Chicago CTA want to limit "Excessive Photography"

[john schroeder]

<p>http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/Losing-Focus-CTA-Cracks-Down-on-Photography-82138272.html</p>

[tonmestrom]

<p>and for those who don't heed that first warning there will be no doubt a mandatory rehab in Guantanamo Bay in order to cure them from that excessive compulsive disorder ;-)</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>More official hysteria to create the appearance of action. If the powers-that-be think that everybody with a camera is a potential terrorist then they clearly don't know who are the real terrorists - and that's disturbing.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<p>actually Chris if you think about it it's quite funny. Picture a small group of people flocking together in a meeting room thinking this up and seriously discussing it totally overlooking the fact that it can't be enforced eitherway and does them more harm than good. How much must they miss out on in life. Must be tough to have your head up your lower half all the time.</p>

<p>What's less funny of course is that they actually get paid to think this crap up. Oh well, let's get out of here and shoot some more. Excessively!</p>

[howard_m]

<p>It's the Chicago way!</p>

[steve_levine]

<p>Most railroad photographers (railfans) are 20-60 year old men that live with their mothers. They have model railroads in their cellars, and wear socks with their sandals. I doubt any one needs protection from any of them, except maybe from one of their slide shows?<br>

What the CTA is doing : They're doing something, so they can say: "we are doing something". However pointless and foolish.<br /> NYC briefly discussed similar rules, but the foolishness and pointlessness of it was soon realized . Of course NYC does have signs near bridges and tunnels that "prohibit cameras". I'm sure this was a terrible blow to organized terrorists ?</p>

<p>Homeland Security , or a big city's police department. Will not, and cannot protect anyone from terrorists ( or street criminals come to think of it), and certainly not by eliminating 'our' civil rights.</p>

<p> </p>

[charles_stobbs3]

Maybe it's the photographers who are at risk. Standing on the third rail to get a better perspective, running down the tracks looking for a train, falling off the platforms, etc.

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=251971">Steve Levine</a> <br>

Most railroad photographers (railfans) are 20-60 year old men that live with their mothers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Steve, you could be describing the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Metesky#1957_discovery">Mad Bomber</a> . Which may be why some agencies seem to lump photographers together with terrorists. Even if they're not actually dangerous, nerds are extremely annoying.</p>

[bobbuck19]

<p>Of course you gotta wear socks(preferably homemade wool) with your sandals, they keep the snow from packing between your toes, duh.</p>

[szrimaging]

<p>Howard, it is also the Boston and New York way!</p>

<p>As a midwesterner, I have to say I am kind of shocked. The el is one of the most iconic things in Chicago, and I love taking photos (from the outside) of it.</p>

[steve_levine]

<p>The pointless part is represented by all of the non camera looking cameras. All sorts of hand held communication devices, can take and transmit photos. Not to mention the pinhole type video cameras that can be as small as a shirt button! These can also be linked to wireless transmitting devices.</p>

<p>As one might guess. I'm a closet railroad photographer. I have however, moved out of Mom's basement.</p>

<p>Realizing this isn't a political forum. I will only say that the most recent terrorist's name was given to the US intelligence agencies. But he still managed to board a flight with a load of explosives in his BVD's. I suppose so long as he didn't take any photographs, we all are safe?</p>

[tholte]

<p>Chicago is a great place to take photographs. The Chicago police could care less and actually pose if you ask them. The CTA, that's a complete laugher, there is no one to bust you, you can get mugged and no one will know it. Ignore the rules and if, by a miracle, someone questions you, say you are from Milwaukee (like I do) and they will shrug their shoulders and let you on your merry way.</p>

[phyrpowr]

<p>As usual, a furor over currently photographing something that probably has a thousand online photos already, and detailed schematics published and sitting on the public library shelf.</p>

<p>Or have they recently installed the double secret anti-terrorist pods on the trains?</p>

[craig_gillette]

<p>It's Chicago. Thinking of Chicago politics and personal rights together is a joke. These are the same people that fumbled their way through a senatorial debacle, have some of the most extreme firearms laws, and were considering dropping examination requirements for their police force. I suppose the people of Chicago and fans could write to the local government officials but, I doubt it's going to be read. </p>

[Jerry_]

<p>Will the CTA send troops into each and every Illinois library to secure any book that has images of the 'system?' Any engineering text might be a target in need of dire action from Homeland Security, et. al., as well.</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>Ton,<br />You know, we used to fear first being invaded by the Fascists, then swamped by the communists, or the Trotskyites, or the Maoists but guess what - we ended up being taken over by the Anal Retentives. You have to laugh - or else you'd cry.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<p>Right Chris,</p>

<p>you know, the French have a more pragmatic outlook on this. I visit Paris about 4-5 times minimum each year and learned only recently that official policy prohibits photographing in the metro where I do shoot a lot. But in all these years I've never been hassled about it even when in plain view of officials or police nor have I heard of anyone else having been questioned about it.<br>

Common sense goes a long way.</p>

[paul_nicol]

<p>

<p>What government agencies miss is the prolific use of photo equipment has actually led to the capture of an uncountable number of criminals and criminal activity on the premises of the public and private land/sites/business such as the CTA and otherwise. The only people who would not want a camera in their vicinity would be the criminals. Could it be that the CTA (and others) are trying to hide something? I know that is not really the case but this whole "photographers are criminals" created by the Bush administration and it’s proliferation through out North America and parts of Europe flies in the face of common sense. The more pictures the better should be their slogan.</p>

</p>

[scott_murphy_photography]

<p>Sounds like typical political fear mongering bull$hit to me.</p>

[d_f11]

<p>Stil, what does "excessive" mean?</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"...what does "excessive" mean?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ask Australia. They seem to know how to quantify and qualify amounts, proportions and sizes based on their recent policies that seem to attempt to <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/28/australian_censors/">classify photos of small breasted nude women as potential child pornography</a> . Presumably they have some scientific studies to back this up, so they could probably also help Chicago define "excessive photography".</p>