|
|
| Here's a good letter :) (23083) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Here's a good letter :) |
|
|
Posted by Richard Rabinowitz on Fri Nov 26 00:15:56 2004, in response to Re: NYCTA moves forward with photo ban, posted by Mark on Thu Nov 25 12:59:28 2004. Reasons the ban would be problematic:Security: Terrorism isn't the only problem in the subway, and even if it was, cameras might be able to catch the evildoer in the act and at the beginning of his or her crimes. Today's cell phone cameras can record and send photos to security agencies, and vigilantes with cameras would save the police energy and money (thus saving the taxpayers money, thus saving votes for the politicians up in Albany). As the world actually is, the Islamic terror is not the subway's only trouble with crime, with such wrongdoing as assaults, robberies, turnstile jumping, and Metrocard fraud threatining to swipe our subway's hard-won gains since the downtrodden 1980s from under its feet. Photographers can catch the bad guys in the act, and a photo ban wouldn't help in such cases, as pictures are such vivid descriptions that they led to that cliche about "a picture being worth a thousand words". Constitutionality: Photography that is not obscene, and does not appeal to the country's prurient interest, is likely federally protected speech. In such a case, the photography curtailment proposed by the NYCTA would be, in all likelihood, unconstitutionally overbroad. (Please note that there was a case involving the Boston subway, I think - the MBTA - and the Jews for Jesus, in which the latter were caught "illegally" pamphletting in the subways by the former, and this ban was struck down by the courts as "unconstitutionally overbroad".) A ban might not pass constitutional muster, even in a Supreme Court handpicked by George W. Bush. Discrimination against tourists and lovers of New York State and New York City: While this has nothing to do about the Constitution, it is nonetheless unfair and unethical to keep the right of picture-taking from people who are New Yorkers, whether rich or poor, contributors to the GOP or the Democrats, freelance journalists or folks from the "Daily News", subway enthusiasts or folks who travel by helicopter. New York is a city with a teeming crowd, probably with enough of the rich and famous to make permit-granting to them a hassle, and thus a photography ban may be quite tough to enforce, even on a selective basis. Moreover, New York City and New York State both stand to lose tourism money if tourists are kept from photographing New York City landmarks - and let's face it: the Subway is a landmark. |
|
|
|