Re: Another Blow Against Photography
X-ray machines may be able to detect substances of the same density as liquid explosives, but I doubt that they could tell the difference between the explosives and a harmless hand cream. Frits Wüthrich wrote: From the news I also learned about the restrictions on flying from Europe to the USA as you have mentioned. Flying to the UK however, the restrictions are even stronger, also from mainland Europe to the UK: No handluggage at all. Exception for passports, prescription medication with your name on them, and some stuff for the baby traveling with you. All that you are allowed need to be carried in a transparent plastic bag. The rest need to be checked. How long this will stay in place in not yet known. The next step the Netherlands wants to push for in Europe is to install in European airports X-ray machines for handlugage with the same capabilities as is already in use for checked luggage, as these can detect liqued explosives as well. And it was the intention of the terrorist to use liqued explosives is my understanding. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I think that's if you call compare your opponent Hitler or a Nazi in a flame war. Describing his behavior probably doesn't count, unless you attribute it to your opponent. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Another Blow Against Photography Utter nonsense. Blaming radical behavior on poverty and bad conditions is the old liberal excuse for everyone who can't behave. It no longer holds water. Never has. Is that why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? Radical Islam has a fundamental problem with everyone else in the world. That makes them a problem. It has nothing to do with conditions. We tried the liberal cure in many places: Give them a lot of money and better living conditions and everything will be okay. Never has worked. Won't work now. Isn't there some sort of rule that when Hitler gets mentioned, the arguement is over, the battle lost? William Robb -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
David Mann wrote: On Aug 13, 2006, at 2:43 PM, William Robb wrote: Isn't there some sort of rule that when Hitler gets mentioned, the arguement is over, the battle lost? Godwin's Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law - Dave Good call! -- keith whaley -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another bit of liberal nonsense :-) -- Original message -- From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Isn't there some sort of rule that when Hitler gets mentioned, the arguement is over, the battle lost? Not quite so, Paul... The observation is apt, regardless of the speaker's political bent. Besides, what is 'nonsense' in that statement? keith whaley -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 22:59:20 +0100, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: John Forbes Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. I think that is the only way Bob. Agreed. Israel seems to be a slow learner though, and we are all inconvenienced and endangered as a result. Israel isn't the only slow learner, just the most obvious example at the moment. William Robb I agree. But it is Israel that needs to move in order to address the real grievances of the Palestinians, and it is the plight of the Palestinians that upsets the whole Arab world, and by extension, other Islamic countries too. The Catholic minority in Northern Ireland also had real grievances (like a rigged voting system and a wholly Protestant police force), and as Bob W suggested, it wasn't until those issues were addressed that support for the IRA amongst a large part of the Catholic population (and Catholic church) dwindled. Ted Kennedy, the New York police force, and other American sympathisers didn't really drop their support until terrorism came to their back-yard, and they decided they didn't like it. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:11:21 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Utter nonsense. Blaming radical behavior on poverty and bad conditions is the old liberal excuse for everyone who can't behave. It no longer holds water. Really? Why? Never has. Really again?? Is that why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? Since when was Hitler a terrorist? Radical Islam has a fundamental problem with everyone else in the world. That makes them a problem. It has nothing to do with conditions. With respect, it has everything to do with conditions. When people have nothing, they have nothing to lose (to quote a Jewish poet). When people have money and security they become politically apathetic. Witness the turnout in US presidential elections. 200 years earlier the impoverished ancestors of modern Americans were committing horrid atrocities like destroying the life-blood of the British in Boston. We tried the liberal cure in many places: Give them a lot of money and better living conditions and everything will be okay. Never has worked. Won't work now. Where did you try this? And did the usual American solution (bombs, napalm, etc) work any better? (I agree you did manage to invade Grenada successfully.) John No they don't. They believe that by killing themselves and as many of us as possible they will be able to bring about some kind of improvement in the conditions they and their families live. Rightly or wrongly they blame these conditions on us. Mostly they live in shit conditions. If you lived in similar conditions you would probably want to kill someone to escape them. Treating them as lunatics, fanatics and demons does absolutely nothing whatsoever to stop terrorism. Finding out what their grievances are about, and doing something constructive to resolve them will help, even though it will take a long time, won't be glamorous and won't allow our glorious leaders to strut around in uniform on aircraft carriers. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
The issues there are the same as they are elsewhere. The people who want power over others can not get it in a free election, so they will do it with whatever means is at hand. One of the most noticeable things about terrorism is that their leaders are not the ones doing it. If they were it would be a self-limiting phenomena. The only problem with dealing with terrorists is that you have to be very careful about, so called, collateral damages or you become one yourself. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Bob Sullivan Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. Bob, the Muslim world wouldn't give a damn about the west, and certainly wouldn't be trying to blow westerners up if they didn't have greviances that they cannot address any other way. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
John Forbes wrote: On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 22:59:20 +0100, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: John Forbes Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. I think that is the only way Bob. Agreed. Israel seems to be a slow learner though, and we are all inconvenienced and endangered as a result. Israel isn't the only slow learner, just the most obvious example at the moment. William Robb I agree. But it is Israel that needs to move in order to address the real grievances of the Palestinians, and it is the plight of the Palestinians that upsets the whole Arab world, and by extension, other Islamic countries too. The Catholic minority in Northern Ireland also had real grievances (like a rigged voting system and a wholly Protestant police force), and as Bob W suggested, it wasn't until those issues were addressed that support for the IRA amongst a large part of the Catholic population (and Catholic church) dwindled. Ted Kennedy, the New York police force, and other American sympathisers didn't really drop their support until terrorism came to their back-yard, and they decided they didn't like it. John Just a note, but when the First Intifada started in the 1980's, The Palestinian Arabs had the highest standard of living of any Arabs outside of the Gulf States and Israel Proper. Israel continues to be the only state in the region which offers its Arab citizens full civil rights. And the current troubles started on the two borders where Israel had pulled out completely. The West Bank, which Israel still occupies, has been almost entirely quiet for the last 6 weeks. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Yes, Bob, that is why a multi-millionaire becomes a terrorist leader. Seems like he could do better spreading some of that money around amongst the poor. The fact is, the poor are hardly ever revolutionists, they are too busy trying to put food in their children's mouths to get involved. It is always the affluent middle class intellectuals who foment revolution. Yes, it was even so, here a couple of hundred years ago. The only difference between the American Revolution and others that I can see is that the fomenters were altruistic enough to let others set up the government (of course they did have a say about it). That is so unusual that I do not know of another case where that happened. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Bob W wrote: No they don't. They believe that by killing themselves and as many of us as possible they will be able to bring about some kind of improvement in the conditions they and their families live. Rightly or wrongly they blame these conditions on us. Mostly they live in shit conditions. If you lived in similar conditions you would probably want to kill someone to escape them. Treating them as lunatics, fanatics and demons does absolutely nothing whatsoever to stop terrorism. Finding out what their grievances are about, and doing something constructive to resolve them will help, even though it will take a long time, won't be glamorous and won't allow our glorious leaders to strut around in uniform on aircraft carriers. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
But unless the fomenters have a broad base of support, they will get nowhere. It is a perception of injustice on the part of a large proportion of the population that allows a revolutionary/resistance/terrorist movement to flourish. John On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 15:35:14 +0100, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, Bob, that is why a multi-millionaire becomes a terrorist leader. Seems like he could do better spreading some of that money around amongst the poor. The fact is, the poor are hardly ever revolutionists, they are too busy trying to put food in their children's mouths to get involved. It is always the affluent middle class intellectuals who foment revolution. Yes, it was even so, here a couple of hundred years ago. The only difference between the American Revolution and others that I can see is that the fomenters were altruistic enough to let others set up the government (of course they did have a say about it). That is so unusual that I do not know of another case where that happened. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Another Blow Against Photography
as somebody else pointed out (possibly you) it's not the multi-millionaires who are blowing themselves up. They are power-mongers who take advantage of the grievances of the ordinary people to convince a small number of deluded people into blowing themselves and others up. The British and other Western Muslims who blow themselves up are just straightforward idiots. By addressing the actual grievances of the ordinary people you can stop them producing terrorists in significant quantities, and the multimillionaire power-mongers will just have to go back into politics and big business to get their kicks. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of graywolf Sent: 13 August 2006 15:35 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography Yes, Bob, that is why a multi-millionaire becomes a terrorist leader. Seems like he could do better spreading some of that money around amongst the poor. The fact is, the poor are hardly ever revolutionists, they are too busy trying to put food in their children's mouths to get involved. It is always the affluent middle class intellectuals who foment revolution. Yes, it was even so, here a couple of hundred years ago. The only difference between the American Revolution and others that I can see is that the fomenters were altruistic enough to let others set up the government (of course they did have a say about it). That is so unusual that I do not know of another case where that happened. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Bob W wrote: No they don't. They believe that by killing themselves and as many of us as possible they will be able to bring about some kind of improvement in the conditions they and their families live. Rightly or wrongly they blame these conditions on us. Mostly they live in shit conditions. If you lived in similar conditions you would probably want to kill someone to escape them. Treating them as lunatics, fanatics and demons does absolutely nothing whatsoever to stop terrorism. Finding out what their grievances are about, and doing something constructive to resolve them will help, even though it will take a long time, won't be glamorous and won't allow our glorious leaders to strut around in uniform on aircraft carriers. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Joseph Tainter wrote: I'm less afraid of being blown to smithereens over the North Atlantic than I am frustrated to exasperation with ineffective and disruptive counter-measures. Me too. I suspect that much of the overreaction is CYA. No official wants to be the one who did too little. No politician wants to be vulnerable to a charge of soft on terrorism. Damned few people, Americans or otherwise, would be willing to tolerate the strictures required, or the acts required, to fully and completely win a counterinsurgency. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Don't get me wrong. I'm happy that they've stopped these buggers. But are you really so ready to surrender liberty in the name of safety? That's a scary thought. Godfrey On Aug 11, 2006, at 8:38 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In any case, it worked. I will be among the first to complain loudly when it doesn't work. I won't complain about inconveniences in regard to air travel, telephone privacy or other similar matters. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I suspect that much of the overreaction is CYA. No official wants to be the one who did too little. No politician wants to be vulnerable to a charge of soft on terrorism. Joe That's one way to look at it. Another is the terror promoted by politicians and the media make us sheep easier to handle. Powell -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Glad to know you are an expert on US firearms laws. BTW if you get caught with a pistol in Massachusetts (non resident) it is an automatic 10 year prison term. Reciprocal CCW permits are fine in the states agreeing to them, but you can find yourself in a world of trouble passing through others. The US has a mishmash of conflicting laws about handguns. Even the federal laws are not all in sync with each other. Enforcement also varies from place to place whatever the local laws may actually say. There are states where it is legal to own a handgun but against he law to buy one, and others where you can legally buy one but not legally own it. Some states have shall issue CCW others do not allow concealed carry under any circumstances, while some of those actually allow open carry, and most of those who issue CCW's disallow your showing the concealed weapon even if they allow open carry. The whole issue is idiotic in the extreme. If you choose to haul a handgun around with you here, you are taking chances with your liberty unless you have done some very serious research on the matter beforehand. Most who have done that and still choose to carry, simply keep their mouth shut about it as any smart lawbreaker would. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Adam Maas wrote: ROFLMFAO. That is so utterly incorrect that it's laughable. It is perfectly legal to transport a pistol across state lines in the United States. Law Enforcement Officials actually have no extra standing when outside their jurisdiction with respect to transporting firearms. In fact if you have a CCW and both states are CCW states you can carry it loaded on your person as long as you aren't flying (And the only restriction there is by the TSA and Airlines). Transporting it via airlines merely requires that it be unloaded, in a locked case in locked, checked luggage and that you inform the ticketing agent of that the firearm is in the luggage and stored correctly. The last time I was in the US for a convention(2 weeks ago), numerous American friends of mine who were also attending brought their carry weapons (And various other firearms, we are the most heavily armed fen) to the convention site (Chattanooga), traveling via air and driving. And we had people come in from as far away as Boston and Salt Lake City(the latter did indeed arrive unarmed, but only because it was a last minute trip). In fact I can transport a pistol into the US and throughout the US as long as I fill out the necessary Authorization to Transport (Canadian form, required for transporting a restricted weapon) and BATF paperwork (to get over the border). The only places in the US where you can't legally own a pistol are Chicago and NYC (It is possible, but difficult to get the necessary permit in the latter city) and both are in violation of Federal Law and the Constitution, I know there are at least two legal challenges to the Chicago restriction currently in the court system. -Adam graywolf wrote: BAD IDEA! You can go to prison for transporting the pistol across state lines. The only ones who could do that safely are legally recognized law enforcement personnel. And they might have problems if they tried to take it into other countries. Also some states can lock you up for merely bring the thing into the state. (If you can prove you are on your way to a legal target shooting event, you may be able to get around some of this stuff, but the burden of proof would be on you). Welcome to the land of the, formerly, free. Of course the terrorists who want to transport their weapons with them merely charter a business jet, as do any others who wish to avoid the long security lines at the airlines. All of this stuff is making the biz-jet manufactures and charterers rich. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I have yet to feel that I have sacrificed anything substantial, yet the monitoring of international phone calls and the activities of some aliens contiues. Most of us will never notice. I'm okay with that. I don't think there is any other way to preven another 9/11. -- Original message -- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't get me wrong. I'm happy that they've stopped these buggers. But are you really so ready to surrender liberty in the name of safety? That's a scary thought. Godfrey On Aug 11, 2006, at 8:38 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In any case, it worked. I will be among the first to complain loudly when it doesn't work. I won't complain about inconveniences in regard to air travel, telephone privacy or other similar matters. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
In recent years, before the 'no lock' requirement by TSA, if they wanted to look into a locked bag, believe me they had a means to open it, un beknownst to the traveler. In 2004, I shipped, via checked luggage, a Gitzo 1548 tripod with my clothes in a locked duffle bag after I had inserted the tripod into a cardboard tube and body taped the ends. When I got to my destination (Fairbanks Alaska), I noticed the taped ends of the tube had been disturbed - obviously opened - yet the lock was still locked when I got the bag. I contacted the carrier and was informed that they had the ability to open all keyed locks in fact would if they were curious about the contents of a locked bag. Same thing happened on the return trip to Detroit. BTW there have been available for the last several years, TSA approved locks that can be used with checked baggage. My experience, however says that no matter what you have, if someone wants it badly enough, they will get it, locks or no locks. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography I never lock my luggage. A lock is easily broken, and it sends a signal that there is something valuable in the case. John On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:33:57 +0100, Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Asad, Was this in the US where you can't lock you luggage or somewhere else in the world where you can - and should? I've had expensive items in checked luggage without problems, but we have a lock on every zip when we travel - the biggest lock we could find that would fit through the loops and all keyed alike so we only need one key. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -Asad Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Another Blow Against Photography
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 August 2006 18:47 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography I have yet to feel that I have sacrificed anything substantial, yet the monitoring of international phone calls and the activities of some aliens contiues. Most of us will never notice. I'm okay with that. I don't think there is any other way to preven another 9/11. Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. Regards, Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
A good reason to get a .22 target pistol or some such Seems to me that would be a real good way to be delayed @ the airport. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:14 AM Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography As long as you're flying within the US, the TSA cannot open your luggage without you present if you have a firearm in your checked luggage (and you declare it properly). A good reason to get a .22 target pistol or some such (unless of course you live in Chicago or New York City). -Adam Paul Stenquist wrote: You can lock your luggage on US flights if you use the special locks that can be opened by inspectors. Someone here will probably post a url. I have them on my camera case but don't remember where I bought them. Paul On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Leon Altoff wrote: Aaron, I hope it lasts less than a week, but there is the chance that it will lead to more restrictions in the long run. We have been working on how to reorganise our luggage for stopping luggage handlers from breaking equipment and how to stop shampoo from leaking out over the rest of our luggage. The US is the biggest problem. You can't lock you luggage and you now can't keep fragiles and valuables with you. The best we have been able to come up with is that the US is cut from all future travel. It makes the rest of the around the world trip we had planned difficult, but we will have to see what can be managed. My major concern at the moment is the chance of the checked luggage x-rays damaging the hard drive in the laptop. Our current plan is to pack all equipment into a large Pelican case and open it at the baggage collection to check everything is still there. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Aaron Reynolds wrote: On the news this afternoon (CBC Newsworld, in Canada) they seemed to think this ban was temporary, likely less than a week. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Another Blow Against Photography Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:14 pm Size: 1K To: pdml@pdml.net The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Saturday 12 August 2006 21:03, Bob W wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 August 2006 18:47 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography I have yet to feel that I have sacrificed anything substantial, yet the monitoring of international phone calls and the activities of some aliens contiues. Most of us will never notice. I'm okay with that. I don't think there is any other way to preven another 9/11. Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. Regards, Bob I think that is the only way Bob. -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 20:24:26 +0100, Frits Wüthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 12 August 2006 21:03, Bob W wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 August 2006 18:47 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography I have yet to feel that I have sacrificed anything substantial, yet the monitoring of international phone calls and the activities of some aliens contiues. Most of us will never notice. I'm okay with that. I don't think there is any other way to preven another 9/11. Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. Regards, Bob I think that is the only way Bob. Agreed. Israel seems to be a slow learner though, and we are all inconvenienced and endangered as a result. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Don't get me wrong. I'm happy that they've stopped these buggers. But are you really so ready to surrender liberty in the name of safety? That's a scary thought. Godfrey Not really ~ it's a personal decision, decided on a case-by-case, geographically limited scenario. No other way to do it. keith whaley On Aug 11, 2006, at 8:38 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In any case, it worked. I will be among the first to complain loudly when it doesn't work. I won't complain about inconveniences in regard to air travel, telephone privacy or other similar matters. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Bob, I don't know what they did in Northern Ireland, but I can't let what you said go unchallenged. Do you believe that the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are just kidding when they propose turning society's clock back to the middle ages and the rule of the clergy? Did you only look at the pictures from Afghanistan and not read any of the text? Come on, I know you're smarter than that. When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. Regards, Bob S. On 8/12/06, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 August 2006 18:47 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography I have yet to feel that I have sacrificed anything substantial, yet the monitoring of international phone calls and the activities of some aliens contiues. Most of us will never notice. I'm okay with that. I don't think there is any other way to preven another 9/11. Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. Regards, Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
- Original Message - From: John Forbes Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. I think that is the only way Bob. Agreed. Israel seems to be a slow learner though, and we are all inconvenienced and endangered as a result. Israel isn't the only slow learner, just the most obvious example at the moment. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
- Original Message - From: Bob Sullivan Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. Bob, the Muslim world wouldn't give a damn about the west, and certainly wouldn't be trying to blow westerners up if they didn't have greviances that they cannot address any other way. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Another Blow Against Photography
When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. ? I never said or implied anything of the sort. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. It's far more complicated than that. Part of the problem is that too many people take a one-sided, black white view of everything and try to turn it into angels versus demons. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Sullivan Sent: 12 August 2006 22:51 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography Bob, I don't know what they did in Northern Ireland, but I can't let what you said go unchallenged. Do you believe that the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are just kidding when they propose turning society's clock back to the middle ages and the rule of the clergy? Did you only look at the pictures from Afghanistan and not read any of the text? Come on, I know you're smarter than that. When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. Regards, Bob S. On 8/12/06, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 August 2006 18:47 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography I have yet to feel that I have sacrificed anything substantial, yet the monitoring of international phone calls and the activities of some aliens contiues. Most of us will never notice. I'm okay with that. I don't think there is any other way to preven another 9/11. Removing the conditions that lead to terrorism is another way. That is the lesson learned from Northern Ireland and it will likely apply in this situation too. Regards, Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Bob Sullivan Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. Bob, the Muslim world wouldn't give a damn about the west, and certainly wouldn't be trying to blow westerners up if they didn't have greviances that they cannot address any other way. William Robb Unfortunately, many of the grievances they're bitching about are essentially unresolvable without a complete capitulation on the part of teh West. They regularly complain about the Reconquista, the results of the Battle of Lepanto and the lifting of the Siege of Vienna by Jan Sobieski (the latter two occurances broke the power of the Ottoman Empire). They're major beef with the west is the idea that any land that has ever been under the control of Islam must be returned to the control of Islam. This includes most of Europe (really all of Continental Europe except Germany, Poland, Scandinavia and Northern and Central France, as at some point or another an Islamic Nation or Army controlled most of Europe). The Average Muslim doesn't believe this, but the problem children committing the violence do. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Another Blow Against Photography
They regularly complain about the Reconquista, the results of the Battle of Lepanto and the lifting of the Siege of Vienna by Jan Sobieski (the latter two occurances broke the power of the Ottoman Empire). They're major beef with the west is the idea that any land that has ever been under the control of Islam must be returned to the control of Islam. This includes most of Europe (really all of Continental Europe except Germany, Poland, Scandinavia and Northern and Central France, as at some point or another an Islamic Nation or Army controlled most of Europe). The Average Muslim doesn't believe this, but the problem children committing the violence do. No they don't. They believe that by killing themselves and as many of us as possible they will be able to bring about some kind of improvement in the conditions they and their families live. Rightly or wrongly they blame these conditions on us. Mostly they live in shit conditions. If you lived in similar conditions you would probably want to kill someone to escape them. Treating them as lunatics, fanatics and demons does absolutely nothing whatsoever to stop terrorism. Finding out what their grievances are about, and doing something constructive to resolve them will help, even though it will take a long time, won't be glamorous and won't allow our glorious leaders to strut around in uniform on aircraft carriers. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Another Blow Against Photography
Utter nonsense. Blaming radical behavior on poverty and bad conditions is the old liberal excuse for everyone who can't behave. It no longer holds water. Never has. Is that why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? Radical Islam has a fundamental problem with everyone else in the world. That makes them a problem. It has nothing to do with conditions. We tried the liberal cure in many places: Give them a lot of money and better living conditions and everything will be okay. Never has worked. Won't work now. Paul No they don't. They believe that by killing themselves and as many of us as possible they will be able to bring about some kind of improvement in the conditions they and their families live. Rightly or wrongly they blame these conditions on us. Mostly they live in shit conditions. If you lived in similar conditions you would probably want to kill someone to escape them. Treating them as lunatics, fanatics and demons does absolutely nothing whatsoever to stop terrorism. Finding out what their grievances are about, and doing something constructive to resolve them will help, even though it will take a long time, won't be glamorous and won't allow our glorious leaders to strut around in uniform on aircraft carriers. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
At 4:50 PM -0500 8/12/06, Bob Sullivan wrote: Bob, I don't know what they did in Northern Ireland, but I can't let what you said go unchallenged. As I understand it the common people themselves have grown tired of the terrorism - both from the IRA and the UDF and their ilk - and have stopped supporting and tolerating it. When the terrorists lose that kind of grassroots support they become little more than gangsters. Do you believe that the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are just kidding when they propose turning society's clock back to the middle ages and the rule of the clergy? Did you only look at the pictures from Afghanistan and not read any of the text? Come on, I know you're smarter than that. When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. It's also a result when a society or way of life feels threatened. It's a way for a small minority to make a big bang and get noticed. -- Steve Sharpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Adam wrote: They regularly complain about the Reconquista, the results of the Battle of Lepanto and the lifting of the Siege of Vienna by Jan Sobieski (the latter two occurrences broke the power of the Ottoman Empire). They're major beef with the west is the idea that any land that has ever been under the control of Islam must be returned to the control of Islam. Thanks Adam. I like to imagine that my ancestors were there with the Polish Cavalry, the Winged Warriors, who helped break that siege and the advance of the Ottoman Empire. To Bob W's point, I don't want to paint anybody as angels or devils. The situation is complex, but I don't see anybody in my neighborhood recruiting suicide bombers and exhorting others to kill the infidels. Talk about seeing things as black and white! Regards, Bob S. On 8/12/06, Adam Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Bob Sullivan Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography When you can tell me with a straight face that you will be willing to live under the rule of the fundamentalist clergy of Osama's choice (or even Episcopalian for that matter), I'll believe you. The conditions that lead to this terrorism are the march of time and tide as we grow into an educated, plural, tolerant society. Bob, the Muslim world wouldn't give a damn about the west, and certainly wouldn't be trying to blow westerners up if they didn't have greviances that they cannot address any other way. William Robb Unfortunately, many of the grievances they're bitching about are essentially unresolvable without a complete capitulation on the part of teh West. They regularly complain about the Reconquista, the results of the Battle of Lepanto and the lifting of the Siege of Vienna by Jan Sobieski (the latter two occurances broke the power of the Ottoman Empire). They're major beef with the west is the idea that any land that has ever been under the control of Islam must be returned to the control of Islam. This includes most of Europe (really all of Continental Europe except Germany, Poland, Scandinavia and Northern and Central France, as at some point or another an Islamic Nation or Army controlled most of Europe). The Average Muslim doesn't believe this, but the problem children committing the violence do. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Aug 12, 2006, at 7:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Utter nonsense. Blaming radical behavior on poverty and bad conditions is the old liberal excuse for everyone who can't behave. It no longer holds water. Never has. Is that why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? Radical Islam has a fundamental problem with everyone else in the world. That makes them a problem. It has nothing to do with conditions. We tried the liberal cure in many places: Give them a lot of money and better living conditions and everything will be okay. Never has worked. Won't work now. I agree. Remember back in Teddy Roosevelt's day when the Barbary Pirates were terrorizing shipping and making life hell for many? T.R.'s solution? Eradicate the SOBs. Worked then, would work again today. The simple fact is that radical Islam is incompatible with a modern world, and one or the other has to go. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Bob Shell wrote: On Aug 12, 2006, at 7:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Utter nonsense. Blaming radical behavior on poverty and bad conditions is the old liberal excuse for everyone who can't behave. It no longer holds water. Never has. Is that why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? Radical Islam has a fundamental problem with everyone else in the world. That makes them a problem. It has nothing to do with conditions. We tried the liberal cure in many places: Give them a lot of money and better living conditions and everything will be okay. Never has worked. Won't work now. I agree. Remember back in Teddy Roosevelt's day when the Barbary Pirates were terrorizing shipping and making life hell for many? T.R.'s solution? Eradicate the SOBs. Worked then, would work again today. The simple fact is that radical Islam is incompatible with a modern world, and one or the other has to go. Bob Bob, That wasn't Teddy Rossevelt. He wouldn't be president for another 100 years after the Algiers War. It was Thomas Jefferson who proscecuted that war, after John Adams rolled over and paid tribute a few years earlier. But the Barbary Pirates were the genesis of the US Navy. The Humphries Frigates were laid down in response to the Barbary Pirates under Adams, and completed several years later when that problem flared up again during teh Jefferson Administration. It's also where the US Marine Corps Hymn got the line 'The Shores of Tripoli'. And it's unsurprising that Tripoli was connected to the ongoing issue of Islamic Terrorism this time as well (at least until the UK and US scared Quadaffi into temproary submission). Under Roosevelt, US forces would fight the Moros in the Phillipines, which led to the development of the M1911 Pistol (Which was ordered because the .38 round then in common use was not powerful enough to stop a charging Moro). Ironically, US Special Forces is moving back to the same .45 ACP round as the 9mm (Ballistically similar to the old .38 Army) has proven to be insufficiently powerful enough. And ovcer the last 15 years, the Moros have returned, as allies of Jamaal-al-Islayyah and Al Qaeda. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
At 9:11 PM -0400 8/12/06, Bob Shell wrote: On Aug 12, 2006, at 7:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Utter nonsense. Blaming radical behavior on poverty and bad conditions is the old liberal excuse for everyone who can't behave. It no longer holds water. Never has. Is that why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? Radical Islam has a fundamental problem with everyone else in the world. That makes them a problem. It has nothing to do with conditions. We tried the liberal cure in many places: Give them a lot of money and better living conditions and everything will be okay. Never has worked. Won't work now. I agree. Remember back in Teddy Roosevelt's day when the Barbary Pirates were terrorizing shipping and making life hell for many? T.R.'s solution? Eradicate the SOBs. Worked then, would work again today. The simple fact is that radical Islam is incompatible with a modern world, and one or the other has to go. As events of the past few decades and especially the past five years would indicate, eradicating them is easier said than done. -- Steve Sharpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Another Blow Against Photography Utter nonsense. Blaming radical behavior on poverty and bad conditions is the old liberal excuse for everyone who can't behave. It no longer holds water. Never has. Is that why Hitler wanted to kill the jews? Radical Islam has a fundamental problem with everyone else in the world. That makes them a problem. It has nothing to do with conditions. We tried the liberal cure in many places: Give them a lot of money and better living conditions and everything will be okay. Never has worked. Won't work now. Isn't there some sort of rule that when Hitler gets mentioned, the arguement is over, the battle lost? William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Another bit of liberal nonsense :-) -- Original message -- From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Isn't there some sort of rule that when Hitler gets mentioned, the arguement is over, the battle lost? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Aug 13, 2006, at 2:43 PM, William Robb wrote: Isn't there some sort of rule that when Hitler gets mentioned, the arguement is over, the battle lost? Godwin's Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Take it somewhere else, folks. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Asad, Was this in the US where you can't lock you luggage or somewhere else in the world where you can - and should? I've had expensive items in checked luggage without problems, but we have a lock on every zip when we travel - the biggest lock we could find that would fit through the loops and all keyed alike so we only need one key. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -Asad Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I agree completely. I'm booked to fly to the UK in two weeks. If restrictions continue past Monday, I'll package everything I need for my photography work there and ship it FedEx ahead of time. It's a royal pain as it will cost me an extra hundred bux or two, but at least it will be insured and safer than commercial passenger plane checked luggage. G On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Godfrey, If you want to get advice about travel and the new rules I suggest you look at the Security and Safety forum on Flyer Talk. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=222 There's lots of talk about it now, but people will soon be reporting about experiences and be able to give practical advice. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I agree completely. I'm booked to fly to the UK in two weeks. If restrictions continue past Monday, I'll package everything I need for my photography work there and ship it FedEx ahead of time. It's a royal pain as it will cost me an extra hundred bux or two, but at least it will be insured and safer than commercial passenger plane checked luggage. G On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I have had goods stolen from checked luggage on flights from Milan to London, Frankfurt to New York, London to New York, Zurich to London, London to Munich, and Tokyo to San Francisco. Usually small things ... a watch I bought for a gift, a radio someone gave me at a conference, etc. Some of them were even before the no locked luggage BS. I've never trusted putting anything valuable in checked luggage anywhere. Godfrey On Aug 10, 2006, at 11:33 PM, Leon Altoff wrote: Was this in the US where you can't lock you luggage or somewhere else in the world where you can - and should? I've had expensive items in checked luggage without problems, but we have a lock on every zip when we travel - the biggest lock we could find that would fit through the loops and all keyed alike so we only need one key. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I never lock my luggage. A lock is easily broken, and it sends a signal that there is something valuable in the case. John On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:33:57 +0100, Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Asad, Was this in the US where you can't lock you luggage or somewhere else in the world where you can - and should? I've had expensive items in checked luggage without problems, but we have a lock on every zip when we travel - the biggest lock we could find that would fit through the loops and all keyed alike so we only need one key. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -Asad Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I live quite near Heathrow. I would be happy to provide a post box service for any traveller coming into the UK that way. And before you ask, I already have all the Pentax gear I want! John On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:36:51 +0100, Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree completely. I'm booked to fly to the UK in two weeks. If restrictions continue past Monday, I'll package everything I need for my photography work there and ship it FedEx ahead of time. It's a royal pain as it will cost me an extra hundred bux or two, but at least it will be insured and safer than commercial passenger plane checked luggage. G On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:44 PM, Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
You can lock your luggage on US flights if you use the special locks that can be opened by inspectors. Someone here will probably post a url. I have them on my camera case but don't remember where I bought them. Paul On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Leon Altoff wrote: Aaron, I hope it lasts less than a week, but there is the chance that it will lead to more restrictions in the long run. We have been working on how to reorganise our luggage for stopping luggage handlers from breaking equipment and how to stop shampoo from leaking out over the rest of our luggage. The US is the biggest problem. You can't lock you luggage and you now can't keep fragiles and valuables with you. The best we have been able to come up with is that the US is cut from all future travel. It makes the rest of the around the world trip we had planned difficult, but we will have to see what can be managed. My major concern at the moment is the chance of the checked luggage x-rays damaging the hard drive in the laptop. Our current plan is to pack all equipment into a large Pelican case and open it at the baggage collection to check everything is still there. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Aaron Reynolds wrote: On the news this afternoon (CBC Newsworld, in Canada) they seemed to think this ban was temporary, likely less than a week. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Another Blow Against Photography Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:14 pm Size: 1K To: pdml@pdml.net The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
At the moment you cannot even carry mobile phones on board. Everybody is hand-checked. Only wallets and passports are allowed, in a transparent plastic bag. No food and no drink are allowed on board and parents are asked to drink from their babies' bottles to prove it's milk. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
As long as you're flying within the US, the TSA cannot open your luggage without you present if you have a firearm in your checked luggage (and you declare it properly). A good reason to get a .22 target pistol or some such (unless of course you live in Chicago or New York City). -Adam Paul Stenquist wrote: You can lock your luggage on US flights if you use the special locks that can be opened by inspectors. Someone here will probably post a url. I have them on my camera case but don't remember where I bought them. Paul On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Leon Altoff wrote: Aaron, I hope it lasts less than a week, but there is the chance that it will lead to more restrictions in the long run. We have been working on how to reorganise our luggage for stopping luggage handlers from breaking equipment and how to stop shampoo from leaking out over the rest of our luggage. The US is the biggest problem. You can't lock you luggage and you now can't keep fragiles and valuables with you. The best we have been able to come up with is that the US is cut from all future travel. It makes the rest of the around the world trip we had planned difficult, but we will have to see what can be managed. My major concern at the moment is the chance of the checked luggage x-rays damaging the hard drive in the laptop. Our current plan is to pack all equipment into a large Pelican case and open it at the baggage collection to check everything is still there. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Aaron Reynolds wrote: On the news this afternoon (CBC Newsworld, in Canada) they seemed to think this ban was temporary, likely less than a week. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Another Blow Against Photography Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:14 pm Size: 1K To: pdml@pdml.net The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Hi John, A broken lock is evidence for police, insurance and airlines that the luggage has been tampered with. There has been a lot of news over recent years about drugs being put into peoples luggage. They don't do it with locked luggage as it draws attention to them. Until the entire world has one system for managing security of planes and luggage, from my point of view, locked luggage and not going through the USA are my best options for travelling. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon John Forbes wrote: I never lock my luggage. A lock is easily broken, and it sends a signal that there is something valuable in the case. John On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:33:57 +0100, Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Asad, Was this in the US where you can't lock you luggage or somewhere else in the world where you can - and should? I've had expensive items in checked luggage without problems, but we have a lock on every zip when we travel - the biggest lock we could find that would fit through the loops and all keyed alike so we only need one key. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -Asad Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Paul, I know about those locks. They are an option, but I have no idea how securely the master keys are controlled. Having a lock that can be gotten around is worse than no lock at all. We had to put off our planned round the world trip until next year. When we start to plan it again we will see what new developments there are and take them into account. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Paul Stenquist wrote: You can lock your luggage on US flights if you use the special locks that can be opened by inspectors. Someone here will probably post a url. I have them on my camera case but don't remember where I bought them. Paul On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Leon Altoff wrote: Aaron, I hope it lasts less than a week, but there is the chance that it will lead to more restrictions in the long run. We have been working on how to reorganise our luggage for stopping luggage handlers from breaking equipment and how to stop shampoo from leaking out over the rest of our luggage. The US is the biggest problem. You can't lock you luggage and you now can't keep fragiles and valuables with you. The best we have been able to come up with is that the US is cut from all future travel. It makes the rest of the around the world trip we had planned difficult, but we will have to see what can be managed. My major concern at the moment is the chance of the checked luggage x-rays damaging the hard drive in the laptop. Our current plan is to pack all equipment into a large Pelican case and open it at the baggage collection to check everything is still there. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Aaron Reynolds wrote: On the news this afternoon (CBC Newsworld, in Canada) they seemed to think this ban was temporary, likely less than a week. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Another Blow Against Photography Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:14 pm Size: 1K To: pdml@pdml.net The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Hey, they xray the damned things. There is no need for them to mess with luggage without something that looks valuable in it. Luckily for me, I can not afford to travel. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- John Forbes wrote: I never lock my luggage. A lock is easily broken, and it sends a signal that there is something valuable in the case. John On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:33:57 +0100, Leon Altoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Asad, Was this in the US where you can't lock you luggage or somewhere else in the world where you can - and should? I've had expensive items in checked luggage without problems, but we have a lock on every zip when we travel - the biggest lock we could find that would fit through the loops and all keyed alike so we only need one key. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -Asad Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
BAD IDEA! You can go to prison for transporting the pistol across state lines. The only ones who could do that safely are legally recognized law enforcement personnel. And they might have problems if they tried to take it into other countries. Also some states can lock you up for merely bring the thing into the state. (If you can prove you are on your way to a legal target shooting event, you may be able to get around some of this stuff, but the burden of proof would be on you). Welcome to the land of the, formerly, free. Of course the terrorists who want to transport their weapons with them merely charter a business jet, as do any others who wish to avoid the long security lines at the airlines. All of this stuff is making the biz-jet manufactures and charterers rich. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Adam Maas wrote: As long as you're flying within the US, the TSA cannot open your luggage without you present if you have a firearm in your checked luggage (and you declare it properly). A good reason to get a .22 target pistol or some such (unless of course you live in Chicago or New York City). -Adam Paul Stenquist wrote: You can lock your luggage on US flights if you use the special locks that can be opened by inspectors. Someone here will probably post a url. I have them on my camera case but don't remember where I bought them. Paul On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:36 AM, Leon Altoff wrote: Aaron, I hope it lasts less than a week, but there is the chance that it will lead to more restrictions in the long run. We have been working on how to reorganise our luggage for stopping luggage handlers from breaking equipment and how to stop shampoo from leaking out over the rest of our luggage. The US is the biggest problem. You can't lock you luggage and you now can't keep fragiles and valuables with you. The best we have been able to come up with is that the US is cut from all future travel. It makes the rest of the around the world trip we had planned difficult, but we will have to see what can be managed. My major concern at the moment is the chance of the checked luggage x-rays damaging the hard drive in the laptop. Our current plan is to pack all equipment into a large Pelican case and open it at the baggage collection to check everything is still there. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Aaron Reynolds wrote: On the news this afternoon (CBC Newsworld, in Canada) they seemed to think this ban was temporary, likely less than a week. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Another Blow Against Photography Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:14 pm Size: 1K To: pdml@pdml.net The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I suspect they are cannibalizing the parts from disposable cameras. The flash its self will not trigger any explosive I know of. However the high voltage spark you can get from the charging circuit sure will. It would be a very cheap source for such electronic circuits. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- Joseph Tainter wrote: According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
ROFLMFAO. That is so utterly incorrect that it's laughable. It is perfectly legal to transport a pistol across state lines in the United States. Law Enforcement Officials actually have no extra standing when outside their jurisdiction with respect to transporting firearms. In fact if you have a CCW and both states are CCW states you can carry it loaded on your person as long as you aren't flying (And the only restriction there is by the TSA and Airlines). Transporting it via airlines merely requires that it be unloaded, in a locked case in locked, checked luggage and that you inform the ticketing agent of that the firearm is in the luggage and stored correctly. The last time I was in the US for a convention(2 weeks ago), numerous American friends of mine who were also attending brought their carry weapons (And various other firearms, we are the most heavily armed fen) to the convention site (Chattanooga), traveling via air and driving. And we had people come in from as far away as Boston and Salt Lake City(the latter did indeed arrive unarmed, but only because it was a last minute trip). In fact I can transport a pistol into the US and throughout the US as long as I fill out the necessary Authorization to Transport (Canadian form, required for transporting a restricted weapon) and BATF paperwork (to get over the border). The only places in the US where you can't legally own a pistol are Chicago and NYC (It is possible, but difficult to get the necessary permit in the latter city) and both are in violation of Federal Law and the Constitution, I know there are at least two legal challenges to the Chicago restriction currently in the court system. -Adam graywolf wrote: BAD IDEA! You can go to prison for transporting the pistol across state lines. The only ones who could do that safely are legally recognized law enforcement personnel. And they might have problems if they tried to take it into other countries. Also some states can lock you up for merely bring the thing into the state. (If you can prove you are on your way to a legal target shooting event, you may be able to get around some of this stuff, but the burden of proof would be on you). Welcome to the land of the, formerly, free. Of course the terrorists who want to transport their weapons with them merely charter a business jet, as do any others who wish to avoid the long security lines at the airlines. All of this stuff is making the biz-jet manufactures and charterers rich. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
In the US, it's more complicated. TSA has the right to examine your checked bags even if they are locked. (I know that they actually do thisk because frequently my bag winds up with a TSA inspected paper inside.) If they choose to look inside a locked bag, they simply clip the lock. The way around this is to use a combination lock designed specifically for this purpose. It can also be opened by a TSA key. This means that the potential thief has to simply get a copy of the TSA key to provide himself with free access to your bag's contents. Larry in Dallas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Gun control argument thread in 3.. 2... 1... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On 8/11/06, Ryan Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gun control argument thread in 3.. 2... 1... No kidding. I wonder how far you'd get with airport security packing one of these: http://www.zenit-camera.com/photosniper_zenit_camera.htm -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com Shoot more film! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
This is exactly right. I flew to Kauai with a fully loaded Pelican 1620 case and it was locked on departure. On arrival the lock was gone and there was a TSA form inside notifying me that they'd gone through it per regulations but nothing was missing. I was told that locked bags are often targeted for physical searches. The one thing that bugged me was that the pressure valve on the case used to equalize the pressure to make it easier to open on arrival was loosened and the inside of the bag was a bit cold from being exposed to the atmosphere inside the cargo hold at 35,000 feet. So, there was a slight amount of condensation on one lens case but nothing more. I doubt if the TSA guys knew what the valve was for and so they didn't screw it back it in all the way. On the flight home I had it prescreened by a TSA agent. I didn't bother to lock it this time. Everything arrived with me in San Francisco. -Brendan --- Larry Levy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the US, it's more complicated. TSA has the right to examine your checked bags even if they are locked. (I know that they actually do thisk because frequently my bag winds up with a TSA inspected paper inside.) If they choose to look inside a locked bag, they simply clip the lock. The way around this is to use a combination lock designed specifically for this purpose. It can also be opened by a TSA key. This means that the potential thief has to simply get a copy of the TSA key to provide himself with free access to your bag's contents. Larry in Dallas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Leon, Once within Canada, from Toronto to Vancouver and my bag was locked, the second time it was NY to Vancouver this time the bag was not locked. -Asad Leon Altoff wrote: Asad, Was this in the US where you can't lock you luggage or somewhere else in the world where you can - and should? I've had expensive items in checked luggage without problems, but we have a lock on every zip when we travel - the biggest lock we could find that would fit through the loops and all keyed alike so we only need one key. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Asad Masede wrote: Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -Asad Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
From the news I also learned about the restrictions on flying from Europe to the USA as you have mentioned. Flying to the UK however, the restrictions are even stronger, also from mainland Europe to the UK: No handluggage at all. Exception for passports, prescription medication with your name on them, and some stuff for the baby traveling with you. All that you are allowed need to be carried in a transparent plastic bag. The rest need to be checked. How long this will stay in place in not yet known. The next step the Netherlands wants to push for in Europe is to install in European airports X-ray machines for handlugage with the same capabilities as is already in use for checked luggage, as these can detect liqued explosives as well. And it was the intention of the terrorist to use liqued explosives is my understanding. -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On 11/8/06, Paul Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed: You can lock your luggage on US flights if you use the special locks that can be opened by inspectors. Someone here will probably post a url. I have them on my camera case but don't remember where I bought them. Ditto. They're combination locks with a generic keyhole underneath. Very handy - but exactly how effective they are remains to be seen ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On 10/8/06, Joseph Tainter, discombobulated, unleashed: I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. At the moment, anything other than a set of keys (*minus* electronic car- key fobs), passports, and wallets are effectively the only things permitted in the aircraft cabins. No exceptions. This rule will apply for the short term, certainly - look at a couple of weeks from now. For the long term, it is entirely possible that many handheld electronic items and most if not all liquids will be banned, although this is by no means certain. You're travelling sept 8th? I'd consider buying a Pelican case a few days before you travel if the ban is not lifted - you'll have to check *everything* photographic. Sad but true, and necessary. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On 11/8/06, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: At the moment, anything other than a set of keys (*minus* electronic car- key fobs), passports, and wallets are effectively the only things permitted in the aircraft cabins. No exceptions. This rule if flying from a UK airport to the USA and other destinations - apologies for confusion. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
I'm going to hold on my trip to the UK for another week before making a decision, but it looks very likely that I will re-schedule it for late September. All the regulations are in flux, and will be until this current panic is sorted out and a new equilibrium is reached. Luckily, for this trip I don't have to hit any particular dates. The terrorists win again. It pisses me off that our beloved governments seem to aid achieving the goals of maximum disruption of our lives in the name of counter-measures, leading us to suspicion and paranoia. I'm less afraid of being blown to smithereens over the North Atlantic than I am frustrated to exasperation with ineffective and disruptive counter-measures. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Cotty wrote: Ditto. They're combination locks with a generic keyhole underneath. Very handy - but exactly how effective they are remains to be seen ;-) In general, the more master keys there are, the less secure a lock is. So I'd be curious to know if there's one master key pattern or many. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:35:33PM -0700, Brendan MacRae wrote: This is exactly right. I flew to Kauai with a fully loaded Pelican 1620 case and it was locked on departure. On arrival the lock was gone and there was a TSA form inside notifying me that they'd gone through it per regulations but nothing was missing. I've got a little wad of these inside my Pelican 1620. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 07:32:37PM -0400, Doug Franklin wrote: Cotty wrote: Ditto. They're combination locks with a generic keyhole underneath. Very handy - but exactly how effective they are remains to be seen ;-) In general, the more master keys there are, the less secure a lock is. So I'd be curious to know if there's one master key pattern or many. I believe there are at least three series, each with a different master. I haven't yet got round to putting two different locks on my Pelican case, though - anyone who has one master key probably has all of them. The usual place to but these locks is at a luggage store (or, for about twice the usual price, at a kiosk in the airport). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
John Francis wrote: I believe there are at least three series, each with a different master. Well, it's heartening if there really is only one master pattern for each series. I've wanted for years to go out to this place in Raton, New Mexico, to do about two weeks worth of shooting and hiking and photographing. But the though of trying to travel with a couple of rifles and four or five handguns has always put me off. I know it's legal, and I know how to do it legally, but I just can't find it in myself to trust the baggage system with them. With mastered locks, I'm even less inclined to take the risk. I haven't yet got round to putting two different locks on my Pelican case, though - anyone who has one master key probably has all of them. Bet on it. And if they don't, they /do/ have bolt cutters. The usual place to but these locks is at a luggage store (or, for about twice the usual price, at a kiosk in the airport). Wow, someone is really falling down on the job if they're only twice as expensive at the airport. Or the luggage stores have really jacked up the prices. :-) Actually, I've seen them in Sears, Kohl's, WalMart, and Target, too. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
--- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:35:33PM -0700, Brendan MacRae wrote: This is exactly right. I flew to Kauai with a fully loaded Pelican 1620 case and it was locked on departure. On arrival the lock was gone and there was a TSA form inside notifying me that they'd gone through it per regulations but nothing was missing. I've got a little wad of these inside my Pelican 1620. I wish I had the time and resources of late to collect more of those TSA forms. ;) -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Uh, apparently,the countermeasures were quite effective. Monitoring phone calls played a big part in rounding up these guys. Paul -- Original message -- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm going to hold on my trip to the UK for another week before making a decision, but it looks very likely that I will re-schedule it for late September. All the regulations are in flux, and will be until this current panic is sorted out and a new equilibrium is reached. Luckily, for this trip I don't have to hit any particular dates. The terrorists win again. It pisses me off that our beloved governments seem to aid achieving the goals of maximum disruption of our lives in the name of counter-measures, leading us to suspicion and paranoia. I'm less afraid of being blown to smithereens over the North Atlantic than I am frustrated to exasperation with ineffective and disruptive counter-measures. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On 12/08/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh, apparently,the countermeasures were quite effective. Monitoring phone calls played a big part in rounding up these guys. Specific taps maybe but... According to The Washington Post, the first whiff of the alleged plot came after the July 2005 suicide bombings on London's transit system, when a member of the Muslim community tipped off British intelligence about the suspicious activities of an acquaintance. The vague tip led investigators to a coordinated and long-planned plot, a senior European intelligence official said. London's Metropolitan Police were brought into the investigation in December, British media said. Pakistani officials were also brought in. http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=newssubclass=generalstory_id=501662category=Generalm=8y=2006 -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
In any case, it worked. I will be among the first to complain loudly when it doesn't work. I won't complain about inconveniences in regard to air travel, telephone privacy or other similar matters. Paul -- Original message -- From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 12/08/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Uh, apparently,the countermeasures were quite effective. Monitoring phone calls played a big part in rounding up these guys. Specific taps maybe but... According to The Washington Post, the first whiff of the alleged plot came after the July 2005 suicide bombings on London's transit system, when a member of the Muslim community tipped off British intelligence about the suspicious activities of an acquaintance. The vague tip led investigators to a coordinated and long-planned plot, a senior European intelligence official said. London's Metropolitan Police were brought into the investigation in December, British media said. Pakistani officials were also brought in. http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=newssubclass=generalstory_id =501662category=Generalm=8y=2006 -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Another Blow Against Photography In any case, it worked. I will be among the first to complain loudly when it doesn't work. I won't complain about inconveniences in regard to air travel, telephone privacy or other similar matters. Wow, you have no problem with your phone being tapped? How about your mail being opened? Your bedroom bugged? Would you be OK with people in dark suits asking your co-workers pointed questions about you or your activities? Would this be similar to an inconvenience in regard to air travel? William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Another Blow Against Photography
You're travelling sept 8th? I'd consider buying a Pelican case a few days before you travel if the ban is not lifted - you'll have to check *everything* photographic. Sad but true, and necessary. -- Cheers, Cotty - That's a possibility. Trouble is, I would have to ship it unlocked. I am more concerned about theft than inadvertent damage. Last year German air travel security sawed a suitcase of mine in such a way that it cannot be locked again. It had a U.S. Transportation Security Administration-approved lock on it. Surely The German security types have keys to these. If not, they could have sawed the lock. Instead they sawed the suitcase and stole the lock. Arrogant is the term that comes to mind. The main problem is theft. I am committed to the conference in Italy and have to go. Beyond that, I have committed to a conference in Israel that was supposed to take place in November, but is now postponed until spring. If I can't photograph on those trips, with my equipment safe, I may just give up overseas travel. Photography is too big a part of it for me. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Another Blow Against Photography
I'm less afraid of being blown to smithereens over the North Atlantic than I am frustrated to exasperation with ineffective and disruptive counter-measures. G - Me too. I suspect that much of the overreaction is CYA. No official wants to be the one who did too little. No politician wants to be vulnerable to a charge of soft on terrorism. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Another Blow Against Photography
The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On 11/08/06, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. Interesting, I guess it's look forward to horrific insurance premiums time (at least around here), make sure you have 5k or 10k spare on plastic and research where you may be able to purchase some interim kit before you travel. :-( -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
This message on the TSA web site says laptop computers, cell phones and other electronic items are still permitted. Taking them with you on the flight back could be a problem though: http://tsa-7.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/tsa.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php? p_faqid=254p_created=1155227254p_sid=1WOaCMeip_lva=p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZw X3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfcm93X2NudD0xNiZwX3Byb2RzPSZwX2NhdHM9JnBf cHY9JnBfY3Y9JnBfcGFnZT0xp_li=p_topview=1 How do I deal with gear when I fly overseas? If I can't bring it with me, I pack it and FedEx it to the destination. It's likely that the FedEx package is more secure --- or at least, you can insure it for more than the contents of passenger baggage. --jc On Aug 10, 2006, at 9:57 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. ... For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
On the news this afternoon (CBC Newsworld, in Canada) they seemed to think this ban was temporary, likely less than a week. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Another Blow Against Photography Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:14 pm Size: 1K To: pdml@pdml.net The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Aaron, I hope it lasts less than a week, but there is the chance that it will lead to more restrictions in the long run. We have been working on how to reorganise our luggage for stopping luggage handlers from breaking equipment and how to stop shampoo from leaking out over the rest of our luggage. The US is the biggest problem. You can't lock you luggage and you now can't keep fragiles and valuables with you. The best we have been able to come up with is that the US is cut from all future travel. It makes the rest of the around the world trip we had planned difficult, but we will have to see what can be managed. My major concern at the moment is the chance of the checked luggage x-rays damaging the hard drive in the laptop. Our current plan is to pack all equipment into a large Pelican case and open it at the baggage collection to check everything is still there. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon Aaron Reynolds wrote: On the news this afternoon (CBC Newsworld, in Canada) they seemed to think this ban was temporary, likely less than a week. -Aaron -Original Message- From: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Another Blow Against Photography Date: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:14 pm Size: 1K To: pdml@pdml.net The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Another Blow Against Photography
Whatever you do, *do not* put expensive items in the checked luggage, unless you want to part with it. I've lost a camera and a cellphone on two separate flights, once the entire bag vanished with my camera and a bunch of lenses and flashes in it, and another my sister put my brand new cellphone in her luggage, someone just took it out... So, ship it if you have to, but don't put your camera in the bag, what good are lenses without a body? -Asad Joseph Tainter wrote: The Transportation Security Administration has not yet updated its web site today. I heard on a news report, though, that electronic devices are not allowed in carry-on bags on flights from the U.S. to and from any location in Europe, or with connections anywhere in Europe -- not just England. According to some reports, the would-be bombers were going to trigger the liquid explosives from the flash units of disposable cameras. So I think there is a good chance that cameras will be banned from carry-on bags to and from Europe. I am scheduled to leave for Italy on September 8. It is another conference that I must attend (and that someone else is paying for), but I had hoped to spend a couple of days before the conference in Venice. Naturally, photography would be a big part of those two days. So if I have to put my *ist D in my checked bag, can I still carry my lenses on board? Are the security employees sophisticated enough to understand that a lens is not, by itself, an electronic device? What to do? I could-- --just put the D in my checked bag and hope for the best. --Buy a cheap DL, K100, or K110 and take that instead. --Buy a case that is designed for shipping photo gear (but this would not prevent theft). --Wait until I am in Europe, contact the black market, and buy a camera newly stolen from someone's checked bag. For those of you who sometimes fly overseas, I am wondering how you plan to handle this problem. List members in Europe: Please let us know what you are hearing. Thanks, Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
