Are photographers really a threat?

[johnastovall]

Bruce Schneier, well know cryptographer and secuirty expert, brings some rationally to the photogrpher as terrorist debate.

"
What is it with photographers these days? Are they really all terrorists, or does everyone just think they are?
Since 9/11, there has been an increasing war on photography. Photographers have been harrassed, questioned, detained, arrested or worse, and declared to be unwelcome. We've been repeatedly told to watch out for photographers, especially suspicious ones. Clearly any terrorist is going to first photograph his target, so vigilance is required.
Except that it's nonsense. The 9/11 terrorists didn't photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid subway bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn't photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber didn't photograph anything; neither did shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs aren't being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. The IRA wasn't known for its photography. Even those manufactured terrorist plots that the US government likes to talk about -- the Ft. Dix terrorists, the JFK airport bombers, the Miami 7, the Lackawanna 6 -- no photography..."




Full article here.

[alamoshutterbug]

How about this link

[Charles Putnam]

I know this link has been posted here on TPF, but Scott Kelby linked it to his blog. What's interesting is that the local Washington DC Fox station was interviewing one of the heads of Amtrack in Union Station, and one of the security guards came up and told them to stop filming.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/myfox/pages/H...d=1.1.1&sflg=1

When I worked in downtown L.A., every so often I'd go on a photo walk - camera in hand, just trying to improve my "photographic vision". Several times, security personell for some of the building would come out and tell me it was against the law to photograph their building. Mind you, I was on a public sidewalk. One actually flagged down LAPD, who appropriately told the security guard there were no such laws.

[LDB]

In a word, no. This is a "look like you're doing something and feel good" exercise just like additional restrictions on gun ownership and many other things. An issue either has no solution or the solution is crystal clear but tough and incomprehensible to the damaged liberal mind so it's dealt with hysterically like photography restrictions.

Coming soon to an area near you.. prime lens only restriction because we can't have those dangerous high capacity zooms around.. 85mm and smaller focal length limits because who needs those giant lenses anyway other than the police and military.. one body/lens limit because we don't need folks packing too much iron/glass.

[Charles Putnam]

Originally Posted by LDB

Coming soon to an area near you.. prime lens only restriction because we can't have those dangerous high capacity zooms around.

hmmm...that was the line I got from the security goofballs at the XGames - they claimed ESPN had restrictions on photographing the XGames (even though there wasn't anything posted on the XGames website, or at the games themselves).

[jerrykr]

Funny thing is, they never stop a person with a P&S silver camera. It's so obvious, even the dumbest terrorist would know to get a little pocket camera for that kind of "work". Better yet, Google already has better images then they could take, and it's all online, available to anyone. The whole photographer/security risk thing is just plain dumb.

[barP]

that last thing - espn having restrictions on the x-games - at least has some credibility. most professional sports are "owned" by some organization and they fiercely protect the rights to images of their athletes. that's based in copyright law, however, and has nothing to do with security threats.

wp.

[dreemes]

Bin Laden does not need to terrorize America. All he has to do is put a few photos and some papers on one of his low life friends and let him get caught. Then DHS has "credible evidence" and does the terrorizing for him.

[C!LLY]

when I was in high school I had a drama trip down to tampa for a week and I took my old canon 35mm. I was walking down the street taking pictures of my friends and there was a cool cloud formation reflecting off of one of the glass buildings and I was trying to take a picture of it and an old cop came over and threatened to take my camera away and arrest me if I did not stop taking illegal pictures of the building. Being that I was 18 and was already in deep poo poo with my teacher for being a "ba student" I did not want to cause any trouble and stopped taking the pictures without argument, but if I wasnt so far away from home and on a school function I would have given him crap about it.

[thorin]

Lincoln Karim, Central Park red tailed hawks (Pale Male & Lola) photographer, was ordered to stop taking photographs of the hawks on a surveillance camera at the MET. Story at http://www.palemale.com/

[georgep6506]

My experience with this is two fold.

I was once told I couldn't photograph someone making glass vases because the images may be used by someone trying to make bombs. Hmmmm… I told the lady she was crazy and moved on to another glass blower who would help me out.

On the other hand, I have been stopped, at gun point, by a company who was having legal troubles and they thought I was working for the attorney who was suing them.

I wonder how much of this "you can't take our picture" is really do to fear of terrorism and how much is due to legal fear?

[kenw]

Originally Posted by georgep6506

I wonder how much of this "you can't take our picture" is really do to fear of terrorism and how much is due to legal fear?

most is actually due to stupidity, the legal issues are often more realistic but the terrorist part gives a better cover story.

If you say it's copyrighted, there are exclusivity rights, etc, someone may challenge you and prove you wrong. Fear of failure mode kicks in. You need another story.

Use the "terrorism" bucket, and most toadies will nod in agreement and go on....and your manhood remains intact.

[SCone]

Maybe we should start posting the shots so the authorities can spot people doing things they shouldn't be doing? Think of it... 50 MILLION security cameras!