If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
Richard Williams wrote:
In article , wrote: How could it be worse, you ask? Probably only if you were a British journalist flying into LA: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...231089,00.html Nah. If she had been from a non-western country it would have been far worse. Richard. -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++ |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
Richard Williams wrote:
In article , wrote: How could it be worse, you ask? Probably only if you were a British journalist flying into LA: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...231089,00.html Richard. Wow. I almost don't know what to type as a response. I try to follow Reporters sans Frontiers, yet I seem to have missed this one. Really shocking behaviour. Thank you for sharing this report. I live in California, though I am originally from Germany. I recall growing up and hearing this sort of behaviour as common in some parts of Latin America, Eastern Europe, and other places, basically some places that were not the US, Canada, Australia, or Western Europe. I have gone to high school and college in the US, and even briefly worked for the US Government, yet I still find this type of behaviour almost unbelievable. Obviously, the once noble profession of journalism has suffered a great decline in the last six (or more) years. That governments, especially the US, would place any restrictions or monitoring on journalists is a disgrace to the principles of the US Constitution, especially the First Amendment. While I understand that the Constitution does not apply to citizens of other countries, how can the US claim to uphold "freedom of expression" when it places restrictions on journalists. All this makes me very sad that things have progressed this far. Even worse is that I have no sense of increased security when I travel anywhere in the US. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com http://www.agstudiopro.com Coming Soon! |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
Lionel wrote:
Kibo informs me that ospam (Lewis Lang) stated that: [...] If the events are in or near major cities you could buy film there and/or how about shooting 400 speed (and slower) film (could your lenses apertures/technique handle the 1 stop drop in speed?) which might be less sensitive to get by with no fogging after a couple of passes through inspections lower dosed x-ray unit (forget about cargo's hand checked luggage as they are supposed to have much more massive doses of x-rays there). Do a test to see how much if any the x-ray passes affect your 800 spee film (or 400 speed film if you switch over to that). Why not _let_ a roll or five of your 800 speed film go through the X-ray machine (place them in strategic places in your bag and mark them "C" (Center of bag between clothes, gear, [Huge, enormous snip] to spare you from going over to "digimania" ;-). Maybe there are even more way(s) around this Orwellian problem without having to go digital or FedEx... Jesus. I think I'll avoid the USA until all this insanity goes away. There are still some very nice people, and very nice places to go in the US. It is not a Police State (yet). Just be sure to avoid any major international summits (G8, WTO, etc.), or an BioTech conferences, unless you really want trouble. Oh, and don't try to photograph military bases from the fence lines. Anybody else? Wouldn't it be easier to either go digital, or just delay any air-travel until monkey-boy's been voted out of office? The system in the US is that laws are enacted in the Legislative Branch, which is Congress and the Senate. The President can veto those laws, or sign them into law, or just let them pass into law. Without going more into detail, a change in the Executive Branch (President and Cabinet) is unlikely to reverse any laws that currently exist, including the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Bill (about 500 pages), and what is called Patriot Act II. The Judicial Branch in the US is the third form of checks and balances of power, and it would be up to them to determine the Constitutionality (or lack) of any new laws that are enacted. Basically, you change the guy in the oval office, and it is unlikely to have any impact on existing laws. The damage is already done. The only possible benefit of a change in the Oval Office is that the outward perception of the US might change, which theoretically could affect the value of the US Dollar. It is unfortunate that so much attention is placed upon the President, and that aspect of the election, that people overlook much that goes on in the Legislative and Judicial Branches. There might be Constitutional challenges to the Patriot Act, though it is written purposely in a manner in which all clauses would need to be individually considered under any challenge of Constitutionality. The Homeland Security Act has similar provisions, many of which were put in place from the original 32 page draft, to the final 500 (approx.) pages. If you want to see how the US changes in the future, watch what goes on in the Judicial Branch, though have patience, since these challenges can take many years. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com http://www.agstudiopro.com Coming Soon! |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
Gordon Moat writes:
Without going more into detail, a change in the Executive Branch (President and Cabinet) is unlikely to reverse any laws that currently exist, including the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Bill (about 500 pages), and what is called Patriot Act II. A lot of law is established by Executive Order, and by various administrative orders that don't involve any elected officials at all. Congress has signed away a great deal of its authority to control the force of law, giving many non-elected individuals and a handful of elected officials much more legislative power than they were ever intended to have. Eventually, Congress will establish a dictatorship, as that is the tendency of most democracies over time. Democracies are their own worst enemies. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
On 16 Jun 2004 12:13:23 -0400,
(Stephen H. Westin) wrote: But won't that shipment be X-rayed? And quite possibly by something much nastier than they would want to put in the terminal. Wow...30+ comments already. I must have touched a nerve. Several follow-ups: 1. I e-mailed ASMP's Exec Dir Eugene Mopsik, and he wrote back immediately. He's going to forward myletter to his TSA contact and try to get some answers. He also advised me that the ASMP main office phone number listed on their web site is good. I tried it from my office today and got through, but three attempts from Chicago only got me an intercept saying it was kaput. 2. FedEx, to my knowledge, is the only carrier that does not x-ray. Or at least they don't x-ray film. Or so I've been told. I don't know what the USPS is doing these days, but I don't trust them or UPS. 3. Tom Daschle's what? Dude, don't make me laugh. All this fascistic overreaction is directly courtesy of the right wing. The left wingers are merely spineless accomplices. I'm an equal opportunity despiser, so don't get me started on any of them. 4. Write my Congressman? Amazingly, my particular Congressman is one of the few who've consistently resisted the lunacy. He's pretty much outnumbered by about 400 votes. (P.S. to Dieter: I've written President Bush many times, all of which I'm sure are now included in my FBI file.) 5. Yes, I could buy film at the destination, but: A) Have you ever tried to buy anything other than Kodak 400 at Big Boulder, PA in the Poconos or in Cotati, Cal? C'mon, guys, not every town has a pro shop. And even if they do... B) I get most of my film for two bucks a roll. Ever price p3200, or even a roll of Fuji Press 800x36, at a retail/pro shop? C) Buying at the destination also takes additional time and expense. 6. I don't ever recall hearing about explosives disguised in film. 7. Sabineellen wrote: http://www.bok.bonnier.se/foton/abfo...ena_lappin.htm That would mean that tens of millions of Americans look suspicious. Uh, yeah. Bingo! 8. Bill Hilton wrote to Lionel: Just how burdensome is it to wait an extra five minutes while they check your film by hand? Big deal. Five minutes? Bill, if it was only five minutes you never would have seen a post from me. It was 20 minutes at Sea-Tac and nearly half an hour at Midway. 9. I've received off-list e-mail from other photogs whose experiences mirror mine. They're not happy, either. They're equally powerless to do anything about it. What was that line from Jim Carrey in "Liar, Liar?" Oh yeah... Fletcher: "Why you.......you LIAR! You know what I'm going to do about this?" Attendant: "What?" Fletcher: "Nothing. Because if I take you to small claims court it'll just drain eight hours out of my life and you probably won't show up and if I finally got the judgement you'd just stiff me anyway. So what I'm GONNA DO is **** and moan like an impotent jerk and then bend over and take it up the tailpipe!" Attendant: "You've been here before haven't you?!" Cheers, JJ (Personal replies: remove "unspam" from address) |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
Mxsmanic wrote:
Gordon Moat writes: Without going more into detail, a change in the Executive Branch (President and Cabinet) is unlikely to reverse any laws that currently exist, including the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Bill (about 500 pages), and what is called Patriot Act II. A lot of law is established by Executive Order, and by various administrative orders that don't involve any elected officials at all. Congress has signed away a great deal of its authority to control the force of law, giving many non-elected individuals and a handful of elected officials much more legislative power than they were ever intended to have. Eventually, Congress will establish a dictatorship, as that is the tendency of most democracies over time. Democracies are their own worst enemies. The balance of power, and system of checks and balances, has suffered greatly in the last ten years (or longer, depending upon system of reference). It is a shame, yet history has shown the evolution of democracies, and they are never without problems. This is a somewhat difficult time in which we live. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com http://www.agstudiopro.com Coming Soon! |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection
Mxsmanic wrote:
Hzakas writes: I do agree with one respondent about writing the TSA, your local Congressman, DHS director Tom Ridge, and maybe even President Bush. Taken individually, your letter may not have much of an impact, but a collection of letters detailing similar experiences by others may cause them to sit up and take notice. The only thing they notice is votes. Contribution$. Contribution$. Contribuition$. That is all most politicians notice. -- --e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|