| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/27/2007 07:27:51 AM · #1 |
Hi all. Please click the link below and sign the petition if you haven't already to help photographers keep their right to shoot on NYC streets. Thanks and pass it on.
//www.pictureny.org/petition/index.php
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 07:30:10 AM · #2 |
From what I understand, photographers aren't losing any rights to shoot on the streets of NYC, just that they need permits (rather uncostly ones at that) to set up "commercial" shoots on the streets of NYC, which makes perfect sense to me.
Feel free to prove me wrong, but it really doesn't affect me anyway.
Message edited by author 2007-07-27 11:30:35.
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 07:52:12 AM · #3 |
The iffy thing is that to get a permit, you must know exactly where and when you'll be shooting and for how long. It's not just "commercial" photographers-- it's any two people who will be shooting in the same location for more than 30 minutes (sans tripod). Plus I believe there is an insurance requirement.
The buzz among my photographer friends here in NYC is that they feel it will open the door to police harassment of photographers, racial profiling, etc.
There is an interesting website about the law here.
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:07:23 AM · #4 |
Ahhh, more info = good :-)
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:14:55 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by literaryradical:
The buzz among my photographer friends here in NYC is that they feel it will open the door to police harassment of photographers, racial profiling, etc.
|
The buzz around here says that proposed law is just F'in stupid. |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:24:06 AM · #6 |
HERE is the proposal in PDF format. If you read it, it does not affect the average amateur/hobbyist photographers in any way. This rule is designed to take control over commercial endeavors.
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:28:31 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
HERE is the proposal in PDF format. If you read it, it does not affect the average amateur/hobbyist photographers in any way. This rule is designed to take control over commercial endeavors. |
It may be designed to affect commercial ventures, but it's so poorly designed that its effects are much broader.
Just don't take pictures or video of your kids playing in the park for more than 30 minutes.
Message edited by author 2007-07-27 12:29:58. |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:36:50 AM · #8 |
Ya, I agree. It seems to be designed for commercial shooting. However...
1) it may be a devious way to control nearly all photography.
2) a strict interpretation of the rules would make it required to get a permit for say a NYC GTG or even two chums shooting together with tripods.
OTOH, if you do fall outside the strict jurisdiction it would be another thing to print and put in your bag so you could show the harassing cop that you are quite aware of the rules and what your rights are.
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:38:50 AM · #9 |
| Jeez, it´s stuff like this that makes me less and less eager to come over for a visit each time. Hope this clears up for all the NY shutterbugs, I would not want a law like that set up here in Iceland, too bad I can´t sign without a Zip code. |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 09:04:06 AM · #10 |
First they go after the "pros" then it'll be the "amateurs"; and not to shortly after that it'll be the point and shooters. Once they take one freedom away it's not too hard to get the rest.
This is B.S. if you ask me, I could see it if you were planning on blocking off / up traffic or that you were going to be shooting something or someone of great importance that might draw so much attention that you'd need traffic and or crowd enforcement in the area. Sure make the photographer get a permit but this is over the top IMHO.
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 09:54:15 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Larus:
Jeez, it´s stuff like this that makes me less and less eager to come over for a visit each time. Hope this clears up for all the NY shutterbugs, I would not want a law like that set up here in Iceland, too bad I can´t sign without a Zip code. |
make up 5 numbers
say....... 34711 |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 12:10:34 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Fetor:
Originally posted by Larus:
Jeez, it´s stuff like this that makes me less and less eager to come over for a visit each time. Hope this clears up for all the NY shutterbugs, I would not want a law like that set up here in Iceland, too bad I can´t sign without a Zip code. |
make up 5 numbers
say....... 34711 |
Or use a famous one from TV: 90210 |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 12:24:36 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
....OTOH, if you do fall outside the strict jurisdiction it would be another thing to print and put in your bag so you could show the harassing cop that you are quite aware of the rules and what your rights are. |
Gee doc... are you suggesting that if a police officer acted in good faith on a legal ordinance that he would be "harassing you".
Ray
Message edited by author 2007-07-27 16:36:31. |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 02:24:04 PM · #14 |
| Our NYC mayor thinks he is some kind of dictator. This is simply a squeeze shakedown job. Have you paid any NYC real estate taxes in recent years? I could go on a ways. There is a trend of capricious advantage taking by this administration in everything from city admin to education. From someone who has lived and worked here since 1988. |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 04:11:49 PM · #15 |
If you don't like it then move.
Originally posted by pineapple:
Our NYC mayor thinks he is some kind of dictator. This is simply a squeeze shakedown job. Have you paid any NYC real estate taxes in recent years? I could go on a ways. There is a trend of capricious advantage taking by this administration in everything from city admin to education. From someone who has lived and worked here since 1988. |
Message edited by author 2007-07-27 20:14:03.
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 07:55:04 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
....OTOH, if you do fall outside the strict jurisdiction it would be another thing to print and put in your bag so you could show the harassing cop that you are quite aware of the rules and what your rights are. |
Gee doc... are you suggesting that if a police officer acted in good faith on a legal ordinance that he would be "harassing you".
Ray |
No, I'm suggesting a police office may ask you to stop doing what your doing by misinterpreting the statute. It could be out of ignorance for the detail of the law or just because they want an excuse to have you stop. Either way you'd be armed by carrying this around. |
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:00:29 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
No, I'm suggesting a police office may ask you to stop doing what your doing by misinterpreting the statute. It could be out of ignorance for the detail of the law or just because they want an excuse to have you stop. Either way you'd be armed by carrying this around. |
I knew I liked you for some reason. A fellow law enforcement educator :-)
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 08:03:02 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
No, I'm suggesting a police office may ask you to stop doing what your doing by misinterpreting the statute. It could be out of ignorance for the detail of the law or just because they want an excuse to have you stop. Either way you'd be armed by carrying this around. |
Armed maybe... Armed with anything that would keep you shooting, not likely.
There is a missing element to all this discussion anyway. Has anyone asked a police officer in NYC what this rule means to them? If they are not properly educated on what it means, it's up to the photographer community to do that. Don't expect to educate them on the street when they are telling you to stop shooting.
|
|
|
|
07/27/2007 10:10:26 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
No, I'm suggesting a police office may ask you to stop doing what your doing by misinterpreting the statute. It could be out of ignorance for the detail of the law or just because they want an excuse to have you stop. Either way you'd be armed by carrying this around. |
Armed maybe... Armed with anything that would keep you shooting, not likely.
There is a missing element to all this discussion anyway. Has anyone asked a police officer in NYC what this rule means to them? If they are not properly educated on what it means, it's up to the photographer community to do that. Don't expect to educate them on the street when they are telling you to stop shooting. |
I've never been stopped so I don't know what will happen when I eventually am. I keep the photographer's rights in my bag. If I can keep my wits about me (which would be difficult), I would give him the rights, tell him I'm not going anywhere, give him a chance to read it over, have him talk to his superior before he decides what to do. If he asks me to still stop I'd do it, but the next day I would be talking to somebody "downtown".
I may be lucky though. The guy who wrote the rights pamphlet lives in Portland so perhaps our cops are a little more educated than others. I shoot at the airport on occasion and all I do is give dispatch a call a few hours in advance and tell them I'm shooting. I've never been stopped.
Message edited by author 2007-07-28 02:11:18. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 06:34:35 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
I knew I liked you for some reason. A fellow law enforcement educator :-) |
Something tells me that your attitude might just someday land you in a predicament you might just not be prepared for my friend.
You really ought to limit your "educational" endeavours to things that you really know... like photography, and leave legal issues to people that actually know the law.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 06:38:51 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The guy who wrote the rights pamphlet lives in Portland so perhaps our cops are a little more educated than others. I shoot at the airport on occasion and all I do is give dispatch a call a few hours in advance and tell them I'm shooting. I've never been stopped. |
Could it be that what you meant here was that the police in your environment are more cognizant of the contents of the pamphlet in question?
I would hazard to guess that the level of education of the police officers in your area would be akin to those in other parts of the country, but I could be wrong.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 08:23:46 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The guy who wrote the rights pamphlet lives in Portland so perhaps our cops are a little more educated than others. I shoot at the airport on occasion and all I do is give dispatch a call a few hours in advance and tell them I'm shooting. I've never been stopped. |
Could it be that what you meant here was that the police in your environment are more cognizant of the contents of the pamphlet in question?
I would hazard to guess that the level of education of the police officers in your area would be akin to those in other parts of the country, but I could be wrong.
Ray |
You seem to be getting quite defensive, but since the northwest has one of the highest average level of education, I could suppose the cops ARE more educated in general. Clearly I meant they were more educated about photographic rights. Since "cognizant" means "fully informed" I think you are just being pedantic. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 08:31:04 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The guy who wrote the rights pamphlet lives in Portland so perhaps our cops are a little more educated than others. I shoot at the airport on occasion and all I do is give dispatch a call a few hours in advance and tell them I'm shooting. I've never been stopped. |
Could it be that what you meant here was that the police in your environment are more cognizant of the contents of the pamphlet in question?
I would hazard to guess that the level of education of the police officers in your area would be akin to those in other parts of the country, but I could be wrong.
Ray |
You seem to be getting quite defensive, but since the northwest has one of the highest average level of education, I could suppose the cops ARE more educated in general. Clearly I meant they were more educated about photographic rights. Since "cognizant" means "fully informed" I think you are just being pedantic. |
Really now... had it been that clear I wouldn't have asked. As for the term "cognizant" one can be aware of something without being "fully informed" on the subject matter.
Ray
Message edited by author 2007-07-28 12:33:59. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 08:46:52 AM · #24 |
//dictionary.reference.com/browse/pedantic
//dictionary.reference.com/browse/cognizant
just thought i'd help out those of us from the south :D
carry on ;)
Message edited by author 2007-07-28 12:47:07. |
|
|
|
07/28/2007 09:07:41 AM · #25 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/11/2025 12:58:46 AM EDT.
