I think it is now illegal to photograph some bridges. JCO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message----- From: David Miers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 9:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: photographer arrested Bizarre may a good term for the whole thing, if it even really happened. IMHO anyone with any common sense wouldn't have admitted to any alliance or relationship with the jumper, but rather just happened to be in the right place at the right time. I thought the situation might have been enhanced by the effects of 911 and new security measures. I assume Herb that by your comment about the permit you are referring to one to put on a public display, not for photography itself aren't you? My primary reason to posting this to the group is to be more aware of possible laws we may break simply walking about clicking away with our cameras. Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 7:40 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: photographer arrested > > > the usual legality is permit for a public display, suitably worded for the > locale. > > Herb.... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 8:03 PM > Subject: Re: photographer arrested > > > > Not having a permit for what? Did they impute the whole offence to him > because > > he was engaged in a common enterprise or something? it seems rather > bizarre to > > me. > >
