Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Baltimore's Preakness Race bans cameras with detachable lenses  (Read 2602 times)
Bob_B
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 199



« on: May 02, 2013, 08:25:00 AM »
ReplyReply

FYI: Don't know if anyone cares, but the Washington Post recently reported that due to security concerns cameras with detachable lenses or lenses bigger than 6" will be banded from this year's Preakness Race.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/othersports/pimlico-tightens-restrictions-at-preakness-stakes-following-boston-bombings/2013/04/30/316bf08a-b1de-11e2-bbf2-a6f9e9d79e19_story.html
Logged

Photography by Belas

Bob Belas
Catonsville, Maryland USA
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1570


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2013, 08:39:59 AM »
ReplyReply

What utter nonsense this all is. As with everything, follow the money. Where in these restrictions does somebody stand to make a profit? I guarantee there's money in it for someone, somewhere.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2013, 09:56:13 AM »
ReplyReply

What utter nonsense this all is. As with everything, follow the money. Where in these restrictions does somebody stand to make a profit? I guarantee there's money in it for someone, somewhere.


Sigma?

Rob C
Logged

Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 830


WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2013, 10:47:09 AM »
ReplyReply

What a victory for terrorists - a great country brought down to a quivering wreck.  Taking reasonable steps is sensible, but one wonders how well the Boston bombing has played into the hands of the multi-billion dollar security operation in the US.  Not saying they want terrorists, but just a bit of a threat on a regular basis keeps everyone happy to pay the huge bill to the taxpayer involved.

Jim
Logged
langier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 651



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2013, 03:40:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Trading freedom for safety gets you neither.
Logged

Larry Angier
ASMP, NAPP, ACT, and many more!

Webmaster, RANGE magazine
Editor emeritus, NorCal Quarterly

web--http://www.angier-fox.photoshelter.com
facebook--larry.angier
twitter--#larryangier
google+LarryAngier
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1570


WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2013, 03:45:31 PM »
ReplyReply

I do wonder how the US would ever cope with something like The Troubles, as the problems of PIRA & UDF violence & terrorism were euphemistically termed in the UK.
Logged

PeterAit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1952



WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2013, 04:10:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I bet this restriction does not apply to the press photogs. And, while I agree with your assessment about money, don't forget stupidity as a likely cause.
Logged

Peter
"Photographic technique is a means to an end, never the end itself."
View my photos at http://www.peteraitken.com
louoates
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 780



WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2013, 05:28:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I just inspected all my big lenses and concluded that if I filled them with high explosives it would definitely void the warrantees.
Logged
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1175



« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2013, 05:42:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Trading freedom for safety gets you neither.
+1
Logged

Gary Brown
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2013, 06:54:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Curiously, pressure cookers are allowed (at least, they're not on the prohibited-items list)
Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1695


« Reply #10 on: May 02, 2013, 08:14:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Long lenses and drinks (water!) aren't forbidden for safety reasons, IMHO. My shoulder bag was very carefully inspected at a baseball game in Phoenix last month.  Not for safety.  For foodstuffs that would compete with the concessions.

Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #11 on: May 03, 2013, 08:12:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Long lenses and drinks (water!) aren't forbidden for safety reasons, IMHO. My shoulder bag was very carefully inspected at a baseball game in Phoenix last month.  Not for safety.  For foodstuffs that would compete with the concessions.


Isn't there something specific in the Constitution that would make that negative action illegal? I mean, it's not like you were hiding a gun in your bag... oh, isn't that legal in Arizona? However, there is the consideration that should such foodstuffs (your own imports) make you take ill at the game, one of those ambulance-chaser law firms might jump into the scene on their own your behalf. So yes, money worry probably is behind it all. The not having to spend it, sort of worry.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

Rocco Penny
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 483



« Reply #12 on: May 03, 2013, 09:22:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm not sure this is a security measure as much as an exclusionary measure.
No 600mm even hand held?
Because you can pack the thing w/ c4?
stupid...
Maybe ban anything you can't carry in outstretched hands and while havinfg a full workover...
unless it carries money in which case any size suitcase full is permissible
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #13 on: May 03, 2013, 11:20:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Ah suitcases, Rocco.

We used to travel with large ones, and they always came home holding more than they left with, but money was always the opposite way around.

Balance I find difficult.

I can't even think of a good song. That's because I have wasted the afternoon waiting for a painter to come check out damaged bathroom ceilings the insurance company of the guy upstairs are going to fix. This is the second painter. The first one came when the floods had just stopped in both bathrooms (adjoining) and obviously he couldn't do anything then because one needs resurfaced as well as painted, though the other only needs paint. So we arranged to wait until one was dry and could take paint. In the meantime, his price rocketed and he was dumped. A replacement painter turned up weeks later and told me both ceilings were still wet. In truth, I think he simply couldn't stretch the staff to cover more work right then, and employed a delaying lie trick.

Today I went to the Community Administrator's office to ask what the hell was going on, and he rang the second painter, there and then, and I was assured he'd turn up this afternoon. It's six-fifteen and nobody showed. So no exercise walk after lunch, no cellpix and I'm blood pissed off with the lot of them. The weekend is dead, so perhaps Monday, but perhaps not.

No wonder there are no songs.

Rob C
Logged

Gulag
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 216


« Reply #14 on: May 03, 2013, 12:27:34 PM »
ReplyReply

FYI: Don't know if anyone cares, but the Washington Post recently reported that due to security concerns cameras with detachable lenses or lenses bigger than 6" will be banded from this year's Preakness Race.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/othersports/pimlico-tightens-restrictions-at-preakness-stakes-following-boston-bombings/2013/04/30/316bf08a-b1de-11e2-bbf2-a6f9e9d79e19_story.html

The message is loud and clear here. Photographers are "Terrorista #1."
Logged

“For art to be art it has to cure.”  - Alejandro Jodorowsky
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #15 on: May 03, 2013, 01:49:03 PM »
ReplyReply

The message is loud and clear here. Photographers are "Terrorista #1."


No, I can't agree. The message is that terrorists can easily masquerade as snappers, the tools of the trade providing wonderful cover. Remember those gunstocked follow-focus lenses of yore? Perfect way of disguising a burp gun.

For my part, I'd ban rucksacks for anyone but schoolchilden. There is absolutely no reason at all for them. Society survived for thousands of years without them; they became a fashion item some few years ago, and suddenly every goddamned tourist carries one, even whilst being vulgar enough to parade off-beach wearing a swimsuit.

No rucksacks, and maybe many more people would have been alive today, and not just in Boston.

Rob C
Logged

Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1570


WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 03, 2013, 02:25:41 PM »
ReplyReply

I regularly carry a rucksack when out & about. Food, drink, fleeces & wetproofs and the like. Ad that's just a UK summer.
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #17 on: May 03, 2013, 02:47:50 PM »
ReplyReply

I regularly carry a rucksack when out & about. Food, drink, fleeces & wetproofs and the like. Ad that's just a UK summer.


Good grief, Bill!

All you need's a brolly.

Don't you have a home where you can leave your stuff and even find a meal? Are you frightened of dying of hunger and/or thirst as you go and do your daily chores? Do contemporary clothes no longer admit to pockets?

I can't even bring myself to carry a smallish camera bag that takes a single body with a 180mm fitted.

And I thought that I had managed to stress myself out...

;-)

Rob C
Logged

Gulag
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 216


« Reply #18 on: May 03, 2013, 03:38:09 PM »
ReplyReply


No, I can't agree. The message is that terrorists can easily masquerade as snappers, the tools of the trade providing wonderful cover. Remember those gunstocked follow-focus lenses of yore? Perfect way of disguising a burp gun.

For my part, I'd ban rucksacks for anyone but schoolchilden. There is absolutely no reason at all for them. Society survived for thousands of years without them; they became a fashion item some few years ago, and suddenly every goddamned tourist carries one, even whilst being vulgar enough to parade off-beach wearing a swimsuit.

No rucksacks, and maybe many more people would have been alive today, and not just in Boston.

Rob C

Perhaps Foucault was absolutely right when he pointed out "docile bodies" are what today's society really needs.
Logged

“For art to be art it has to cure.”  - Alejandro Jodorowsky
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #19 on: May 03, 2013, 04:37:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps Foucault was absolutely right when he pointed out "docile bodies" are what today's society really needs.


Not to mention common sense and a little less yo, hombre!

;-)

Rob
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad