Re:Re: (erielack) New restrictions on photographing trains

["Philip Martin" <martinpl3_@_earthlink.net>]

If the authorities deem railroad rolling stock and infrastructure of
interest to enemy planners, as has it has been almost as long as there have
been railroads, the it makes some sense to limit access to it.

Philip Martin
martinpl3_@_earthlink.net



> [Original Message]
> From: Janet & Randy Brown <jananran_@_mymailstation.com>
> To: <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
> Date: 6/5/2004 7:52:01 AM
> Subject: Re:Re: (erielack) New restrictions on photographing trains
>
> Two notes, Doug:
>
> During WWII, illumination along the East Coast was significantly reduced
by "brownouts" and half-painted over vehicle headlights -- cars, trucks and
trains.
>
> Getting kicked out of railroad yards has nothing to do with terrorism or
paranoia.  They were simply ejecting a trespasser.
>
> Hassling someone standing on public property taking pictures of a
publicly owned corporation which is part of the public life comes close to
a First Ammendment violation.
>
> Randy Brown
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think that the government doing what it can to protect us from
saboteurs is paranoid.  As I mentioned to you, Gary; when I saw a guy
photographing the Hack (PRR) bridge, where I worked, years ago, it struck
me as peculiar.  Of course the police don't always use sense; but as long
as they don't stick you in jail, were not hurting too much. During World
War II, in the US life went on as though there wasn't really a war on.  The
authorities didn't douse the coastal lights, and U Boats were able to pick
off freighters silhouetted against the coastal skyline. As an old railfan,
I've been kicked out of my share of rail yards, with my camera.  That's the
bumps you get, now and then.
> Philip Martin
> martinpl3_@_earthlink.net
>
>

------------------------------