Bottom line is it's not illegal to take pictures at airports. If someone gives you a hard time about it, POLITELY ask them what law you are violating and ask to speak with their supervisor.
There's no rule that says you can't do it.
Here's a great column on it.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...tech/col/smith There's a shiny new airport in Manchester, and I'm there to take pictures as part of an article I'm working on for that mouthpiece of liberal fascism, the Boston Globe. I've shot about six digital pictures, and I'm working on the seventh -- a nicely framed view of the terminal façade -- when I hear the stern "Excuse me." A young guy in a navy windbreaker steps toward me. It says AIRPORT SECURITY in block letters across his back. "You can't do that. You need to put the camera away." "I do? Why?" "Pictures aren't allowed." "They're not?" "Sorry." "Sorry what? I don't think that's true, actually. I'm pretty sure that it isn't illegal to take pictures at an airport." "You'll need to talk to a deputy, sir." I slip the camera into a pocket as the guard, who despite his crested cap and cocksure understanding of the rules, is a private security guard and not a law enforcement official, quickly summons over two members of the Rockingham County sheriff's department, which administers the Manchester airport. The deputies -- a woman and a man -- are polite but stern, and they'd like to know exactly what I'm doing. "You need to have a permit to take photographs," one of them says. "Maybe we can call and see if they'll give you clearance." I'm not sure I believe it. "What do I need a permit for? Is there a rule here against taking pictures? Is it illegal?" "I don't know," she replies, crossly, as if the question somehow isn't relevant. "I don't think so, technically." "So, if not, why would I need a permit?" "That's what the airport wants. You'll have to ask the airport manager." They ask to see press credentials. When I explain that I'm a freelancer they demand a driver's license. The woman deputy takes it and disappears for several minutes. While waiting for my license to return from its secret mission, I tell the other officer how this is the same airport where, in 1986, I received my private pilot's license. From runway 35, four years later, I made my first takeoff as a cockpit crewmember. It's all very different now, in more ways than one. And I tell him how, as adolescent planespotters in the late '70s, my friends and I would scour the terminals at Boston-Logan every weekend, armed with cameras, notebooks and binoculars, taking pictures and logging tail numbers, fully aware that in many countries, hobbies like ours were essentially illegal. The cop shakes his head. He's an older guy, who probably remembers when MHT had two flights a day with 15-seaters, before Southwest came in with seven gates and nonstops to Vegas. "I know," he says. "It's too bad. But we live in a different world now." Soon thereafter my license reappears and I'm free to go.
"May I use my camera?" "Yes," is the answer, so long as I don't take any photos inside the terminal. And next time, it would behoove me to receive permission before arriving.
All of this is complete and utter BS if you ask me. We aren't taking pictures of top secret super duper black book programs. We're taking pictures of airplanes and public facilities.
Terrorists don't want to take pictures of airplanes. They want to blow them up.
Besides, if the department of homeland (in)security would take their collective heads out of their butts for two seconds, they'd realize that having people around the airport who enjoy taking pictures of the facilities and airplanes would be BENEFICIAL to security. You'd have extra eyes on the premises and if they hang out at the airport enough, they'd be able to know what to expect and something unusual could be reported.
And the thing that steams me the most is the response of the cop. She's acting as if it's not relevant that there is no law against taking pictures at airports. She's there to enforce the law, not her whim.