On beach stroll; would you photograph nuclear plant?

[Iamme]

Today's hot news on the Mike Gallagher conservative radio talk show. Three arab immigrents 'on a stroll' down the beach, in Plymouth. Massachussetts, decide to photograph a nuclear power plant there, and send pictures back home. They are being held for questioning.

Hmmmm. I shouldn't have laughed...but I did. To hear Mike Gallagher put his spin on things....to hear him try to pronounce the names of these arabs. Ha!

Mike challenged their proclaimed innocence, that they were just on this stroll down the beach wanting to take photos. He said this 'beach' is not your nice sandy beach. He said it is a challenging area, with rocky outcroppings. He asked us if we thought they were just sending these pictures back home to grandma. Ha. I laughed more.

Then, I said to the radio, "*I* would have taken pictures of the power plant. It's not everyday that you come across a nuclear power plant, so accessible to viewing, from a stroll down the waterfront, like this." Then again, I might be influenced by the fact that I helped build the World's largest nuclear reactored power plant in the world. (Circa 1980, Bay City, Texas, South Texas project...listed in the World Almanac)

Let me ask you: Suppose you were walking down a beach...even if you had to climb over rocks...and you were taking nature photos...and you came across this nuclear power plant...would you take photos of it? As I said, *I* would have. What about you?

[Lurker]

I would probably take a picture. I always pose my wife in front of large landmarks and take the picture from down low so it appears she is a giant next to the landmark. Eiffel Tower, Big Ben... you get the idea. A nuclear power plant would qualify for fun.

Lurker

[DavidJames]

I would have taken pictures and I would have been annoyed if I was then questioned by the feds, but as long as there was no mistreatment I'm okay with that. I would have been definitely p*ssed off if people had started making public accusations about my guilt and might look into legal remedies if possible.

[Jon_in_london]

So em... is it illegal to take pics of power plants in the land of the free?

[arcticpenguin]

I might have taken pictures. Many nuclear power plants are interesting to look at, with their containment domes and their cooling towers. I would assume that any really sensitve areas would be fenced off.

On the other hand, there really are terrorists out there who want to blow up American facilities and Americans.

[Professor Frink]

Originally posted by arcticpenguin
I might have taken pictures. Many nuclear power plants are interesting to look at, with their containment domes and their cooling towers. I would assume that any really sensitve areas would be fenced off.

On the other hand, there really are terrorists out there who want to blow up American facilities and Americans.

Yes, but it's not like they just uncovered one that was hidden that was a big secret. Any decent terrorist already knows where they all are by now.

And besides, with the Homeland Security Act, I'm sure that plant has plenty of security and plenty of money to upgrade its warning and emergency systems. Right? Right? <sound of crickets...>

Frink

[Tmy]

TERROR TERROR!!!!

HAve you ever been to Plymouth? The most photographed thing is a ROCK!!!! A nuke plant is more exciting if you ask me.

Any real terrorist could get detailed areil phots from the local library.

[Iamme]

Jon---Greetings from across the sea. It's because they are Arabs, with arabic names. Similarly, these arabs are the ones being profiled at the airports. It's no wonder why, I guess. If they are innocent, you have to feel sorry for them, I guess.

Conservative radio talk show hosts believe this profiling is O.k., as a matter of security. They realize it is like racial profiling (don't our very own black people know all about THIS!), but feel national security rules.

So far, the results of my unscientific survey show that it is not out of line to want to take a picture of a nuclear power plant. Keep 'em coming, folks. This is interesting. I should e-mail Gallaghers website and have him come here and read the posts.

It would be interesting to know exactly what kind of terrain is at this supposed 'beach'. If they had to climb cliffs and stuff like that...then this would maybe make motives appear more sinister. BUT....if say people were out climbing cliffs to photograph say Area 51....the motives might not be sinister. The people could be thrill and curiousity seekers. But is someone so curious about a nuclear power plant to climb all kinds of obstacles to photograph it? Now I'm pondering if *I* would. I don't think I would. But then again, I have seen one before, obviously. So, I'm not a fair candidate to base this on.

[tamiO]

I now know better than to photograph any property of the city, state or federal governemnt, including the roadways and electrical lines they own, without prior permission.

On July 3rd 2001, I walked around my downtown area taking pictures of buildings and made the mistake of taking pictures of the drive-thru payment building where you pay your electric bill.

I was waved down by police and harrassed about what my purpose was in taking pictures. I explained to them that I was taking pictures of the downtown area to publish on my website which I was producing to promote the town. They hassled me for almost an hour threatening to arrest me. They even told me they checked and that I did not own DothanArea.com!

I now know how to handle myself better when being hassled by cops and have practiced the response of "I do not wish to answer any questions at this time and would like to speak with a lawyer."

I never did find out if it really was against the law to take pictures of government buildings, but it became very illegal just a few short months later.

[HarryKeogh]

i saw people with a video camera by the park by me. a police officer who was there told them to please not get the triborough bridge (a very big thoroughfare here in nyc) in the video. i thought it was more sad that it comes down to this than thinking what happened to our freedoms.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by HarryKeogh
i saw people with a video camera by the park by me. a police officer who was there told them to please not get the triborough bridge (a very big thoroughfare here in nyc) in the video.

Apparently, the terrorists do not know what a bridge looks like and need these pictures to plan.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by HarryKeogh
i saw people with a video camera by the park by me. a police officer who was there told them to please not get the triborough bridge (a very big thoroughfare here in nyc) in the video. i thought it was more sad that it comes down to this than thinking what happened to our freedoms.

lamme- I guessed it was because they are Arabs... pretty sad that a country that could be so good has sunk so low....

Harry, I dont know how it works in the US but if a policeman told me not to take pictures of something Id tell him to please leave me alone and continue to photograph whatever I want. So far as I know, its not illegal to photograph anything...

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london

Harry, I dont know how it works in the US but if a policeman told me not to take pictures of something Id tell him to please leave me alone and continue to photograph whatever I want. So far as I know, its not illegal to photograph anything...

Not in public, it isn't. Of course, they can harrass you big time, but in the end, they won't have anything.

I grant the US mint, etc, the right to not allow photography inside the building.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by pgwenthold

I grant the US mint, etc, the right to not allow photography inside the building.

Inside a building is different though.... privacy issues etc.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by pgwenthold


Not in public, it isn't. Of course, they can harrass you big time, but in the end, they won't have anything.

I grant the US mint, etc, the right to not allow photography inside the building.

I can't find the law now, but maybe I can put the correct search terms together another time. In the meanwhile, here is a story about an amateur photographer named Mike Maginnis who was arrested for taking pictures of buildings in an area where Vice President Cheney was residing.

http://www.2600.com/news/view/article/1441

[Jude]

We should all dress up as Arabs and pose for photographs in front of nuclear facilities. It could be amusing, as well as meaningful.

[Stig]

Remember the British plane spotters that were convicted of spying on air-bases in Greece.

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_703847.html?menu=

Apparently they don't really get plane spotting hobbyists in Greece.

I wonder if the Arabs in question have a new hobby that Americans are not into?

Nuclear facility spotting anyone? I can see one on the French coast from where I live. Cap De La Hague Nuclear plant is on the Cherbourg penninsula. They have anti-aircraft missiles stationed there since the World Trade centre attacks.

I hope the wind isn't blowing in my direction if that ever goes up in smoke.

Stig

[Silicon]

If they don't want people taking pictures of the power plant, they should close the beach.

[Mr Manifesto]

I was in Canberra and having a look at all the embassies. They're really amazing, some of the architechture is unlike anything in Australia, because they're all done up to make the diplomats 'feel at home'.

So I took photos.

Ten seconds later, I'm being mobbed by security guards wanting to take my camera. I turned on my Canadian accent and explained that it was just an honest mistake, and all was well.

[WildCat]

The whole rationale of harassing people photographing from a public place is assinine. These people need to get their heads out of their fecal exit holes and get a clue as to how to really prevent terrorist attacks.

Here is a site explaining photographer's rights. (http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm)

[Iamme]

Is this for real? The posts above that say police have stopped you and others for taking pictures of public places? In the U.S.A? (I'm talking outside photographs...not inside photographs.)

[Agammamon]

Originally posted by Stig
. . . I wonder if the Arabs in question have a new hobby that Americans are not into?

Nuclear facility spotting anyone? I can see one on the French coast from where I live. . .Stig

Hey, they've got people who SPEND THEIR FREE TIME keeping track of the comings and goings of trains.

Ye, I would take a picture of a nuke plant. There's nothing illegal about it but this country now seems to have a phobia about photography. I run into this problem on base here. There is no regulation prohibiting photography on base. I researched it since part of my job is to take pictures of subs for work planning. Still I get stopped quite often by people wanting to know if I have a "camera pass". There is no camera pass it's just that no-one knows the actual regs, they just make up what seems to be appropriate. Though it's actually kind of ridiculous. There's nothing you can't photo from the pier that a telephoto lense from across the river wouldn't do just as well, and there the military has no jurisdiction anyway.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Iamme
Is this for real? The posts above that say police have stopped you and others for taking pictures of public places? In the U.S.A? (I'm talking outside photographs...not inside photographs.)

My story is true.

I will have to find the source now, but in times of war it is illegal to take pictures of anything that is government owned.

Does the War on Terrorism count?

We were not at war when I was hassled. It was July 3rd, 2001. The day before our Independence Day, here in the States. It was also just a little over 2 months before the WTC tragedy. The way they acted made me think that they were already on some sort of TERROR alert.

When I restart my project, I will be better equipped to handle the hassle and I HOPE they F with me.

I am 5'6" and the officer who was intimidating me stood well over 6 feet tall and had me nearly in tears. I waited until I got home to completely break down.

edited to add: I am a white girl; don't let the dots on my forehead fool you ;)

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Silicon
If they don't want people taking pictures of the power plant, they should close the beach.

Hire Randi to make them disapear!

[P.S.A.]

I've taken pictures of power stations before; the last one was next to Ironbridge, in Shropshire, UK... the world's first all-iron bridge, and I thought the juxtaposition of the beginnings and current level of the Industrial Revolution made for an interesting shot. Fortunately the plant was neither nuclear, nor my skin arabic, nor was it after September the 11th, so it wasn't an issue.

But here's the thing that really gets me. You don't need any local knowledge of any particular power-plant to be able to strike it effectively. Just the tiniest bit of general knowledge... we have all heard of "Water Cooling Towers". Nuclear plants need them or they go boom. So all you need to do is know roughly where it is, bring your hijacked jet in low, and hit either the big round thing, or any of the big sticky up things. Of course, you don't even need to know that... hit anything in the plant at all. Tomorrow's headlines? "Nuclear Plant Struck By Terrorists!" Result? Lots of terror. Any big bang you get is a bonus. But you don't need it to be a succesful terrorist...

However, the police et all have to be 'seen to be doing something', so that means arresting people of a suspicious skin colour near nuclear plants. It's like mommy telling you things are going to be ok, when really she has no idea when she'll next get any money. Security from a symbolic teat to suckle at.

[HarryKeogh]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


lamme- I guessed it was because they are Arabs... pretty sad that a country that could be so good has sunk so low....

i'm pretty sure they were regular garden variety white people.

[Charlie Monoxide]

Is this like the ban on taking photos in court rooms? Why don't our Arab brethern (or others), take up sketching or oil painting. It would look neat to see a group of men wearing arab clothing (turbans would be a nice touch as well), doing sketchings of various "sensitive" public places.

Charlie (can you draw me?) Monoxide

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by tamiO
I will have to find the source now, but in times of war it is illegal to take pictures of anything that is government owned.

Even such things as the national parks? Seems like a bogus law, if so. (Or even if not so. :) )

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist


Even such things as the national parks? Seems like a bogus law, if so. (Or even if not so. :) )

I swear I read it shortly after my "incident."

The passage talked about it being illegal to even take pictures of the roadways and power lines. I think it was okay if you got permission first.

I cannot find it again for the life of me. It was a reputable site on the law as it applies to photographers.

[Iamme]

The South texas Project (World's largest nuclear output power plant in the world at that time) had no cooling towers. Instead, it had a huge manmade lake diverted off the Colorado river. to serve it's cooling needs. I helped build the flood gates. BUT...low flying craft could try their luck against the tall four feet thick containment buildings walls. That I'd like to see.

Speaking about what I'd like to see. STP has a visitors center across the road. There you can sit in a theater and watch a film on how safe nuclear power is. Naturally.:D I watched it. They showed how safely they transport nuclear products. To demonstrate, they showed what happened to the transport cargo-hold during such things as (get ready), two train locomotives slamming head-on into each other at high speed. Wow. it was worth watching this film, just to see this! The cargo containment vessel stayed completely intact.

[Agammamon]

Originally posted by tamiO


I will have to find the source now, but in times of war it is illegal to take pictures of anything that is government owned.

Does the War on Terrorism count?


Actually there is no such law. There are laws against industrial espionage, but it is incumbent on the company to hide anything they don't want anyone to see. If it's out in the open it's fair game. The Commander of a military installation can prohibit photography as he sees fit but that prohibition is only applicable to those actually on the base. If you can see it from beyond the fence you can take a picture of it. The Atomic Energy Commission can prohibit photography of nuke power plants but exceedingly rarely apply that prohibition to areas viewable to the public (especially the exterior).

[Blarg]

A related thread(it may take a minute to load):

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005zOm

[Agammamon]

". . .The general rule in the United States
is that anyone may take photographs
of whatever they want when they are
in a public place or places where they
have permission to take photographs.
Absent a specific legal prohibition
such as a statute or ordinance, you are
legally entitled to take photographs.
Examples of places that are traditionally
considered public are streets,
sidewalks, and public parks.
Property owners may legally prohibit
photography on their premises
but have no right to prohibit others
from photographing their property
from other locations.

There are some exceptions to the
general rule. A significant one is that
commanders of military installations
can prohibit photographs of specific
areas when they deem it necessary to
protect national security. The U.S.
Department of Energy can also prohibit
photography of designated
nuclear facilities although the publicly
visible areas of nuclear facilities are
usually not designated as such.

Despite misconceptions to the contrary,
the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully
from public places:
accident and fire scenes
children
celebrities
bridges and other infrastructure
residential and commercial buildings
industrial facilities and public utilities
transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
Superfund sites
criminal activities
law enforcement officers

Published by
Bert P. Krages II
Attorney at Law
6665 S.W. Hampton Street, Suite 200
Portland, Oregon 97223
www.krages.com
Your Rights and
Remedies When
Stopped or
Confronted
for Photography
February 2003"

There's more to this if anyone wants to look at it.

[eli54]

Must be South Texas Arizona. If they diverted the Colorado River over the Rockies to the state of Texas, the Mexican government is really going to be upset!;)

[MoeFaux]

I've got a tiny digital camera that holds 400 pictures at once. I take pictures of EVERYTHING.
When I'm in a store or taking pictures at an art fair, I always ask permission first.
But, when I'm outside, everything is game. I would have had a campy pic of me in front of the plant.

[Iamme]

eli54---Here I lived down there, and *I* wondered how the Colorado River got over there! I guess if there can be a Miami of Ohio, and a Miami, Florida...we can have two Colorado Rivers. :D

[peptoabysmal]

I have two questions:

1) Has anyone seen the photos in question or heard the content described? (Are they long shots of the facility or close ups of valves and such?)

2) tami0 - what exactly are those dots on your forehead there for?

[Dilettante]

I think the idea is to find out who the guys are and see if there's any other mischief they've been up to. (Just photographing a power plant may not be mischievous--but it sure looks suspicious under the circumstances.)

By the way, crashing a jet into a power plant isn't the only way to sabotage one. (I'll let the nuclear engineer speculate about different sabotage options.)

Even if the sabotage did not direct affect plant operation, all the saboteur needs to do is create a perception of major risk. This could force that plant and other plants to be shut down, or run at lower power, or investigated at tremendous expense. That could be the whole point. (It would probably force us to buy more "Arab" oil too.)

The real solution is to put an opaque fence around most of the reactor, so a would-be saboteur would have to get very close in order to get details. That would clear up some of these borderline cases.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

FYI for those who don't know - Mike Gallagher is an idiot. So factor that into your judgement.