Overzealous Security Guards Overstepping Authority

Every time I am taking photos around downtown Denver, I find myself Confronted by security guards. They ask what I'm doing, who

I'm with, etc and (incorrectly and with out success) tell me that I am not allowed to take pictures of the buildings. Ive been downtown

on three different evenings recently, and the same thing has occurred each time. Obviously, these instances leave me irked, and to

some extent unsurprised (private security guards have an deserved rep for this type of behavior). What I find iniquely disconcerting, it

the extent to which this us occurring, and the exaggerated degree of paranoia being displayed. What's the deal?

 

Anybody else running into the same thing? And, assuming one is on public property, what rights do property owners/managers

regarding pics being taken of their buildings?

<p>The deal is they have a right to put those cameras in the ceilings that take thousands of pictures of you.</p>

<p>Don't pick your nose in the elevator.</p>

<p>As long as you are on public property in the U.S., building owners and their security guards have no right to stop and interrogate you. However if they do try to stop you, I recommend being nice and talk with them. Don't take it personally and use this as an opportunity to educate them. Also don't do anything stupid.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>"assuming one is on public property, what rights do property owners/managers regarding pics being taken of their buildings?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Photographing in general (USA)? Virtually none. Although intrusion usually isn't from public property, it can be so that may apply. Same with criminal voyeurism statutes. Some military or other sensitive areas perhaps. For the most part, however, there would need to be some separate crime or civil action at issue. Breach of peace for some over the top behavior perhaps. Maybe stalking of some kind. But note these things generally have to do with people and not structures themselves.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>However if they do try to stop you, I recommend being nice and talk with them.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And if they are not being nice, call the police.</p>

<p>Mr. Rouse…</p>

<p>I’ve about had it too. In most municipalities, private security guards have no more authority to detain you, nor accost you nor lay hands on you or your property in the public domain than the other common thugs do. </p>

<p>There are exceptions. Governing bodies, acting as Pimps, are passing local ordinances giving the local gentry, major property owners and big box store mega-corporations more and more off premise “rights” over the ever shrinking middle class. I have lawyer friends in the two places that I travel to where I take pictures. They are just now researching (on my dime) exceptions to common law public freedom, especially in photography. Soon I will have attorney’s opinion letters, which will outline the law in that area. Thereafter, the next time some thug, in private patrol uniform or not, breaks the law and harms me in any way, I’m going to use my cell phone to call 911 and press charges with the responding police. If that does not work I’ll file suit naming the governing body, the guard service and whichever entity hired the guard service as co-defendants. </p>

<p>That is not everybody’s solution. It is my luxury because I’m old, retired and can afford it. I’m damn tired of being treated like a Jew in 1939 Germany. I don’t want to see America get to the point where men have to drop their pants in public to be examined for circumcision. </p>

<p>Please, go ahead and scoff at my ridiculous attitude and concerns. I got the same gaff and sneer when the first airport security started up in the early 1970s. I was the fool that said that before I died, every passenger would be heavily screened, probably with full body scans, luggage restricted, most personal pocket and purse items banned and people’s clothing would be stripped to the bare essentials as we’d go through security barefooted. See, I was WAY off. You get to keep your socks on………for now. </p>

<p>A. T. Burke</p>

<p>We'll your opposition to airport security doesn't seem to have done much good. If it ever gets to the point of flying naked, there are pluses and minuses to that. The planes will be less crowded for one thing. Though the scenery might not always be very aesthetic, there could be a few exceptions that might make it worthwhile....</p>

<p>Anyone who tells you you can't take a picture while you are standing on public property and not interfering with the flow of traffic can safely be ignored (with a couple of exceptions like photographing of some active military bases). Of course if it's a real cop you have to suffer the consequences of disagreeing with them which might include being detained for a while. If it's a private security guard they are committing assault if they attempt to physically detain you when you have committed no crime. They may also guilt of False Imprisonment, depending on the circumstances. They could be technically guilty of kidnapping, though that would be a stretch.</p>

<p>The best approach is to take the picture and then move on while ignoring them. Minimize the conflict but take the picture.</p>

<p>You really can't stop it happening. They have their instructions. as long as they don't actually get in your face, just ignore them. They have a perfect right to ask you what you are doing. You have a perfect right to ignore them. If they touch you, it's assault, though you might have a hard time bringing charges or even getting the police interested. Not being nice isn't a crime. </p>

 

<p>Awhile back someone started a thread that included a YouTube video of photographers in London testing security. One policeman informed a security guard that was bothering a photographer that since he was on the sidewalk (considered public property), he could point his camera in any direction he wished. I would think that would apply to a true downtown area in the US.</p>

<p>Here in Las Vegas, there are very few areas with any personality so they have to create "fake" downtown shopping areas (Town Square south of the Strip and Tivoli Village on the west edge of town are two). Those are indeed private property with lots of private security.</p>

<p>A.T. Burke said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>. . . Soon I will have attorney’s opinion letters, which will outline the law in that area. Thereafter, the next time some thug, in private patrol uniform or not, breaks the law and harms me in any way, I’m going to use my cell phone to call 911 and press charges with the responding police.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As far as I recall, from my vague memories of my business law class in college, is that the most applicable action would be <em>false imprisonment</em>, which is a tort, so I believe this would have to be taken to civil court (rather than criminal).</p>

<p>From USLegal.com's website:</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"False imprisonment is the unlawful restraint of a person without consent or legal justification. False imprisonment can be committed by words, acts, or by both. The common law tort of false imprisonment is defined as an unlawful restraint of an individual’s personal liberty or freedom of movement[ii]. In order to constitute the wrong it is not necessary that the individual be actually confined or assaulted[iii].</em><br /><em></em><br /><em> Dietz v. Finlay Fine Jewelry Corp., 754 N.E.2d 958 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).</em><br /><em>[ii] Pechulis v. City of Chicago, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11856 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 7, 1997).</em><br /><em>[iii] Whitman v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., 85 Kan. 150 (Kan. 1911)."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>If the conduct is being repeated, go to police in advance and ask them to watch from afar. Then when the security guard comes out to hassle you, the cop will be right there. Let the police know that the security guards are threatening you and or your equipment. If the police refuse to protect you, write a letter to the police with the time, date, and name of Offfice who refused to help you, and again make the same request in writing and ask for a written response. If the security guard continues to harrass you, then sue the guard, the guards employee, and the local police.</p><div></div>

<p>Good point from Eric. Many large outdoor commercial areas are entirely private property. They can <em>look</em> like normal suburban streets wandering past those stores and parking lots, but while you're driving on them or walking on those sidewalks, you're no more on public property than you are when you're in a restaurant's restroom.<br /><br />These areas' guards are responsible for everything that goes on there - not for stopping people from doing things they don't <em>like</em> but to do what they can to prevent things that might get the property owners sued. Some kid skateboarding down the middle of one of those private streets? If he gets hurt by a car pulling out from a lot, that street - part of the property management company's turf - makes them (the management company) more exposed to legal grief from the kid's famly's lawyers. That concern about the kid on the skateboard is the same as the concern about someone tripping over the legs of your tripod on a private sidewalk that <em>feels</em> like a public way.<br /><br />There's a mixed retail/residential/entertainment area near us that is hundreds of acres, multiple traffic intersections, and a mile or so of named but not public streets feeding in and out of it. Every bit of it is private property. Happily, the guards there have been well-briefed on the photography issue, and keep the tenant businesses' PR interests at heart- they don't give people a hard time about "real" camera use unless it's very disruptive.<br /><br />Just the other day on that property, I passed a Quinceaneara party with a pro photographer hard at work, and two obvious engagement shoots all within a hundred yards and five minutes ... as well as what had to be a club or workshop shooting the resident waterfowl flying in and out. Tripods, long lenses and all. The management folks really don't care, as long as you aren't being an ass about things. To my delight, I've even seen them tell off the proverbial soccer mom who was actiing creeped out by a guy with a 300/2.8 chasing ducks around the pond that happens to be <em>near</em> the kiddie play area. <br /><br />But: it <em>is</em> private property. All of that is subject to their policies, and some of the guards definitely "get" it better or sooner than others. I can see how a person who doesn't realize they're on private property, combined with a newly minted guard and the wrong set of circumstances, could all add up to an unnecessarily tense exchange. But being a large surly-looking guy who carries around a bag of gear and points cameras at odd things, none of those guards has ever been anything but neutral when I shoot there, and sometimes they're genuinely, personally interested.<br /><br />Make sure, when you're out in a popular commercialized area, that you actually know if you're on private property or not. It can be surprising.</p>

<p><em>"Don't pick your nose in the elevator." - </em>it could get illegal, soon... :)<br>

You can pick a friend, but you cannot pick nose of a friend. Is already illegal... :)</p>

 

<p>Mr. Oshiro…</p>

<p>Yes that is one of the charges. <em>"False imprisonment is the unlawful restraint of a person without consent or legal justification….” </em></p>

<p>I have asked my attorneys to address the attorney letters to the <strong><em>legal justification </em></strong>issue both from a civil and criminal viewpoint. One of the places I like to take pictures is San Diego, CA. The average San Diego PD officer is just this side of Gestapo. They use their hands a lot when both unnecessary and illegal.</p>

<p>In California some of the other charges I can bring are assault, battery and elder abuse (92). The latter can be filed without them even touching me, be it regarding a real policeman or a wanna-be security guard.</p>

<p>Courts and the DA’ offices change emphasis from time-to-time on what they spend their time, effort and sympathy on. Both the San Diego DA’s office and courts are currently quite harsh on elder abuse in general. There have also been some massive jury awards. That changes insurance rates and insurability. That changes behavior.</p>

<p>Since fast track cases are taking up to five years one attorney has already suggested that my estate be instructed not accept a settlement that contains a non-disclosure clause. Settlements are always less in dollar amounts without the non-disclosure clause. That is not my problem. Anyone named in my will is already getting a LOT of free money and any settlement proceeds would just be icing on the cake. </p>

<p>A. T. Burke</p>

<p>The law regarding taking photographs from public property of private property in view.</p>

<p>United States Code Title 17 Chapter 1 § 120<br>

(a) <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00000120----000-.html">Pictorial Representations Permitted.</a> — The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"As far as I recall, from my vague memories of my business law class in college, is that the most applicable action would be <em>false imprisonment</em>, which is a tort, so I believe this would have to be taken to civil court (rather than criminal)."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Huh? How did you come up with that?</p>

<p>Its like saying a theft victim has a tort cause of action and can sue the person that stole from them so theft can't be a criminal matter.That's ridiculous.</p>

<p>If this civel case trumps criminal case notion were true, we wouldn't see statutes like this.... http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2010/pen/236-237.html</p>

<p> The ACLU recently released something on photography in public and Bert Krages' info has been around for quite a while. (One wonders if there are attorney forums where these stout fellows, esquire, are up in a snit about these two sources "working for free" and devaluing the profession?)</p>

<p>The "Espionage Code" (Title 18, Chapter 37 of the US Code) discusses photography as well and the process by which certain types of places can be made illegal to photograph (in the US) but the facts of the matter are, if there is something sensitive, it's kept hidden, because signs do little to actually provide security.</p>

<p>Matt said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Many large outdoor commercial areas are entirely private property.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You know why you can't shoot from the sidewalk on Lankershim Blvd., at Universal City, the entrance to Universal Studios Hollywood? Because NBC/Universal <em>owns</em> the sidewalk! (I work for NBC/Universal, and even we need permission to shoot there.)</p>

<p>A.T. Burke said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>In California some of the other charges I can bring are assault, battery and elder abuse (92). The latter can be filed without them even touching me, be it regarding a real policeman or a wanna-be security guard.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I believe that <em>assault </em>can also occur without touching. Assault can be merely the threat of battery. If I pull my hand back, poised to punch you in the face, that's assault. If, in fact, after appearing poised to punch you in the face with my fist, but I then merely point my finger and touch you lightly on the nose instead, that's assault <em>and</em> battery. Assault is generally defined as, <em>"an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact."</em></p>

<p>John said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Huh? How did you come up with that?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I just didn't know which statute would apply.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2010/pen/236-237.html" target="_blank">http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2010/pen/236-237.html</a></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Gotcha!</p>

<p>We had just this issue recently here in the UK - Scotland to be exact. Here's the story:-<br>

<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15250846">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15250846</a><br>

This whole issue gives me high blood pressure. When will these people realise that the real threat comes from people who do NOT announce themselves, as in the four bombers in the London 7/7 bombing. Britain used to have a reputation for being a pragmatic, common sense place but now it seems to have been taken over by every kind of puffed up idiot you can imagine. It's like living in a lunatic asylum.</p>

<p>A slight digression perhaps but just to illustrate my point. I took this photograph when I was about 11 years old. You will see that I was standing on the railway track - strictly against the rules, but did the driver call the security guards? Did he call the police? No - he figured I was interested so invited me up into the cab of the locomotive, explained all the controls to me, then gave me a guided tour of the engine and generator compartment. Whatever happened to that world?</p><div></div>

<p>Last year I was confronted at America's 2nd largest shopping mall (Palisades Center, Nyack, NY). The security guards falsely claimed there were "no picture taking" signs at each entrance. They asked me to delete my images. I told them "only a judge is going to make that happen". And they went back to chasing unruly teens from the food court.</p>

<p>I am still puzzled by the "no cameras or video" signs on NYC's bridges and tunnel approaches. Has NYC not heard of Google maps? I can view these places from space. If I were plotting some evil deeds I would not need to photograph them.</p>

<p>FDR said it best: "the only thing we have to fear, is fear itself".</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Has NYC not heard of Google maps? I can view these places from space.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They are from cameras in aircraft rather than from satellites, but a good point anyway.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>...treated like a Jew in 1939 Germany.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Now there's a little hint about your mind-set! I'm always amazed when I see yet another of these whines about being bugged by security guards. I'm out shooting almost continually and rarely get pestered. When I do it's a quick chat and nobody gets mad. Look in the mirror dude! Maybe you just have a bad 'tude.</p>

 

<p>The only comparable situation I can think of offhand that I've personally experienced occurred sometime between 2002-2004.</p>

<p>I was in Fort Worth's Trinity Park, near the duck pond, off 7th Street. After finding the duck pond rather dull, I set the camera on a tripod and photographed some sneakers dangling from a power line - another cliche, but what the heck.</p>

<p>Locals might recall that at that time, almost 10 years ago, the old Montgomery Ward building was vacant and hadn't yet been transformed into the Montgomery Plaza shopping center and lofts.</p>

<p>A security guard posted outside the Montgomery Ward building actually crossed 7th Street to confront me about my photographing the sneakers dangling from a power line. If you're familiar with the area, you know the fellow had to walk across a wide, busy boulevard just to chat with me. I was flattered.</p>

<p>The conversation went something like this, at least in this particular embellishment of the tale:<br>

He: "Hey, mister, what are you doing?"<br>

Me: "Exploiting a visual urban cliche."<br>

He: "Huh?"<br>

Me: "I'm minding my own business. You should try it sometime. Does wonders for one's sense of perspective."<br>

He: "Huh?"<br>

Me: "These aren't the droids you're looking for."</p>

<p>That was about the extent of it. He returned to his post. If he'd persisted I would have called the <del>stormtroopers</del> police.</p>

<p>The only other incidents that involved any sort of authority, or someone acting under the color of authority, involved either actual police officers, or private security guards acting appropriately when I was on the private property they were assigned to patrol. The exchanges were all very civil, and in some cases actually friendly as we chatted about photography.</p>

<p>In fact, in one case, the private security guard actually radioed for instructions and got permission to allow me to continue taking photographs. This was on one of the privately owned parking lots in downtown Fort Worth, near Sundance Square. I needed that particular spot to get the desired composition for one of the classic older buildings. In my experience the bicycle security patrolfolk around downtown Fort Worth are well aware of the value of maintaining good relations with residents and tourists, so getting permission was mostly a technicality.</p>