The moral of the story is that SLR = terrorist. Sneaky point-and-shoot = tourist.

None of this makes sense. Ben – you have a cool head. I would have been hog-tied, pistol-whipped and shipped to Gitmo because I turn into a dick in this type of situation.

If you or others would have a passion around this issue, let me suggest the DC photo rights group on flickr: http://flickr.com/groups/dcphotorights/

I especially enjoyed when it happened during the construction of the ballpark. What was happening there was that the low-paid security staff were probably being told to keep lookie-loos away by any means necessary, and had been given “pictures aren’t allowed” as one of the options. Sure, if you stepped onto the ballpark footprint, they could get rid of you however they wanted, but I loved being told I wasn’t allowed to take pictures when I was standing across the street.

I have two friends who were detained by transit police in Baltimore for 4 hours when “caught” taking pictures in the harbor at night. They are both shades of brown and one has a very Muslim name. Does they’re appearance lend credence to the otherwise ridiculous actions of the police?

For someone looking for a hobby, is the SLR the way to go?

Ansel Adams, apparently.

So apparently, the guard went based on looks. Because that older white gentleman wasn’t yelled at from across the street to come over to him “immediately.” Only me.

I offered to let them search my bag, look at my camera photos, etc. All politely refused. They had every opportunity to check me out; instead, I’m told a lame excuse as to why I can’t photograph and then it’s implied I could be a terrorist threat.

My offhand remark you refer to is just my response to such a stupid assumption on the guard’s part.

You are right, Jake – there are some implications that do lurk beneath all this; questions that we all have to ask ourselves. But that’s not why I blogged this. It’s simply to report what happened to me and my snotty reply to the whole situation after the fact. Nothing more. Because I know if I’d said that phrase to them in the tone I reserve for sarcasm, I might still be in the bowels of the DoT building…

Look at it this way: At least I didn’t write a nasty note on a dollar bill and tip the guys with it… :)

Limiting violations of liberties only to people who look a certain way is hardly an improvement. I realize you tossed that remark in as an aside, but maybe you should give a bit more thought to the implications that lurk behind it.

seems like the average white person would be a perfect terrorist – the police wouldn’t expect it.

Thanks.

Thanks.

On my more empathetic days I feel somewhat understanding; becoming the victim of random violence is scary in large part because there’s little we can do about it. What could anyone in the World Trade Center have done to avoid their fate short of living in the woods in a shack? No reason to believe law enforcement is any different – these folks want to feel they’re doing something, and obsessing over photo-takers gives them an activity.

Unfortunately it’s an activity akin to walking through Manhattan beating on a trash can lid in order to keep the bears away. It does nothing but annoy everyone else and allows them to say that it must be working because they don’t see any bears.

Although this is a particularly egregious example of securi-noia run amok. No photography of federal buildings? I don’t mind guys just “doing their job”, but they’ve got to receive better training than this. If these guys honestly thought that taking pictures of a federal building is illegal, then something has gone horribly wrong with the way the federal government trains and educates its employees. Taking pictures is the only thing half the people who visit the city end up doing anyway.