In the present times and with recent events as well as in my own experience I have been wondering What can we Shoot? I mean in the US with all this Homeland Security stuff going on, we can't shoot bridges, communications buildings, Federal Court houses (great architexture), Historic Monuments (at least not with a tripod), I was on a trolly trestle for gods sakes! And in a no name little suburb of Philadelphia! Has anyone looked into exactly what we can and cannot shoot? It is getting to the point where I am afraid that if I take my camera out of the house I feel like I am going to get cited or arrested. Is there a list out there? The Whitehouse web site on Homeland Security only tells you how to be paraniod and how to report your nieghbors for suspicious activity. One of the things to look for is someone looking at a site too closely. What the hells is that? A pedestrian looks at things to not trip over them. A photographer studies the light and the angles sometimes for days or weeks. Does this mean we are studying it too closely? Yep, we must be terrorists. This is a serious request for real information. I want to know what I can and can't shoot and I am afraid to ask the authorities because I don't want to end up on some list as a potential suspect or something. Magick Michael (Seriously considering moving to another country)

If you're standing in a public place, you can shoot whatever you want (barring setting up any "obstacles" (tripods, lighting, etc.) that may restrict traffic flow. (as was the excuse I was given for setting up a tripod - as far as mounting a clamp to the railing...guess they figured I was going to damage the hardened steel chain link whatever with my rubber-coated clamp teeth). As I understand it - this is the law...you can shoot people, places, buildings, etc. - you don't get into "trouble" until you publish or make publicly available images of proprietary nature (shots of people who are not in the "public eye", etc. How the laws are written and how the laws are enforced are two entirely different things - walk along the sidewalk with a huge lens outside of the White House, and you'll probably be stopped and questioned - but you are fully within your rights - then pull a Rodney King! (Double check my statements - This is the law as I've heard it from people I trust, but not actually researched)

keep in mind, law or not, the US's security based agencies are beyond paranoid right now, and whterh it's written in the books or not, they can probably get away with charging you with anything. Take'em to court, and they'll just appeal everyt decision til you're broke. I'd say just be stealthier when you shoot, but that would probably make ya look REALLY suspicious. good to be livin' in canada right now...

You all should know that I've just turned in all your names to the Homeland Security Department. This clearly is a terrorist cell in the making. Oh yes, they have agents in Canada too!

No no...I'm MISTER Noosebaum...

Have you tried this? Make a "official" looking badge and show it to anyone who asks and tell them you are with the Government Photographic Security Branch? Your looks is just a disguise. All government types do NOT wear black suits. =:-) Bsteph

Ah Huh..... One more added to the terror cell list.

Bsteph is gonna rot inside an unknown cell block in fricking Siberia now...

The guard did peer at me awhile as I was setting up the tripod in front of the Federal Reserve building. But guess he thought an old fat guy was mostly harmless. Zhounder's story is really sad; are you really taking up a collection? Think you'd be better off moving to Canada than trying to fight this.

If you are in public, you can photograph whatever you want. If you are on private or restricted property, you probably can't without permission. If there is a sign prohibiting you from going somewhere, you can pretty much guess you're going to get a warning, citation or ticket if you go there. And in all cases, the police have the authority to ask you to leave an area; whether you were doing anything or not. Arguing with them is not going to help you. This isn't new stuff, folks. I think it's happening more often than it used to and I think we can all understand why. Just use common sense and don't do anything stupid. I shoot everything (buildings, cars, trains, boats, planes, etc) all over the Seattle-area day and night (some time as late as 3am) and with the exception of an over-zealous rent-a-cop around Thanksgiving, I have never had any problem what-so-ever. Just the opposite, the police have been very friendly when they see me shooting. Hell, I've talked to some officers about the stuff I've shot and some have even told me about a spots I should check out for some really cool shots. -=>Donald

Donald, you have one BIG atvantage, Seattle is a Patriot Act Free zone. Local government there passed a law stating the the federally enacted Patriot Act is illegal according to the Washington State Constitution and would not be enforced in the city of Seattle. This makes a HUGE difference in the attitudes of the local police. Add to that Philadlephia police have not been known for their "people skills" historically. How many other police departments have burnt down entire city blocks? Though what you say is technically true you have to take into consideration that due to the recent hightened state of alert law enforcement is bit on edge. In California you can't photograph the Golden Gate Bridge. As if another photograph of that bridge is going to give terrorists any images not already available...

Mike - Don't forget I may be in Seattle now, but I'm a Baltimorean born and raised. I've experienced first hand the difference between the police forces. Of course they're gonna be a whole lot more paranoid and I can't blame them. In the event of a successful terrorist attack, would you want to be the one who didn't stop the guy with the camera from photographing a key point in a bridge (or whatever) when you were told to not allow it? My point was, for the most part, treat people (not just the cops) in a friendly and respectful manner and they will do the same. Of course there are exceptions - there is no naivety here ... c'mon, African-American male here from an East Coast inner city. But it is not going to do any good to get all worked up at a police office because you think it's your right to take a photo of whatever. Let it go and if you feel that your rights have been violated, report it to your local representatives or leaders. You will not win an argument against a police officer in the streets...just not going to happen. -=>Donald

How many other police departments have burnt down entire city blocks? Sounds like there's more politics here than reality.

Donald - Just so you know I was very polite to the officer. It was killing me to do so but I did it anyway. Phrank - Mayor Good (thats his real name) had the PD throw a bomb on the roof of a row home where "Move" memebers were hold up. Move is a group of radicals that have had many run ins with Philly Police. Anyway the bomb started a fire in the house, it sperad to the houses on either side and they spread... The Fire Department wasn't allowed or wouldn't fight the fire due to Move shooting at them. The entire block burnt to the ground. I think it was around 1990 or so. To learn more about Move do a search on "Move" and Ramona Africa. You should find something.

I think you have a good case to get that ticket overturned (we talked about that in another thread). And I think you did the right thing. Be polite then, argue it in court where it counts. :) -=>Donald

zhounder, I remember that now. I thought it was more mid 80's but yea, that was a real bad deal. I think the "Move" people were crazy and violent themselves, but that event was handled so wrong. To the best of my knowledge though, I don't think it's ever been repeated.

How many time does it (burning a block )have to be repeated? I've read articles by members of MOVE they are understandably excited. Passionate people often write that way BUT I didn't think they were unreasonable. This is however the first time I've heard a reference to members of MOVE shooting back at the officers. Thanks for the info. Regarding taking pictures. Photography at night can be a dangerous process anyway. Apparently a TRIPOD looks amazingly like a rifle to a police man. So much so that they often attenpt to shoot first then ask questions later. As a person who was almost blasted first hand by such an officer. I would exercise caution when apporaching or being ovserved by the police. Bsteph

That's why I don't take a tripod or monopod shooting in the city. Handheld with Ilford Delta 3200 (shot at 3200 or EI 6400). I also don't approach officers...I let them approach me. Last thing I want is someone wearing a Baretta to see me walking through the shadows carrying a small metallic thing in my hand. :) -=>Donald