Security Guard Hassles In Worcester Mass

[mark_korabo]

I really did'nt know where to post this but I use Nikon equipment.

 

Im staying Worcester Mass. for the next four months because of

work, I normally reside near Toronto, Ontario.

 

The architecture of the older buildings in town is really

spectacular & interests me a great deal as we have very few similar

buildings back home.

 

This past Sunday morning I decided to get up early and walk around

town with a D1H & 24mm lens to photograph some of the architecture.

I was shooting hand held because I was just trying different angles

& perspectives with a view to return again in ideal light with a

tripod & my F4 to shoot some chromes.

 

During my one & half hours of shooting I was approached by three

different security guards which all seemed to appear out of nowhere

in plain vanilla vans. They all wanted to know who I was and why was

I taking pictures?

 

At no time was I on private property, I shot from the sidewalk or

the middle of the street(no traffic). The story the security guards

had was that I was not supposed to be photographing any

buildings "as there is a lot of research carried out here"

 

Being polite I explained I was from out of town and was interested

in the city's architecture. I also explained I knew my legal right

to photograph as long as I wasn't on private property.

 

They did not ask for my CF card but they did keep an eye on me until

I left, probably got my plate #.

 

It's unfortunate that having interests in architecture &

photography, one is treated with suspicion.

 

The whole thing made me feel uneasy and hesitant to return. Maybe

I'll just wait for the New England Fall colours & shoot the Cape Cod

seacapes.

 

Anyone else here having a hard time shooting buildings?

[ken_kartes]

I wouldn't catagorize it as a hard time. They simply asked you a question or two. Security people are paid to be alert to things unusual or different. Since 9/11 security companies and police have to look at events with new eyes. I am sure if you acted suspiciously they would have contacted the police. If you had acted suspiciously and they didn't act upon it they would not have been doing their job. It doesn't mean you were doing anything wrong, but neither were they. You could always thank them for being alert. A marine on an outpost in Iraq is required to report anything unusual, unfortunately we as americans must do the same. Is it an invasion of your privacy? That is subjective to me. I believe it is for the greater good they asked you.

[bwcombs]

They were doing their job.

 

Sounded like they were polite and professional as well.

 

And you were too. That is good.

 

It's when they become threatening or abusive, both verbally and

physically, that is a problem. If that occurs, then it is best to walk

away.

 

Be polite, as you were. I've found that most often, if you explain

what you are doing, and why, that's all they really want to know.

 

If they say that they are going to call the police, then you should

encourage them to do so. Most cops know the rules by now, and

number one is you have the right to take pictures from public

property, as long as there are no visible signs barring such.

 

I have a copy (PDF) of some guidelines for shooting in public

post 9/11 that has come in handy a couple of times for me in

situations like this. If you want a copy, email me and I'll send you

a PDF.

[vincent_frazzetta]

Not surprised at the security guard situation, nor your reaction. Been there. Last year I was questioned by a cop while shooting a railroad tunnel in New Haven CT. We talked a bit--he judged I was "OK", and he allowed me to continue shooting. About six months ago while shooting the neon lights of a diner in Milford CT, the manager came after me with a sawed-off baseball bat. After backing away quickly and a little explanation, he let me fire off a few more shots. A month later, I was shooting the face of a closed-down factory in Stratford CT, when the owner came racing up in a car, and threatened to shoot me. Yes, shoot me! Again, back away, a little talk, and she let me continue--in fact, I made a new friend! I think it's coming to the point where excellent communication skills will be a necessity to street photograph in 21st century America. That, and behaving, dressing, and carrying a minimal amount of gear, so as to appear non-threatening.

[anupam]

A polite inquiry is fine, but if they were telling you that you were not supposed to be photographing the buildings then they were misinforming you or making up their own rules. Not part of their job.

 

-A

[darren_cokin]

For a REALLY outrageous story of overzealous security guards hassling a photographer, read this:<br>

<a href="http://www.brownequalsterrorist.com/">http://www.brownequalsterrorist.com/</a><br>

(click "link 1" or "link 2" under the picture)

[mark_korabo]

Wow, at least they did'nt threaten to shoot me!

 

I realize post 9/11 things are different, but I was shooting churches and a restaurant that had some turn of the century machinery outside. I can't imagine what kind of "research" theses places were conducting!

 

Yes, polite communication is essential these days, although they didn't ask I would have deleted any images they were concerned about.

It's not worth making a stand over it, after all I am a guest in this country and respect their legitimate concerns.

 

While I understand it makes the security guards feel better to ask us photographers their questions, if one of us had ill intentions we would probably be more clandestine in our actions, in addition one could probably find out a good deal of information about buildings through the internet, which has no borders, cops or security.

[greg s]

"It's unfortunate that having interests in architecture & photography, one is treated with suspicion."

 

I agree. There are so many ways to for someone with ill intent to circumvent this (think telephoto). A few super sensitive sites I can halfway see being scrutinized. The idea that architecture photography in general is problematic doesn't make much sense.

 

Sorry about that. There's lots of 'going thru the motions' measures employed while truly pressing issues make little to no forward progress.

 

Perhaps if they don't want people photographing buildings/structures because of some specigfic sensitivity, then they should post a sign to that effect. At least then people will know what is on and off limits.

[bernard_frank]

Vincent,

 

You made a new friend with someone who wanted to SHOOT you for taking pictures? May I

advise you to chose your "friends" a little more carefully in the future ;)

 

The guards were doing their jobs? Wait a minute. A PRIVATE security guard has the right to

stop anybody IN THE STREET, on PUBLIC ground, and question them, in today's US?

 

This is a little too much vigilante to me. What next? Frightening.

 

I know where I will NOT spend my next vacation.

[bekster]

For me it is good to know that people are doing the jobs they are being paid to do. You must have been in a sensitive area, and yes its probably a good idea not to return to that location. Try nature and landscape, its very relaxing being out in nature... ;)

[dmitriyk]

<i>The guards were doing their jobs? Wait a minute. A PRIVATE security guard has the right

to stop anybody IN THE STREET, on PUBLIC ground, and question them, in today's US?

</i><br>

<br>

Everyone has the right to stop anybody IN THE STREET, on PUBLIC ground, and question

them.

[ken_kartes]

Bernard, the guards as well as you have a right to ask a question! Freedom of speech sir. Whether and how you choose to answer is also your right and responsibilty. Police and security have a RESPONSIBILITY to do their job ethically, morally and with integrity. You have a RIGHT to take pictures within the means of the law ethically, morally and with integrity. I appreciate them doing their job and I hope that you would too.

[bernard_frank]

Police, I can understand, within reason. They are public servants, acting under oath, and

they are liable for their actions. They are, hopefully, well trained, and they have a

knowledge of the law, as well as of my rights. They have a code of ethics, and a reputation

to protect. But, 9/11 notwithstanding, private employees, acting on public ground,

on behalf of who knows who, stopping me and asking me questions? No sir, I'm sorry, this

not what I call "freedom and democracy".

 

And what if I happen to answer them: "This is none of your business"? Do they have any

power to arrest me? To confiscate my camera gear? To physically restrain me? To handcuff

me? To shoot me? Where do you draw the line?

[ted turner]

Within approximately 10 seconds after taking this shot...

 

http://www.pbase.com/turnert/image/28555429

 

...I was surrounded by Grand Central (NYC) security and escorted back into the main terminal. This occurred around 2 weeks after the Madrid train station bombings in 2004. I was a little pissed off at first, but I understand why I made them nervous.

[robert_johnson15]

If you want the police to understand that you know your rights, ask them if they have a warrant or probable cause for an arrest? If the answer is "NO", then anything more than asking what you are doing could be interpreted as harassment. The photo staff is told to get basic information about the police questioning and refer it to our attorney for an "official" complaint if one is warranted!

[watermelon]

Funnyest thing I ever heard was when I was shooting in The City in London. (The Financial district). Was turfed off the Swiss RE tower property (fair enuf I guess) and then 50m down the road at the Llyods tower a police car followed me and demanded to see my.... Tripod liscense!! errr......?! I just told them Im nearly done, just another roll of film to go and wished them a pleasent evening. They shut up and retreated to watch me from their car.

[john_h.1]

"Everyone has the right to stop anybody IN THE STREET, on PUBLIC ground, and question them."

 

This is absolutely incorrect. There are various circumstances in which law enforcement may stop people in public areas and much less circumstances for other persons to do so. If you don't mind false arrest and false imprisonment lawsuits, go ahead and try to do as the statement above says.

 

Its too bad that some common sense can't be applied to those engaging in photography. An inquiry as to what one is doing is one thing, the harassment and use of force and legal power against those engaging in harmless law abiding activity is not going to do anything beneficial.

 

Maybe those stealthy camera phones aren't such a bad idea afterall.

[dai_hunter]

NO ONE HAS ASKED THE MOST OBVIOUS QUESTION HERE...

 

How do you think these private security stiffs who materialise out of nowhere, at any time you seem to want to shoot a building, even know that you are there?

 

They are watching YOU on their..... errrr... CCTV security CAMERAS!

 

Sauce for the goose = sauce for the gander.

 

ROTFLMAO

 

Hunter

[dmitriyk]

<i>This is absolutely incorrect. There are various circumstances in which law enforcement

may stop people in public areas and much less circumstances for other persons to do so.

If you don't mind false arrest and false imprisonment lawsuits, go ahead and try to do as

the statement above says.</i><br>

<br>

I'm not talking about arrest or imprisonment. I, like any other American (or any security

guard, for that matter), can stop you on the street and ask you what you're doing. This

doesn't mean that I have the right to arrest you, confiscate your equipment, or shoot you.

But there are no laws preventing me from asking questions. Of course there are no laws!

<br>

<br>

All of us have the right to ask questions. And all of us have the right to call the police if

the answers don't satisfy us. Security guards included.

[john_h.1]

Why would that be a question at all, much less an obvious one? The issue being discussed is not whether photographers can be seen by someone (Excepting my quick phone camera digression). It is the reaction to the photography taking place. How the photographers came to be noticed has nothing to do with the reactions that have been discussed.

 

If the fact that a photographer might be seen on a camera makes you roll around on the floor laughing your butt off then, at least you are having a good time then I guess.

[john_h.1]

Dmitriy,

 

Yes you may stop yourself and/or ask questions. Your post said anyone can stop other people. False arrest and imprisonment does not require formal arrests ect. as you suggest. Will someone recover much in compensation for minor inconvienences? No. But in some instances, decribed on this site, they could. This is relevent because it is important for people to know about restrictions upon photography. This is just one part of it.

[dmitriyk]

Nobody can detain anyone (except in certain circumstances), but anyone can ask questions.

You can't be sued for asking questions. If the questions are unduly persistent, that's

harassment. If you're compelled to leave the area by physical force, that's assault. If your

equipment is taken away, that's theft. If you're just asked questions about what you're doing,

that's tough luck. The security guards are only doing their jobs, and they're well within their

rights as private citizens.

 

Honestly, you can't believe that there's a law preventing me from asking a photographer

about what she's doing! That would be a ridiculous abrogation of freedom!

[kevin mayo]

I grew up in the Worcester area. When I was growing up they would have been ecstatic to have anyone in the downtown area. The Worcester Centrum is in the area I'm not sure if any events where being planned however I can understand that secutity will be on their toes so soon after the London bombings. If the restaurant was Maxwell Silverman's the police station is next door which again might lead to a certain amount of zealousness. The train staion is also near by.

As an aside its intersting to hear a visitor found Worcester a worthy subject. I quess its the old story when you are looking at something your entire life it becomes mundane.

Kevin

[kevin mayo]

PS I would love to see the pictures

Kevin

[mark_korabo]

Kevin,

 

Your absolutely correct! I grew up in Vancouver Canada which has some of the best water & mountain scenery anywhere. It was only after I moved to Toronto did I appreciate the photographic opportunities in the area.

 

I always have the urge to go back and photograph what I took for granted.

 

Mark