Salon runs a weekly column called "Ask The Pilot," and this week, it focuses on photography of planes and airports. (If you're not a subscriber there, you'll have to sit through a short ad to get a "Day Pass" to read the article).
It's interesting because it covers a lot of the same issues that many railfans run into while trying to take pictures of trains; in particular, police and security officials who insist that taking pictures is somehow "illegal" but can never cite a statute for it.
Some choice quotes from the article:
It's interesting because it covers a lot of the same issues that many railfans run into while trying to take pictures of trains; in particular, police and security officials who insist that taking pictures is somehow "illegal" but can never cite a statute for it.
Some choice quotes from the article:
There's a shiny new airport in Manchester, and I'm there to take pictures as part of an article I'm working on for that mouthpiece of liberal fascism, the Boston Globe. I've shot about six digital pictures, and I'm working on the seventh -- a nicely framed view of the terminal façade -- when I hear the stern "Excuse me." A young guy in a navy windbreaker steps toward me. It says AIRPORT SECURITY in block letters across his back. "You can't do that. You need to put the camera away."
"I do? Why?"
"Pictures aren't allowed."
"They're not?"
"Sorry."
"Sorry what? I don't think that's true, actually. I'm pretty sure that it isn't illegal to take pictures at an airport."
"You'll need to talk to a deputy, sir."
I slip the camera into a pocket as the guard, who despite his crested cap and cocksure understanding of the rules, is a private security guard and not a law enforcement official, quickly summons over two members of the Rockingham County sheriff's department, which administers the Manchester airport.
The following afternoon, at T.F. Green Airport in Providence, R.I., the very same thing happens. Again I'm taking pictures for the Globe story, and again I'm detained by an airport policeman. The conversation unfolds almost identically, with similar confusion over whether my activities are in violation of a law or statute. And this time, it winds up taking an absurdly long 45 minutes before I'm allowed to proceed.
"I understand what you're doing, and why you're doing it," I say. "But can you tell me: Am I breaking a law or statute?"
"Well, no, I don't believe so," he answers, sounding less than confident and maybe a touch annoyed that I'd phrased things so directly. He's professional and polite -- a young guy, maybe an ex-Marine, all arms-akimbo and barrel-chested in that way of cops. "But," he asserts, "there are certain things you can't take pictures of."
The million-dollar questions are: Is it a violation of law to take photographs at airports? And under whose jurisdiction does the matter fall?
"No, it's not against the law," says Anne Davis, a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) spokeswoman.
[Logan Airport media relations director Phil Orlandella] warns that yes, individuals snooping around with cameras might be approached and questioned, but photography itself is fully within a visitor's rights. "A passenger is free to take any picture he or she wants," he says, "in any public area of the airport, end of story. If you're not deemed a threat, you're free to click away."
Phil Gengler
Overheard in NY Penn: "All aboard! Get on the train if you're coming with us!"
Overheard in NY Penn: "All aboard! Get on the train if you're coming with us!"