|
|
| Re: First platform to open for new World Trade Center PATH station (1277422) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: First platform to open for new World Trade Center PATH station |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Wed Feb 26 16:15:01 2014, in response to Re: First platform to open for new World Trade Center PATH station, posted by Lord Vader on Wed Feb 26 11:08:54 2014. First of all, as my post indicated, I applied for the permit in 2006. My first run-in with the NYPD wasn't until April of 2007, so unless a couple power-tripping MBTA rent-a-cops decided to phone up an entity several states away over a run-in too minor to generate any paperwork, I couldn't possibly have been on anybody's radar. I'm not sure what you meant by "fear period" though.Second, I've never actually broken any laws, so my name isn't in any systems, and therefore it wouldn't come up today, let alone in 2006. The Port Authority doesn't have access to NYPD personnel logs or shift reports or whatever minor bits of paper get written up after each conversation a cop has, and they don't have access to summonses that got dismissed because those are declared void and sealed by law; even if they illegally accessed confidential records (which is a stretch), there's nothing that would give them legal grounds to deny a permit— discrimination of any sort because someone accused me of breaking the law when I didn't actually break the law is specifically banned by New York State. I'm the one who will actually be taking the photo, facing the risks, and (if necessary) challenging and overturning an unconstitutional law (or more likely, simply suing for false arrest since photography isn't actually illegal), so I'm the one who gets to decide whether it's "not worth it" and therefore should "just be let go." Admittedly, I'm not going to go downtown for the sole purpose of challenging the theoretical (but probably unlikely) reaction of potential cops (who may not actually be present) to an activity that is certainly not illegal. My railfanning time has been cut considerably, and if I do have an afternoon free, I'm more committed to getting a last RFW on the 7 express, or seeking out an M3 bound for Port Washington if I can spare an extra hour or two. However, while I may not end up personally challenging this particular (theoretical) photo ban, I nonetheless respect anyone who makes the effort to support photography rights anywhere. |
|
|
|