ray . Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Some while back I posted a thread in which I described being stopped from photographing and asked to leave John Wayne Airport by security police acting by authority of the Department of Homeland Security. I've since talked to the person at that airport via telephone about obtaining a permit, and received a mixed reaction. This person explained that she would need to meet me and see what kind of photographs I was taking for a permit to be granted. At the same time she hinted that I should probably wait until security alert changed from Orange to Yellow before attempting to continue with my photographic project. While having a fair amount of patience in discussing the issue, it was apparent to me she would rather not have to deal with it. I decided to move to photographing at LAX in the meantime. Security seemed tighter and more visible there, however the Airport Police did little more than give me a friendly greeting at first. In one instance I was looking through the viewfinder at a policeman, who looked directly at me and continued on without seeming to bat an eyelash. Another time I was wandering around inside a baggage claim area which was empty of people at the time, and was framing possible photos through the viewfinder. Looking up I saw a policeman approaching and figured I was done for. He walked by and gave a friendly Hello. This led me to believe I had found the perfect place to continue my photography of an Airport environment. As it turned out, that was not to be the case. Last Sunday, on the 3rd expedition to LAX, after shooting almost a full roll, there suddenly appeared three police in front of me as I sat on a ledge near the sidewalk outside the building. They asked if I was waiting for a flight, to which I replied no, I was there to do a photo project on the Airport for myself, as photography was my hobby. The first officer told me that an employee had complained about being photographed when getting off of a bus, and that in general people were uptight because of the situation after 9/11. I told him I understood that situation. This time my driver's license was checked, and I was asked if I had any warrants out for my arrest. I replied that I had never been arrested but had only had parking and automobile moving violations in the past. One officer, who was about half my age, repeated the same question again and then asked if my tickets had been paid. I asked him what that had to do with anything. After about 10 minutes I was told I was free to go but that I should leave the airport, and that I would be cited if caught photographing again. I was told by the 2nd officer that it would be alright if I photographed on the street outside the airport, but that I should expect to be questioned there too. I made some attempt to explain during the course of the conversation that these were "artistic" photographs. I got the impression that none of the officers had a clue what I was talking about. I bring this topic up again, I guess partially because of the news today that there's a move in Congress to scale back the Patriot Act to protect people's civil liberties. Apparently candidate Dean also mentioned the same issue today in the Democratic Presidential Debate. Without placing the blame on any one group, and in full understanding of the reasons for the fear that exists in people's minds today, I still very much resent not being able to do something that I consider a constructive and innocent activity, and in the process being made to feel somewhat as if that activity was criminal. At some time I will proceed with attempting to obtain a permit, but I'm not all that sure that will be a solution. I should add that while photographing in candid situations I'm usually relaxed and out in the open with it, and I don't think I have a threatening presence at all. The general question is, even if you consider it a hypothetical one: How much freedom are we willing to give up in seeking a sense of security? How careful do we need to be? At what point does awareness become paranoia? What do we value most? I'll post the rest of what pics I did get at LAX next week...<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shambrick007 Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 "How much freedom are we willing to give up in seeking a sense of security?"<p>For me, not any more than has already been taken. This does not apply only to the post 9/11 atmosphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik_asgeirsson Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 <i>He who gives up essential liberty for a little temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security.</i><br> - Benjamin Franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 <i> I still very much resent not being able to do something that I consider a constructive and innocent activity, and in the process being made to feel somewhat as if that activity was criminal.</i> <br> <br> my point of view is simply, tough shit. photograph something else... <p> <p> you cant really expect to shoot photographs in places like that and not be hassled by authorities, especially today, and thats the way it needs to be for people to feel safe. its the way it is. <p> <p> i would bet that most people could care less about your artistic intentions compared to their needs of feeling safe. <p> <p> theres a time and place to be a photographer and fight for that, and a time and place to stand by and just look. i personally dont think shooting in airports or other 'high risk' areas are worth fighting for, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 <i>"He who gives up essential liberty for a little temporary security deserves neither liberty nor security.- Benjamin Franklin"</i><br><br>its not essential to photograph people in airports, especially during times like these. some things are just common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vance_lester Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Grant, How is taking pictures in an airport making people feel more unsafe than say, the internet, where you can actually learn enough about planes to actually be a threat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 how many people have you personally seen just wander around an airport taking photos of other people, and random things? <br> <br> do you honestly believe that in the u.s. that wouldnt be considered suspicious behavior by the majority of people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackers_. Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Security is the ruse to keep you from becoming another Rodney King photographer - you are a liability that carries no benefit. I may understand what you mean by taking public photos but to most people you're a step above collecting womens' shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 I haven't read it yet, I'll report later..... there was an article today about the idea that kids with photo cell phones at school could photograph other kids who were nude in the locker room and post them on the internet..... and what should or could be done about it. As I said to one of the policemen, "What kind of terrorist plot am I going to concoct by standing out in the open with a camera taking pictures?" I agree with the common sense comment, but then again I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe_murphy1 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Grant, thanks for letting us know what is and is not essential. Do you have a link to the entire list? We can just print it off and check it prior to each activity... Hey, what we don't need is a government that tells us what we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 It's not really "essential" to photograph on the streets of New York either. Suppose that was challenged because someone thought you were scoping out a building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 <i>As I said to one of the policemen, "What kind of terrorist plot am I going to concoct by standing out in the open with a camera taking pictures?"</i> <br> <br> heh, say what u will.....if you get arrested dont call me... :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted January 30, 2004 Author Share Posted January 30, 2004 To be fair, I don't blame an airport employee for feeling uncomfortable being photographed at their job. There are 2 sides to the issue of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 <i> Grant, thanks for letting us know what is and is not essential. Do you have a link to the entire list? We can just print it off and check it prior to each activity...</i> <br> <br> ok, we can play that game. if you feel its essential to shoot, go for it. as long as you accept that mr. policeman feels its essential to kick you outta the airport or arrest you if need be.....alls fair in love and photography... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 <i>There are 2 sides to the issue of course.</i> <br> <br> of course, and in most cases the majority rules.....c'est la vie... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b1 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 I distictly remember being hassled and then body-checked by two priests for "daring" to photograph the interior of Chartres in 1975. They wanted me to buy the fourth-rate slides available at the sales table, just inside the entrance. It takes all kinds. It has nothing to do with security, but with the ancillary motives of the perps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeeter Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 remember the link in ray's related thread a few months ago to the airport that showed live continuous video from an airport, broadcast on the net by the airport? how could that not be considered a security risk? what about the ease of surreptitious photos by cell phone cameras and other small digital p&s cameras? no one has ever offered an explanation as to why still photographs of an airport should be considered a security risk, and if they truly were, shouldn't all cameras be banned entirely from the terminal just like knives are? surreptitious photos (from the hip, or bring your "friend" to "pose" in front of areas of interest as a decoy) are easy enough. it just doesn't make sense to me. no one has stopped me or any of thousands of tourists from photographing inside the texas state capitol building, which seems to me like it should rank somewhere on a potential terrorist's list of targets. what gives with airports? there is no evidence that photographs played any role whatsoever in the 9/11 attacks, and no reason to suggest that photographs of an airport should contribute to an attack any more than careful observation and a sketch pad. unlike grant, i am not yet willing to give up basic liberties due to a irrational reactionary response of the government. i just hope no one ever decides that street photography is somehow a risk, for we will have to forgo grant's excellent artistic efforts. btw, ray. nice shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_evans4 Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 It could be claimed that there's an issue of security, and it could be claimed that there's an issue of privacy. The former would be a matter of photographing buildings, spaces, and their use; the latter of photographing individuals. In places the two overlap, of course. Still, if an employee is bothered about your photograph of her getting off a bus, that, surely, is an issue (or non-issue) of privacy, and has nothing to do with security. If I were a security person looking out for people working out where in the area a bomb would be easiest to leave, most lethal, or both, I wouldn't be much interested in people walking around with camera; I'd be a lot more interested in people who seemed to be looking around and making notes, or walking around odd corners of the spaces. So all of this looks nonsensical to me -- and therefore fully consistent with (if an extremely mild manifestation of) Ashcroft-era US government policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
link Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Ray, I understand your frustration but please keep in mind that all the attention you attract is attention that might well miss a real potential terrorist. And, passengers these days are pretty nervous at the airport, and you must be making many rather uncomfortable. If this project is important enough to you, you can obtain a permit. It will probably not be cheap and may require that you hire an off duty police officer to accompany your photo shoot. I would start by contacting the Los Angeles Film commission to get information about obtaining permits in general. They should be quite familliar with getting permits to shoot at LAX. You might also check out Ontario airport in Riverside. They have a large terminal building that is not currently in use and is often used for films and photo shoots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 tom,<i>surreptitious photos (from the hip, or bring your "friend" to "pose" in front of areas of interest as a decoy) are easy enough. </I><br><br><br>you really dont see the difference between a snap here and there, especially of people you know, and wandering around the airport shooting photos of people you dont know, and scenes of the airport?<br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 a quick story,<br><br>i recently flew from houston to new york. on the plane some dude, probably in his late teens, early 20's got up, and stood in the aisle for at least 20-30 minutes.<br><br>he did this at least 2 or 3 times during the flight.<br><br> let me tell you, my eyes were glued to him the whole time. you can bet i was suspicious of this dude, lookin around the plane, with no real reason to do so. he looked very nervous to me. turned out to be nothing, but i was ready for whatever.<br>if thats any indication of the psychology of flight travel, i can see why the way things are the way they are.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 Oh yes, give in to the paranoia. Suspect everyone. Because HOLY CRAP! A nervous person on a plane, my god I'd never seen one of those before 9/11. And what if he had been wearing a turban? What would you have thought then? Maybe I should have suspected that grandmother who kept clutching her rosary and praying out loud for my last four-hour flight. The point that People like Tom and Ray and I are trying to make is that trying to keep people from photographing an airport or a set of railroad tracks is a waste of time, money, and manpower. Any visual information that a terrorist needed to get could be achieved with a video camera and a couple of pretend "relatives". It would take all of 20 minutes. Nobody would think twice about it. How many times have you seen a family with a camcorder recording the arrival of their distant friends and family? I've seen it every time I have been in an airport in the past decade. The US govt is doing virtually nothing to make us safer at home (I am ignoring my opinion of Iraq in this discussion). The states don't have money for the new rules that the federal govt wants to enforce. Our border is full of holes. Our incoming air and sea freight is virtually un-inspected. If it weren't such a horrid thing to wager on, even as a joke, I would bet any amount of money that the chances of 9/11 happening again are no worse than 80% of what they were before 9/11. Now the privacy issue. That I can see. Technically, I'm not sure that Airports are public property or not. I guess it would depend on the specific lease agreements set up with the local/state govts and also the lease agreements set up with the individual airlines/vendors. I can smell a long and pointless court case if anyone wanted to take the "public property" path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeeter Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 "you really dont see the difference between a snap here and there, especially of people you know, and wandering around the airport shooting photos of people you dont know, and scenes of the airport?" grant my point is that if one wants photos of an airport it can be done, and the examples i listed above would easily suffice to covertly image areas of interest. if a co-conspirator acting as a decoy is all it takes to distract attention and allow photos of areas of interest (i.e. the "background") the "security" is pretty flimsy. the only reason ray got hassled was he was being so obvious about it. someone with ill intent would likely study the facility and photograph only those areas of interest (i still haven't seen anyone offer an explanation as to how photos of such a public area would further such activities). so if there really is a security risk, the notion of busting ray, but not every person with a camera seems a pretty silly and ineffective strategy overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeeter Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 "recently flew from houston to new york. on the plane some dude, probably in his late teens, early 20's got up, and stood in the aisle for at least 20-30 minutes." maybe he had leg cramps... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted January 30, 2004 Share Posted January 30, 2004 the point is MOST people dont give a rats ass about your artistic intentions. thats the way it is.....majority tends to rule....like it or not. when the majority of people agree with you, then im sure you will have no problem shooting in airports. <br> <br> and yes, the fact is anybody can do anything they REALLY want to do in most intances. buildings in nyc are as easy as pie to walk into and detonate a bomb. anyone can walk down the street and do it. <br> <br> nobody can really make anything safer for us. we just have to keep our own eyes open. thats what that woman coming off the bus did. can you blame her? <br> <br> its a matter of understanding....just like the security did, and just like ray does....when you have that i see no real problems.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now