Photography Prohibited on Public Property in Rochester, NY!!!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2010
- In our post-9/11 era it seems that any form of photography is a no-no. After all, all terrorists run around taking photos with big cameras, as to be as obvious as possible (I had a DSLR on a neck strap). I was just taking a panoramic video of the city when a security guard approached me and told me that I must have permission from the City of Rochester to be able to take photos from there. I guess they don't want people taking pictures of their crappy city. In addition, I had a reason to be on that property, since that's where I parked. This video will be sent to the city council as a formal complaint against their unconstitutional photography policy which infringes on the freedoms of speech and of the press. After all, I could have been calling attention a safety flaw in the structure, itself since it did suffer a partial collapse a few years ago - see: www.democratandchronicle.com/a...
Copyright 2010 Elevation Productions.
Did you ever do anything with this? This is pure bull. I had an issue in rottenchester as well.
This actually freaks me out. If the ongoing development continues, i will have to ask myself the relevant question. "Am i gonna live my future life in suppression by the lawmakers"?
It is time for you to seriously SAY STOP to the big brother takeover! This is actually scaring me a hell lot. Freedom and privacy is on retreat from the expanding state control power.
Well seeing how that guard really makes me want to visit that shitty little town.. If that garage is indeed owned by the city I don't know the legality of that "no photography" rule they are attempting to enforce...
Even if I could pretend to understand why it's legal to prohibit photography in a public building, I don't understand how by any stretch of the imagination taking pictures of the city from the garage could be an issue, I've taken pictures from both public and private parking decks (even set up a tripod on occasion), only thing guards have ever said to me has been stuff along the lines of "watch out for cars" also gotta agree on the camera thing, what terrorist is gonna use a big-ass DSLR?
@musicfreakcc
Aggreed.
Balarick and I, got harassed by Allied-Barton after shooting the West Garage at City Square Worcester (Ma.). It's private, sure, but they tried to form a human chain to block the exit: too few people. We were then followed 50 feet until we were clear of City Square. I wish I had the camera going, stealth-wise.
It is defiantly crazy that photography is not allowed pretty much anywhere.
Wait a minute. If i for example visit America one day with my family, can i not take a picture of them on a public area? Of course i can.
Those policies are not just sick, they are strictly illegal. At least if i have understood the basal freedom and epxression rights the correct way.
But of course it can be different from Denmark... NOT!
I also got harrased once. But that was not in my country, that was the UK. I am happy that Denmark is not freaked out.
@musicfreakcc WHAT?? Part of the structure collapsed?? Wow, that sounds unsafe. Remind me to never visit that crappy little town. I am a little confused though, I thought you lived in Atlanta.
From andrew's video, it looks like the city uses ALLIED-BARTON for security. Pay attention to their patches.
When I see tourists from the parts of the USA come to Little Rock, I see them take pictures of some buildings and other stuff downtown. Most of them will be on West Markham/President Clinton Ave around the River Market. You won't get harrassed by security nor the police for taking pictures.
These guards seem like they are here to harass people more than to protect.
I've been thrown off of there, too.
...after I got my pics! haha!
@dieselducy : Did you know you got questioned by security about anti-photography from Court Street Parking garage (if I spell correctly)?
If it was me I would have laid down some rubber and spun some donuts all over the car park concrete in The Subaru.
Rochester isn't a SIMON mall.
if there is no photography allowed then there should be no news footage or newspaper pictures in the town
Good for you, Rochester is terrible it seems for photography. First dieselducy and jimster586, and now you.
A security guard? Lmao, would you takes an order from the guy flipping the burgers at McDonald's too?
Not exactly promoting tourism if tourists aren't allowed to take so much as a single picture..
You should had told him that "Why not you ask all the camera retailer to stop selling as mentioned that photography is prohibited". =.=
So i guess all the pictures i took from the sidewalk out front of my place are illegal? since the sidewalk is owned by the City of Concord... what if i get a picture of the state house? thats property of New Hampshire and the US government... hmmm
Isn't New York awesome!?
I wonder where is the world coming to. Its public you are supposed to have the right to take pictures. Even the privately owned malls go too far about it. look at what happens in Roosevelt field, with pinepowerli, and crapper1 at the CBL owned mall. yeah its their mall and they ban photography, thats their right, but the security just makes such a big deal out of it. Meanwhile someone could be, shoplifting or breaking in a car in the garage, but they dont care.
Photo-Nazis. NY is notorious for this. Rochester isn't in great economic shape, so making tourists feel unwelcome is just plain stupid.