Jump to content

PHOTOGRAPHY PROHIBITED


KD7MXI

Recommended Posts

Assuming you actually get to the location of the benchmark (you would need to for the find anyway), you could take a 'rubbing' of the disk. Bring some blank paper and pencil or crayon. Lay the paper over the disk and rub the surface with the pencil/crayon to transfer the disk markings onto the paper. Then just take a picture of your rubbing.

 

-

Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by kd7mxi:

how do you log a visit @ a milatary or photography prohibited location?


 

This is a hard one. Here's how I would go about it:

 

1. Go to the gym at least 4 days a week. Get your cardio routine up and in shape.

2. Join the military. Depending what specific benchmark you want, you may have to choose a specific branch.

3. When you are in basic training, choose a job that will get you stationed at the military installation for the benchmark.

4. Work your way up the chain of command. At every opportunity, put in a request for transfer to that military installation.

 

Here's the second way:

 

1. Don't. If it's off-limits to civillians, private property, or in a dangerous location (or many other reasons), don't seek it out.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to post

Hey kd7mxi. where the heck are u looking? I thought I once read that they moved area 51 to Utah. Man I am glad I don't live near that place. I am sure that N.S.A. spooks would make me disappear after I tried to place the "Auroa Project cache". icon_wink.gif

Link to post

Hey kd7mxi. where the heck are u looking? I thought I once read that they moved area 51 to Utah. Man I am glad I don't live near that place. I am sure that N.S.A. spooks would make me disappear after I tried to place the "Auroa Project cache". icon_wink.gif

Link to post

just to let you know, here in new york city, it is prohibited to photograph bridges and tunnels and other structures vital to transportation. one bridge has two benchmarks in it. in todays climate, Mr. Irish is correct, just leave it alone.

 

dboggny

Link to post

Sounds like something that would be easily overturned for violating our right for free speech. After 9/11 folks were a bit too quick to pass rather poorly thought out laws.

 

Jeremy

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to post

Taking pictures of a bridge may not be a new law. As far as I know there is still a law somewhere that you can not photograph post offices. I ran into this over 15 years ago. The postmaster told me it was an old law then. Let me go on my way but told me I may want to keep it in mind if I am out shooting other post offices. But don't even get me started about the amazing pile of red tape and regulations I ran into taking pictures at the U. S. Capitol well over 10 years ago. Short story is if you want to take a picture using a tripod you have to get a permit. But to get the permit you have to state that you will not sell the pictures you take. I thought sure I'll sign it and then discuss it in court if it comes up. Then they needed to know if I was shooting inside or outside. I fell on the floor laughing.

Link to post

very interesting..

 

I'm learnig actually a lot here on the forums..

some threads are explaining things that I have never thought off.. This thread is very interesting to me..

 

Thanks to everybody for the lessons...

 

Irresisti

N12º 55.475

E100º 52.865

Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by GOT GPS?:

Military Personel are also prohibited from using their personal cameras in the same areas.


 

If you get permission from the base commander you can take pictures. And if you put in a request to photo a benchmark, I don't think they'd mind. You'd have a much better chance than if you were a civillian.

 

Once you enter the military you lose your First Amendment rights, so all that is thrown out for the poor GI. But if someone from the press photographs something they "shouldn't," as long as no laws have been broken (e.g. Tresspassing) there should be no legal response. It's argued that there is certainly a moral responsibility, depending on the topic.

 

I'm probably wrong. I usually am.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin):

Sounds like something that would be easily overturned for violating our right for free speech. After 9/11 folks were a bit too quick to pass rather poorly thought out laws.

 

Jeremy

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location


 

With all do respect to Jeremy's statement; in the grand scheme of things, i dont want a point of law named after me by the supreme court (e.g. Dboggny v. State of New York) as i am fighting an arrest for photographing a bridge. For better or for worse, this appears to be the world we now live in. There are some security concerns here in NY that are an issue, which this rule attempts to address. My humble advice is to proceed with care and be guided by your particular community if specific instructions (ie the no photograph sign) is not posted.

 

dboggny

Link to post

Actually, it might be a kick to get a case named after you. What better adventure than to go down in a blaze of glory for a frivolous cause!

 

icon_eek.gif Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son!

Link to post

Actually, it might be a kick to get a case named after you. What better adventure than to go down in a blaze of glory for a frivolous cause!

 

icon_eek.gif Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son!

Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by slinger91:

Hey kd7mxi. where the heck are u looking? I thought I once read that they moved area 51 to Utah. Man I am glad I don't live near that place. I am sure that N.S.A. spooks would make me disappear after I tried to place the "Auroa Project cache". icon_wink.gif


 

Area 51 is merely a facility for the testing of new aircraft, nothing more. There is no special facility in Utah, and the NSA does not make people disappear.

 

(AO grabs his cell phone...) This is A. Begin a new dossier, username "slinger91." Possible threat to primary directives or Seraphic-8x facilities.

(AO walks away...)

 

CODENAME: ALPHA OPERATOR

daedalus://govlink/secure/majestic/12.12.12/ops/throne/AO

MAJESTIC-12: THRONE G6 LEVEL AGENT

http://www.planetdeusex.com

Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by slinger91:

Hey kd7mxi. where the heck are u looking? I thought I once read that they moved area 51 to Utah. Man I am glad I don't live near that place. I am sure that N.S.A. spooks would make me disappear after I tried to place the "Auroa Project cache". icon_wink.gif


 

Area 51 is merely a facility for the testing of new aircraft, nothing more. There is no special facility in Utah, and the NSA does not make people disappear.

 

(AO grabs his cell phone...) This is A. Begin a new dossier, username "slinger91." Possible threat to primary directives or Seraphic-8x facilities.

(AO walks away...)

 

CODENAME: ALPHA OPERATOR

daedalus://govlink/secure/majestic/12.12.12/ops/throne/AO

MAJESTIC-12: THRONE G6 LEVEL AGENT

http://www.planetdeusex.com

Link to post

I believe there were a number of laws passed during the Vietnam War era that prohibited the photographing of federal property. If I recall correctly, these laws were very broad and were written to included any public works project that involved federal funding, i.e., bridges, monuments, etc.

 

It seems a number of war protesters were scouting federal buildings and other properties before they planted bombs. Draft boards and post offices were favorite targets, so popular that they even bombed the main draft board building way up north in Minneapolis.

 

Connected with this is an interesting bit of trivia. There was a law enacted around 1970 that reduced the time necessary to establish residency in a state to 24 hours. They enacted the law to make it easier for states to prosecute war protesters that crossed state lines to incite riots. As far as I know that law was never rescinded. icon_eek.gif

Link to post

I believe there were a number of laws passed during the Vietnam War era that prohibited the photographing of federal property. If I recall correctly, these laws were very broad and were written to included any public works project that involved federal funding, i.e., bridges, monuments, etc.

 

It seems a number of war protesters were scouting federal buildings and other properties before they planted bombs. Draft boards and post offices were favorite targets, so popular that they even bombed the main draft board building way up north in Minneapolis.

 

Connected with this is an interesting bit of trivia. There was a law enacted around 1970 that reduced the time necessary to establish residency in a state to 24 hours. They enacted the law to make it easier for states to prosecute war protesters that crossed state lines to incite riots. As far as I know that law was never rescinded. icon_eek.gif

Link to post

Laws restricting photography of federal facilities date back to WW-I. During WW-II soldiers were posted around various defense industry facilities to prevent photography. Laws were beefed up during Vietnam, and now copyright issues have intruded and commercial outfits are also prohibiting photography of their buildings.

 

As Jeremy pointed out earlier, though, it is often possible to get waviers by contacting the appropriate authorities and asking nicely for permission.

 

quote:
Originally posted by The Shadows Know:

I believe there were a number of laws passed during the Vietnam War era that prohibited the photographing of federal property. If I recall correctly, these laws were very broad and were written to included any public works project that involved federal funding, i.e., bridges, monuments, etc.

 

It seems a number of war protesters were scouting federal buildings and other properties before they planted bombs. Draft boards and post offices were favorite targets, so popular that they even bombed the main draft board building way up north in Minneapolis.

 

Connected with this is an interesting bit of trivia. There was a law enacted around 1970 that reduced the time necessary to establish residency in a state to 24 hours. They enacted the law to make it easier for states to prosecute war protesters that crossed state lines to incite riots. As far as I know that law was never rescinded. icon_eek.gif


Link to post

Laws restricting photography of federal facilities date back to WW-I. During WW-II soldiers were posted around various defense industry facilities to prevent photography. Laws were beefed up during Vietnam, and now copyright issues have intruded and commercial outfits are also prohibiting photography of their buildings.

 

As Jeremy pointed out earlier, though, it is often possible to get waviers by contacting the appropriate authorities and asking nicely for permission.

 

quote:
Originally posted by The Shadows Know:

I believe there were a number of laws passed during the Vietnam War era that prohibited the photographing of federal property. If I recall correctly, these laws were very broad and were written to included any public works project that involved federal funding, i.e., bridges, monuments, etc.

 

It seems a number of war protesters were scouting federal buildings and other properties before they planted bombs. Draft boards and post offices were favorite targets, so popular that they even bombed the main draft board building way up north in Minneapolis.

 

Connected with this is an interesting bit of trivia. There was a law enacted around 1970 that reduced the time necessary to establish residency in a state to 24 hours. They enacted the law to make it easier for states to prosecute war protesters that crossed state lines to incite riots. As far as I know that law was never rescinded. icon_eek.gif


Link to post

OK. I have spent the past couple of hours searching the internet for information to substantiate some of the claims about restrictions mentioned here with no luck. I understand and believe governmental ability to restrict photography aboard military instillations and inside federal buildings. (Heck, I read a sign stating that every day on the way into work. icon_wink.gif) Beyond that and without supporting evidence I have to think a lot of this is urban myth. I did come across a reference that images of buildings built since 1990 are copyrighted, but that that copyright protection only protects them from unauthorized commercial use of those images. So taking a picture of the building can’t be prohibited, but selling that picture as a postcard can.

 

If anyone can point me to some further information, I think it would be fascinating reading.

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~whidbeywalk/

Link to post

OK. I have spent the past couple of hours searching the internet for information to substantiate some of the claims about restrictions mentioned here with no luck. I understand and believe governmental ability to restrict photography aboard military instillations and inside federal buildings. (Heck, I read a sign stating that every day on the way into work. icon_wink.gif) Beyond that and without supporting evidence I have to think a lot of this is urban myth. I did come across a reference that images of buildings built since 1990 are copyrighted, but that that copyright protection only protects them from unauthorized commercial use of those images. So taking a picture of the building can’t be prohibited, but selling that picture as a postcard can.

 

If anyone can point me to some further information, I think it would be fascinating reading.

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~whidbeywalk/

Link to post

Watching the news last night, they showed one of their "weather" cams which points directly at the Same bridge in my pics (link in post above). The also show lots of other bridges when they do traffic reports.

 

Checking the web reveals countless "bridge cams", including the Golden Gate in SF.

 

If this is indeed illegal and the feds didn't want pictures publicly accessible, I'm sure they'd have these cams removed post-haste. While it could be an old law still in the books, it apparently isn't anything one needs to worry about being charged for.

 

-

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...