Went to Home Depot today

[tasman]

Should have just used a camera phone, pretend your making a call and snap a few pics.

 

[Easy_Target]

The government owns a lot, and they don't mind you taking photos on their property.

I beg to differ...

 

[hovis]

I have to confess to being a tad confused - I thought the US had a constitution that guaranteed all citizens certain rights, including (these days) the right to photograph what they liked as long as they were not on private property.. Is this not the case then?

 

[Phazan]

I'll bet if you didn't ask, they probably wouldn't have said anything..And even if they did, what are they gonna do? Take away your camera?? They can't do that

 

[clarinetJWD]

A wise man once told me "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission."

Just go somewhere and start shooting, if they ask you to stop, stop, but they can't take away the shots you got without a court order.

 

[Senor Hound]

Someone please explain how "no pictures in the store" equates to being mistreated? I see nothing in the original post that says anyone was "mistreated".

The OP implied the reason was said with a rude tone by putting it in capital letters.

And all of these "photographer's rights," threads turn ugly anyway, but since its already going in that direction, I'll say that its not as cut and dried as we make it out to be. Certain things are allowed, certain things aren't, and the only people who know are law enforcement, lawyers and judges.

 

[Doug]

Someone please explain how "no pictures in the store" equates to being mistreated? I see nothing in the original post that says anyone was "mistreated".

I never said we was mistreated, I was just telling of a experience that we had. The fact that I said it with capital letters is that it was cut and dry, No picture taking is allowed in Home Depot, period.

The assistant manager on the other end of the walkie talkie was very clear that he didn't want anyone taking pictures in his store. That was it end of discussion. There was no explanation or questions from the assistant manager as to why my wife wanted to take photos.

We didn't question the assistant manager either, didn't care. He was probably one of those overweight, promoted past the level of incompitence brown nosing dweebs that got picked on while in school types, that let the power of managment go to his head. (My opinion only, for legal purposes).

 

[mrodgers]

I never said we was mistreated, I was just telling of a experience that we had. The fact that I said it with capital letters is that it was cut and dry, No picture taking is allowed in Home Depot, period.

Sorry, I was responding to replies, only it was the replies I remember from the "car accident" thread and not this one....

In the other thread that I confused this one with, the replies specifically were that the OP was mistreated. The question still stands, but pertains to the other thread and not this one....

 

[usayit]

For me, it is cut and dry. Privately owned business has every right to set the rules just as long as they don't conflict with the laws of that area. What an individual thinks is right and wrong.. what is ethically right and wrong.. what is logically right and wrong has absolutely NOTHING to do with what is legally right and wrong.

Put yourself on the other side of the coin. If you were the business owner, would you feel compelled to make your business open to public if it means giving up your right to set rules.

On one hand, we are a society so quickly to sue the business but we moan when that same business sets rules to protect itself. Remember, we are a group of photographers that have posted many times our grievances against the slow erosion of our right to take photos.... on the same coin we should also respect other entities (business) rights as well.