DOT Response to ACLU Queries Regarding Photography of Federal Buildings

can you summarize; I cannot read.

The Flickr user apparently is involved in a recent query from the ACLU to the DOT (Dept of Transportation) regarding photographers being prevented from taking photos of various government buildings on the grounds that it 'is illegal'. There is a letter sent to the ACLU from the DOT which apologizes and states that the guards were in error. The letter is scanned and presented online.

The user further did some digging into DOT written regulations, and came up with a couple pages (scanned) which state what photographers can and cannot take photos of with regard to government buildings, and when security guards can and cannot hold the photographers against their will.
 
Thanks. Flicker not accessable from where I am.

The last time I photographed a federal building -- the US Capital, about 6 weeks ago -- I walked right up to the barrier at the foot of the stairs and took photos just like I was a citizen. The guards looked and watched continuously until I left but that was it. I also photographed the Supreme Court.. with a similar experience.
 
"Well, it's never happened to me," does not mean it never happens. I've never been in a bank as it was being robbed. However, banks get robbed, even if I choose not to believe it.
 
Cops are not lawyers, yet they know what they can and can not do. If the guards are not trainable, they should not be hired.

When cops do something wrong, there are consequences, frequently covered up, but at least they know they did something wrong.
 
When anyone (security personal et al) starts quoting rules and regulations over the area they are hired to protect kindly ask them to show you such rules and regulations in writing...most can't or won't...
And the VP would be...Joe "I can't control my tongue" Biden...
 
"Well, it's never happened to me," does not mean it never happens. I've never been in a bank as it was being robbed. However, banks get robbed, even if I choose not to believe it.

This is true. In my case I was one guy with a dumbass rangefinder camera; they were 8 or more, each with what looked like a machine gun. If they said "go away" I would... and would not bother calling the ACLU. No doubt -- these things happen, as do other things, but I am always intrigued by the fact that it happens to other people. Maybe I'd get the same mistreatment if I had a tattoo???
 
Cops are not lawyers, yet they know what they can and can not do.

I've not always found this to be the case.

These kind of regulations are so vague that it almost forces mistakes. The initial interview could easily go south if either party is in a bad mood, or on their second or third 'interview' of the day.

I just spoke to my photo classes about this kind of stuff today- the general consensus was that it would never happen to them, but I assured them come December at least two of them would have been hassled. Happens every semester, even here in the middle of nowhere.
 
Back
Top Bottom