New airline security proceedures - travelling with our cameras and film...

[joshroot]

Back off Bob,

 

<p>

 

This whole thread is pretty selfish in light of the tragedy that has

occured. But if we are going to discuss it, we're going to discuss

it. Of course I would travel with nothing more than the clothes on my

back if I had to. Peoples lives are more important than any boredom

that I might encounter. Saying crap like "Go do something useful,

like give blood" is a pretty holier-than-thou way to act. As if

someone couldn't both care and worry about the tragedy (and give

blood or money to the rescue), and yet still think about what life

will be like and how it will affect them after this is all settled

back down. Some of us fly a lot, some of us hardly ever. But it is

somnething we'll all have to deal with. Especially as photographers

and ESPECIALLY those of us who have to travel for a living.

[glenn_travis]

As my Uncle Theodore used to say, "What's done is done! Forget about

it." It's not up to the Airlines or the Citizens to protect the USA;

it's the business of the Government. If, ten years ago, the

Government had decided to get serious about terrorist, then NY may

not have happened. Unfortunately, the Government decided to spend a

billion dollars using cruise missles to blow up some mud huts in

Afganistan, and a laxative factory in the Sudan(?). So now, what's

the answer? No more plastic knifes in Airline terminals??? I'm sorry,

I DON'T GET IT! Don't whine or cry about it! It's your Government,

demand real action, or suffer the consquences!

[douglas k.]

Jeff--

 

<p>

 

Do you know for a fact that hand inspection of film is to be

immediately disallowed? If not, then perhaps you should not so

stridently object to my statement. I was writing about the situation

UP TO tuesday, in case it was not obvious.

 

<p>

 

I like this forum because it seems very civil and polite; perhaps we

should try to keep it that way...People will always state things with

which others disagree, even things which are factually wrong, but such

statements do not necessarily require discourteous responses.

[bobtodrick]

and the rest is stuff to keep me occupied on cross country flights.

Six hours of reading the inflight magazines is going to be pretty

boring. (from Josh's previous post)

 

<p>

 

Josh - I hope you have given blood - or would you find that too

bori

[bobtodrick]

and the rest is stuff to keep me occupied on cross country flights.

Six hours of reading the inflight magazines is going to be pretty

boring. (from Josh's previous post)

 

<p>

 

Josh - I hope you have given blood - or would you find that too

boring.........

[john_fleetwood]

Sounds like the freaking LUG around here today.

[joshroot]

Who's the one doing something useless now Bob? Screw you. Not all of

us can give blood. Some people have medical conditions. I donated

money to the Red Cross as soon as I could get through on the phone.

And if I were anywhere around the disaster area, I would try to help

in any way I could.

 

<p>

 

But I'm not, so I can't. And if I want to discuss how this will

affect my life as a working photographer. Then I will.

 

<p>

 

Take your pissy attitude somewhere else.

[joshroot]

The Red Cross phone lines and website are jammed up these days. As

the good people of the US (and the world) try to help however they

can. So for those who can't (or won't due to religious or other

beliefs) donate blood, Amazon is accepting donations for the Red

Cross and not taking any kind of fee. Don't get me wrong, I think

that everyone who can, should give blood. But everyone's specific

circumstances need to be respected.

 

<p>

 

Here's the <a

href="http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/paypage/PKAXFNQH7EKCX/103-

5976579-3101401">link</A> to the Amazon donation page.

[kens]

I feel sorry for Jack Flesher, who's getting deluged with all these

cyber-missles by email copy. What a week.

[jackflesher]

Hey everybody... Let's calm down, let's not start ripping each other

up; that happens regularly in the LUG forum and most other chat-

rooms, and the last thing I want to happen is to have this forum

stoop down to those levels.

 

<p>

 

It was not my intention to set off a flame war. I posted here as a

diversion to the madness in NY and in an attempt to latch on to the

one commonality we all hold passionately -- the love of photography

and the appreciation for Leica camera gear. Let's celebrate what we

have in common, and continue to have rational discussions (and only

polite disagreements) about Leicas and photography.

 

<p>

 

Thank you all for your inputs.

 

<p>

 

God bless,

[andy_piper2]

Dan Blair (and all): I accept the criticism on the Midway Airlines

comment. Clearly not even remotely comparable events, although Midway

themselves said the travel lockdown was what put them over the edge.

 

<p>

 

Some passengers getting off the first Alitalia flight allowed into LAX

from Canada reported All items were hand-searched before they

reboarded, FWIW. I also have a picture I'm about to put in the

newspaper of massive hand searches at Omaha as stranded passengers

reboard.

 

<p>

 

IF carry-ons are allowed, to get back to Jack's original question;

some ideas for enhancing speed, security, and the chance of a request

for hand-search being approved: Small bag, limited amount of equipment

loosely packed and easy to get to, unloaded bodies, "baggied' film.

 

<p>

 

Courage.

[joshroot]

After a couple of badly thought-out angry e-mail's, decency has

prevailed and Bob and I have apologized to each other.

 

<p>

 

This is truely one of the best and most friendly places on the net to

discuss photography (or anything for that matter). And I'd hate to

start bringing in the nastyness that wrecks that. Horrible events

bring out strong emotions, even in the smallest of things.

 

<p>

 

For myself, and I think for Bob also, I can say that I'm sorry for my

bad attitude in earlier posts.

[tony_rowlett2]

<font size="+3">:-)</font>

[michael_reichmann3]

I have posted this afternoon a piece on The Luminous Landscape web

site that discusses some of the things that photographers who travel

with equipment should consider in light of the changed situation.

 

<p>

 

As more information on new regulations becomes available it will be

updated.

 

<p>

 

http://luminous-landscape.com/flying.htm

 

<p>

 

Michael

[bobtodrick]

Yes, Josh and I have made up ;-) It's strange, though I thought that

living in Canada has somewhat distanced me from the events of the

last few days, I found myself quite agitated and short tempered

today. I think -the times they are a changin'-.

Apologies to any who took offense to my earlier remarks.

[andy_piper2]

Michael: Good Stuff!!

[Rob F.]

As of this moment, we've not been told we can't bring our cameras on

board, or get our film hand-inspected. These issues are much less a

problem just now, than finding an airplane to carry onto. My

girlfriend and I are getting married at the end of this month, and

have our tickets and B&B reservations in Vermont, to go shoot fall

colors. I thought I'd bring two Leicas. Since Tuesday, neither Sue

nor I has even voiced the possibility that we might not get onto our

flights. We both know it's an issue, I'm sure, but I think we both

realize that the risk we might not get to go is so trivial compared

to what has happened, that it would be too selfish to bring it up.

[samuel_dilworth]

In the wake of this fiendishly successful act of terrorism, there is

going to be a lot of speculation about airport security in the

future, ranging from the highly impractical (sky marshall on every

plane???) to the unacceptable (no hand luggage whatsoever), through

the unlikely (well paid, effective security personnel), to the

probable (more x-rays, delays, and worthless documentation checks).

Along the way ludicrous ideas will be brought up, such as giving all

flight crew elementary lessons in suppressing armed passengers. (So

you think an overweight pilot who vaguely remembers self-defence

lessons from ten years ago in flight school is going to be a hero and

take out an armed terrorist of the highest order, hand-chosen from

his training companions for his particular aptitude with weapons,

situational awareness, self-control, etc.? Hollywood would dump that

on grounds of implausibility.) In the final analysis though, there

are no methods that ensure safety from skyjacking, or even reduce its

frequency or likelihood. Anyone dedicated enough to blow themselves

up for their cause will treat security with contempt and will bypass

any security dreamed up with impunity -- merely another evening�s

planning during a period of preparation involving vastly greater

problems than a couple of customs officials and the odd x-ray

machine. The problem of airborne terrorism needs to be attacked at

its root: why would someone willingly step forward to die, in order

to kill thousands of innocent Americans? The answer is known to all

who are honest with themselves, and the solution lies in the hands of

the US government. The spin being delivered about this being an

attack on "all the civilised world" is pure rubbish. If we could

have asked the terrorists who they were attacking, who among us

realistically thinks the answer would have been anything other

than "imperialist America"?<p>

 

And soon, NATO and America and Russia (after all, Afghanistan is a

symbol of Soviet-era unsettled scores) will start bombing the world,

and evil will attempt to destroy evil, and out of the countless

wrecked lives that will result, evil will emerge triumphant with hate

at its right hand. And Jane will still weep for her husband, and

Muhannad will still mourn his friend, and Jennifer will still ask why

the hell she had to grow up in a senseless world without a parent�s

love.<p>

 

But we�ll all be safe, don�t worry, because we�ll be eating airport

meals with our fingers...<p>

 

My head hurts. If someone can explain to me the correlation between

airport security and airborne terrorism, bearing in mind that we're

in the real world, I'd greatly appreciate it. My sincerest

commiserations to all directly affected by the monstrous depravity of

Tuesday.

[andy_piper2]

Oh dear....and just when I thought the flames were out...(sigh) 8^(

[kens]

You're right, Samuel. We are in the real world. In the real world

tonight, in New York, 2 more teams were arrested on, or trying to get

on, 2 more transcontinental flights. This was stopped because of

improved security.

 

<p>

 

Do we think improved security will solve all the problems? Do you

think we are that naive? Should we just not bother then?

[art_karr]

In answer to your question:

 

<p>

 

I just got home. I have been diverted and stranded and all of

those good things. From actual experience, I can tell you what

they are enforcing at the moment [this may change]. Note, not

much is flying at the moment.

 

<p>

 

You may carry on what they define as a purse or a brief case. My

soft camera bag had to be checked. I put it in a suitcase and

surrounded it with clothes [i am too tired to see how it survived

:)]. Don't know how this will change, but on the first day of the

new security rules, that is what was enforced. I was on one of the

first commercial flights to fly today.

 

<p>

 

Art

[art_karr]

By the way; in the previous statement, today was 13 sept. Just

took that long to get home :).

 

<p>

 

Art

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

we are all quite sensitive yet, and I´m sure will be for long, I can

imagine the world getting into a new era, my biggest hope is that

this new era will be terrorism free.

 

<p>

 

Few hours ago I was watching TV with my girlfriend when electricity

went off, it passed few hours until we had electricity again, that

darkness and calm gave me the time to see what had been happening in

the last three days; I just couldn´t belive how a success of this

magnitude could had happen; I remembered the bombing in Harrod´s in

1983, and all that terrorism attacts we watch daily in the news; but

this was something I have no words to, of course the rules to get a

plane will change and radicalize, may be since I don´t have plans to

travel soon, I don´t think about it; I think in a way and in any way

we want to be part of the people who will figth against this sort of

culture (terrorism is a culture); I want to understand it is a shared

feeling, and I know I will do it with a camera in my hand around my

kneck; that is also something we share here.

 

<p>

 

Lucky me I don´t need to worry how I´ll get my plane Jack, I just

hope you get yours rigth.

[oliver_s.]

Yes, many of the statements here sound, and probably are, egoistic; I

don't exempt my previous one. But I think that tightening security

easily reaches a point that signifies success of terror. As Michael

Reichmann wrote in the short essay he has pointed us to (<a

href="http://luminous-landscape.com/flying.htm">here</a>), accepting

extreme restrictions means "the terrorists will have won, and this

they must not ever be allowed to do".</p>In Germany, the simple

statement that the NATO as a whole was the target has put certain

emergency regulations into action--by an automatism built into these

regulations when they were passed in 1968. Power is a sweet poison

whose consumption many office-holders never notice, so they love to

pass restrictive acts as they give them the sensation of control. I

pray that the western world may continue in democracy.</p>Pax et

bonum,

[david_smith12]

"All that is required for evil to flourish is for good men to do

nothing."

 

<p>

 

Mr Dilworth's childish and immature notions declare him to be a

coward. The idea that any violent response to evil is also evil is

rubbish.

 

<p>

 

It is wonderful that Mr. Dilworth enjoy's the freedom to express

himself in this forum. I wonder if it ever occurred to him how this

freedom was obtained? Does he think Saddam would have left Kuwait if

everyone would have sat in a circle, holding hands, and

singing "Feelings?" And were his troops having consensual sex with

the innocent women they were raping? And if they were to try to

resist, would that act of violence be evil?

 

<p>

 

Mr. Dilworth may be free to spew his garbage here. Free speech comes

with responsibility. When those notions are irresponsible, it is not

bad manners to point them out.