Are you in the Homeland Security database?

[cyrus]

You have two law degrees and they didn't teach you how to spell Corpus Juris Secundum? Or that Blackstone's Commentaries, being commentaries on the laws of England in the 18th century, have minimal relevance to the matters about which you're expounding?

Oh fer chrissakes I was just making a point on a discussion forum as I sip a latte and work on other tihings. Get over yourself. I don't know why you feel so threatened by all this. Heres a suggestion: if you think this sutff isn't important DON"T READ IT. No on is forcing you!
You raise a point then decide its not relevant to LF photography. SHeesh brian, you woke up on the wrong side of hte bed again.

PS: Blackstone's COmmentaries has a particular relevance to prior restraint, and is particularly applicable to the US since it greatly influenced the US constitutional view of the issue.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

Believe me, if you make a Homeland Security list you will know it the next time you fly. No reason to go piddling around with the FOIA.

[BrianShaw]

Hey... I have an idea... let's discuss the type of film used to take the picture... or how the pictures come out... or whether (or not) a 6x7 is large format. This is the "Large Format Forum" after all!

[cyrus]

Hey... I have an idea... let's discuss the type of film used to take the picture... or how the pictures come out... or whether (or not) a 6x7 is large format. This is the "Large Format Forum" after all!

The issue of laws re: photo permits is relevant to location photography. So, hey, I have another idea. I don't tell you what to talk about, and you don't tell me what to talk about? Deal?

[BrianShaw]

I wasn't telling you what to talk about. You can talk about whatever you want. I enjoy most of your threads. I just thought the discussion had kinda played out. Really... what kind of film were you using, and how did those pics come out?

[dslater]

Well Brian, for the sake of others who may be interested, the first issue is that requiring a permit of photographers is still the official policy of the Port Authority system - where as in the NY and NJ Transit system has had to bow to constitutional law. See, requiring permits for the exercise of First Amendment rights constitutes a little something we call Prior Restraint - which is presumtively unconstitutional - especially when, as it turns out, the NJPATH makes a habit of routinely denying permits based on the arbitatrary wishes of some faceless bureaucrat, which has no relationship to any legitimate security issue (note that the terrorist can take all the photos they want with camera phones)

Second, the police can be perfectly polite and friendly - and still violate your constitutional rights. Its not the police - its the policy that's at question. It doesn't have to amount to a "major hassle" - its still a violation YOUR rights too not just mine. Even if only 1 person's rights are violated by an unconstitutional law,it affects us ALL because we are ALL going to have to look over our shoulders for Big Brother and worry about what he may think of our photography.

Third, it may not seem like a big deal, but its these little invasions of rights that add up. First, they came for the photographers . . . If more people stood up and asserted their rights, we'd have fewer problems.

All good and true arguments except for one small detail - I believe you stated you were on private property - the owner of private property has every right forbid photography while you're on his property.

Fourth, the fact that I don't know what the list is that my name may or may not be on is IN ITESELF a violation of due process and federal/state privacy laws. I shouldn't have to guess, I should be able to challenge/expunge/correct the information as with say, my credit record - but guess what! Homeleand Security has exempted itself from most forms of FOIA by creative interpretation of the applicable exemptions, so I can't ever know for certain what list I am on, what use is made of this list now or tomorrow, and how to get off of it. Tens of thousands of Americans are on various lists that prevent them from getting credit or getting on airplanes - and they have no way of knowing what list they're on, why, and how to get off of the list. Yes, you read that right.

Hmm - I don't remember anywhere in the constitution where it says I can't be put on a list or that I have a right to know what lists my name happens to be on. Putting you on a list doesn't violate your rights - it's what is done with that list that may or may not violate your rights.

[cyrus]

All good and true arguments except for one small detail - I believe you stated you were on private property - the owner of private property has every right forbid photography while you're on his property. .

I said I was on NJ Path system property whch is not "private property" but is government property open to the public and in any case there's a public easement there. Its about as private as the New York subway system, and yes, your constitutional rights follow you there too.
Some restrictions are allowed on first amendment activity but subject to strict scrutiny and time-place-manner limits.
A general arbitrary ban on un-permitted photography doesn't meet that standard, which is why photography is allowed on other transit system.

Hmm - I don't remember anywhere in the constitution where it says I can't be put on a list or that I have a right to know what lists my name happens to be on. Putting you on a list doesn't violate your rights - it's what is done with that list that may or may not violate your rights.

Well, you.ve reversed how the constitution is interpretted. You assume that unless it says you have a particular right, then you don't have it. The reverse is true. Constitutions are meant to be limits on governments, not people. So, unless the constitution says that the government is allowed to do something, IT isn't allowed to do it. The consitution is not an exclusive list of your rights - it is a list of what the gov't is or isn;t allowed to do. You won't read anything in the constitution that says you have a right to privacy either. Nor does it say anything about a right to marry or raise a child or choose a career.

I deleted the long legal talk I had typed because it is out of bounds of this forum and I dont want tlo be dispensing legal advice but basically when people's names are placed on lists due to exercising their right of free expression or association, that results in a "chilling effect" on free speech which in many ways is more insidious than outright gov't censorship since it results in self-censorship. There are? (were - things are changing) laws placing all sorts of limits on gov't power to surveil peaceful first amendment activity. You don't have to wait to be arrested or whatever = the chilling effect is enough of a "constitutioanl injury" (See Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) v. US, 870 F.2d 518, 522 (9th Cir. 1989); Initiative & Referendum Inst. v. Walker, 450 F.3d 1082 (10th Cir. 2006))

“The right to be left alone is indeed the beginning of all freedoms.” -Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

[eddie]

FWIW i think the US govt is getting a bit carried away in their attempt to to violate the constitution and people's right and freedoms. it makes me sick that they are applying scare tactics on the american people, non stop all the time.

go to another country and see how the news differs. it is not all fear, war and terrorists. in the same breate i will tell you i have live extensively in thailand which is now under a military junta. my wife is from myanmar (burma) another military junta, and my brother lives in vietnam a communist country. i have spent many months in these countries. so i am very familiar with govt who provide their citizens with little or no freedoms. i think the US is heading toward being just like these places! the US population should be very careful how they let fear run their lives and their govt policies.......

[Greg Lockrey]

FWIW i think the US govt is getting a bit carried away in their attempt to to violate the constitution and people's right and freedoms. it makes me sick that they are applying scare tactics on the american people, non stop all the time.

go to another country and see how the news differs. it is not all fear, war and terrorists. in the same breate i will tell you i have live extensively in thailand which is now under a military junta. my wife is from myanmar (burma) another military junta, and my brother lives in vietnam a communist country. i have spent many months in these countries. so i am very familiar with govt who provide their citizens with little or no freedoms. i think the US is heading toward being just like these places! the US population should be very careful how they let fear run their lives and their govt policies.......

I too lived in many of the countries that you have described. Upon returning to thew US after being "away" for ten years I noticed the same thing back in 1978. Americans apparently want this thing called socialism. Now they are getting it. If your'e bitching already, you haven't seen nothing yet.

[jetcode]

And yes, apparently it does take someone from Iran to remind Americans of their own values and freedoms that they take for granted once in a while.

We need not be reminded of the rights we have and the adjusments we all have to make in order to maintain those rights, good, bad, or indifferent.

We're all on lists, have been since birth, what's the big deal? Having a SS card put's you on a list, having a credit card puts you on a list, being a taxpayer puts you on a list, having a mailing address puts you on a list, having email puts you on a list, and on and on and on.

Until the list makers come knocking on my door with a search warrant for my arrest lets see how many more lists I can get on before I die.