you're anti-terrorism 'thinkers' in the states are crazy. how is that going to stop terrorists? are they seriously suggesting the terrorist will give up on their evil plan because they don't want to risk the $25 fine. and didn't the terrorists make a film in disneyland? so no cameras in there too? if they start prohibiting you from photographing i feel sorry for you. i only hope we have voted out tony blair by then or else we'll follow suit.

Boston's MBTA already prohibits photography without a permit (which is easy to get - you go to their marketing department, show some ID and five minutes later, you have a permit). Last time I went subway photographing, the conductor saw me with my camera out as the train pulled in - she shrieked at me to put my camera away, then, just in case I was deaf, as the train started, she got on the PA system: "No filming in stations without a permit! Put that camera away!" When the train got to my stop, boy did it feel good to wave that damn permit in her face.

This is fucking outrageous and exactly in the direction the paranoid USA is going -- if you have a camera in public you are now considered either 1) A Terrorist 2) a Peadeophile. No one ever stops to think -0- um maybe he/she is a photographer??? Or Tourist??? FUCKING PISSES ME OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anyways that is my input -- i mena seriously -- for security??? Dudes if the terrorists want to blow shit up banning photography isnt goign to stop them. DUD.. americans... I weep.

Okay, so I'm a member of the press and I can shoot without fear. As long as photographers aren't doing up-skirt stuff, it can't possibly be a security threat (not that up-skirting is, either, it's just a violation of someon's privacy).

And for all you numbskulls who thing it's no bid deal to ban photography, what's next? Using negative language about the President? Scoffing at people you disagree with if they're right-wing? Where does it end? That slippery slope Jason refers to is very real.

Oh, and confiscating one's film is a no-go. They must have a warrent to deprive you of your personal property. But be prepared to challenge them if they do take your film to not destory it or process it by threatening a civil lawsuit. But do not physically challenge Barney Fife. He's got a big stick and can give you lumps on the head. And you probalby won't win if you started the phsical altercation, no matter how righteous your cause.

It's a slippery slope we're heading into ladies and gentlemen. I know I may sound like a fearmonger, but with each day the Big Apple become less and less free. First the smoking ban, and now this, if this keeps up, metal detectors in front of Macy's Herald Square may not be far behind.

~why ban photography? paranoia runs wild?~

Not more than a month and a half ago, I was "busted" by two (and later four) officers for allegedly taking photos in the subway when in fact all I was doing was ajusting my focal length before putting my lens cap back on. I even showed the officers that there were no shots of the subway on my digital camera. They also took down information wrong and or made up answers to questions they didn't even ask me.

...and this is all before the latest news of a ban.

Bloomberg has spoken against this ban. There's absolutely nothing that could be done to make the subway 100% safe (short of closing it), but politics require that they act like they're trying.

It would be an insane policy, contact your representatives and have them put as much pressure as they can on the MTA to drop this ridiculous idea.

It's really directed at hobyists and railfans, which the MTA would rather be without; they call them "foamers."

Much of Transit Museum paraphernalia consists of station photography, mosaics, etc. I will boycott the Transit Museum and drop my membership if this ban takes effect.

www.forgotten-ny.com

With technology, the stupid would-be law is unenforceable. Tiny tiny tiny cameras, 4 am (or high noon), any terrorist --or artist-- would probably be able to shoot whatever they want without being caught. Unless they start recording our every move with tiny tiny tiny hidden "security" cameras. To protect us you know. Seems law-proposers consider the loss of rights and freedom (to make photographic art or even tourist documentation) no loss at all if it prevents one would-be terrorist from taking the photos they need to conduct harm. It won't prevent any such thing. Mmm... false sense of security. Won't keep anybody any safer. Just gives us one more thing to mistrust our fellow citizens over. How soon until it becomes actually imposible not to break the law by walking out our front door?

I'm glad there's going to be a photography ban. Photographers can simply go outside to take photos. The effects of secondhand flash can cause others to go blind.

I heard that they may allow one separate photography car where photogs can shoot photos, given that it's properly lined with non-reflective surfaces to minimize the harmful effects of secondhand flash. But this may eventually be superceded by a state law.

European tourists may scoff at New Yorkers because it's legal to shoot subway photos in Europe, but at least we'll all be safer.

And the best part is that my clothes won't smell like cameras when I go home after a night out on the town.

yup- that's why i make sure to always rock the 6' tripod when i'm out on the trains. fight the power!

Actually, Jake, tripods and flashes are currently illegal in the subway. Seems reasonable to me, because there are actual safety implications to tripods and flashes.

Another reason to walk between cars:

Some stations (like South Ferry, and possibly only South Ferry) require you to be in the very front of the subway to get off. Say you're coming from 116th St station, where the stairs are towards the back of the train, and you get to the station just in time. You don't have a chance to run all the way down the platform to the first five cars before you board, so walking between cars is a good way to make sure you're in the right section of the train.

Lock the doors between cars?? WTF? Hello, if you are stopped in a tunnel, to exit the train you can only go out the front or end of the train. I was going to move away from all the hipsters in the front car ;), but now I want to stay near that door just in case some anti-terror idiot forgets that fact and we get trapped in a minor track fire. And die. Actually, I think I've noticed more locked door recently- hopeing they keep at least one route open to the tracks.

Aha, Joe, thank you. That makes much more sense. As I said before, I was shown the rules book where it said you couldn't take pictures without a permit. Banned until 1994, then. That works.

I can't help believeing that this proposed policy is a fig leaf for the MTA. They can claim to be doing something to make us safer in the subways without actually doing some of the concrete things that really could make us safer.

What about better training for conductors and motorwo/men on preventing and responding to terrorism? What about really fixing the public address system so that it will be able to be used to guide riders to safety during an attack or even just a dangerous smoke condition?

yeah, that'll show those new yorkers. it's going to be interesting to see how this city functions without a constant supply of amateur photographs of subway cars and the people who ride them.

>>but I don't believe it binds. I have at various times over the past 25 years been stopped by Transit Police...

Subway photography *was* banned until 1994 when the MTA was embarrassed into changing the rule. See the Times article today.

I say let's also have all NYC photobloggers devote one week to their best subway photos -- or put together an actual, physical gallery. That'll show New Yorkers what they have to lose.

-=-Joe

"...if the law takes effect", that is.