There is a lot of talk and little clarity about what the new law
would do, but of course, it's not going to pass because we're going
to stop it.
There is a quote from one city official saying that (and I'm
paraphrasing because I don't have it in front of me) "taking more
than two or three photos in one place in less than 20 minutes is
grounds for suspicion."
I want to reiterate that this is a legal issue but also a social
one. Many photographers, including myself (two years ago in Miami),
have been stopped by Department of Homeland Security officials for
taking pictures. In my case, I was photographing public sculpture
for a newspaper article on the same. One of the sculptures I
photographed was in front of the federal building in downtown Miami,
a building that is bought and paid for with taxpayer money, a
building that in other words, belongs to us, a building that any
terrorist, if he or she wanted to, could photograph on a cell phone
completely undetected.
Here in Mexico last year, I walked outside and pointed my camera at
an intersection just to check the light. An American confronted me
screaming "Why are you taking pictures of my rental car??? You could
be a terrorist?" I wasn't interested in the rental car and didn't
even photograph it. So it's an attitude that's contagious, and one
that government officials are spreading.
On a larger level, this is an issue in which the government is
saying, these aren't your streets anymore. They're ours, and we make
the rules. I don't see grassroots movements of Americans calling for
these rules restricting photography. I see them coming from the top
down.
If NY City wants to put regulations on huge, commercial movie crews
that tie-up traffic and create traffic risks, that's between the
government and the film industry. But Joe Public photographers like
us risk getting swept up in these sorts of proposals and it's not
fair and does not reflect the values of a "freedom loving people."
I ask all of you again to please sign the petition.
www.gonecity.blogspot.com
--- In Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70
yahoogroups.com, "avrahamreiss" <avrahamreiss...>
wrote:
>
> I don't live in the States, but you aroused - and did not satisfy -
my
> curiousity.
>
> Neither your blog nor the NY Times article you referred to give
the
> reason for the new proposal.
>
> If the reason concerns security, then I'd see it as another
example of
> post-9/11 hysteria. I've seen a lot of that on visits to Britain
in the
> last few years, and this despite experience with many decades of
IRA
> terror in the UK.
>
> The only other reason I can think of is that when photo crews
appear in
> public crowds naturally gather, occasionally impeding free passage
to
> the uninterested. If that's the reason, it sounds like heavy
> overkill ...
>
> Incidentally, single photographers _will_ be allowed to photograph
at
> will, the proposed new law begins with 2 or more people.
>
> --- In Nikon-D70%40yahoogroups.com">Nikon-D70yahoogroups.com, "sevignyj" <sevignyj> wrote:
> >
>; > I urge all of you to sign this petition against NY City's
efforts to
> > restrict the freedom of photographers -- pros, amateurs and
others --
> > to take photographs on the street.
> >
> > I've posted a link to the petition on my blog, some of my
thoughts on
> > the matter, and a link to a NY Times story explaining the
background.
> >
> > Best to all.
> >
> > John Sevigny
> >
> > gonecity.blogspot.com
> >
>;
