Photo by Stefan Postles
Rachel "The Glove" Hulin posted about the photo fracas at Union Station, so I figured we could coordinate our outfits today.
So here's a post from The Guardian that Jim Colburn posted on Sportsshooter entitled "Are Photographers Really a Threat?"
"Since 9/11, there has been an increasing war on photography. Photographers have been harrassed, questioned, detained, arrested or worse, and declared to be unwelcome. We've been repeatedly told to watch out for photographers, especially suspicious ones. Clearly any terrorist is going to first photograph his target, so vigilance is required.
"Except that it's nonsense. The 9/11 terrorists didn't photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid subway bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn't photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber didn't photograph anything; neither did shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs aren't being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. The IRA wasn't known for its photography. Even those manufactured terrorist plots that the US government likes to talk about -- the Ft. Dix terrorists, the JFK airport bombers, the Miami 7, the Lackawanna 6 -- no photography."
Stumble Upon
While I do believe that a photographer has a right to photograph public and public access areas there are some areas where it is best to preplan by contacting the security authority in that area because of the added security that comes with the terrorists threats. On my last trip north I wanted to have access to photograph the port of entry at the Canada border which meant dealing with Homeland Security. Two weeks, three emails, and some personal information later I had full access with an escort and there were few rules that they required. It was a great experience and I will always follow this procedure for future shoots that require it.