ruben.vuittonet

Who is more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows him. You did not get that photo and you will never get those 20 minutes back.

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

Because many times with the phone they think your checking messages :)

marycar53 Loc: Tuscumbia Al

The only trouble I've had is from a couple of vendors at 4th Thursday in Tuscumbia Al. I was taking pictures to put on the Remember Tuscumbia page on Facebook and was taking pictures of this ladies painted gourds and she asked me why I was taking pictures of them. When I explained that it would be on FB she was okay with that since it would be a promotion of the street craft night. She then explained that people come up and take pictures and she was worried they were stealing her ideas. I told her they probably were, but I wasn't. Another vendor said she was going to back hand me if I took her picture, so I took her picture and told her that I'll be sure she gets on FB for that.

JohnnyRottenNJ Loc: Northern New Jersey

A mall is NOT private property. It is considered "quasi-public" because customers are invited to go there and shop. I would have started taking photos of the security guard and asked to see his supervisor. He is a guard, his primary function is "loss prevention" not Homeland Security. He has no powers of arrest per se. If you break a law, he can restrain you until the police arrive, but he has no right to lay his hands on you or touch your camera, unless you become physically combative. Giving him a hard time, is not the proper forum to debate mall policy, and this forum isn't much better as it won't solve your problem there. I would shoot a few photos of the guard (don't use any flash) and politely ask his name. He is required to give it to you or show you his name tag. Making derogatory marks to him will not help your cause. I think for a mall to be able to enforce any ridiculous policy like that, it would have to be posted (in at least two or three languages these days) and the guards should certainly know why that is the policy. Sorry, but just saying "that is the policy" is not good enough.

Now, to something more common sense. I would refrain from taking photos of any government buildings that aren't monuments. And I wouldn't walk around taking photos of any public place wearing a turban. I'm not an Islamaphobe, but why make yourself a lightning rod for added scrutiny or worse. Since nothing good has come out of the Middle East in a little over 800 years, I don't suspect that law enforcement anywhere would buy a story that you (a man or woman dressed in Muslim garb) is a tourist just taking photos of something that could be deemed a terrorist target. Revert back to the first sentence of this paragraph (common sense.)

lowbone

I was told to stop photographing the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco last year. Sometimes it is futile to argue about your rights. The cop who stopped me from taking photos was not familiar with photographers rights however arguing with him would get me nowhere and possibly detained or even making a trip to the police station. Sometimes common sense has to prevail. I stopped taking photos that day but returned the next day. There was no cop in sight and I photographed for over an hour.

Festina Lente Loc: Florida & Missouri

Taking photos can be intimidating to some folks. Why are you taking pictures? What are you going to do with them? Will taking pictures here somehow compromise our security, pose a legal evidentiary concern, or make our customers uncomfortable? It is usually perception that drives policy restricting the taking of photos than anything specific and substantial.

A SLR with a large lens pointing at anything just naturally garners a variety of attention in a public place, especially when attached to a tripod and a strobe. I have been asked to get rid of the tripod for a variety of reasons, including that it posed a tripping hazard to others (possibly true) and that while in public areas it crosses the legal threshold of something "permanent" versus portable. Many municipalities have laws regarding this and require a permit to use a tripod in some public places.

While always good to ask, the problem is often discovering whom to ask. I find General Patton's philosophy works well for me: it is far better to beg forgiveness than to get permission ahead of time.

JohnnyRottenNJ Loc: Northern New Jersey

I think COMMON SENSE is the key to any of this. The cop may have stopped you for shooting photos of the Golden Gate for any number of reasons. Was your car parked legally? Were you standing in an unsafe area? (like out in the middle of traffic?) Often, it makes more sense to leave and just come back another time. I will say this though, if the police officer gives you a stern warning, I would not return anytime soon. If he was chasing a bunch of people away from the bridge, you could probably return and he might not remember you. But if you had a face to face conversation and he sees you the next day or a short time later, he will likely get very pissed off and unpleasant things are likely to occur. Don't get me wrong, I am VERY pro police, but there are a small percentage of cops who abuse their authority. And trying to get satisfaction in a large city because an officer gave you a hard time isn't easy. In NYC they have over 35,000 police officers. So unless you get a badge number and name, your complaints can go nowhere. This ain't Mayberry folks.

Mark Bski Loc: A sleepy little island not far from Seattle

Alaskan, If I am not mistaken, there has been an "Occupy Westlake Park" thingy going on here in Seattle, along with those other Occupidiots on Wall Street. Perhaps the mall security was confusing you with them. Either way, nothing to make a big deal over.

DougW Loc: SoCal

I've been asked for "my permit" here in a public park because I was using a Dslr with a unipod. I was told it looked "professional " so I had to have a permit to use the park . It's all about the $$$$.

spy351 Loc: North Carolina

First, I am a newbie here on the forum. I have quite the passion for photography, but it doesn't pay very well.... My job as Emergency Services Director does. I see almost on a weekly basis information on terror threats, suspected targets and malls are still high on the list. Why? Easy access and lots of people. Our country is a much different place than pre-9/11. We bristle at the fact that we are losing our freedoms and yet we scoff at the notion that it will never happen again or it will never happen here. It seems that you encountered someone who has their "marching orders" and were following them to a T. Sad, but it happens. Asking permission before hand, most likely would have gotten you the opportunity to take the shot that you so desired.

KrazyKyngeKorny

Anything that can be seen from public property, can be photographed from public property. They do not have to allow photographs taken from ON THEIR PROPERTY! And, they do NOT have to post it.

If you are in a parking lot, don't take a picture. If you are on the sidewalk, or street, shoot away. It's very simple. Just don't shoot from within the confines of the private property.

Your protests will not change their right to protect themselves from unscrupulous paparazzi.

Mark Bski Loc: A sleepy little island not far from Seattle

WHO asked you for a permit?

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

Perhaps the ACLU should get in on this. On the one hand it is Private Property. On the other hand it is openb to the public not unlike the restaurants that would bar some races from their restrants before civil rights laws. I do not think the terrorest thing would hold up. They could bomb the mmall camera or no camerra. In a public setting you can take pictures of anyone you want you just can not sell or publish them with out permmison. If they are newsworthy you can publish them anyway. - Dave

Sue-Jim Loc: Missouri

I was in Los Alamos to visit my brother soon after WW II when family finally were allowed to visit, with passes arranged well in advance (after a background check). Photographs were not allowed "on the Hill" but that was well posted (including in the visitor's information sheet) & we all understood the security reasons for this. But I have been worried by the creeping infringements on the rights of citizens to photograph happenings in public areas - not posted, no reason - just the authorities do not want their actions on record (look at the difference between "official" reports & what is actually shown happening on videos of the scene, from different angles). We have been like the frog in warm water - we've been so busy trying to survive in a changing world we haven't noticed the water getting hotter (it's about to boil now) - some of us have, but haven't been able to get others' attention.
In the case you described (which was frustrating because the security person should have been supplied with the answer to your questions) I would have written to all the higher-ups I could think of, that he worked for - report this exchange, ask for an explanation & express my complaint. This is supposed to be a free country, with a Bill of Rights - that bill is being shredded & the only thing we can do is stand up (respectfully) & claim those rights guaranteed us by the Constitution of the USA.

RPMustang Loc: The Great State of Texas

I enjoy aviation photography, and have taken pictures at many airports around the country. I always contact airport security to advise them of my activity, and have never had any problems. At LAX, the airport police actually told me the best area to get some great pictures. In light of world events it is understandable that public photography may raise concern. Whether it's an airport, shopping mall, or public building, it sure doesn't hurt to check on their photography policy. I laugh at the thought of explaing my rights to some 19 year old "mall cop"!