Our paranoia, political and other, is obviously aimed in the wrong direction.

wouldn't have been the first time an illegal search was done by the DPD, it's their specialty.

From a professional photographer who (for reasons too obvious) requests to remain anonymous...

"Darien is not alone - in fact it represents the latest the latest assault on our civil liberties.

As a photojournalist, my calling cards are my photos and this creates problems, so I am intimately aware of that this has been going on for years since 9/11. I call it a knee-jerk reaction by our law enforcement community mindset. It is a misguided attempt at is called security. For years, a public place was good enough when it came to taking photos.

Now, it seems that police are taking matters into their own hands by making up this 'no photo' policy. CDOT, the MTA and other transportation agency media relations personnel have told me that the policy was that so long I was on a public place like a train platform, I was ok.This is where the confusion arises.

Personally, I've had several occasions to give a justified reply but this would only be met with handcuffs - so I played the game - show them some id and they let you go. Recently, I was harassed by Metro-North personnel on the NY State side of the border. The 'train master' didn't come out to talk to me but called MTA PD first then told me it was against policy - which was completely against what I've been told by the Metro-North Press Office and later the MTA Press Office. Call the police first, ask questions later is now the norm.

- more -

More from my photographer friend...

"There seems to be a message that is missing between the press office and the individual police depts. Amtrak has been no angel, arrest of photographers and/or deletion of their images has occurred in recent years. It should be noted that their most recent policy only raises more questions than answers as they're creating a database of friendly photogs (who knows where that list winds up) but conflicts over what photo is taken where is only the beginning of the issues on the table of discussion.

There's no logic behind this 'photo policy' that is in direct conflict with our constitutional rights.

With all this said, let me clue you in what's behind this police 'enforcement'. The goal is catching those with outstanding warrants for tickets that are unpaid among other reasons. If someone is in this situation, they cuff you and haul you in. Policemen then get a gold star for catching someone on the wrong side of the law with some new charges to boot as they've 'done their job'. It is all about ticket and arrest numbers and increased numbers mean departments can require larger budgets - which arises from the fact that police are now required to be 'revenue generating cost centers'.

- more -

Part 3 from the photog...

"By the way, tripods on platforms are a safety issue as people can trip over the legs - even imaginary ones that are not on the platform.

This illegal harassment by police departments has got to stop. Press credentials used to prevent this harassment but press credentials are no longer a safeguard.

On the bright side, one railroad official once told me, "I've told law enforcement if someone with a camera has his back to the sun and looks like they know what they're doing - those guys are not the terrorists. The ones you have to be concerned about are the ones that take photos into the sun doing crazy things." This quote seems to sum it all up."

My husband is a transit fanatic, loves busses, trains, trolleys. I take lots of pictures for him. A while back I was shooting some trolleys in Philadelphia that were goin to be demolished. I was on public property but was stopped by septa police , he took our drivers licenses and even asked my husband how much he weighed. The next day I got a call from the FBI with all kinds of questions. All because my husband likes to look at the pictures. I think with all that's going on in the world they can find better use for their time.

Yes, the tripod can be a tripping hazard, and the photographer using it can cause a traffic jam, because he may be stationary, or have a harder time getting out of the way of "The Dashing Commuter". But these concerns, while probably real, are still not terrorism, except in the minds of someone trying to meet an arrest quota.

Anyone who is desiring to take photographs from public locations have the right to do so but I would recommend that they get a copy of Attorney Bert P. Krages II's print-out titled "Photographer's Rights." All a person needs to do is Google his name or the title to find it on the web. It is a valuable resouce that clearly states what the Law says about such photography, where a person can be and where a person cannot be.

As for the reporter trying to do a report from the train platform, contrary to popular belief the property is not Public, it is owned by the respective transit authority. And Metro North police responding to an incident on Connecticut DOT platforms... it is likely that ConnDOT has a contract for them to police certain stations.

There are places photographers can go to shoot whatever they choose and specifics about what the Law says is our Right to do so. If you plan on photographing anything out in public learn what can and cannot be done. Get a copy of the Photographer's Rights. It will give the photographer some legal teeth that the police can not refute and could help to turn the tide of the strong armed harassment.

I'm sorry, but talking about this continuing issue hasn't and isn't going to accomplish much.

The time for talking has past. It is time for some people to be unemployed for their actions. It is time for some various agencies to be sued for large sums of money. Only then will these Barney Fife types get the message. There will be no American Gestapo tolerated

This nonsense should be a loud wake up call to everyone about just what sort of people we place in these authority positions. It is time that a reevaluation of the selection processes and training policies for individuals placed in these positions takes place.

Jimmy, The terrorists can't win nor union labor. duc06820 is my YouTube channel. The masthead states I created the Ultra-Conservative Party. Darien's conservatives are moderate at best. The 25 videos are pretty poor with my iPhone but good fodder non-the-less, I get my point across. Darien is changing and we need to steer the direction with bold leadership. I am filling a vacuume.

Cops in darien catch underage drinkers, people not wearing seatbelts and now train photographers.
They dont catch burglers....as burglers are REAL criminals.
I remember reading about 2 months ago, an off duty cop ran a stop sign--caused an accident..with injuries--and guess what? He was given a warning. A warning--for going through a stop sign causing injuries. However, if you have a can of beer in your home at 20 years old--they will come down hard on you.
This is why we need an 18 million dollar building. To make sure the beer consumption is down--but they dont give a damn about car crashes that injure people. There you get a warning. Oh , and the motorcycle cop? He 'll get you for going 38 in a 35 and from what I hear--doesnt want to hear a word. Unless maybe you are an off duty cop who caused injuries--then its not a big deal. 3 mph over might cause an accident. But if you do--then no citation. Just a warning----go figure the logic.

I think that there is a 13 year old boy in Oslo that begged for his life after watching his Father get executed that wished the Police were more vigilant when dealing with suspicious activity. Who would have thought a blond haired blue eyed Caucasian would be responsible for the death of 80-90 people of his own nationality. There have been reports that Anders Behring Breivik used surveillance before initiating the attacks. The bottom line is if you want to video tape mass transit or public buildings, be prepared to explain why you are there. If you see something say something we are told. I think if the Officer hadn't been vigilant and observed the Subject videotaping the R/R Station, someone would have called to report the suspicious activity and the Officer would have an obligation to investigate the incident. I hate to "Monday morning Quarterback" but maybe the Oslo tragedy could have been avoided with vigilance. I commend the Officer for doing his job.

rusty you have to be kidding. Using the tragic incident in Oslo to somehow justify harrassing a guy taking a cell phone picture?

You honestly should be ashamed of yourself for bastardizing the Oslo incident, to make a weak point ----fear mongering and abandoning any and all perspective is not really analagous to this situation. There were no trains involved in Norway. Are you really going to somehow tell us that ALL public pictures should be banned? Your analogy is beyond perverse.

Oh and--"you wouldnt want a 20 year old drinking on your property -because if he overdoses and dies (get this!) you wouldnt want the civil suits. Really? Thats what would concern you? The lawsuits? And what if a 21 year old drinks and dies in your house Rusty? Then its different? Ridiculous stuff.
And the oslo incident did not have anyone taking pictures on a railroad track--and rusty--thats what the issue here is.

Rusty , by the way--you don't know what a burgler is but you do know what a burglar is. Cute.
So, in turn, when you say that "I think that there is a 13 year old boy in Oslo that begged for his life after watching his Father get executed that wished..." you might want to know that, unless the boy's father was God, you shouldn't capitalize the word. Not that I care--but apparently this is very important to you.....calling people uneducated and uniformed.... maybe you should step it up a bit Mr. Educated.

I would like to explain my encounter with a Darien cop after filming (with an iPhone) from the sidewalk on Rt 1. The cop was rude and agressive with escalating antisocial behavior. After I had explained what I was doing, making a campaign video to post on YouTube and running for 1st Selectman. Condescending he said, "You're running for 1st Selectman, I know the 1st Selectman." I had explained I lived in town 25 years. He looked at my license in his hand and referred to me as Chris. He said something about, "In this day and age don't you think I have the authority to do this." I said, I would not interfere with him doing his job. He said, "Well then you won't mind if I search your vehicle (motorcycle)." I said, I do mind. That was followed by his curt response, "OK, we'll do it that way," he called backup. Under intimidation of his firearm I was ordered to stand in one place until other officers arrived. I was then placed in the custody of another officer as he spent time in his K9 truck with the dog barking constantly. As the midday sun began to sting my face the officer told me to not make any sudden moves because he (K9 cop) might think I am threatened. The K9 cop returned flaunting his Napoleon Complex and handed me my license. He then proceeded to tell me if I had any problem with what he had done I could come to the police station "now" and make a complaint.
This cop had every opportunity to tone it down. He did just the opposite and ramped it up.