Arrested in April 2004

Only found this board today -- that's why I am posting rather late.

Here's the short version of what happened to me:

http://www.ratgallery.com/news/040429/news040429.html

I was not aware of any regulations then. Got a permit to take photos at Grand Central for a few hours some time later.

Now how's the situation today? Is it possible to get a two week permit or so? I will visit NYC in February.

-rAt

If anything it has gotten worse.

If there is a permit that you can get - GET IT before you come.

Usually the MTA doesn't give permits for anything.

Also just to let you know that the MTA board has proposed a total ban on photography on the NYC Subway. It will be voted on by the end of January. The protests agianst this have been loud and strong but there is not way to know how the MTA board will vote.

It's not looking good. If it passes, photography on the NYCT system will be restricted to those with valid NYCT-issued "press photo cards".

Well the one who was arrested at Grand Central made a big mistake, that was carry and use a tripod which is of course a no-no. Tripods really give it away when photographing, so that was a big mistake.

Robert Paniagua wrote:Well the one who was arrested at Grand Central made a big mistake, that was carry and use a tripod which is of course a no-no. Tripods really give it away when photographing, so that was a big mistake.

Well, I think the "big mistake" was that there were no signs or other hints that picture taking was not allowed. How was I supposed to know?

I assumed that Grand Central was public ground -- still don't understand why it is not. Isn't it "public transportation"? And for what I know photography is legal on public ground generally and anywhere in the US. Without a tripod or not ...

So: No signs = no restrictions

-rAt

Grand Central is Metro-North property.

Well, I think the "big mistake" was that there were no signs or other hints that picture taking was not allowed. How was I supposed to know?

Actually they are not required to, believe it or not, put up any signage telling people that photography is forbidden. I found out myself with consequences (end result: verbal warning) in Washington, DC's Metrorail System. PATH though did have a notice saying that photography was not permitted in their property.

I assumed that Grand Central was public ground -- still don't understand why it is not. Isn't it "public transportation"? And for what I know photography is legal on public ground generally and anywhere in the US. Without a tripod or not ...

It is public transportation, but there's something that you're probably not aware of: It may be a public way to get to transportation and the like, but the station and platforms are Private Property, and the owner of that property has the say of what can go on and what can't.

Also, most transit systems, mainly because it's a fire hazard, prohibit the use of tripods because of not only that but other safety reasons as well as including liability, so that's why that MNRR employee turned you in, since you may have been compromising safety as he may have claimed.

So: No signs = no restrictions

Not exactly, see my first paragraph I wrote in this post.

Thanks for the replies, guys.

Actually they are not required to, believe it or not, put up any signage telling people that photography is forbidden.

Well, if this is so from a legal point of view it doesn't mean it is a practical or even a fair thing. How is a foreigner supposed to know? It is not common sense to assume that taking pictures without a tripod is allowed but not whilst using one.

... the station and platforms are Private Property, and the owner of that property has the say of what can go on and what can't.

If it is so: OK and I made a mistake then. But again: How am I supposed to know? There's zillions of information they give thousands of times per day("Stand clear of the platform!" -- I would do that even without them telling me.) -- so why don't they just post a sticker at the doors with a "no photography" information if they think this is important and necessary for people to know?

Also, most transit systems, mainly because it's a fire hazard, prohibit the use of tripods because of not only that but other safety reasons as well as including liability, so that's why that MNRR employee turned you in, since you may have been compromising safety as he may have claimed.

That guy was in a bad mood. I didn't block anyone or anything, it was around noon and that area I was in was pretty empty.

No signs = no restrictions was what I assumed. I learned that I was wrong but that doesn't mean that MTA found a customer-friendly way of communicating the regulations they have. It's just not very smart to think that people should guess what they allow and what not.

And putting me in handcuffs and a cell for 90 minutes, hurting me physically and verbally is no appropriate reaction at all.

-rAt

Just one or two more thoughts:

What makes me feel strange is the way many institutions deal with these things. Well, institutions means people and especially in the US I rather often see a weird way how "officials" deal with problems. As an example MTA police could have tried to solve this verbally instead of using physical power.

Here's an other example of how I feel that many US employees behave in their work role:

I got wrong advice from an MTA employee while going to JFK. She told me to buy a certain ticket which then was not valid. I complained -- and MTA sent me an excuse letter and a MTA ticket worth one ride. That was nice -- but they sent it to my home which is in Germany. So it is sitting here on my desk for quite a long time now already ...

Don't get me wrong: I have wonderful friends in the US and I know damn smart people there. But I ran in some "average" workers that don't have any common sense and they gave me the feeling that they liked that "virtual" power they have while wearing a uniform.

I travelled the former communistic countries rather often at those dark times -- and what happened to me or other people in the US somehow reminds me of that.

On he other side many private businesses offer a superior service than most over here where I live. I like that extra-friendliness and the extra-smiles so much -- and that makes the differences to these nazi-like people in uniforms even more obvious.

Again: I met very nice policemen in the US and I don't want to come up with a stereotype. Nevertheless there is a certain tendency that makes me wish to avoid contact with people in uniform.

It would be interesting to find out the reason for all that.

-rAt

Frankly, by your replies I think you were clearly in the wrong. I am getting an extremely arrogent impression from you and I think your reaction to the replies only enforces that. You might want to take a good look at the rules and regulations for the transit systems next time to avoid any problems and don't assume that just because there isn't a sign for everything that a rule against something does not exist.

And also with the attitude shown here, I think the officers were more than justified in their response. You didn't follow the rules and have a bit of an attitude, they have every right to take you into custody as officers of the law.

Efin98, did I step on your patriotic toes? Sorry for that! I had no idea you couldn't stand another opinion. If only I knew before -- I would have avoided my posts.

I will happily wait for your next visit to where I live (Germany) when you are a visitor in a foreign country and you somehow get in some unexpected trouble with because of regulations you don't know. I will read your experiences with curiosity when you try to understand what people are yelling at you in a foreign language (and with a strong accent: this policeman at Grand Central -- he spoke fast and with an accent that I hardly understood).

But -- no, that won't happen because you sure took "a good look at the rules and regulations" beforehand. And your German is probably much better than my English ...

Well, I am glad that some local people who were around when I was arrested assured me that it was a clear over-reaction of these officers. But maybe they were all as arrogant as I am?

I better avoid Chelsea, MA -- you might be a policeman there and think that I deserve even worse treatment? Maybe I could help building a human pyramid?

-rAt

I better avoid Chelsea, MA -- you might be a policeman there and think that I deserve even worse treatment? Maybe I could help building a human pyramid?

Actually, Mr. efin98 is not a policeman at all. I also live near him but in Holbrook, MA. We are both Bostonians. As for going in another country while railfanning, I was photographing a similar system in Toronto, CA, but was never approached and questioned by officials there. Only in WMATA Washington, DC.

But -- no, that won't happen because you sure took "a good look at the rules and regulations" beforehand. And your German is probably much better than my English ...

Yes, I usually would and him too. I tryn to be careful not to film in ovbious places such as underground tunnels and stations.

I also don't understand Greman, actaully, for the record

It's your fault for not knowing the rules and regulations whether you like it or not. Ignorance is not a defense, you found that out the hard way. And if you think what you got was bad treatment, wait until you committ a worse crime- and I know you will. Your arrogence will make you.

efin, you don't know a thing about me but you keep on posting stuff as if you did. You probably believe what you write. That is weird, don't you think?

What I know is that you mean "arrogance", not "arrogence". But what can I say -- it's your language and again you sure know better, right?

Your accusations are way too stupid and your strange predictions have zero relevance.

Over and out.

-rAt

I understand, but he has a point. I know you were visiting from another nation, but you must have been in the public way with a tripod, which could have interfered with commuter's walking towards their desired trains, which is why that MNRR conductor turned you in.