Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Rangefinder Photography Discussion

Rangefinder Photography Discussion General discussions about Rangefinder Photography. This is a great place for questions and answers that are not addressed in a specific category. Take note there is also a General Photography forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 02-15-2018   #41
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by farlymac View Post
This sounds to me like a story of changing times. The developer bought the place when it was abandoned, and leased out space to make some money while trying to figure out what to do with the place. Many years go by, suddenly it makes sense to put up some new condos in the area, so now it's time to start all over.

But the artists revolt, claiming ownership of the art makes them owners of the property, which then really p's off the actual owner who tears the place down without waiting for permits to stop any legal action by the artists. Which then lands him in court for the permit violation.

He's not getting fined for destroying the art, but for demolishing the buildings without a permit, no? LIC will get the money, not the artists.

Am I right?

PF
I really don't think those artists have any legal right to sue the owner. If that were true then banksy could probably sue most of the buildings in NYC. It's just a permit violation. The city will get the money. I don't understand how the artists can get anything. Unless they had a written contract which the owner violated
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2018   #42
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
I really don't think those artists have any legal right to sue the owner. If that were true then banksy could probably sue most of the buildings in NYC. It's just a permit violation. The city will get the money. I don't understand how the artists can get anything. Unless they had a written contract which the owner violated
Pro-Mone,

Feb 12; (UPI). "A New York City developer must pay $6.7 million to 21 graffiti artists after he painted over their artwork, a judge ruled Monday."

There is a "Visual Artist Rights Act" that protects public art. No contract was needed.

"The judgement took into consideration that Wolkoff painted over the walls while litigation was pending."

"If not for Wolkoff's insolence, these damages would not have been assessed, the judge wrote."

The demo without a permit is a separate issue.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2018   #43
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,871
I'm a big fan of supporting the arts. That said, the mistake that the owner made was allowing it in the first place no? Since he allowed it initially and over the years it gained importance in some circles, then it was protected by this particular law?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2018   #44
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I'm a big fan of supporting the arts. That said, the mistake that the owner made was allowing it in the first place no? Since he allowed it initially and over the years it gained importance in some circles, then it was protected by this particular law?
John,

I'm thankful for his support, but like the judge said he acted above the law and displayed arrogance and insolence.

My gripe is that developers first welcome artists, but then disrespect us. I would think that rich developers can afford to remember to continue support the arts.

I'm not saying that 5 Pointz should have been preserved, but what about documenting the place. Even a small plaque would have mattered.

I don't think the city or these developers realize that artists and the communities they help create are the goose that lays the "golden egg."

Also as a gentrifier I have feelings for the poor people I help displace. This city should not be for only rich people, and I'm glad that this wealthy developer is being punished. Fug-him.

What ever happened to respect for the community?

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2018   #45
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Pro-Mone,

Feb 12; (UPI). "A New York City developer must pay $6.7 million to 21 graffiti artists after he painted over their artwork, a judge ruled Monday."

There is a "Visual Artist Rights Act" that protects public art. No contract was needed.

"The judgement took into consideration that Wolkoff painted over the walls while litigation was pending."

"If not for Wolkoff's insolence, these damages would not have been assessed, the judge wrote."

The demo without a permit is a separate issue.

Cal
Then it's completely ridiculous. If the law is interpreted in that way for this specific instance, no one would ever allow anything remotely similar to occur. Ever again. I'm siding with the developer on this instance. Damn greedy "artists" trying to make a buck.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #46
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
Then it's completely ridiculous. If the law is interpreted in that way for this specific instance, no one would ever allow anything remotely similar to occur. Ever again. I'm siding with the developer on this instance. Damn greedy "artists" trying to make a buck.
Pro-Mone,

So you believe that wealthy people, in this case a developer, should be able to break the rule of law, and because of their wealth can basically do what they want like demo a building without permits, and deface art that was protected under law. You support the abuse of power and privilage.

I think the judge knows the law. In this case the judge sited "insolence" as the reason for the stiff penalty as punishment for someone that not only disrespected art and artists, but also the law.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #47
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Pro-Mone,

So you believe that wealthy people, in this case a developer, should be able to break the rule of law, and because of their wealth can basically do what they want like demo a building without permits, and deface art that was protected under law. You support the abuse of power and privilage.

I think the judge knows the law. In this case the judge sited "insolence" as the reason for the stiff penalty as punishment for someone that not only disrespected art and artists, but also the law.

Cal
I think the permit issue is another matter. The defacing of art? It's on his building. It's graffiti. If he violated city ordinance rules then he should be made to pay the city. Paying the artists for "defacing" graffiti? Absolutely not. If it were me I would appeal. If there's any body abusing something it's these so called "artists"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #48
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,871
Wow Pramodh... another notch on your right wing belt!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #49
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Wow Pramodh... another notch on your right wing belt!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #50
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
I think the permit issue is another matter. The defacing of art? It's on his building. It's graffiti. If he violated city ordinance rules then he should be made to pay the city. Paying the artists for "defacing" graffiti? Absolutely not. If it were me I would appeal. If there's any body abusing something it's these so called "artists"
Pro-Mone,

Clearly this developer bypassed the law by doing demolition without permit. That is a separate issue is correct. There is no question that he violated city ordinances and was inproper. Clearly with this developer broke the law with intent, and because of this disregard for rule of law he is rather being severely punished instead of getting "paper whipped."

If you think the other law that protects public art is unjust I can understand that, but this developer displayed insolence, disrespect and a disregard for the separate law that protected Public Art that was undergoing litigation and was severely punished for that by a judge who's judgement surely will be appealed.

It is all a matter of where one draws the line. That is what makes this case so interesting. Did the judge abuse his power? In a way all parties are guilty. To me there are three sides of the story. I see the most mal-intent by the developer, so I do kinda take the side of both the judge and the artists. This developer showed little respect for the art, artists and the laws. I don't pardon his errors like you do.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #51
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Wow Pramodh... another notch on your right wing belt!
John,

What ever happened to rule of law?

Are Fascists really entitled to make their own justifications and get away with not following rule of law and civil society?

"Long live the republic," I say.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #52
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
John,

What ever happened to rule of law?

Are Fascists really entitled to make their own justifications and get away with not following rule of law and civil society?

"Long live the republic," I say.

Cal
I think you are taking things a little too far. I don't understand how this is any different from me being allowed to sue my landlord if I painted the walls of my apartment and he whitewahsed them. It's his property.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #53
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
Damn greedy "artists" trying to make a buck.
Pro-Mone,

I take exception to being called a greedy artist or with your inflammatory connotation.

I for one have struggled for decades in the arts. I have been forced to work humbly in day jobs that suck and are oppressive. I have sacrificed a lot. I have a rather imbalanced life where most of my disposable income goes into my art with little return or financial gain. The rewards are elsewhere, I have a rich life that has meaning, but the reward is seldom money.

While I may now have a luxury lifestyle that enjoys comforts, that only has happened over the past decade, and that was only because of my investments and a product of my day-jobs.

Greedy people generally do not pick the arts to make their buck. If I were pursuing wealth I would of done other things.

When I think of greed I think of landlords, bankers, and real estate developers. I generally don't associate artists with greed like you do.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #54
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
John,

What ever happened to rule of law?

Are Fascists really entitled to make their own justifications and get away with not following rule of law and civil society?

"Long live the republic," I say.

Cal
Well, I´m not sure the owner was a complete fascist ...he did allow it for many, many years. I can´t find any information as to why he felt he needed to whitewash the building immediately. What was going on behind the scenes here? Were the artists threatening a long legal battle to stop him from using the building as he had originally purchased it for (development)? There's a lot of info I don't know. I support the arts, but I'd also like to think that if I own something legally, I should be able to use it the way I like. Probably would've benefited him to have a little patience, but he most likely thought he could do what he wanted with what he owned.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #55
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Pro-Mone,

I take exception to being called a greedy artist or with your inflammatory connotation.
I think he was referring to the graffiti artists Cal.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #56
finguanzo
Registered User
 
finguanzo's Avatar
 
finguanzo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR
Posts: 929
Greedy little fu***.
LOL

I see the point on both sides, then again, I think the judge had a hardo* for the developer because the owner decided to whitewash it while it was in court instead of waiting for the final verdict/ permits.
Judges, as all people of power, want their authority respected...
Respect my au-tho-ri-ty!
__________________
some pictures
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #57
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Pro-Mone,

I take exception to being called a greedy artist or with your inflammatory connotation.

I for one have struggled for decades in the arts. I have been forced to work humbly in day jobs that suck and are oppressive. I have sacrificed a lot. I have a rather imbalanced life where most of my disposable income goes into my art with little return or financial gain. The rewards are elsewhere, I have a rich life that has meaning, but the reward is seldom money.

While I may now have a luxury lifestyle that enjoys comforts, that only has happened over the past decade, and that was only because of my investments and a product of my day-jobs.

Greedy people generally do not pick the arts to make their buck. If I were pursuing wealth I would of done other things.

When I think of greed I think of landlords, bankers, and real estate developers. I generally don't associate artists with greed like you do.

Cal
It might help if you read what I wrote. Unlike you, I wasn't personally attacking you. I really don't care. I presented my point of view.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #58
Beemermark
Registered User
 
Beemermark's Avatar
 
Beemermark is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,685
So when does graffiti become art? If I spray somebody else's property in NYC than the owner is banned from the full use of his property? If I allow someone to spray paint my property and then decide to sell my property, is the new owner than prohibited from the use of his property? Interesting, probably a big reason why I see in the Carolina's so many NY & NJ license plates.

Being arrogant, acting above the law and being greedy is not a criminal act. I know many arrogant people and unfortunately there is no law (at least in NC) to make them change their behavior. I think a lot of sellers and dealers on this web site are greedy; the idea of selling their property for money when they should be giving it to artists for free.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #59
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
I think you are taking things a little too far. I don't understand how this is any different from me being allowed to sue my landlord if I painted the walls of my apartment and he whitewahsed them. It's his property.
Pro-Mone,

Following laws by definition is Civil Society. I question your defense of this developer because he did not follow the laws, the judge judged him harshly for his disregard, and basically he acted as if he was above the law. He defied Civil Society and acted in a Fascist manner.

As far as painting my apartment: the law is I have to have permission of my landlord because it is his property. In fact by NYC law landlords are responsible for painting an apartment every three years, but this is not enforced. Painting an apartment is the duty of a landlord and not the tenent, unless written in a lease or contract.

Many landlords put on their leases that tenants can't paint their apartments to ensure that murals are not painted or loud colors like purple or red that are hard, difficult or impossible to cover and make white again.

I know all these laws because I am a part of Civil Society, but I'm sorry your developer who you defend is not.

In Boston Legal the TV show there was a term "Willy-Nilly" used by one judge that would be spins on law interpetation.

Clearly there were laws to be followed, but your spin on them is a bit "Willy-Nilly."

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #60
finguanzo
Registered User
 
finguanzo's Avatar
 
finguanzo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR
Posts: 929
In Elizabeth NJ it is illegal for a women to walk down the streets on a Sunday without a petticoat on.
Damn hooligans!

I take nothing in life serious, including what artists or developers do.I Ingest everything in jest.
__________________
some pictures
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #61
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
It might help if you read what I wrote. Unlike you, I wasn't personally attacking you. I really don't care. I presented my point of view.
Pro-Mone,

I get that it was not a personal attack, but come on who is accualy being greedy in this case. Can you not conceed that this developer bypassed the law and was uncivil?

If the 21 artists get the 6.7 million eventually it is a windfall. This is unlikely though and pretty obvious that this will be appealed.

Who is really making the money here? Is greedy artists a gross exaggeration?

BTW I'm not attacking you, but I'm kinda digging into the facts of the case that you disregard and don't respond to. Did the landlord not follow the rule of law in a consistent manner? I'm confronting your thinking.

Again when I think of greed I don't think of artists, I think of landlords, bankers and real estate developers, not artists. I don't think I have to think of your association of greed as personal to find it offensive.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #62
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by finguanzo View Post
In Elizabeth NJ it is illegal for a women to walk down the streets on a Sunday without a petticoat on.
Damn hooligans!

I take nothing in life serious, including what artists or developers do.I Ingest everything in jest.
Fidel,

As you know many laws are not enforced, especially in NYC. I was really shocked to find out in Toronto they yield right of way, don't jay-walk, and that I saw not a single dog-turd. Then I learn that in NYC basically thee is only a few laws and things are a bit arbitrary as far as enforcement.

I do know how to stay out of jail. When I was younger I could easily outrun lots of cops, never got caught LOL.

I started this post for entertainment value. I find it amusing. There is a lot of debate here. Lots of opinions.

Pretty much this developer asked for it. I find his situation amusing. IMHO he asked for it.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #63
fireblade
Vincenzo.
 
fireblade's Avatar
 
fireblade is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,141
Sometimes, the law is an ass.
__________________
Vincenzo

"No place is boring, if you've had a good night's sleep and have a pocket full of unexposed film."
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #64
finguanzo
Registered User
 
finguanzo's Avatar
 
finguanzo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR
Posts: 929
The developer asked for it, yes, for breaking the city ordinance that required him to obtain a permit. Agreed. Not really sure if it’s a law..
But for the judge to take that and make it into a six million dollar judgement for the artists because he decided to do with his property what he wanted, is a bit rediculouse to me.

Let’s all forget that he’s a big greedy multimillionaire nyc developer, and think of him as José Luis, the guy who spent 40 years working to buy his 3 apartment building in Newark, nj, was kind enough to let kids make they’re art on his building because he enjoyed it, but now 10 years later can not afford the taxes on the building, so he has to sell it. No one is going to buy the building with a big mural on it, so decides to paint the brick. Is José Luis going to get sued for six million dollars,? Will a judge side with the artists in this situation.?
The law is the same for everyone, whether it be big developer or poor schlepp.
That’s my problem with this whole story..

End scene.
__________________
some pictures
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #65
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by fireblade View Post
Sometimes, the law is an ass.
Kinda true. Many laws make no sense.

In Canada in Montreal and Toronto I found no dog-poop as booby traps in my wanderings, even in the poorer neighborhoods. Realize that I explored both Canadian cities fully on foot without ever using mass transportation.

Here in NYC one needs to be rather agile to avoid soiling the bottom of your shoes. This goes for rich neighborhoods as well as poor, although it is worse in the poorer areas. Many a times it is a hop-skip and a jump to avoid soiling one's shoes.

Interesting to note that in all three cities it is a $300.00 fine for not picking up after your dog. Evidently in Canada there is much more respect for the laws, and I assume the laws are enforced.

Overall I like the behavior of Canadians more than Americans. We Americans certainly are rude and impolite in comparison. Mucho A-hole in U.S. and I feel I can say that because I'm an American. LOL.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #66
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Fidel,


I do know how to stay out of jail. When I was younger I could easily outrun lots of cops, never got caught LOL.


Cal
So you think this is ok? This is a very enlightening thread Cal. Better be careful. One day you just might get caught
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #67
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by finguanzo View Post
The developer asked for it, yes, for breaking the city ordinance that required him to obtain a permit. Agreed. Not really sure if it’s a law..
But for the judge to take that and make it into a six million dollar judgement for the artists because he decided to do with his property what he wanted, is a bit rediculouse to me.

Let’s all forget that he’s a big greedy multimillionaire nyc developer, and think of him as José Luis, the guy who spent 40 years working to buy his 3 apartment building in Newark, nj, was kind enough to let kids make they’re art on his building because he enjoyed it, but now 10 years later can not afford the taxes on the building, so he has to sell it. No one is going to buy the building with a big mural on it, so decides to paint the brick. Is José Luis going to get sued for six million dollars,? Will a judge side with the artists in this situation.?
The law is the same for everyone, whether it be big developer or poor schlepp.
That’s my problem with this whole story..

End scene.
Fidel,

That certainly is the case for most people. A fourth part here are lawyers. I found out the hard way when getting divorced that it is the best interest of lawyers to drag out and create nasty fighting. This is how they protect their best interests and make the most money.

The bills added up fast, and it did not take long at $375.00 an hour to limit even a phone call because it cost me mucho money.

This is why some poor slob is always on the bottom of the scrow-tum pole.

Lawyers...

Talk about greed. I forgot about them. This is why I take offense at the suggestion that an artist can be greedy. Certain professions surely have an abundance of greedy people.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #68
finguanzo
Registered User
 
finguanzo's Avatar
 
finguanzo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR
Posts: 929
I’m not talking about greed, everyone is greedy. I’m talking about the judge making the same judgement no matter who you are or what your background is, which is the way it should be. If José Luis where in front of the judge, the artists would not be winning.
So In that scenario the artists not winning they’re case would be fine with you.? Or do you want José Luis to pay up 6 mil.? Are José and developer not equal as people.?

Either you side with artists rights, or you side with the building owner, regardless if it’s José Luis or millionaire. Can’t decide depending on who’s on that side, not how rights work..
__________________
some pictures
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #69
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemermark View Post
So when does graffiti become art? If I spray somebody else's property in NYC than the owner is banned from the full use of his property?
Of course not.

Quote:
If I allow someone to spray paint my property and then decide to sell my property, is the new owner than prohibited from the use of his property? Interesting, probably a big reason why I see in the Carolina's so many NY & NJ license plates.
I believe this is a special circumstance... since it was not just a building with some simple vandalism on it... it looked like this... and the owner allowed this for 30 years



Quote:
Being arrogant, acting above the law and being greedy is not a criminal act. I know many arrogant people and unfortunately there is no law (at least in NC) to make them change their behavior. the idea of selling their property for money when they should be giving it to artists for free.
Completely true...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #70
finguanzo
Registered User
 
finguanzo's Avatar
 
finguanzo is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR
Posts: 929
I object! That's circumstantial evidence!


You can tell its a slow work day for everyone.
__________________
some pictures
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #71
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
So you think this is ok? This is a very enlightening thread Cal. Better be careful. One day you just might get caught
Pro-Mone,

Back in the 70's street fighting was frequent. There were no video cameras, and here in NYC the police were a joke. It was a different time when crime was expected and even tolerated.

Example: Drugs were rampant. Many people who did not live during that time don't know that basically illegal drugs were kinda legal. just like in the HBO series "The Wire" NYPD set up areas that kept illegal drug sales contained.

My friend Oscar, a Latino from the Southside of Williamsburg, told me that on South 2d Street right in front of the firehouse, one block from Bedford Avenue, pretty much the NYPD would have a cop car to ensure the drug traffic and dealing was restricted to this one block to keep drugs out of the rest of the neighborhood. LOL.

Since I grew up out on Long Island, we use to go to the upper parking lot in Alley Pond Park where drugs were sold openly like an outdoor flea market. A cop car stayed at the lower lot as a vigil. Understand that to get up to the upper parking lot it was one way in one way out. Over the years never got stopped.

Back in the 70's they had a separate police department just for the subway, and another police department for public housing.

Pretty much was a lawless time. Everyone kinda broke the law. Law basically was not enforced and it was a total free for all. The NYPD was not like it is today.

Last time I got chased by NYPD was about eight years ago. I was being chased by a NYPD helicopter on September 11th, 2010. I purposely stayed out of Madhattan and decided to trespass into the Dutch Kills railyard to climb a railroad tower to photograph Madhattan with this railyard in the foreground.

I shot a Rollie 3.5F and a Tele Rollieflex, I had to wait for NYPD helicopters to clear out of my shots, and then I heard a helicopter hovering directly over me. I threw my cameras into my Domke and scurried like a Cockroach hiding in the shadows as the chopper circled looking for me. My Cockroack impersonation worked and I eventually escaped without getting arrested.

Another time I got caught by three undercover cops in LIC. Heavy snowfall had knocked down a chain link fence over the winter that had secured some abandoned buildings. I was caught out in the open when a black towncar pulled up and three men dressed in black got out. It took a while to realize they were cops. It took a bit untill they got closer untill I saw the badgeholders.

Two of them detained me while the other made sure I was alone. Pretty much I talked my way out of getting arrested. I was caught red handed. The only thing that made sense is that these two hipsters I saw earlier called 911. My guess is seeing a skinny Chinese guy with a poney tail and camera was suspiscious. If you see something...

After that I no longer do my exploring. Oh I forgot I did recently trespass up in the Bronx with Andre and two Mormans. LOL. Oh-well.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #72
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
Oh I forgot I did recently trespass up in the Bronx with Andre and two Mormans. LOL. Oh-well.

Cal
Morman photographers?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #73
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by finguanzo View Post
I’m not talking about greed, everyone is greedy. I’m talking about the judge making the same judgement no matter who you are or what your background is, which is the way it should be. If José Luis where in front of the judge, the artists would not be winning.
So In that scenario the artists not winning they’re case would be fine with you.? Or do you want José Luis to pay up 6 mil.? Are José and developer not equal as people.?

Either you side with artists rights, or you side with the building owner, regardless if it’s José Luis or millionaire. Can’t decide depending on who’s on that side, not how rights work..
Fidel,

I see your point on equity and equality. I will frame what I say feels right to me.

I support a bias against the man who enjoys privelage, and I would give mucho lee-way to the average guy or the disadvantaged.

As for greed, perhaps for me it has its limits. Andrew Carne-Gee made mucho money with his steel mills. He also is responsible for deadly working conditions and creating slums as he concentrated his empire and wealth. Later in life he kinda bought a "stairway to heaven" by setting up a foundation to redistribute wealth and mitigate the poverty he created.

Shame on him. If I won some grand lottery perhaps I would only keep 6-10 million to ensure a comfortable life. I would not need more luxury items because I already kinda have a lot, and any more is pointless. I'm pretty happy with all my possessions and perhaps only lust for a darkroom, a studio space, and perhaps a nice truck and or car. Really my life would only marginally different because I already am a happy guy that has more than my fair share.

So the surplus of my windfall I would try to help others and try to make the world a better and fairer place. There is greed and there is being greedy. At a certain point I can afford to do both.

I know injustice, I know discrimination, I know bias, and I know violence. My life experience imposes certain values of fairness, and sometimes justice should be appropriate. I do feel a sense of community and I do think it is Civic Duty that sometimes wealth and power has to be gauged into punishment. This is part of Civil Society.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #74
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,938
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Morman photographers?
John,

Yup. It was a guy and girl who escaped Utah and then found each other online.

I thought you would like that twist. LOL.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #75
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone View Post
John,

Yup. It was a guy and girl who escaped Utah and then found each other online.

I thought you would like that twist. LOL.

Cal
Haha...awesome! Good work?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2018   #76
jszokoli
Registered User
 
jszokoli's Avatar
 
jszokoli is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 190
Cal,

Early on I made the point that the award was bad for the arts because it will deter owners from allowing art on properties. Fair what's fair. There is nothing fair in life. But lets not screw up the incentives (or punishments) that make our society better.

I just don't see the serious crime here...

Joe
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:29.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.