Hey, there! Log in / Register
Some T employees still haven't gotten the memo about photos
By adamg on Sat, 09/10/2011 - 5:54pm
Adam Weiss reports a T worker at State Street ordered him to put away his camera "because of 9/11."
Weiss adds it was one of the orange vests, not a T cop, and that he would have tried to explain the T's photo policy, but his train was pulling in.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Their photo policy has been
Their photo policy has been unrestrictive for several years but even before then it was not clear that the T could actually stop you from photographing in public places. There's apparently no LAW which prevents anyone from photographing MBTA property and no law by which the MBTA could restrict you from photographing their property.
Typical
Always a solid precaution to carry a copy of the official policy when snapping photos.
doesn't matter
You can show them a printout from the website and they'll still argue with you.
The only solution, really, is to tell them to go ahead and call MBTA police, get arrested (unlikely, since MBTA police know the policy), and then sue the shit out of them with the ALCU's help.
Until people stand up for their rights, this will keep happening.
Exactly. Until people stand
Exactly. Until people stand up for their rights, this nonsense will continue. If a (non-cop) T employee ordered me to stop taking photos "because of 9/11", I would simply ignore him. If he touches me or physically forces me to stop, that employee will have assault charges brought against him. If he wants to call the police, let him. I'll probably be on my train and on my way by the time the police show up.
If someone can see it with their own two eyes...
...then it doesn't matter how many photos are taken of it. Really.
If it's not a restricted area, then people can see every detail of everything every single day of the year. Your average commuter is familiar with every cracked step, bizarre stain and other quirks of the stations they pass through on a daily basis.
Yes, terrorists take photos. They even took photos of the World Trade Center prior to 9/11. Standing on the observation deck and in the plaza below. It was all over the news.
But you'll never for a moment convince me that this was somehow vital to their plot. The "asking to learn how to fly planes but not takeoff or land" thing was vital to their plot. Taking photos? Not so much.
The photo gives you your
The photo gives you your target, then you plan your mission to take out the target, such as what is the best way to approach the target and where to hit it. Other questions the photo may answer are what are the defenses that need to be overcome, are their guards, or are there cameras.. It could also answer where are the best places to set up and hold the target until the press can get there and maximize the impact of the attack. So...the photo could be important depending on the type of mission. I'm sure during the planning for the attack in Mumbai that alot of photos were taken but that could never happen here....right?
That's all information that
That's all information that can be acquired without taking a photo. A photo is an efficient means of collecting that information, of course, but given that a location is publicly accessible, the essential information is available to anyone. You could sketch it, make detailed notes, memorize the details, etc. Blocking photography would not block access to the information, and that's the real issue.
Besides that, the commenter was making a specific statement about the use of photos in planning the 9/11 attacks, not other terrorist attacks or hypothetical terrorist attacks. It was a narrow claim about the relative unimportance of photography in a specific situation, and I one I don't think I'd dispute. Photography of publicly accessible locations can be a vital aid in planning some terrorist attacks, sure, but so are any number of things we wouldn't think of banning.
Exactly. The question is not
Exactly. The question is not whether photography could be used as an aid in planning an attack. The issue at hand is that such a criterion should not call for a ban on all photography. Any number of innocuous activities could be used in planning an attack. Do we ban people from standing for more than ten minutes in the same spot on a T platform? After all, how do we know they're not intently studying the ceiling structure? Do we ban cell phones from stations? After all, how do we know a passenger is not relaying real-time details about passenger and train movement to someone else who is recording all the details? Should the T disable the real-time bus and subway tracking data that anyone can access on their smartphone? After all, how do we know someone won't use that data to attack one of those buses or trains?
Of course not. Unless you want to continue to live in a world where every innocuous activity has a sinister interpretation and you believe that anyone doing anything that you and your fear consider suspicious needs to be checkout out and stopped.
I agree with this idea.
I agree with this idea. Stopping people of taking pictures of publicly visible things for security reasons is just stupid. A friend and I were in the North End and saw a big ship coming by and tried to take a picture of it through the entryway to the Coast Guard base there and the guard yelled at us. And this struck me as incredibly stupid cause if I was a terrorist I'd just go across the harbor with a telephoto lens and have a clear view of everything going on on the base rather than shooting through the entrance and getting a tiny glimpse of what's going on there.
Policies as oppossed to law
can you get arrested for failure to obey a T-person when taking pictures?
can you get arrested for eating on the T ?
can you be arrested for refusal to have your bags checked?
can you be arrested for smoking cigarettes that you buy at T-stores?
can you be arrested if you don't show proper identification on demand?
can you be arrested for sleeping on the T?
can you be arrested for smoking pot on the T?
can you be arrested for spitting on the T?
can you be arrested for loitering on the T?
can you be arresting for writing on the walls with a pencil?
can you be arrested for same sex smooching on the T?
ACLU CAN YOU ANSWER
There's actually a poster at the Inbound Chinatown stop
The poster says it is OK and it is posted behind glass, so the MBTA made an effort to put it there.
good kickstarter idea?
Maybe someone should get a kickstarter group going to buy advertising on the T, and then posting the photo policy on the advertising space.
There's one at Ruggles too
I have a picture on it on my phone as an extra precaution
Real example for you gutless wonders
I walk and take the T alot. I have lived in Brookline and Boston. I have two young kids, and try to be a good pedestrian and cross on walk signals. In the past 18 months, I have been struck twice (once while carrying my six month old) in a cross walk during a walk signal by a cyclist, and have had someone nearly hit me (within 3 feet) at least 3-4 times, withouth exaggeration during that period. After I was actually knocked to the ground (and the person sped off into JP) I started carrying copies of the bicycle safety laws and regs.
When I actually shouted at someone who clearley could see me in a crosswalk from 3 blocks away, and cursed at me, I chased them down when they paused to drink their vitamen water and shouted at them and tried to give them a copy of the regs, they called me a queer and told me to f off. I've been cursed at more than once, again with a young child, for stepping into a cross walk because Lance Armstrong over there couldn't be bothered to slow down or stop.
So whats the point? The point is, people may or may not be aware of rules, they just don't care. That goes for jerk workers not knowing policies, or douchey artsy fartsy people who think a blog is a job and that snapping a photo of the orange line is your first ammendment right.
So you are all equally wrong, and equally assholes, and really need to shut up. Put your camera away quietly, and take it another day, but please, stop posting on it, you whiney hipster douchebag.
As for my problem with folks on bicycles, I now carry one of those collaspible lightweight staves - it has a reach of about 8 feet and can jam up spokes nicely. If folks aren't going to obey the law, time for me to introduce them to Mr. Pavement.
God bless America!
I was going to be mad at you
I was going to be mad at you for trying to start a bicyclist vs. walker vs. driver comment war, but the 2nd part of your comment made me laugh haha.
You sound like a kindhearted
You sound like a kindhearted and lovely person.
wow bravo! unbelievable,
wow bravo! unbelievable, really.
The summary for those of you who want to skip ahead:
She's been hit by a bicycle twice, and has had cyclists ride near her another handful of times, and she blames JP, Vitamin Water, bloggers, and artists--especially photographers.
She condones physical punishment inflicted to bicyclists who don't follow traffic laws, and believes she is a saint and everyone else are assholes.
Those poor 2 young kids. Or was it 7? Is UH now just about chronicling all of the parents with fucked up worldviews in this commonwealth?
I have to disagree
You are not an asshole for getting hit by a bicycle.
Wait, was something else your point? Because what I got was that you think you're an asshole. Either that, or you just like to criticize others for the same things you do yourself. But that would be silly.
equally wrong
i assume you are using supreme sarcasm and cannot possibly have and love your children and at the same time hate other people so much (who are, after all, somebody's children).
i came here to point out the irony that Amtrak runs a *photo contest* for customers - whatever the T policy is, people should know that.
but when i saw an admitted mother make these sweeping generalizations, calling people jerks and fantasizing about possibly killing a human being riding a bicycle, well, i stopped to shed a tear for your future, too.
why don't you get a babysitter, have a martini, and relax? seriously. although be sure, if your babysitter arrives via bicycle, not to kill him or her in front of the children. i care about your children.