As all of us, I’ve noted with dismay and apprehension the heavy-handed tactics used by law enforcers in the post 9/11 “security” hysteria to prevent citizens from engaging in Constitutionally-protected activities…not unlike that during McCarthyism in the 50s, Vietnam in the 60s and the FTAA protests in Miami in 2003. If my overseas counterparts will forgive the rhetoric, it’s simply un-American, having more in common with Nazi Germany, the USSR…or Cuba.

The meat: FLL spotting from the official viewing area at 9R was briefly interrupted by significant construction on the SW side of the airport. It’s open dawn to dusk. The Hibiscus Garage at Terminals 1& 2 is open, but sparsely used, unpatrolled and you’ll sometimes have to navigate the homeless who live there.

HOWEVER, I’ve twice in the past week been accosted by BSO (Broward Sheriff’s Office) deputies, told to cease my activities and leave, and twice threatened with arrest – once over the phone by an assistant with FLL’s Community Relations Office.

In each case, I’ve been on the public sidewalk on the departure level between Terminals 1 & 2. In each case I’ve been told “some people” – always unspecified – are nervous about photography. In each case, I’ve displayed ID on request and calmly answered their questions about my [Constitutionally-protected] activities. Their response has been (sometimes inflammatory) verbal intimidation, bullying and harassment. They’ve refused when requested to provide their ID as I believe is required by law. This lawful citizen's request seems to inflame them further.

Here’s the skinny, updated 11/06, "The Photographer's Right": http://krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

Simply, as I understand it, no one is absolutely required to submit to a background check or obtain airport ID to engage in their hobby. It may smooth the way, but it's intrusive and carries no guarantee against harassment.

I’ve contacted our elected officials (http://broward.org/countygov.htm) whose initial response has been as horrified as mine. Whether a local or a visitor, I’d appreciate it if forum members could follow up with these officials (Keechl, Rodstrom or any others) any way possible. I’ve also been in touch with local media and will update here. If you have video documenting any of these incidents – even a personal pinhole cam - please contact me through the forum so we can get it to the media.

These are unnerving incidents. I can only imagine how I’d react if, say, I was a visitor from the UK or Germany…or anywhere. As much as I hate to say it – we rely on tourists here – your personal safety is questionable in Broward/Ft. Lauderdale if you do what we used to hope tourists would do. If I was planning my holiday, I'd go elsewhere.

Quoting DavyCam (Thread starter): I’ve been on the public sidewalk on the departure level between Terminals 1 & 2.

Which is on airport property which is owned by the airport, which is owned by the city and county. Which, makes it private property (with public access), which allows them to make and enforce what ever rules they see fit.

Quoting DavyCam (Thread starter): "The Photographer's Right": http://krages.com/ThePhotographersRi...t.pdf

Has no legal bearing, it sounds nice, but is basically worthless.

If you had taken a few moments to do a brief search on this topic, you would have found it beaten to death over the last few years.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 1): Which is on airport property which is owned by the airport, which is owned by the city and county. Which, makes it private property (with public access), which allows them to make and enforce what ever rules they see fit.

Absolutely wrong. You just denied Constitution and any law in the USA.

All land belongs to somebody. It does not give him right to set their own laws. They are obliged to respect Constitution and any other federal and state laws. That includes respecting people's freedom.

I ran into the exact same problem at the same location in August. Same story also, "others are worried about you photographing aircraft".
I told the officers (2 of them) that it was THEIR job to tell the worrywarts that I was not violating the law, AND, it was also their sworn duty to uphold & protect my civil liberties, it was not accepted in a friendly manner by them. I received the same threats of arrest. Unfortunately, you can't win an argument with a cop bent on making himself feel good about harassing law abiding citizens, he'll find something to charge you with (contempt of cop?).
Since FLL really does makes a good effort (thank you!) to provide spotters/photographers with alternate locations, and, the fact that I am not a local like you, I did not pursue it in the interest of not having my name pop up on their little list of "non-kissass citizens".
Expect Jeff to jump in and give us the ridiculous & flawed logic that the airport cops/personnel can do whatever they want even at public (read citizen funded) airports. Wrong! They will take you into custody, but, it won't hold up in court.
The 1st time I was taken into custody (MCO), I was released by the shift supervisory lieutenant at the station who told the officer it was a bogus charge, the 2nd time (IAD), a supervisory field officer who showed up out of curiosity, told the #@&* officer that he could not arrest me and let me out of the back seat of the cruiser to the great displeasure & disgust of the overzealous officer. Stand up for your rights! This is America, Land of the Free.

You mentioned that you contacted your elected officials and the media about this incident, but why didnt you contact the airport authority (people that run the airport and not security guards)? If the airport parking garage could possibly be part of the airport, then they should definitely be able to tell you if you have the right to take photos there or not. If they are correct and say that you are not allowed to take photos from there with out written permission, then work with them to get access to take photos from there and other areas around the airport. I would imagine that they would be willing to work with you in some way or another. If you do get written permission from the airport authority then atleast you have something to show whatever security guard who harasses you proof that you can be there. If you pursue this avenue, then I would suggest that you include the areas that you would like to photograph things from in your letter.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 1): If you had taken a few moments to do a brief search on this topic, you would have found it beaten to death over the last few years.

So very true and it seems that everyone who brings it up seems to bash either the regular law enforcement personnel or security guards. I dont recall anyone mentioning anything about contacting the airport authority directly. Are people so afraid that if they did this, then they would be told it is illegal to take photos of aircraft operating at the airport and ruin their love for the hobby?

[Edited 2007-01-01 23:04:05]

Hey all...discussion's great and I appreciate seeing such a spirited discourse, positive and negative. Thank you.

Fellow South Floridian Don Boyd posted a USA Today article in these forums a while ago that I think is relevant and worth repeating. The link's here: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columni...006-08-11-photography-rights_x.htm

To answer and clarify one question, an airport office rep was one of those who threatened me with arrest, effectively, imho, slamming the door. My best course of action, therefore, is to enlist the Broward Commissioners. It may result in clearly defined, unquestionable policy.

Given, too, the successes noted in this thread, I think it remains important to continue to assert our rights.

On a personal note, I have medical limitations which make unnecessary confrontations potentially risky to me - I'll let the [relative] youngsters in the forum do the 'in your face' work - but I won't give up my hobby.

Quoting Danny (Reply 2): Absolutely wrong. You just denied Constitution and any law in the USA. All land belongs to somebody. It does not give him right to set their own laws. They are obliged to respect Constitution and any other federal and state laws. That includes respecting people's freedom.

  
Danny boy......you my friend don't have a clue. I personally spent the better part of a year investigating this same circumstance at my airport all the way through and including the regional FBI. You are correct in that all land is owned by somebody. Where you are wrong is stating that they cannot make the rules.....Notice I said 'rules' not law. BIG DIFFERENCE. When you own the property, you can deny photography from it. All the airport security director has to do is claim it is in the interest of public safety, and that is that.

What I found was that many so called officials involved with airport operations have virtually no authority to say 'yea or nea' on something like this, nor do most elected officials. They will tell you what you want to hear, but will be ineffective in making any worthwhile changes. Find the one that does have the authority, and you will most likely have found the person that does not want you taking pictures there.

Like it or not.

Quoting DavyCam (Reply 5): My best course of action, therefore, is to enlist the Broward Commissioners.

I was editing my post when you wrote this, but how hard is it to bring up the FLL website (http://www.broward.org/airport) or look in the phone book and get the phone number and e-mail address for the airport authority/manager and then get in touch with them? That should be your first and best course of action right now.

This would be just like if someone wanted to take photos around a military base here in the USA without getting harrassed by the base police. The best place to start in this situation would be to contact the base Public Affairs Office.

Quoting Mcdonobr (Reply 3): This is America, Land of the Free.

- Not anymore.

Such a shame, the USA used to be the best country in the world, such a shame it has turned into a Police state fighting those who follow aviation as a harmless hobby.

Quoting Danny (Reply 2): All land belongs to somebody. It does not give him right to set their own laws. They are obliged to respect Constitution and any other federal and state laws. That includes respecting people's freedom.

Jeff is correct - the operator of a private facility can set their own rules. You can't be arrested just for taking pictures, but if you don't obey the request to stop you can be asked to leave. If you don't leave and continue to break their rules, you can be charged with trespassing and arrested as such.

You can not be prohibited from taking pictures on public land, but the thread starter was pretty clear that he was on airport property.

B

Calgary Bill, your response about private facility doesn't make sense because FLL is owned by the public via Broward County government. The City of Ft. Lauderdale has no ownership in the airport.

I seriously doubt if Broward County has passed any legislation prohibiting photography at its airports so on what legal basis can one be arrested for except for refusal to follow a LEO's (illegal) directions to stop and leave? He was on a wide public sidewalk used by many pedestrians so he wasn't in a prohibited area. There are no signs posted prohibiting photography and there probably will never be unless the airport can convince the county commission to pass a county ordinance and that will never happen.

This is all BS and everyone involved knows it.

Quoting Avsfan (Reply 7): get the phone number and e-mail address for the airport authority/manager and then get in touch with them? That should be your first and best course of action right now.

That's exactly what I did when I was threatened with criminal trespassing charges at SAT. I have a meeting tomorrow with the Aviation Director, Airport Manager, and Chief of Police at the airport.

Quoting BA319-131 (Reply 8): such a shame it has turned into a Police state fighting those who follow aviation as a harmless hobby.

Rare cases like these shouldn't be used to judge the country as a whole. It's obvious why people are sensitive to our hobby, especially when they know nothing about it. As long as we handle these situations with mature, rational thought, and as long as we go through the right channels, everything will get worked out.

-Mike

Quoting DB777 (Reply 10): your response about private facility doesn't make sense because FLL is owned by the public via Broward County government. The City of Ft. Lauderdale has no ownership in the airport.

Same as DEN. Owned by the City and County of Denver, which then has legal authority to make what ever regulations concerning public access and conduct on it's property as they please.

Quoting DB777 (Reply 10): I seriously doubt if Broward County has passed any legislation prohibiting photography at its airports

That's just it. They don't have to pass a law, just put up a sign, or have some one in authority say so.

Quoting DB777 (Reply 10): There are no signs posted prohibiting photography and there probably will never be

...again...no signs needed, just a say so.

Quoting Scottieprecord (Reply 11): That's exactly what I did when I was threatened with criminal trespassing charges at SAT. I have a meeting tomorrow with the Aviation Director, Airport Manager, and Chief of Police at the airport.

Good for you. That is the way it should be handled before someone decides to automatically goto their elected public officials and the media.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 12): That's just it. They don't have to pass a law, just put up a sign, or have some one in authority say so.

This is similar to most city buildings, correct? Though they are public (city) property, a normal citizen can't just go roaming around the fire station/police station/city hall taking pictures as they wish.

-Mike

Sure you can set your rules but they cannot interfere with laws. Otherwise American Consitution would be nothing more than a joke.

You have freedom of speech but... not on somebody's property. Right, so you only have it on your own property?

Quoting JeffM (Reply 12): That's just it. They don't have to pass a law, just put up a sign, or have some one in authority say so.

Are there no photography signs at FLL?I remember the locations were actually marked as aircraft observation/spotting place or something like that. Has this changed?

[Edited 2007-01-02 08:09:55]

Quoting DB777 (Reply 10): Calgary Bill, your response about private facility doesn't make sense because FLL is owned by the public via Broward County government. The City of Ft. Lauderdale has no ownership in the airport.

Doesn't matter if it's the City, State or Federal government, it's still treated as private property. See below...

Quoting JeffM (Reply 12): Same as DEN. Owned by the City and County of Denver, which then has legal authority to make what ever regulations concerning public access and conduct on it's property as they please.

  

Quoting Scottieprecord (Reply 14): This is similar to most city buildings, correct? Though they are public (city) property, a normal citizen can't just go roaming around the fire station/police station/city hall taking pictures as they wish.

         Well put!

Quoting Danny (Reply 15): You have freedom of speech but... not on somebody's property. Right, so you only have it on your own property?

Or as mentioned in my first post, on public land.

B

Quoting DavyCam (Thread starter): Their response has been (sometimes inflammatory) verbal intimidation, bullying and harassment. They've refused when requested to provide their ID as I believe is required by law. This lawful citizen's request seems to inflame them further.

Hmmm..

Quoting JeffM (Reply 1): which allows them to make and enforce what ever rules they see fit.

Shame that. Guess its just the price of Democracy and Freedom..

or something?

Quoting DavyCam (Thread starter): [Constitutionally-protected]

Quoting DavyCam (Thread starter): Constitutionally-protected

I don't think that works anymore mate  

Quoting BA319-131 (Reply 8): Such a shame, the USA used to be the best country in the world, such a shame it has turned into a Police state fighting those who follow aviation as a harmless hobby.

I spent 16 days in the South USA in November visiting many airfields, mainly local municipal and regional airports and, with just one exception, encountered no problems whatsoever. Quite often someone would pop out of a hangar or office and ask if they could help me; I would tell them what I was doing, have a quick chat, then happily move on with photos taken.

The exception was at Cleveland Muni MS where I found a compound with some cropdusters in. As I was openly photographing them from the fence on what I took to be a public road I noticed two men looking at me and talking to each other and I just had a feeling that there might be trouble ahead. Sure enough a police car pulls up and the female officer asked me if I had been photographing aircraft. I replied that I had and I was an English aviation enthusiast, she said fine and she would go and speak to the people who had called her and that was that.

Oh, and the airport manager happily waved at me as he drove past in his official car  

So no, IMHO not all the USA has turned into a police state etc etc.

  

I have never had a problem at FLL. At the viewing area at 9L the BSO comes frequently, looks, waves and leaves. I have never seen the BSO in the parking garages, so I can't comment there.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 12): ...again...no signs needed, just a say so.

Then it is written in some policy manual, some sort of guidance material. A police officer cannot arbitrarily make up his own rules either. The LEO can't say "No photography becuase I said so..."

I mentioned earlier to contacting the airport authority/manager instead of public officials or the media, well I conducted a little experiment here with the airport manager at Grand Junction - Walker Field in Colorado. I sent him an e-mail yesterday and got a response back this morning and here is what he had to say:

"You’re fine to come out and take photographs. I would be great if you would call and let us know when and where you will be. You can call 244-9111 and let who ever answers the phone know when and where.

Rex"

This was a very easy task to do and I was able to get a kind response back in no time. My return e-mail even pointed out the areas around the airport that I thought were the best to photograph aircraft.

Why go directly to your public officials or the media to complain when an avenue like this works even better. Remember, the airport manager is the first person to start with in a situation like this.

-Louis

Quoting JeffM (Reply 12): Same as DEN. Owned by the City and County of Denver, which then has legal authority to make what ever regulations concerning public access and conduct on it's property as they please.

The thread originator and I were speaking of FLL and you're speaking of DEN so don't assume that the scenario is identical.

Perhaps the airport authority or whatever at DEN has the legal authority under Colorado law to make whatever regulations concerning public access they want to regardless of civil liberties usually afforded to the rest of the USA. I don't live out there so I don't know. I've never been accosted by anyone while shooting at the old DEN Stapleton or the new DEN or at COS so I'm not privileged like the locals out there.

However, the Broward County Aviation Department is a county department, not an airport authority, and the regulations they create have to be codified by ordinance passed by the county commission. Otherwise we would have all kinds of fools in every county department making up rules willy-nilly. I worked in Airside Ops at MIA for 26 years and the airport's Rules & Regulations were all contained in Chapter 25 of the Dade County Code which established penalties that could be imposed by a county judge. All violations cited under Chapter 25 required a court appearance, which allowed an offender the right to explain the situation to the judge, who could dismiss the charges or impose a fine of up to $500 and/or jail time up to 60 days. After usually hearing cases involving real crimes all day long, the judges usually imposed a minimum fine or dismissed airport-related cases because misdemeanor records would be imposed on anyone found guilty.

Any and all changes to those airport regulations had to be approved by the county commission. We had copwannabee fools employed with us, and cops assigned to the airport district, trying to make up "no photography" rules, and other stupid non-existant rules, all the time over the years and when grilled about it after complaints from the public and airport users they couldn't find the "rules" in Chapter 25. These made-up rules were like urban legends going around on the internet for years on end. I'm fairly sure that FLL is operating under the same constraints, i.e. the rules have to be approved by the county commission to be legally enforceable. Again I say, the odds of the Broward County Commission passing a "no photography" law at FLL are slim to none.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 12): That's just it. They don't have to pass a law, just put up a sign, or have some one in authority say so.

Maybe under Colorado state law they get away with that but it certainly doesn't work that way down here even though you imply it when you say "they." As this quote from the USA Today article says: "Just because you or your boss "don't allow" something doesn't mean it's not legal. I can post a sign on my lawn, "Hopping on one foot in front of this house is prohibited," but I'll have a tough time enforcing it." If there isn't a law prohibiting it then you can't be arrested for breaking someone's "rule" - the BSO deputies contracted to work at FLL have to cite a state or county ordinance to arrest someone.

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 16): Doesn't matter if it's the City, State or Federal government, it's still treated as private property. See below... Quoting JeffM (Reply 12): Same as DEN. Owned by the City and County of Denver, which then has legal authority to make what ever regulations concerning public access and conduct on it's property as they please.

Sorry, I disagree. Public property is public property, at least it is in Florida, even though access is controlled to non-public areas unless you have an airport ID or boarding pass to get there. I have been in a zillion internal airport meetings over the years and I have never heard an airport official, airport lawyer or LEO state that an airport down here is treated as private property. Instead they use the words "public", "owned by the taxpayers of Miami-Dade County", etc. You will never be cited for trespassing on private property when on a public airport, unless of course Colorado law allows that.  


Don

.

Quoting DB777 (Reply 21): I can post a sign on my lawn, "Hopping on one foot in front of this house is prohibited," but I'll have a tough time enforcing it."

If they do it on the sidewalk too bad. If they do it on your lawn you can kick them off, and if they don't leave you can charge them with trespassing. This is really basic law 101.

Quoting DB777 (Reply 21): Sorry, I disagree. Public property is public property, at least it is in Florida, even though access is controlled to non-public areas unless you have an airport ID or boarding pass to get there. I have been in a zillion internal airport meetings over the years and I have never heard an airport official, airport lawyer or LEO state that an airport down here is treated as private property.

Well, as one poster said, just saunter on into the cells at your local police station, hang out in the lobby of City Hall after closing time, or go hang out in the local fire hall for an afternoon. If you really want to prove your point, go hang out in the waiting area of a hospital and start chatting on your cell phone - heck, give their security office a call and tell 'em you're doing it! It's perfectly legal, dumb, but legal. Good luck.

I used to be a swimming instructor many years ago. We had a sign up that said "no horseplay." But kids would run and, when we told them not to, they said "running isn't horseplay." After a few years the sign was 10 times bigger with a ton of fine print - no horseplay, no running, no jumping, no yelling..." And you bet if they continually disregarded the rules we threw them out. It's the same with operating an airport, keep challenging people on private property (government owned or not) and just watch the signs go up (they already have no photography signs outside security screening areas, won't take much to move them farther out or put more up).

I'm out of this debate. Some of you just don't "get" that you can't do whatever you want, where ever you want. The reality nowadays is that sooner or later you're going to go through a hella trouble that is totally unnecessary, and if you make a stink about it you'll do nothing more than make the rest of us look like a bunch of renegades that don't respect operator wishes. And then the signs will go up, and then they'll pass anti-photography laws, and you guys can debate whether THAT is a good thing or not.

B

In NY, it's similar to what Don states. The operating authority, county, whatever cannot just pass rules on-the-fly in regards to unsecured areas accessible by the public. They must be official rules/laws approved by the governing body.

Take the NYC Subway system for example, public system operated by MTA/Metropolitan Transportation Authority. A while back they decided to pass a law to prohibit photography in the system. Without it, they could not stop you from taking photos because a particular transit cop and/or employee of the MTA said so as you're on public/public-access property. It is NOT private property. I'm assuming it's different in DEN but luckily not here. Well, long story short the proposed bill/law was reveresed/never got approved, quickly I might add. I still see cops telling people on the subways you can't take photos. If I'm in the mood, I usually tell the cop he better read-up on the current transit rules because photography IS ALLOWED. I've even had one tell me I'm wrong and called his sgt. to verify. Well, he wasn't too happy with the reply he got from the boss  

Sure, there are laws/rules (ie. no spitting, no fighting, etc...) to follow and areas that are off limits when on public/public-access property but trust me, they are written, approved laws/rules. A transit cop or port authority cop cannot just make up a law/rule as he/she sees fit, on a whim. Some do and it's of course crazy to fight them on it because you'll probably end up in cuffs but it won't be for photography thats for sure.

I can only speak about our area, DEN and other areas I have no experience with.

Mike

While cops and law enforcement can't make up rules on the fly they can even in public areas envoke parts of the Patriot Act which allows them to deny you your rights if they suspect the safety of the public is at risk.

Quoting Tbird (Reply 24): While cops and law enforcement can't make up rules on the fly they can even in public areas envoke parts of the Patriot Act which allows them to deny you your rights if they suspect the safety of the public is at risk.

Luckily, every cop I've ever encounter at/near JFK isn't an idiot and didn't used that lame excuse. But I agree, you'll get those that will. I'm sure there is tons of paper work involved when you decide to deny someones rights envoking the Partiort Act, most common-sensed cops I've dealt with couldn't be bothered with the nonsense and prefer to do real work.

Mike

For all of those still rambling on about taking photos at FLL, you might want to take a look at this forum thread: Update: SAT Photography (by Scottieprecord Jan 2 2007 in Aviation Photography). Mike from this thread has shown the correct way to go about this problem. Even with me contacting the airport manager of my airport through e-mail was a lot better than someone going to their local public officials or the media to try and solve this problem.

Everyone have a great day!

-Louis

Quoting DB777 (Reply 21): Public property is public property, at least it is in Florida

If you say so.

But I imagine your airport officials deal with the same FBI ours do, and that is where ours were getting their 'stick and rudder' from.

Quoting Mikephotos (Reply 23): I'm assuming it's different in DEN

Much...we don't have a nasty subway system...  
We are talking airports, not trains.

Either way....You guys have fun with this, your going to be playing 'tag' for a while I'm sure.

Look, just buy yourself a 300mm lens, shoot from the Hibiscus garage like the rest of us, and enjoy the open air...  

Besides, the construction near the 9L viewing area will be over soon enough, and being that it's winter right now, 25R is going to be used far more often anyway...

From one local to another: Don't ruin this for us.   

Quoting JeffM (Reply 27): Much...we don't have a nasty subway system... Wink

Nor much of anything else either, hahahaha  

Quoting JeffM (Reply 27): We are talking airports, not trains.

Which is the same subject here in NY. Both subway and airport are operated by authorities that require official rules to be set. They cannot "make and enforce what ever rules they see fit" as you state they do in DEN.

But your point is taken, while public property you still have a set of rules/laws to follow. But everyone knew that, no one here would think it's okay to walk down a public street naked and expect not to get harrassed by the cops (well, maybe here in NY you could get away with that  )

Mike

Hehehe...like the walking naked in NY comment.

Jus' sittin' back here and lettin' y'all have it. Excellent discussion.

I received a response from The FLL Powers That Be that I believe to be a genuine attempt at resolving things - including apologies for the unprofessional behavior of a few individuals - and outlines steps they're taking to change the situation. So, we're moving forward a bit.

I don't believe, however, it's fair or ethical - despite my conflict with FLL - for me to post/attribute correspondence sent in confidence. That demonstration of respect has to be maintained. Therefore, I've only a brief quote below which I will not attribute to a specific individual.

What I can reasonably say is that we're miles apart on two issues: first, that hobbyist photogs such as us, whether locals or tourists, must make arrangements through the airport to conduct our hobby and, second, that, "...it should be recognized that the completely free exercise of one's
constitutional rights...are [sic] somewhat limited by the
interest in protecting the public."


For what it's worth, too, there are likely some first time visitors to this forum who are also very interested in this discussion and I appreciate the absolutely solid tone that's been evident here. Cheers!

I also was very rudely booted out of BUF last Feb by NFTA's finest. I was taking pics from The very closed 'Flying Tigers' restaurant,where I have spotted for years and never had a problem.I'v seen the NFTA cops drive by all the time and never stopped.Hell,one time the guy cutting the grass inside the perimeter actually shut off the lawnmower and walked to the fence to tell me that the World MD11 would be arriving soon to pick up the BUF Bills!!
Anyways,I was sitting on a picnic table awaiting some action,and here come these 2 dopey schmucks. We go through the usual back and forth banter.Well,I made the mistake of saying that I was waiting for the Aeromexico 73G to arrive.....whoooaaa.....I got accosted on all aspects of Mexico,Aeromexico and would I harm the flight?? Yeah,I'm gonna hurl my $2000 camera at the plane 50' away...Since I had no warrants,they pulled the 'do you have permission to be here'? crap.When I said no,the place has closed up a couple years ago,i was threatened with a trespassing charge.
This wasn't even airport property! I mailed in a complaint form from the NFTA's website (pretty bad when your stupid police dept has one of these online!).Mailed it in and waited the allotted 30 days and heard nothing...I mailed another letter to Internal Affairs (they didn't like that!).Ended up getting a letter from the chief stating thay never got the origanal!! Yeah right,how convienant....

Quoting Mikephotos (Reply 29): Nor much of anything else either, hahahaha

How dare you talk bad about the best state in the Union.

Now, I like Louis' suggestion and, considering the - albeit restrained - apology from FLL management, I'm inclined to approach it on that basis.

As far as 'ruining it for everyone'...bah! These cops - I'm old enough to be their father - felt the need to blow off some testosterone. Mom didn't raise me to be a whimp. She didn't raise no reckless dummy either.

The intended result is a better situation for all photogs...and the reason for me to post a request to this forum to have those so inclined do something positive and constructive - contact those people who can change things.

A forum's fine for blowing off steam and to post cautions in the interest of the community. But, your local airport representatives probably aren't reading this stuff. They are, however, more likely to respond to letters and email, particularly if you can be specific about your experience.

If FLL is smart, they'll respond, too, if you indicate you're a tourist who's likely to avoid Fort Lauderdale and Broward because of the perceived hostility at FLL. Y'know, fertilizer does no good unless you spread it around....

(Now, if you're having trouble composing that letter, I'll do it for $25/hour.....jus' kiddin', Moderator).

Quoting DavyCam (Reply 33): The intended result is a better situation for all photogs

But an unintended result could be an overhaul of policy with regard to photography at the entire airport...as in, no more ladders at the 9L viewing area (or photography from there altogether), no more "Designated Aircraft Viewing Area" atop the Hibiscus garage (with the commencement of active patrols), etc, etc, etc...

Your home airport is one of the most photographer-friendly in the country, and there are many, many people on this board who would *kill* to have the level of access we currently enjoy. You mean to tell me you're willing to risk blowing all that on some stupid between-the-terminal eye level shot of a CO 757 nose or the occasional Delta tail? I got news for ya: The ones taken only a few stories higher to the rear come out just as good:

View Large View Medium Photo © Bryan Peterson

View Large View Medium Photo © Helmut Bierbaum

I'm fully content with what we have; it's anything but bad. We have not one, but *two* amazing viewing/shooting areas which, when combined, cover the entire traffic pattern from any direction, and virtually year-round shooting weather to boot. We retain nationwide (and perhaps worldwide) envy. Doing anything to compromise that, at this point, is simply greedy and irresponsible.