BAN: Photography on USA trains and buses

The Americans are going to ban the use of cameras and camcorders on trains
and buses.

So much for the "land of the free".

http://1010wins.com/topstories/winst...141171549.html

"Anastasia Orfanos" wrote in message
...
The Americans are going to ban the use of cameras and camcorders on trains
and buses.

So much for the "land of the free".

http://1010wins.com/topstories/winst...141171549.html


Over here (UK) it is generally considered anti social to take photographs in
public.
Most privately owned public places (like shopping malls) do not permit
photography.
You are not permitted to take photographs, in or near school property.
School children are not allowed cameras on the premises (inlcuding
mobile phones containing cameras).

Most of this is the paedophile backlash.
man with camera = paedophile (apparently).

A lot of this has come from local authorities (who manage schools) and then
be carried forward by other bodies.
You used to be able to video tape the school nativity play, but not any
more.
In fact you will be a lucky to get a photo of your kid in their costume.
These have to be taken by the teacher with no other children present (lest
they end up in the shot)
using a disposable camera.

Lets face it, the UK is gradually becoming the new stalinist state.

Over the past few years I have been getting less and less bold with my
photography.....

Gordon


--
http://www.leica-gallery.net/gordon

In article ,
"Anastasia Orfanos" wrote:

http://1010wins.com/topstories/winst...141171549.html

So much for your BS post, If you actually read it, Its proposed that means people can
protest the propsal. The proposal meerly states that you have to obtain permission
or have valid press credentials before photographing. I am actually surprised this
has taken so long to come about. And would have been surprised if I could photograph
undisturbed to date.

I know it sucks!!!!!!!!!!

Free to be controlled maybe?? & Free to F__K with business.

"Anastasia Orfanos" wrote in message
...
The Americans are going to ban the use of cameras and camcorders on trains
and buses.

So much for the "land of the free".

http://1010wins.com/topstories/winst...141171549.html

"Gordon Hudson" wrote:

Over here (UK) it is generally considered anti social to take photographs in
public.


Complete and utter nonsense.

There is probably a greater tolerance of photography
in public in the UK than in most other countries.

"TP" wrote in message
...
"Gordon Hudson" wrote:

Over here (UK) it is generally considered anti social to take photographs
in
public.


Complete and utter nonsense.

There is probably a greater tolerance of photography
in public in the UK than in most other countries.

Agree with you. I've never ever felt any negative vibes whatsoever, wherever
I've been with my camera, and I am rarely without it. Indeed, photography
seems to be getting more and more popular here, with more and more cameras
in evidence. Though I DO wonder why people bother taking pictures of the
lions at the zoo with their mobile phones!! When we visited Marwell Zoo
quite recently I must have seen at least 6 examples of the practice.

In article , Any
Moose Poster wrote:

So much for your BS post, If you actually read it, Its proposed that means
people can
protest the propsal. The proposal meerly states that you have to obtain
permission
or have valid press credentials before photographing. I am actually surprised
this
has taken so long to come about. And would have been surprised if I could
photograph
undisturbed to date.

Each one of these so-called security measures is a win for the
terrorists.. We've done far more damage ourselves since 9/11 than the
enemy did. The correct proceedure is not to make our country a police
state; the enemy will get in a shot from time to time regardless of
what we do. Rather, make a smoking hole of each terrorists
home/city/country of origin. Eventually they'll get the idea and/or
we'll run out of terrorists. (Or non-radioactive middle east real
estate)

"Gordon Hudson" wrote in message
news:40b1e63f$0
Over here (UK) it is generally considered anti social to take photographs
in
public.
Most privately owned public places (like shopping malls) do not permit
photography.
You are not permitted to take photographs, in or near school property.
School children are not allowed cameras on the premises (inlcuding
mobile phones containing cameras).

Most of this is the paedophile backlash.
man with camera = paedophile (apparently).

A lot of this has come from local authorities (who manage schools) and
then
be carried forward by other bodies.
You used to be able to video tape the school nativity play, but not any
more.
In fact you will be a lucky to get a photo of your kid in their costume.
These have to be taken by the teacher with no other children present (lest
they end up in the shot)
using a disposable camera.

Lets face it, the UK is gradually becoming the new stalinist state.

Over the past few years I have been getting less and less bold with my
photography.....


Antisocial? I have never heard of this before. I admit generally I do not
take photographs of people without their permission, but I see no reason not
to take pictures of public areas. What are you classing as public?

In article ,
wrote:

Oh BFD. You're right to photograph me will be curtailed. What about
my right not to be photographed unless I choose?

Depends on what part of the world you live in, but IMHO as long as you are
in a public place, you have no particular right not to be photographed.

It's going to be harder and harder to avoid now that the digital camera is
becoming ubiquitous.

In article , Scott Schuckert
wrote:

[...]
The correct proceedure is not to make our country a police
state; [....]
Rather, make a smoking hole of each terrorists
home/city/country of origin. [...]

Okay, let's start with Pendleton, New York.