Printable View
Then I think everyone here and in other groups needs to do some advance thinking about whether they are willing to get arrested by agents of government that feel their orders should supercede what the laws allow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20...ingphotos.html
I consider myself lucky enough to live in a place where spotting is generally well tolerated (SEA, RNT, BFI), and in some cases celebrated (PAE). Security and ops at all the Seattle area fields generally wave at you. The idea of an airport watch (a movement I have mixed feelings about: ie the need to have a background check in order to legally do something I was already able to do legally anyways pitted against the reality that these groups are enabling spotting at places notorious for harassment like ORD, for example) is something we don’t even need here thankfully.
Addressing the main topic here, I’d add that while I find actual laws banning photography to be unlikely in the near future, I think the “see something, say something” campaign along with mostly negative stories about suspicious photographers doing this or that popping up from time to time in the media has really helped solidify a societal suspicion of photographers in the US. This is especially true of those who do street photography and—as we are all too familiar with—those who enjoy photographing railways, subways, and aviation. The subway example underscores the point megatop made: you might win in the long run but you’ll often pay a price to get there. And even still, there’s no guarantee you’ll win. The reality that such examples continue to pop up and that we are not having any sort of national discussion on the legality of everyday photography sort of tells me that while we’re not about to make photography illegal, we’re certainly not on the precipice of it falling under freedom of speech either. As long as we continue to maintain security theater and propagate the idea that anyone doing anything you don’t understand or like or find suspicious for whatever reason is a potential terrorism or criminal suspect there will always be citizens convinced you’re plotting a plan, rent-a-cops overstepping their authority, and officers who will insist that plane spotting, street photography, railfaning, and subway pics are illegal because of 9/11 or because of X law that doesn’t really exist or because their supervisor told them to.Quote:
Then I think everyone here and in other groups needs to do some advance thinking about whether they are willing to get arrested by agents of government that feel their orders should supercede what the laws allow.
Related, I’m thrilled to see the growth of cell phone cameras and affordable photography equipment enabling and furthering movements from Occupy Wall St to the Middle East. That being said, I don’t think the Syrians are currently too happy about cell phone pictures being leaked and neither were the Iranians a few years back. I can’t imagine leaders in Yemen or Bahrain have been too pleased with the proliferation of digital photography either. The US generally tolerates it, but seemingly only when it seems to be something important and not particularly related to security. Occupy Wall St movements are not really perceived by critics as a security threat so much as they are perceived as a nuisance. If Occupy decided to start occupying TSA checkpoints and were photographing people as they went through the process I’d bet things would change awfully fast for them. But the powers that be don’t understand why we take pictures of airplanes, and many don’t particularly care either. A lone photographer getting arrested for taking photos at the local airport has not inspired legislators to decry the arrest on the floor of the Capitol in DC. Just because photography is easier and more accessible than ever before (and even integral to movements involving rights and freedom) doesn’t mean it is becoming more acceptable by the powers that be.Quote:
I think that photography has and if not, is quickly becoming, a form of free speech that people will stand up for. The Subway example shows that. The protests taking place here in NYC and around the world, along with uprisings and such, all REQUIRE photography to push their cause. It's a major part of protest and freedom these days. Any laws that would truly limit photography, I feel, will be met hard from the public as a violation of rights.
Also, RE the airfield originally in question, there is a solution: buy a taller ladder J BFI has gradually been expanding their fence from 7ft to 10ft and YVR very very sadly did the same thing – effectively killing spots at BFI and altogether making spotting at YVR darn near impossible. We’ve responded by buying six and eight foot ladders…though I’m not one of them who’ve been able to (97 Oldsmobile just can’t handle it). More realistically Phil’s idea is a good one as is dropping by and having an honest conversation with the head of operation or someone from communications. We’ve done it here at BFI a few times, and while it hasn’t gotten us anywhere yet at least we’ve tried and they know we’re here.
I've actually already been friends with several of the ops people there, and spoke to them when I last visited. They were apologetic but explained with the new general manager, spotting is pretty much no way no how. Believe me, I had incredible access prior. All the lineworkers knew me by name, except the odd new one here and there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
A ladder wouldn't really help since the area in question doesn't have much a view. From where you're now limited to, you have the main terminal blocking the view of the ramp.Quote:
Also, RE the airfield originally in question, there is a solution: buy a taller ladder J BFI has gradually been expanding their fence from 7ft to 10ft and YVR very very sadly did the same thing
I live right down from Hooks but haven't been out there in the last several weeks. Was it just the pilots getting concerned or was there more to it, like the TSA putting restrictions on them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Perriwen
It's a darn shame. GA in this country is down sharply and fewer people are flying because of the cost. These restrictions don't help. Some of the best memories I have from growing up are running around the airports looking at airplanes and hanging out with pilots. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like my son will be afforded that opportunity.
Ah...therein lies the problem. Any chance of getting a group together and meeting with him (or her)? Maybe a group of regular DWH spotters could get together and work out an equitable solution--maybe a "known spotter" type of thing that will get you in the gate until something better can be worked out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Perriwen
As I understand it, Hooks is (or was) a privately owned airport that did not accept federal dollars that many of the other similar sized airports take, thus they were able to pretty much run things the way they wanted without federal interference. Has this changed?
I'm considering any and all that. But, I was the only 'regular' spotter I saw out there, though I may try and see if Andrew Compello is interested in trying anything as well. All I really know is the new GM put this in place and the report was pilots were 'nervous' without the fences. I also have heard 2920 could be a possible place to watch arrivals, but I never tried that before.Quote:
Originally Posted by snydersnapshots
Ahhh once again a voice of reason and sensibilty. :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.