Airport official warned me against photography

[klimraamkosie]

Originally Posted by specd_out

I had a similar experience. Few friends and I where taking shots of planes landing at TPA. We where in a bowling alley parking lot waiting for our lanes to open up. after about 30 min a cop showed up and told us that we had to stop. Then he took all our ids and made sure we didnt have any red flags. He was super cool and commented on some of the photos that we showed him. We all chatted for a while. He explained that the main reason for stopping it is because we could be tracking tail numbers and marking routes down.

all in all he was really a nice guy but he had to do what he had to do.

If you weren't in your car he had no right to get ID from you. And as has been noted, the tail numbers HAVE to be visible to the public (including you).

Please know that Police are legally allowed to lie to you and will do so to get their way every time.

[cdiver2]

Something similar happened to me at the Clearwater St Pete airport except I was surrounded by six police officers. At the end of the questioning I was given a phone number (Sheriff's office) and told it may be a good idea to give them a call before I go. I have not had a problem since.
As far as tracking aircraft by tail numbers easy http://www.flightradar24.com/ There are lots of sights on line that track aircraft live. There are also sites where you can put in a tail number and it will give you make model and owner.

[FlyingPhotog]

Originally Posted by klimraamkosie

If you weren't in your car he had no right to get ID from you. And as has been noted, the tail numbers HAVE to be visible to the public (including you).

Please know that Police are legally allowed to lie to you and will do so to get their way every time.

You're gonna need to defend your last statement there my friend...

Coercion, Entrapment and the right to not Self Incriminate would work against that notion.

AFAIK, none of the popular flight tracking sites are truly in real time. Arrival times may be accurate but they all have at least a slight delay built in in terms of location on the map.

[1Twist]

A.C.A.B. - !

[klimraamkosie]

Here you go. If you'd like to, after viewing the videos and article, I'll talk to you about your questions. There are obviously exceptions. But generally a police officer is legally allowed lie to you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrCh4qLG1EI

http://reason.tv/video/show/flex-you...-producer-stev

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...-interrogation

[FlyingPhotog]

The web is the last place I'll trust for any ammo...

Give me credible cites from real sources. Legal Opinions, Law Books, Local or State Statutes...

[klimraamkosie]

If you're not even willing to look at those that'll be the end of the discussion.

[FlyingPhotog]

Originally Posted by klimraamkosie

If you're not even willing to look at those that'll be the end of the discussion.

Fine by me...Have a nice life.

But if you think I don't know anything about photography Vs aviation, you might want to visit my website...

[klimraamkosie]

I try not to make those kinds of assumptions.

[FlyingPhotog]

Originally Posted by klimraamkosie

I try not to make those kinds of assumptions.

I guess you don't have to because you've obviously got plenty of others already.

[klimraamkosie]

Originally Posted by FlyingPhotog

Fine by me...Have a nice life.

Wishing to rescind your earlier comment?

[Nmcgrew]

Originally Posted by klimraamkosie

Wishing to rescind your earlier comment?

You sure talk a big game about aviation photography even though I see no evidence (including a lack of anything over 85mm in your kit) that you know what you're talking about.

Jay on the other hand, has just a little bit of experience.

The truth is, the police can lie in certain circumstances as held up by the supreme court, but in MOST cases they must be truthful and forthcoming otherwise they risk their case being thrown out for Coercion, Entrapment, violating the 4th and 5th ammendment rights of the other person invloved, etc. It can also lead to law suits.

[klimraamkosie]

Originally Posted by Nmcgrew

You sure talk a big game about aviation photography even though I see no evidence (including a lack of anything over 85mm in your kit) that you know what you're talking about.

Jay on the other hand, has just a little bit of experience.

I talk a big game about aviation photography? Please point out where I did this. I'll ignore your comments correlating an 85mm lens, Jay's obvious Aviation photography experience to a legal opinion.

Originally Posted by Nmcgrew

The truth is, the police can lie in certain circumstances as held up by the supreme court, but in MOST cases they must be truthful and forthcoming otherwise they risk their case being thrown out for Coercion, Entrapment, violating the 4th and 5th ammendment rights of the other person invloved, etc. It can also lead to law suits.

And I probably agree with you on all of your points and indicated that there are exceptions in my comments above.

[davtackett]

The truth of the matter is..., some people, given a little power, let it go to their head and like to play it for all it's worth. This includes groups of people. We have low level idiots in charge of security sometimes.

Looking suspicious, he did his job and checked you out, now he knows your not suspicious. Should have been end of story.

[76Retro]

In today's world, it is not inconceivable that someone from the Police, Security, or Airport Operations would stop someone and ask some questions.

There are numerous classes and training modules out there for personnel who work in this type of environment to see persons/vehicles/etc in close proximity as possible threats.

Possible is the key word.

In most cases it's someone trying to get a good picture of something cool, or someone out with there child for a really neat experience.

It could be someone up to no good. Using range finders to determine approx. distance from the ground to an arriving or departing aircraft for other then "Hobby" purposes.

Flightaware and other programs do provide a great source for information but in some cases flights CAN be blocked from public view.

Anyone unannounced in these locations will likely have some sort of encounter, whether it be someone rolling out the their location to ask questions, or being asked to leave.

I work around the aviation industry and have the ability to tell most inquiring parties to mind their own business with little or no repercussions. Although, with that being said, the last time I wanted to take photos around the airport/airport grounds, I went out of my way to make sure it was OK with Airport Operations.

As suggested in an above post, it would not hurt to go to the Ops Center, introduce yourself, maybe hand them a business card and let them know your intent.

In some cases they might still tell you NO, which would suck, but you may find that it could even be your "in" into getting some of your pics posted in the airports terminals.

Terrorist don't give a fat rats ass who they kill... As evidenced in 9/11... So I'm fine with someone asking me some questions.

Put yourself into a their shoes... The more vague, and less cooperative you are, the bigger the Red Flag. You otherwise make yourself more suspicious the less your willing to cooperate.

Police may ask for ID. It could tell them lots of things.

If your a local or not.
If your from across the country, or not even from the U.S., it might lead to some more follow-up questions.

In the great scheme of things, they are there to protect "US". GOD forbid someone DID in fact do something and never intervened, everyone would be pointing fingers saying they were not doing their jobs.

No one could have ever conceived that Columbine, 9/11, the Aurora, CO shootings would happen... We can't be naive to think a plot against a arriving/departing aircraft is not possible.


I hope that everyone on here will continue to have the ability to takes great aviation pictures with little or no hassle.