Photographing a public place and asked to stop

[480sparky]

Just because someone wears a security guard uniform does not mean he has any authority. Many Rent-A-Cops are over-zealous and under-trained.

And, conversely, it would be ill-advised to believe that all security guards fall into that category.

The reality is that someone working as a security guard does have some level of authority. The question to that is how much, and where. I've seen idiots face off with mall security guards and they end up getting detained until the police arrive, whereupon they're arrested and transported to the local lock-up.

All because they believed that security guards had no authority...

I never stated security guards have NO authority. I merely stated that most EXCEED their authority, due mostly to lack of proper training.

 

[Steve5D]

Just because someone wears a security guard uniform does not mean he has any authority. Many Rent-A-Cops are over-zealous and under-trained.

And, conversely, it would be ill-advised to believe that all security guards fall into that category.

The reality is that someone working as a security guard does have some level of authority. The question to that is how much, and where. I've seen idiots face off with mall security guards and they end up getting detained until the police arrive, whereupon they're arrested and transported to the local lock-up.

All because they believed that security guards had no authority...

I never stated security guards have NO authority. I merely stated that most EXCEED their authority, due mostly to lack of proper training.

If you could point out where you say "most exceed their authority" in the post I quoted, that'd be swell.

A security guard can demand your memory card from you, and he's exceeded no authority whatsoever. If you give it to him, it's not his fault, it's yours. He can ask or demand anything he wants. Only if he coerces or forces you is he exceeding authority.

Also, what constitutes "proper training", and are you personally in a position to know what constitutes "proper training"?

As far as I know, security companies need to be bonded if they expected to be contracted. They can't be bonded without providing "proper training" to their employees. I think it's more likely that what you see as improper training is that training which compels security from allowing you to do what you want, simply because you've offered no examples to support your contention...

 

[480sparky]

And, conversely, it would be ill-advised to believe that all security guards fall into that category.

The reality is that someone working as a security guard does have some level of authority. The question to that is how much, and where. I've seen idiots face off with mall security guards and they end up getting detained until the police arrive, whereupon they're arrested and transported to the local lock-up.

All because they believed that security guards had no authority...

I never stated security guards have NO authority. I merely stated that most EXCEED their authority, due mostly to lack of proper training.

If you could point out where you say "most exceed their authority" in the post I quoted, that'd be swell.

A security guard can demand your memory card from you, and he's exceeded no authority whatsoever. If you give it to him, it's not his fault, it's yours. He can ask or demand anything he wants. Only if he coerces or forces you is he exceeding authority.

Also, what constitutes "proper training", and are you personally in a position to know what constitutes "proper training"?

As far as I know, security companies need to be bonded if they expected to be contracted. They can't be bonded without providing "proper training" to their employees. I think it's more likely that what you see as improper training is that training which compels security from allowing you to do what you want, simply because you've offered no examples to support your contention...

Well, perhaps you could provide me with legal rulings, laws, ordinances, court decisions, etc. that give Rent-A-Cops the legal authority to demand my memory cards.

Many security guards simply fill out an app and are hired and put to work.

 

[Steve5D]

Well, perhaps you could provide me with legal rulings, laws, ordinances, court decisions, etc. that give Rent-A-Cops the legal authority to demand my memory cards.

I never said they have the legal authority to do that. I said if they do it, they've exceeded no legal authority, simply because there's none there, with respect to you being required to hand the cards over, to begin with. They can demand that you hop up and down in a diaper while reciting the Gettysburg Address, and they'll be exceeding no legal authority. As with your memory cards, you don't have to do it.

Many security guards simply fill out an app and are hired and put to work.

Please provide examples of this. Please provide examples of any reputable security company putting people to work with no background check and no training.

You've said that many have no training. I'm simply asking you to support that assertion, and you seem remarkably ill-prepared to do so...

 

[480sparky]

Please provide examples of this. Please provide examples of any reputable security company putting people to work with no background check and no training.

You've said that many have no training. I'm simply asking you to support that assertion, and you seem remarkably ill-prepared to do so...

Dan VanDeventer. Friend of mine, hired as a security guard. Filled out app, got hired, went to work the next day.

I'd have him contact you, but he passed away 3 years ago. Sorry... them's the facts.

Toby Morrison. Classmate, hired as a security guard. Filled out app, got hired, went to work the next day. Last I heard from him, he was working as a guard at the State facility in Ft. Madison, Ia., but that was years ago.

Now, do you want a comprehensive list of EVERYONE who was ever hired in the same fashion, whether I know them or not? I guess if you cannot accept first-hand experiences, then I guess there's no pleasing you.

 

[o hey tyler]

I got hired as a security guard. Went through training, and a background check.

I recently quit said position.

 

[jwbryson1]

if the police want your name and or identification, you DO in fact have to give it.

ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE.

 

[tecboy]

Hey guys, I started this thread and asked you guys "Have you experienced someone asked you to stop photographs in popular places?" I didn't ask for debate about police and security issues.

 

[unpopular]

All this increased security is in the wrong place. I've not had much trouble, sometimes the cops keep an eye on me when I'm out shooting, which is within their right - i'd rather them that then take up time questioning me, which is also within their right to an extent. People get it into their heads that the cops can't even ask what you're taking pictures of without first obtaining a warrant, but a cop can -and should - investigate anything. And if you're distracting a cop from doing his or her job by shoving your penis extending telephoto in their face, yeah, you're going to get one warning before geting a citation for interference, and if you sit there and fight while he or she is doing her job, bashing in the heads of hippys or what not, then you're going to get arrested.

A good photographer will got the shot without interfering, that is the definition of a good photojournalist, not saying misbehaving cops have never attacked the press - just ask any photojournalist in Chicago durring the 1968 democratic national convention.

But really, it's misplaced. If I were a perverted terrorizing thief, why would I use something as conspicuous as a DSLR?

 

[KenC]

Hey guys, I started this thread and asked you guys "Have you experienced someone asked you to stop photographs in popular places?" I didn't ask for debate about police and security issues.

No one ever gets what they expected here.

I've been bothered occasionally, mostly when I lived for a little while in the Chicago area - never figured out why it should be so different there. If you're on private property, best to leave immediately. If you're on public property, you can pretty much do what you want, within limits others have stated, but still best to be non-confrontational about it.

 

[Gavjenks]

if the police want your name and or identification, you DO in fact have to give it.

ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE.

Uh yes it is, in many states, to varying degrees. There is no federal stop and identify law, but there may be a state one in one's local area
Stop and identify statutes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In several states, you can actually be criminally charged for not providing said information truthfully when requested. In other states, not identifying yourself can be grouds for a lawful arrest, etc.

Hey guys, I started this thread and asked you guys "Have you experienced someone asked you to stop photographs in popular places?" I didn't ask for debate about police and security issues.

It's kind of a boring thread to just have a list of people going "yes" "yes" "no" "yup" "no" "nope" Obviously we are also going to debate it.

 

[unpopular]

if the police want your name and or identification, you DO in fact have to give it.

ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE.

Uh yes it is, in many states, to varying degrees. There is no federal stop and identify law, but there may be a state one in one's local area
Stop and identify statutes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have no idea where this myth comes from. And besides, by the time a police officer is asking for your identity, you're probably being detained anyway.

 

[jwbryson1]

ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE.

Uh yes it is, in many states, to varying degrees. There is no federal stop and identify law, but there may be a state one in one's local area
Stop and identify statutes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have no idea where this myth comes from. And besides, by the time a police officer is asking for your identity, you're probably being detained anyway.

Exactly. I love when pedestrians tell me the law...and then link to Wikipedia.

 

[unpopular]

My rule with dealing with the cops is that if it's there's nothing preventing them from asking me questions. There's nothing wrong with a cop asking what I'm doing or what I'm taking photos of, no more than some guy walking his dog at the park - and that happens more frequently than being approached by the cops.

If the cops ask things that I wouldn't be comfortable with a normal person asking, like if they can see my photos or dig through my camera bag, or where I live I can (in my state) say 'no', and once I'm detained the relationship goes from a person who happens to be a cop asking me questions, to a detainee being questioned by the cops and the rules change entirely.

But there's no reason to get all hostile just because a cop starts asking you a few questions.

 

[Gavjenks]

if the police want your name and or identification, you DO in fact have to give it.

ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE.

Dude, this is just flat out wrong. I linked to a wikipedia article yes, but if you'd spent more than 3 seconds looking at it, you'd see that it is full of links to official state government statutes for the relevant laws. Arizona for example, from azleg.gov:

13-2412. Refusing to provide truthful name when lawfully detained; classification

A. It is unlawful for a person, after being advised that the person's refusal to answer is unlawful, to fail or refuse to state the person's true full name on request of a peace officer who has lawfully detained the person based on reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime. A person detained under this section shall state the person's true full name, but shall not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of a peace officer.

B. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.

So yes, in Arizona, when detained (you didn't say anything about whether you were talking about detained situations or not), you are required to answer the officer with your true identity when asked, or you can be charged with a class 2 misdemeanor. Saying nothing at all is not a legal option.

Thus, your comment that it is "ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE" is wrong, and if somebody followed your advice blindly, they could incur a class 2 misdemeanor on themselves as a result.

In Ohio, it's even more strict:

2921.29 Failure to disclose personal information


(A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following:

(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.
(2) The person witnessed any of the following:
(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;
(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;
(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;
(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one's personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.
(C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.
(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person's age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.

Effective Date: 04-14-2006

You can in Ohio be charged with a 4th degree misdemeanor for not giving your name or address even if you are not a suspect, but may simply have been a witness of some felony.