Stopped by a policeman for taking pictures of a church

<p>Hmmm ... armed robbery, except that it was “completely voluntary.”</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The cop was out of line. Period.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually, no he wasn't. I know the Throggs Neck Bridge, and I know that there are conspicuously placed signs expressly prohibiting photography. I also know that that particular bridge is a strategic link from Long Island to the mainland US, of which there are not many. To be specific there are three, the Throggs Neck, Whitestone, and Triboro (recently renamed to RFK) bridges. That's it. All the other road connections from LI to the mainland US route through the very small and very congested island of Manhattan. It is nearly impossible to evacuate people from, or deliver disaster relief supplies to Long Island via Manhattan in anything resembling an efficient manner. Period.<br>

Now, I'm not one to welcome infringements on personal freedoms, but considering the strategic importance of this bridge, I can certainly understand the PO's behavior. If you were here eight years ago, you might feel the same way. If you were here and can't understand that, I suggest you get your head out of your ass.</p>

<p>Frank, do the signs prohibit photography of the bridge or the military reservation (Fort Totten?). And if the former, are the signs backed by a <em>law</em> that prohibits photography? Although it's possible, it would be the first such case I've ever heard of. If there isn't such a law, maybe Nicolas isn't the one who needs to get his head out of his ass.</p>

<p>Oops, it was Landrum, rather than Nicolas, that you quoted.</p>

<p>I know I already posted and declared that I am both a photographer and a Police Officer but let me restate that before adding the following. Those of you taking this OP's story as a chance to take a blanket swipe at law enforcement, you need to get a grip on reality. You don't know the whole story, you never will. Police get ridiculous calls about ridiculous stuff all day, every day. We don't have the option of not responding to calls given to us by dispatch. To fail to do so is a quick way to find yourself unemployed. If someone called just because he was in front of their house taking pictures, albeit of a church, a cat, or even a tree, then the Officer is obligated to go make contact with that person due to the logged concern of the citizen. It has to be addressed regardless of merit. The Officer said "Watch out" and some of you say you should have complained and maybe "knocked him down a few notches". I think that as much as some will argue about some cops being bullies, some citizens only think so because they are granted authorities that those same citizens do not, will not, and could not possess. It is a thankless job and just like you sometimes our day isn't going so well and the people we work with end up having to deal with it. Ask any of your co-workers if you have ever had a "grumpy" day and I bet I can already tell you the answer. Before cracking the whip over our backs remember that there is not a person, no not one, serving time in prison or your local jail that has gotten there of his own free will. He was tracked down through investigation and effort that is strongly based on our desire to keep our society free of those that wish to disturb it. Are there some a-hole cops out there? Of course but for the most part we do a thankless job day in and day out and we do it not for the money but because somebody has to be the sheep dog keeping the fox off the herds back. Get a job where you have to strap a bullet proof vest to your back every day and kiss your family knowing that your decision to protect the lives of your citizens may cost you your own and then talk to me about what it's like to walk in our shoes. Yes we make the decision to do it, but somebody has to. If we didn't nobody would be taking pictures of anything because the bulk of society doesn't have the capacity for violence that would be required to protect their own life in pursuit of such pleasures. OP, he told you to watch yourself and you have waivered considerably in your emotional spectrum as to how it effected you. Get over it and be thankful that that man would have run right at a gun toting perp wanting to take your camera, or god forbid your life. Who knows, he may have just come from a call where a man was bathing his 1 year old in a bath of scalding hot water to punish him as I did recently. Now if you would, tell me just how bad this run in was with him again.</p>

<p>way to go Douglas although I rather suspect that the mind of the "some of you's" was already set. It seems to be an almost knee-jerk reaction to shout harassment on the basis of frankly absolutely nothing. I suspect that most of these people belong to the first ones to shout police incompetence when something happens while you're not there, because you simply can't be everywhere.</p>

<p>And for the would be street shooters amongst you. If you qualify this as harassment you shouldn't be out there in the first place. Stuff happens, deal with it, get over it and go shoot some more or else you're better of shooting the flowerbeds in your backyard or take up wood carving.</p>

<p>I totally agree with Ton and Douglas Scroggins. This is a non event.</p>

<p>I'm sorry the OP felt uncomfortable. I feel uncomfortable when I'm on a stepladder. Therefore, I'm not a painter, electrician (changing a light bulb), etc. As an amateur photographer I've made a very small number of people feel uncomfortable when I've included them in my photographs. I'm not aggressive, confrontational, or whatever when I'm out making photographs. Some people, for whatever reason, just do not like having their pictures taken. I try to respect this, but I'm not going to stop making pictures because of them.</p>

<p>I'm also not a police officer. I suspect that most PO's are human. Some communicate better than others. I believe that part of a PO's job entails bailing out some half-wit that unwittingly puts himself in a position that requires bailing by a PO. I also suspect that a competent PO can see a potential situation developing around a half-wit and will try to head that situation off. The half-wit may not always have the sense to respect this.</p>

<p>We as photographers have many rights. We are not granted the right to feel comfortable at all times while we pursue our vocation or avocation. Just as a police officer is not granted the right to feel comfortable while he is dealing with an unknown situation, let alone while he is in a shoot-out with an armed crazy.</p>

<p>Can you imagine an online forum of people who have had their pictures taken without their permission? Imagine a post where someone was working on the landscaping of their church and had a stranger drive up, stop and take some pictures that included them in a picture of the church. OP: there I was minding my own business, doing my job when some photographer stops on the street and starts snapping away. I went up to the photographer and asked what he was doing. He said it's his right to take my picture. I felt violated that he did this. Where are my rights? He handed me this flyer he downloaded from the Internet explaining his rights. I still feel violated....again, what about my rights? Another forum poster asks: did the photographer do anything wrong? Did he step outside of the law? OP: no, but I still feel violated.</p>

<p>Conclusion: go live in a monastery. Today's world is kind of complicated. Or, just do still life photography.</p>

<p>Now, if the OP had been told to vacate the premises or to surrender his film, that would be a totally different story.</p>

<p>Just my two cents,<br>

Mark</p>

<p>How did I miss this thread? NJ. I live in NJ too. It's the expensive, dictator state. Just pay what they say you owe, and do what they tell you. In seven years when I retire from teaching I will leave as fast as I possibly can and never return. You know what they do best in NJ? Build traffic islands that are absolutely not needed. Bigger contract for bidders, more money and materials, six times as long to finish and pay police off duty OT for directing traffic, more to fix and pay when someone wrecks it, way more work and money when time to remove it. It's all nonsense. Next time you come to NJ see how many islands there are or are being built or taken apart, it's almost too funny until you realize how much taxpayer money is being wasted on this junk. The real reason for Edward's harassment is because the cop was overtired from no days off, too much OT roadwork in front of islands. ;-)</p>

<p>you werent violated. young girls in the congo who are taken by a militia, used as slaves all day and gang raped at night are violated. the guy who got a plunger handle stuck up his but by the nypd a few years back, he was violated. you may have been hassled a little but you werent violated. </p>

<p>on second thought, you werent even hassled. he didnt look in your bag, search your car. he was may have been ever so slightly curt with you. to claim you were violated makes you a big sissy mary. </p>

<p>Hey Ed, thanks for posting the photo. And the church is abandoned?<br>

The officer has the right to inquire about you and your activities in a public place... since you indicate you have a beard, consider this option:<br>

"Bearded man is taking photos of a long-abandoned building. Building has a tower which can be converted into an ideal sniper's nest from which to operate. If I don't investigate and then a sniper incident occurs, I will be derelict in my duties."<br>

I loved the 'watch yourself' line though... the officer has watched a few too many cop shows, probably starting with <em>Dragnet</em>. I'm a little reminded of the piano moving scene from the old Laurel and Hardy film where the cop says 'let that be a lesson to you.' Some things never change.</p>

<p><em>he didnt look in your bag, search your car.</em><br>

He had zero legal right to do those things, and could have gotten into a great deal of trouble for doing so without reasonable cause. Basically he was about as much of an ass as he was legally allowed to be.</p>

<p>of course he can search you...."your eyes are red, your pupils are dilated, you seemed erratic.".. all very subjective and hard to disprove. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>It seems to be an almost knee-jerk reaction to shout harassment on the basis of frankly absolutely nothing.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Tom, you know that I always value your opinion, but in this case I simply cannot see the rationale for a cop interfering with a citizen engaging in a harmless act. If anyone with any malicious intent were taking pictures, he would do it on the sly, not use a Pentax 6x7 with a big lens on a city street--aimed at a church.</p>

<p>The cops are certainly not all ogres. Some just do not exhibit a lot of common sense, and too much of this thoughtless behavior is all too often directed at photographers. That larger phenomenon is of more concern to me than this case by itself.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>Lannie, I'll try to explain via a different angle then. There could be numerous valid reasons for that officer to ask a, what I consider to be a rather innocent question anyhow, from what the OP provided in his first post. There is not much to go on to begin with and yet all kinds of conclusions are drawn and a lot of people immediately took the view that the officer was at fault. There is absolutely no basis for that because simply put, there is not enough to go on. We shouldn't forget however that cops get payed to be alert and vigilant, it's what we expect from them. But when we get confronted with that ourselves it suddenly becomes interfering or harassment it seems. That's hypocritical. And let's be honest, being asked a simple question constitutes hardly the same as being questioned.<br>

<br /> I'm not here to defend the police but in shooting a lot on the street I regularly have dealt with them in a variety of countries. I've been asked questions numerous times but almost all I've met were very helpfull, forthcoming and pleasant people. Most times you get what you give. As some people have already pointed out assholes you can find in every profession. Let's not forget that the field of photography is not excempt of them</p>

<p>Furthermore the OP early on lost all credibility for whom he's got no one to blame but himself. He made quite an ass of himself. At best one could say that he got caught up in his own story although I myself would formulate that in quite another way but one tries to stay polite. Instead of picking up on that a lot of people kept dribbling on about that officers perceived behaviour. Making generalisations like some people did in stating that the police as a whole is ill equped where social skills are concerned was and is in no way called for nor substantiated with any argument.</p>

<p>Speaking of larger phenomena Lannie I myself as a non-native would find it much more worrisome that so many people seem so ill-equipped to read and interpret the English languaqe. This was a foolish non-story to begin with. The best we can do is to forget it as quick as possible.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Furthermore the OP early on lost all credibility for whom he's got no one to blame but himself.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't see that, Tom. Horn seemed pretty dispassionate about it to me.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>If a cop ever approaches you like this again, ask for his shift commander to come out and explain how taking a photo of this church is illegal. I guarantee that the dufus cop will hit the dusty trail and find a little spot to set up a speed trap to get some rascally speeder.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If a cop ever approaches you like this again, ask for his shift commander to come out and explain how taking a photo of this church is illegal.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But no one, including the police officer in question, ever suggested it was illegal. However, that is good advice if that does actually happen to you.</p>

<p>but then the cop never suggested that it was. Why is it so hard to read?<br>

What it all comes down to is this:</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Tom, what you have described better describes the average cop than the average photographer, in my opinion.</p>

<p>The simple fact is that the cop had NO reason to stop and ask questions in this case. Was it a major transgression? No. Is it noteworthy? It is noteworthy only in the sense that it is not all that noteworthy, i.e., that it is fairly common.</p>

<p>Perhaps that is noteworthy, oxymoronic as that may seem.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>For your sake I hope it's fairly common. The simple fact is we don't know if that cop had a reason to ask that innocent question nor is that overly important. What is important that he had every right to do so. Therefore there was no transgression at all.</p>

<p>People keep telling me that America is the land of the free. There is however no freedom without responsability. Part of that responsability we give in the hands of a professional police force. You can't complain if they take that seriously.</p>

<p>What I myself find noteworthy is that someone tells obvious porky's and people making laughable generalisations. And now I'm really out of here.</p>

<p> I don't normally take what you would call Street or Documentary Photos but I have been stopped and approached so many times from Bums to Police that i don't even worry about it anymore. People skills have saved me more than laws (or lack of them) in fact, I might have broken some laws to photograph. Yes, I have even had guns drawn on me and those times I wished it was police.</p>

<p>I think that Security guards have empowered themselves too much, but these are times we live in.</p>

<p>My point is if someone asks me what I am doing I don't mind. Sometimes a banal conversation is ok.</p>

<p>"Watch yourself" could have another connotation of "Be careful out there".</p>

 

<p>After reading many of these posts I want to inject this, I have been doing a series of night shots here in Fort Lauderdale and surrounding areas off and on for two years, I have accumulated somewhere near 150 images. Some of bridges, including under one bridge, churches, waterfront businesses, etc.<br>

After the encounter with the Deputy Sheriff which I mentioned here earlier I felt I was good to go in the railroad station. I set up and waited for the scheduled south bound, it was just after sun down Just about the time the train was due I was approached by a deputy dog (this is what we locally call armed security guards)<br>

What are you doing? I am waiting for the train. No pictures in the station he said. Oh how come? He then said no pictures in the train stations, air port or the port. Well I said I have a pass for the port. You do? yes I do, so I showed it to him and he said I have to go fill out my report, you be gone when I come back, Thank you I said.<br>

After two years and only two encounters I feel lucky.</p>

 

<p>Hi i live in birmingham england and have been stoped from taking photos by the police , it`s big brother , its ok for them to harass me and photograph me . have a look at this site you will see wot`s going on round my part of the world . ps its not only police stoping us security have started harassing us as well ....(<a href="http://www.epuk.org/News/818/police-officer-forced-photographer-to-delete-images">http://www.epuk.org/News/818/police-officer-forced-photographer-to-delete-images</a>)</p>