Very Recent JFK Incident at T6 Parking Lot

[megatop412]

Where was the outrage when Sergio and a group of local spotters got a much worse encounter at EWR and even had their CF cards confiscated? If I remember correctly I advised filing a complaint against the officer which was rebuffed by Phil if I am not mistaken. If you are going to come on with this macho bravado threatening action then do it. If not, spare us. If you want to go down that road be prepared for pushback. Big time.

OK man I tried being empathetic with you so you could see I wasn't attacking what you said, but that pretty much ends with you calling me out and describing what I said as ridiculous.

The ball's in their court as far as I'm concerned, all they have to do is play that hand with me and what you read will happen. Your taunts sure as hell won't get me to do it. And it's not like this is new. I dealt with the PA about this before '9/11' was a buzzword, and they were treating spotters like sh*t back then too. Only reason I haven't raised hell yet is because I haven't had to- unlike you I know how to talk to people without being insulting, so all of my encounters with authorities have been smoother than a baby's ass. Once someone pulls a power play for no reason, it all changes and you'll get to read all about it. I agree that this situation was an anomaly and that people don't need to be going off every time the cops roll up. But it's a mistake to think we just need to 'make and keep contacts', if that were something that worked then it would have worked by now. Somebody here by now would have said "You know what, I know a guy, let me talk to him about this and see what we can do..." Phil has made a lot of effort to bridge this gap and as he says it hasn't really materialized in something that could benefit us.

You think that complaining about your rights being trampled on and demanding some sort of accountability for that behavior should be avoided because it risks a prime spotting location? WTF? I'll say it again: the parking garages were never 'ours' to do what we wished with. They are airport property and if you're asked to leave you do so with no bs.

I don't have to 'spare' anybody jack. If you don't like hearing an opinion different than yours that's fine by me, but not everyone wants to live their lives like you do, keeping your head in the sand while your rights slowly disappear. This is only a free country because of the rivers of blood that have been spilled to make it that way. That won't be for nothing. I'll be damned if I'm just going to roll over and allow myself to be treated like a terrorist when I'm trying to live my life. I don't get what's so hard to understand about it. You can feel free to establish your contacts and see how that works. This has nothing to do with 'macho bravado'; bravado is putting your life on the line to protect the US, its citizens, and their rights. All I'm talking about is enjoying the rights granted to me as a US citizen. I'm not brave, I'm just not stupid and I don't suffer fools easily.

As far as Sergio's situation was concerned, I'm sorry if I didn't formally say it before, but here goes: "The police do not have the right to take your memory card if you have not committed a crime, and they were clearly abusive towards this group of spotters, and a complaint should be filed". There, does that make you happy?

[NIKV69]

It's not a pissing contest. It's standing up for people getting abused. Nothing else.

Then why the ultimatum? Why not follow up officially? Why make a statement like they either love us or ban us? It makes no sense.

Airports are not actually considered public property. Port owns them and they can create and enforce their own rules, unfortunately.

It's amazing how this has transcended over the years from being bullied by police on public land to this. Why is it unfortunate that they own the place and set the rules? That is part of life Phil. More reason to be diplomatic as opposed as standoffish.

I'd rather lose the spot than see people get treated like that.

There you have it. Someone who rarely shoots and hasn't uploaded in over two years not caring if a prime popular spot that locals have been enjoying gets lost. Nice Phil. Think of the big picture.

The ball's in their court as far as I'm concerned, all they have to do is play that hand with me and what you read will happen

I can only imagine.

but not everyone wants to live their lives like you do, keeping your head in the sand while your rights slowly disappear

What rights are those? To do whatever we want on private property? Your thinking is very clouded here. We don't have right to shoot there. It's a privilege and should be treated as such.

As far as Sergio's situation was concerned, I'm sorry if I didn't formally say it before, but here goes: "The police do not have the right to take your memory card if you have not committed a crime, and they were clearly abusive towards this group of spotters, and a complaint should be filed". There, does that make you happy?

Few years late but nice job. As I said. All this bravado is amusing. If you are going to go down that road then do it and stop talking about it. Just get ready for the spotters who will a little mad at you once the garages get lost like the cargo area did.

[threeholerglory]

Before I go back to eating my popcorn, I do have to say Nick that lots was done after the EWR incident to clarify the harassment etc and ultimately got our memory cards back...I can't/won't provide details because either I wasn't informed of all of them (nor do I need to know), or I won't post anything in the forum on it that hasn't already been clarified. Otherwise, great points on all sides!

Ready........GO!

[PhilDernerJr]

First, to EVERYONE, if people disagree or do not like that I wrote this article...if you feel that what I am saying in public is instead creating a threat to the hobby, or if that spotting location in question is more important than the topic at hand...please feel free to let me know, in public or private. I need and want to know people's opinions.

Then why the ultimatum?

There was no ultimatum. It was a request. An ultimatum requires a threat of "if you don't do this, we will do 'this', but there was none of that.

Why not follow up officially?

Again, you're assuming that I'm not. I am following up. I will advise when and as it progresses.

Why make a statement like they either love us or ban us? It makes no sense.

I never said "love or hate us" or anything of the sort. I want official stance of what is allowed and not allowed.

This is because I feel (my opinion) that they shouldn't ride the fence and then tolerate having their police force treat people like bonanzabucks. And also...there WAS just as much upset over Sergio's incident. It happened that the officials involved were already working the issue closely and working on doing the right thing within hours anyway.

Why is it unfortunate that they own the place and set the rules? That is part of life Phil. More reason to be diplomatic as opposed as standoffish.

I have no problem with them making the rules...but they haven't ever MADE the rule! Just because I am told in private by officials that they don't allow photography on airport proper doesn't mean that it is really a rule because so many people will violate that unofficial rule because they won't know about it, and police will respond as they please because there is therefore no guidance for them to follow. I have no problem being a soundboard for stuff, but if they don't want photography on airport property then they should make it a rule.

Keep in mind bonanzabucks didn't even have a camera. So that is why I ask for Port to offer a stance on the hobby in general. If photography is ok, then non-camera spotting must be ok too. I just want people to be able to KNOW what is and is not allowed.

I don't feel it is standoffish, and I think my article IS diplomatic...since when does diplomacy not include writing opinion articles and letters that contain passion? All I did was reference some spotting examples and say that Port should do something to change the situation.

It is something that upsets me and I voiced my opinion in an opinion article. Keep in mind I've spent years shaking hands with these people from all airports and working with them on projects (NYCA and other) and discussing the hobby with them.

There you have it. Someone who rarely shoots and hasn't uploaded in over two years not caring if a prime popular spot that locals have been enjoying gets lost. Nice Phil. Think of the big picture.

I find this ironic and ignorant. I do not spot at JFK often, which we all know. But I do spot. I visit LGA often. I take photos often.

Yeah, I haven't uploaded to JP or Anet in two years...but does that make me any less of a spotter? I didn't know that being at JFK weekly with a DSLR and uploading to JP or Anet was the only way that I can speak out about anything. And I've been to the location in question over a dozen times, so it's not like I've never enjoyed it and am referring to "other" people's locations.

Just as I know I can't define the hobby for others, you don't get to define it for me either. For someone who doesn't spot much yourself...you're being quite vocal, no? ;)

Spotting at that location has been FINE for a while now with very few problems. Others may disagree, which is fine, but to me, but even ONE incident makes it not worth it. I think about the future...what will happen the next time there is an incident? Someone may get arrested or worse. That is why a simple rule is important... a little official guidance for cops and security to go by instead of having free reign to abuse people. If we lose that spot as a result of a new rule, that would suck but at least we don't have to look over our shoulders and worry about whether or not cops are going to verbally abuse us or take us to the precinct again.

Again, I don't care how great a location is or has been...1 person out of 1,000 getting that treatment isn't worth it in my eyes. I'm going to speak out. Others are welcome to disagree.

We have no one else to look out for us...except for our fellow spotters. If bonanzabucks can't look to us for support, then who else? With Sergio's situation...before we even had a chance to do much, it was already being handled behind the scenes (which I only a middleman of, mind you...I just knew it was happening, thankfully).

All this bravado is amusing. If you are going to go down that road then do it and stop talking about it. Just get ready for the spotters who will a little mad at you once the garages get lost like the cargo area did.

Do WHAT exactly? You keep saying "do it" but I am wondering what actual act you're referring to that no one is supposedly doing. Please enlighten me.

[Zee71]

Phil....thank you for the article! We as a spotting community (whether locally or elsewhere) need to stick together (in numbers there is power), and standup for our civil rights and resolve issues like this (or at least get clarification). Especially with the Port, a gray area to say the least.

The poster from Manchester Airport in England is fantastic and really shows how spotters can help as opposed to TSA poster. What a difference! Maybe the Port Authority should send an assembly over to Manchester to gain insight.

Something to think about: Why is it okay to photograph the One World Trade Center (as it is being build), but not okay with PANYNJ to photographing planes? What's the difference?

I am optimistic and think things in the end will work out for our hobby.

[NickPeterman]

Whether or not you agree with Phil's actions or exact phrasing, I think we can all agree that from what info we have, what occurred here was not exactly keeping with standard law enforcement procedures. Having found myself in a situation not to dissimilar from what was described here, it is the intervention of people like Phil who helped me out. In my case, the clarified an incident which could have cost the Washbalt spotters group a hugely frequented location, and also helped Law Enforcement know how to handle us. It was a win-win.

As for how it will play out, from a neutral observer's standpoint, all it seems that you have to lose is a semi-official rule (that was shared with me as though it were law) may become officially codified. On the positive side, maybe, just maybe, you will launch a dialogue that could lead somewhere productive.

You never know!

N

[NIKV69]

There was no ultimatum. It was a request. An ultimatum requires a threat of "if you don't do this, we will do 'this', but there was none of that.

Where one of the requests included banning photography altogether. Good move. Again why such a heavy handed move? Especially when you holding no cards. It's not public property Phil.

Again, you're assuming that I'm not. I am following up. I will advise when and as it progresses.

So you write a rant filled antagonistic article and also contact them? Again, makes little sense. I still fail to see why you would write this and what it could possibly accomplish but to alienate the PA.

I never said "love or hate us" or anything of the sort. I want official stance of what is allowed and not allowed.

Which included banning photography. Phil you missed the mark badly in your article. PA doesn't dislike photographers. They dislike the huge amount of phone calls they receive when the general public sees us and has no idea what we are doing. Remember we live in the number 1 target for terrorism. Now to be honest PA could have taken the path of just totally banning any sort of our behavior a long time ago, but as you say they don't have an official rule saying so. Why encourage them to do it? Was Bonanza's treatment totally out of bounds? Of course it was. If we are to survive spotting in NY in areas that are not public then there is a trade off. Do I like it? No, I know what it is to enjoy garage spotting without any care in the world of badge heavy law enforcement. Unfortunately in a post 9/11 world this may never be the case in NY.

So I would rather try to save these spots than encourage or give someone an excuse to ban them.

I find this ironic and ignorant. I do not spot at JFK often, which we all know. But I do spot. I visit LGA often. I take photos often.

Great, just don't forget the guys who chose to shoot at JFK. They stand to lose a spot they probably really like.

Yeah, I haven't uploaded to JP or Anet in two years...but does that make me any less of a spotter? I didn't know that being at JFK weekly with a DSLR and uploading to JP or Anet was the only way that I can speak out about anything. And I've been to the location in question over a dozen times, so it's not like I've never enjoyed it and am referring to "other" people's locations.

You can speak about JFK all you want. Just remember the guys who use a location u have been to over a dozen times probably use it 4 to 5 times a week. They have a dog in the hunt too.

Just as I know I can't define the hobby for others, you don't get to define it for me either. For someone who doesn't spot much yourself...you're being quite vocal, no? ;)

You follow me around Phil? I spot plenty. Just because I don't use my time editing shots to post on your site doesn't mean I don't spot.

but to me, but even ONE incident makes it not worth it

There you go again. Phil you may think you speak for the spotters in the NY area but trust me, you don't. You really should have spoken to people and got opinions before you published an article like that. I can't for the life of me think that just because a bad cop lost his mind in an encounter that it's not worth trying to preserve a prime shooting location, and to force the people that own the property to make a decision. One of which being to end photography there.

Again, I don't care how great a location is or has been...1 person out of 1,000 getting that treatment isn't worth it in my eyes. I'm going to speak out. Others are welcome to disagree.

Yea we can all just head over to LGA. Right Phil?

We have no one else to look out for us...except for our fellow spotters. If bonanzabucks can't look to us for support, then who else? With Sergio's situation...before we even had a chance to do much, it was already being handled behind the scenes (which I only a middleman of, mind you...I just knew it was happening, thankfully).

Yea what happened was someone who knew someone took a diplomatic approach and got everyone's property back. Without someone writing an article asking PA at EWR to publicly state what their stance is on photographers. End result even though EWR is tough to shoot at we can still at times get over there and shoot. It's a win some lose some proposition. Is it a sacrifice? Sure but the alternative of zero tolerance towards us isn't very appealing to the future of spotting IMO.

Do WHAT exactly? You keep saying "do it" but I am wondering what actual act you're referring to that no one is supposedly doing. Please enlighten me.

Read the thread Phil. It's all right there.

[Delta777LR]

Funny that my name was mention on the EWR incident, i never forget what happened that day, yes i was with 5 other planespotters when PAPD get a call about our presence at the north parking lot. We were blocked in by 3 PAPD Crown Victorias, and asked for our IDs and requested our CF cards. The last thing on my mind was that they were gonna delete our photos which they dont have a right to do. That was the day that we spotted that a UA A319 had a landing gear collapse on 4L which we took pictures of. I thought we were gonna lose the pics, if we did, i would have made a lawsuit bigtime, deleting pictures is the same as ripping up your 35mm film.. I really had a fit. Thats why i rarely spot at EWR. And I believe Nick V about losing the spotting locations. We dont need that

[megatop412]

Do WHAT exactly? You keep saying "do it" but I am wondering what actual act you're referring to that no one is supposedly doing. Please enlighten me.

Phil, Nick is referring to what I said I'd do if someone on a power trip tried to confiscate any of my equipment or tell me that photography is 'illegal'. Which is to say that yes, I would risk arrest by refusing to hand over memory cards or a camera(remember, I already said that I would leave 'private property' if I was told to). Not to make trouble for you or anyone else. And I wouldn't be a d*ck about it at all.

Those who know me know that I'm pretty much the least confrontational person there is. I don't look for trouble and just want to have a good time like everyone else. But I see no reason to just go along with any little thing that infringes on MY right as a citizen of this country. Too many people have died for our way of life. That way of life is a free society, free from tyranny. Photography(of any kind) is an art, not a terrorist activity, and I'll tell people that until I'm blue in the face. The suggestion that me practicing my art is in any way connected to the sickness that was 9/11 is repulsive. I refuse to be a part of the fear machine created over the past ten years, and it looks like I'll go to my grave refusing to accept the whole 'we live in a new world now' crapola.

And Nick, I have done this, I did it at Philly 3 years ago when some terminal worker tried to tell me that photography of the planes was illegal. The first thing I said was "No it isn't. There are no signs, and I'm a ticketed passenger so I have a right to be here. I'm an aviation photographer and this is what I do." I then handed her my card and told her she could feel free to go get her boss. She walked away, and nothing further happened. Would the same thing happen @ JFK? I don't know and could care less. Whatever man, I'm done explaining myself, go take some pictures

[Zee71]

Nick ..... a little humor to break the tension. I'm sure you'll remember these words.

"Show me your policy!", and what happened? Nothing!

William ..... I couldn't agree with you more. Plenty of men and women died for our freedom, and when someone say's 9/11, it irk's me as well (especially knowing a high school buddy who lost his life that morning).

[NIKV69]

But I see no reason to just go along with any little thing that infringes on MY right as a citizen of this country. Too many people have died for our way of life.

You don't have that right on private property. Don't lose sight of where you are. On public property yes but once you are in a parking lot or parking garage it's not your right. It's a privilege. This fact gets lost with many here every time we have a bad cop encounter.

free from tyranny

Oh my, the drama.

The suggestion that me practicing my art is in any way connected to the sickness that was 9/11 is repulsive. I refuse to be a part of the fear machine created over the past ten years, and it looks like I'll go to my grave refusing to accept the whole 'we live in a new world now' crapola.

It's not crapola. It's fact. NY is the prime target of terrorists. Time Square bomber? Fed building bombing? Thankfully these were thwarted but this isn't happening in Las Vegas or Phoenix. Which is why I can spend all day on the parking garages there without incident.

We live in a world and an area where people will be suspicious of any activity around an airport forever. On public land we have right to practice our hobby. On private land it's different. PA is in a position where they have to police, they have to field the calls. More times than not the encounters are civil and we can continue to use spots that we like but sometimes we get a bad seed.

That is all it is. It isn't tyranny, it isn't the eroding of our rights. This is all smoke and mirrors. If it was happening on public land like it did the couple of years after 9/11 I would agree but we have moved on from that for the most part. We need to play the game and coexist with PA or as Phil stated they can just turn around and have zero tolerance anywhere on airport land. This would truly be a loss for the people that are lucky to call themselves JFK spotters.

And Nick, I have done this, I did it at Philly 3 years ago when some terminal worker tried to tell me that photography of the planes was illegal. The first thing I said was "No it isn't. There are no signs, and I'm a ticketed passenger so I have a right to be here. I'm an aviation photographer and this is what I do." I then handed her my card and told her she could feel free to go get her boss. She walked away, and nothing further happened. Would the same thing happen @ JFK? I don't know and could care less. Whatever man, I'm done explaining myself, go take some pictures

It does happen. Mark had an encounter where a security officer got all in his face and Mark used tact and the guy didn't have a leg to stand on. PA didn't even come. It will happen more times than not but every once in a blue we will get what happened to Bonanza when a bad cop went too far. Doesn't mean we need to write articles calling out the PA and demanding decisions be made. It's a poor move and doesn't do anybody any good.

Nick ..... a little humor to break the tension. I'm sure you'll remember these words.

"Show me your policy!", and what happened? Nothing!

Epic words that will go down in history! Great job Mark it was a pleasure to witness.

[eric8669]

Y Doesn't mean we need to write articles calling out the PA and demanding decisions be made. It's a poor move and doesn't do anybody any good.

Nick, You're the only one on here who thinks its a poor move.

The parking garage is not considered an official spot, it never was. If we lost it so be it. Find another spot. I don't consider it a lose as you say.

And by the way I am a JFK spotter.

[NIKV69]

Nick, You're the only one on here who thinks its a poor move.

The parking garage is not considered an official spot, it never was. If we lost it so be it. Find another spot. I don't consider it a lose as you say.

And by the way I am a JFK spotter.

So am I and others that like the garage Eric. If you choose to shoot at the mounds and other spots great but others like the garage and they are JFK spotters too.

BTW I am far from the only person who feels it was a bad move. Remember not everyone that shoots at JFK posts here.

[PhilDernerJr]

Big shock... this is going in circles.

I can only represent me, as I've said and never implied otherwise. I shared my opinion, which no one has to agree with. People are welcome to voice their own opinion and action their own as they feel as well. I will even support them in the process and their actions.

My total point is:

- Not having a rule opens us up to being on the receiving end of these incidents.

- Requesting such action may not end up in an official banning of photography.

- Such a rule would ONLY affect one spot IF it came to that. I am aware of that risk and I feel that not being mistreated by police and security is worth that risk.

Glad everyone is able to share their opinions.

[NIKV69]

My total point is:

- Not having a rule opens us up to being on the receiving end of these incidents.

- Requesting such action may not end up in an official banning of photography.

- Such a rule would ONLY affect one spot IF it came to that. I am aware of that risk and I feel that not being mistreated by police and security is worth that risk.

No, it will probably effect all spots on airport property and could also effect our treatment at EWR where we really can't afford a more restrictive climate as it's a bitch to shoot there as it is. I hope requesting such an action wouldn't end up in any ban. I thought you supported working with law enforcement in developing a relationship by diplomatic ways to preserve our hobby. I just feel that is better achieved being proactive and not reactive. If it has become clear to you that PA will never play ball I just feel the climate of tolerating one idiot officer once in a while and being able to shoot on the garages and other spots on the grounds in better to losing it altogether. It's a crappy tradeoff but I feel it's worth it. In addition to buying us time in the event we catch a break and a sympathetic person on the inside coming around and helping us one day.

You never know.