD began enforcing it. Thanks to opposition from photography, civil rights and free speech groups, the MTA dropped the proposal without a vote in 2005, and the police have been told to stop trying to enforce a non-existent law.

Angelo

Flyinggina wrote:

Recording a conversation without the knowledge and consent of the other party or parties to the conversation is a criminal offense in Massachusetts. I don't know about any other states, but you should check whatever state you are in if you think you may be recording a conversation clandestinely.

Virginia

not if the intent is just to protect or defend yourself

S_Leeper

First, nice shot of the Tappan Zee.

If you go 10 miles up the river you will be at the Bear Mountain Bridge, where I've seen people set up in the middle of the bridge with tripods taking pics... (only two lanes with wide shoulders)

Two, regardless of the legality of recording a conversation it can provide some benefit to protect you from issues...

Three, while most law enforcement officials are very patient, understanding, knowledgable of the law & respectful of your rights there are a fair number of delusional phsycotics(sp?) out there & most of them are the ones driving a patrol car (generally a little too long by themselves). I won't go into too many details, but I've known of several instances where property was unlawfully confiscated & almost always disposed of shortly thereafter (so when you arrive at the police station to claim it they don't know what you're talking about... & it's not their receipt either :-(.