# "Public photography is not a crime" - PEN Article



## tirediron (Jun 23, 2013)

An interesting read, particularily for the Canadian contingent...

Public photography is not a crime


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

What I find more interesting is that people are routinely arrested for things that are not actually crimes.  I take it that was the reason the author wrote that article.  It wouldn't even be an issue if people didn't get arrested for it, despite it being perfectly legal.

Habeas Corpus, what's that?  It doesn't exist anymore in the United States.  Not sure about Canada...


----------



## skieur (Jun 23, 2013)

It would seem that Canadians have lost control of their police, the judicial system and their politicians when it comes to protecting their basic Charter rights


----------



## SCraig (Jun 23, 2013)

Forgive my ignorance, but what is PEN and do they have any authority to do anything other than assert their impression of the laws?  If they have no legal authority then all they are doing is expressing their opinion, which carries no more nor no less weight than anyone else expressing an opinion.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 23, 2013)

They're group that advocates for freedom of expression.  You're right, they have no legal standing, but they do have deep enough pockets to really annoy police forces and other groups that conveniently mis-interpret certain aspects of law.


----------



## 480sparky (Jun 23, 2013)

Judging by the photo at the top of the article, that photographer could be arrested for interfering with a peace officer's official duty.


----------



## SCraig (Jun 23, 2013)

tirediron said:


> They're group that advocates for freedom of expression.  You're right, they have no legal standing, but they do have deep enough pockets to really annoy police forces and other groups that conveniently mis-interpret certain aspects of law.



OK, I understand now.  It's amazing how non-political groups sometimes tend to carry a lot of weight in political circles.  Much like the NRA in the United States.  They don't make or interpret laws, but they frequently have the ability to sway them in one direction or the other.


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

SCraig said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > They're group that advocates for freedom of expression.  You're right, they have no legal standing, but they do have deep enough pockets to really annoy police forces and other groups that conveniently mis-interpret certain aspects of law.
> ...



Bribery in action.

Do you think that politicians would give a **** what these groups said if they weren't being paid?


----------



## SCraig (Jun 23, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> Bribery in action.
> 
> Do you think that politicians would give a **** what these groups said if they weren't being paid?


I don't think it's pure, out-and-out bribery.  At least not in the case of the NRA.  Over the decades they have made far too many political enemies to think they could get away with it.  There are way too many people that would give anything in the world to tie the NRA into a political bribery case, and if it were true someone would have caught them by now.  I suspect it's much the same way with other large political activist organizations.


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

Call it a "donation" then.  Same thing.  They all know what the money is for.

And this is coming from a long time NRA member, lol.

You don't vote the way we want, the donations stop.  It's that simple.

edit
Of course, I'm talking about all organizations that "donate" to political groups, not just the NRA...


----------



## tirediron (Jun 23, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> Call it a "donation" then. Same thing. They all know what the money is for.
> 
> And this is coming from a long time NRA member, lol.
> 
> You don't vote the way we want, the donations stop. It's that simple.


The odd lawsuit doesn't hurt either...


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

I'm not trying to "call you out" or anything like that, but I am curious as to exactly what you mean by that.

I guess I'm out of the loop, because I honestly don't know which lawsuits you are referring to.

edit
Post a link and I will read it with an open mind.


----------



## SCraig (Jun 23, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> Call it a "donation" then.  Same thing.  They all know what the money is for.
> 
> And this is coming from a long time NRA member, lol.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I agree.  It's nothing more "Legal Bribery" but they all toe that narrow line.

Also coming from a very long-time NRA member.  It doesn't mean I agree with everything they do though.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 23, 2013)

It's a slippery slope. I'm a police officer full time .. photographer/student part time.

I have never confiscated a camera or harrased a photographer/member of the press .. but, I HAVE approached and questioned them. I don't assume anything is being done that's wrong... but it's the nature of my job to ask.

As for taking photos of me on the job... hey, click away.  I don't mind it. 

Some police officers take issue with it, but generally it's those who are on a power trip (and there are an unfortunate number of them.)

If you're standing on a highway snapping pictures, I might check it out.. if you're photographing near odd places, I might check it out... but I always allow a photographer the chance to tell me what he/she is doing ... and I've never taken any kind of action against one. I ask my questions, politely thank them and tell them to have a nice day.

I wish more of my brothers and sisters in blue conducted themselves in this way.


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 23, 2013)

I dont know who the photographer in the photo is...but he is WAY encroaching on what I would call "personal space". 
too bad if he doesn't have a long enough lens to get in close without having to get RIGHT in someones  face. get the right equipment,shoot wide and crop, or don't get the shot. seriously. that guy was too close. Personally, in all seriousness, if that were being done to ME...(not being in law enforcement of course) I would absolutely "trip" and bump right into the front of that guys camera. hard....right into his face. totally on accident. 

the article mentioned trespassing. I don't know aboot Canadian law, but here in the US trespassing IS actually a crime, although very minor, and the punishment is typically just an escort off the property. ive not  heard of anyone actually arrested for it though.  (unless you refuse to comply) its a shame the article does not go into more detail on exactly what transpired.


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

The NRA is sometimes questionable, but as a gun owner I think that they do more good than harm.There are arguably better organizations to invest your money in, like the group who's name I cannot remember at the moment - a Jewish gun owners group.  It's said that they have more clout in DC than the NRA.  Damnit, I can't believe that I can't remember their name...


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> As for taking photos of me on the job... hey, click away.  I don't mind it.



If everyone was like you, there would be no issue.  You seem to be in the minority though.  At least from what I've personally seen.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 23, 2013)

In reference to taking photos of a police officer, pixmedic has a point.

I don't mind if someone is taking photos of me on the job. But do NOT get in my space to do so. The job is a dangerous one and I WOULD be irritated at someone for getting right up on me or interfering with my job.

Take your photos, but stay out of my way.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 23, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> ShooterJ said:
> 
> 
> > As for taking photos of me on the job... hey, click away.  I don't mind it.
> ...



Yes, unfortunately I am. Too many cops are in it for the badge and gun. A rare few REALLY care about what they do.


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> But do NOT get in my space to do so.



That *should* go without needing to be said.  Call it a simple courtesy towards your fellow man.

Common sense goes a long way.  Some people just don't seem to have any though...

edit
Cop or not, common sense says that you respect the space of 'the other person'.  I mean, I don't care what uniform you're wearing, I'm not going to get all in your face to take a picture.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 23, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> ShooterJ said:
> 
> 
> > But do NOT get in my space to do so.
> ...



I've only ever had one photographer do it while I was working.  I was on a traffic stop and the guy pulls over, BEHIND my cruiser, gets out, walks halfway up and starts taking photos.

Now, traffic stops are dangerous as hell. You never know what you're walking up on... so that one did make me mad.

I didn't arrest him (though I could have in that particular situation) but I did tell him to get back in his vehicle and wait ... and called in a second unit to talk to him.

It was explained that he should NEVER get involved in a traffic stop like that and he was sent on his way.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jun 23, 2013)

I've read several versions as to why the journalist was arrested and ticketed for taking the photo of an injured person at the train station, and none of them are very clear as to what happened or why.  According to the media/communications person, any photographer that is working in an official capacity has to sign a waiver to be allowed to take photos in the train station, even though it is a public place, it has to do with liability.  The general public are allowed to take pictures in the same train station without signing anything as they are not there in an official capacity.  Shoot it with an Iphone and you're ok, show up with more than a happy snap and you have to sign a waiver, as much as it makes sense, it doesn't make any.

While I believe that the police these days do overreact in some situations, there are also situations where they have to be able to do their job without any interference from anyone. Photographers are still seen as being trouble by most people with any kind of badge, in some cases the photographers push the limit, and it reflects on all photographers.  Did the journalist push the limit to see just how far he could get before pissing the wrong people off?  Who knows.


----------



## SCraig (Jun 23, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> The NRA is sometimes questionable, but as a gun owner I think that they do more good than harm.There are arguably better organizations to invest your money in, like the group who's name I cannot remember at the moment - a Jewish gun owners group.  It's said that they have more clout in DC than the NRA.  Damnit, I can't believe that I can't remember their name...



I think you mean the JFPO (Jews For the Preservation of Gun Ownership).  An admirable organization in my opinion.

I also agree that the NRA does more good than most any other organization which is why I've been a long-time member and will continue to do so.  As I said, I don't disagree with everything they do but they do more than most.


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

Yes, that's the one I was thinking of.


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 23, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> > ShooterJ said:
> ...


Some are out of control as well.Not to long ago two officers where arraigned for shooting in the air outside a bar not far from where I live. I would say drinking had everything to do with this. Two New Haven police officers arraigned following shooting incident at bar- The New Haven Register - Serving New Haven, Connecticut


----------



## Josh66 (Jun 23, 2013)

Really, who hasn't fired off a few guns in a bar parking lot?  Kidding, on one hand, but on the other hand it happens every day and I've seen it happen plenty of times.

But, this is Texas - stuff like that is normal here...


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 23, 2013)

DarkShadow said:


> ShooterJ said:
> 
> 
> > O|||||||O said:
> ...



Oh yes, no doubt about it.  There are a lot of them out of control.  With the authority comes the responsibility to make the right calls and be an example to the community that you serve .. far too many don't take that to heart and I wish that wasn't the case. 

In my position, I have the opportunity to do a lot of good, to help people who genuinely need help.. or to do a lot of harm and potentially put other people in danger.

I'm constantly aware of that and every action I take is considered .. can I pursue this guy down the road without killing someone going home from work? Can I use my weapon without hitting a bystander?  Is this guy driving like mad because he's an ass, or does he have a real emergency and is in need of help?

Every choice I make has the potential to help or harm.. and I never want to be the reason someone gets hurt.


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 23, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> Really, who hasn't fired off a few guns in a bar parking lot?  Kidding, on one hand, but on the other hand it happens every day and I've seen it happen plenty of times.
> 
> But, this is Texas - stuff like that is normal here...


Heck yea,I wouldn't dare walk through some ones yard in texas.


----------



## Tailgunner (Jun 23, 2013)

SCraig said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> > The NRA is sometimes questionable, but as a gun owner I think that they do more good than harm.There are arguably better organizations to invest your money in, like the group who's name I cannot remember at the moment - a Jewish gun owners group.  It's said that they have more clout in DC than the NRA.  Damnit, I can't believe that I can't remember their name...
> ...



I'm of a different opinion. The NRA has been around for a 100 yrs and what have they done exactly? The NRA supported the first ever tax on Gun owners, sat back and watched as states like Illinois and Districts like D.C passed unConstitutional gun laws. In fact, the NRA went as far as asking Robert Levy NOT to file his case with the Supreme Court...the case later named Heller vs DC. Heller vs DC was the first case in US history where a law was over turned based on the Second Amendment and that came about by private NON NRA citizens. The NRA has a history of compromising with our gun rights. The late Chrlton Heston President of the NRA was quoted as saying he does NOT believe Americans should own an AK47 and NRA Board Member Joaquin Kjackson was quoted saying he supports the Second Amendment as long as gun magazines only hold 5 rounds. 

It's not in the NRA's best interest to protect your gun rights...they wouldn't make any cash if people left our guns alone. I wouldn't piss on the NRA if they was on fire let alone give them money and I have been collecting and shooting firearms for 30yrs. 

YouTube


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 23, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> DarkShadow said:
> 
> 
> > ShooterJ said:
> ...


Yes you have a very hard stressful job indeed.My brother is a retired officer and some of the things he seen or went through is very stressful.Lots of scum bag people and good as well.I got a general idea what its like but never will I know what police face daily nor will any one that not actually living it daily.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 23, 2013)

Okay lets leave the anti/pro gun and NRA good/bad discussions for another forum please!


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 23, 2013)

I remember back when "The Photographer's Rights" were making the rounds. "Keep this in your bag" everyone said.

I also remember someone pulling it out when he felt it was his place to educate a law enforcement officer of "what I can and cannot do, regardless of what you say". Yep, verbatim. So, the cop sat there and listened to this idiot read the slip of paper he pulled from his bag. The cop then arrested the guy, telling him to make sure he retrieved that piece of paper from "Personal Effects" before going before the judge.

I don't know who was actually in the right, but I can tell you that idiot photographer spent a rather pleasant, sunny weekend in jail. And I don't recall ever hearing about any lawsuit being filed against the county, city, the cop or anyone else. I think the judge probably ripped the guy a new one for, if nothing else, being stupid.

The best advice anyone has ever given me with respect to photography and dealing with law enforcement is "Don't be a dick". 

Heeding that advice has served me well...


----------



## tirediron (Jun 23, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> ...The best advice anyone has ever given me with respect to photography and dealing with law enforcement is "Don't be a dick".
> 
> Heeding that advice has served me well...


Wise words; a pity that the other way 'round isn't considered just as important.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jun 23, 2013)

One problem is that there are enough jerks out there that trespass, ignore "No Photography" signs, get into people's faces and personal space, don't bother getting easily obtainable permits,  and refuse to stop shooting when asked to stop shooting... that more and more privileges to shoot in public are getting taken away. All for that "Awesome" shot... which usually is marginal anyway.

We have all seen it.. and it is getting worse! Want to change it?  Then be the "Change"... and let those Jerks know it is not a good idea, however you have to do it.


----------



## rexbobcat (Jun 23, 2013)

There was one guy at last year's county fair that got arrested for using his phone to video other men (and boys) urinating in the public restroom on the fair grounds.

Not like this has anything to do with anything. It just popped I to my head when I read the thread title. Lol


----------



## cgipson1 (Jun 23, 2013)

rexbobcat said:


> There was one guy at last years's county fair that got arrested for using his phone to video other men urinating in the public restroom on the fair grounds.



Sounds like a perv! "Off with his head!"


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

I agree that there are cops who push things too far... and I also agree that there are photographers who don't know when to walk the other way. Neither one helps with the situation. I'm in the odd position of being both a cop and a photography lover. LOL

That being said, as much as I love and respect the art, if a photographer gets in my way, violates no trespassing signs, fails to respect privacy when asked to or otherwise doesn't use common sense when taking his/her photographs.. then the cop in me says "get rid of the douche".. Now if it's harmless, then ok. I have no issues with it whatsoever.... having been at both ends of this spectrum, when I'M out taking photos, I show due respect where I need to... I don't infringe upon peoples privacy, I don't get in their personal space, I don't trespass for a photo and I don't get in the way of police officers doing their jobs.

This seems an easy enough practice to follow.

EDIT: I will add, from the perspective of a cop.. that the law is complex.  In regards to the slip of paper about photographers rights, that's all well and good.  But those are guidelines, and any photographer should be aware that in some cases, you might actually be interfering or breaking a law.  So my advice is to actually KNOW your local laws and what the city/state/county says you can and cannot do, rather than relying on a piece of paper with general guidelines (which is not a legal document and will not help you in court against a judge or attorney who DOES know which way the law bends)


----------



## cgipson1 (Jun 24, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> I agree that there are cops who push things too far... and I also agree that there are photographers who don't know when to walk the other way.  Neither one helps with the situation.  I'm in the odd position of being both a cop and a photography lover.  LOL
> 
> That being said, as much as I love and respect the art, if a photographer gets in my way, violates no trespassing signs, fails to respect privacy when asked to or otherwise doesn't use common sense when taking his/her photographs.. then the cop in me says "get rid of the douche"..  Now if it's harmless, then ok.  I have no issues with it whatsoever.... having been at both ends of this spectrum, when I'M out taking photos, I show due respect where I need to... I don't infringe upon peoples privacy, I don't get in their personal space, I don't trespass for a photo and I don't get in the way of police officers doing their jobs.
> 
> This seems an easy enough practice to follow.



Well said!


----------



## Red1SebR (Jun 24, 2013)

it all comes down to common decency


----------



## amolitor (Jun 24, 2013)

Cops really get a bad rap.

They're people, it turns out. And there's a lot of them. Some of them are boobs and idiots, a lot like, well, people. I've had a lot of, um, uncomfortable conversations with cops. Lots of people seem to think that police aren't allowed to have a conversation without probable cause or something, which is a little weird. It turns out that if you're polite and reasonable and act like a human being, pretty much all of the time the officer will too.

Trouble is, the media likes to blow it all up when a cop, or a group of cops, lose their **** and do something dumb. So, we get the idea that "lots" of cops are like that.


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 24, 2013)

tirediron said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > ...The best advice anyone has ever given me with respect to photography and dealing with law enforcement is "Don't be a dick".
> ...



I give cops a good deal of leeway. I wouldn't want the job they willingly do when the need arises.

Unfortunately, when cops go into "dick mode", it's because they have to. Sure, there are some who get off on it, but I think the majority of them just want to get things taken care of as easily as possible. Having someone giving them grief for it only exacerbates the issue.

I left Portland, Oregon about a month ago, and you wouldn't believe the high level of mistrust and disdain that's held for the police department there. Case in point: Several months back, some deranged douche was running through a parking garage with a shotgun. While waiting for a K-9 unit, the deranged guy started to approach the cops, and leveled his shotgun at them. Rightfully, they opened fire, killing him.

One of the local rags (The Mercury) demanded to know why the _cops _were in the parking garage. They wanted to know why the cops weren't "out on the street where they belong". They wanted to know why the cops felt the need to shoot and kill "a poor homeless man who was obviously in need of treatment".

They said nary a word about the danger posed by a deranged guy with a shotgun in the parking garage of the Lloyd Center shopping mall...


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > Steve5D said:
> ...



You have no idea how much that's appreciated.  I understand a lot of what's been said about cops going too far and agree that it happens a lot, but there are good officers working the streets and support like this means a lot.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Cops really get a bad rap.
> 
> They're people, it turns out. And there's a lot of them. Some of them are boobs and idiots, a lot like, well, people. I've had a lot of, um, uncomfortable conversations with cops. Lots of people seem to think that police aren't allowed to have a conversation without probable cause or something, which is a little weird. It turns out that if you're polite and reasonable and act like a human being, pretty much all of the time the officer will too.
> 
> Trouble is, the media likes to blow it all up when a cop, or a group of cops, lose their **** and do something dumb. So, we get the idea that "lots" of cops are like that.



Man I hate it when the media gives cops a bad name.. for that matter I hate it when cops give cops a bad name.

Some of us really do care and we try to provide the service we promised to provide. It's awesome to get good support when we're under fire because of a few bad eggs.


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 24, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...



I was a cop (military), my Dad was a cop (NY State Trooper) and my Grandfather was a cop (NYPD). I have no problem cutting cops a break...


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

Very cool. Thank you for your service Steve.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

LOL.... nice post btw. I have my "dick mode" but as you said... it's there when neccesarry.  Sometimes you just have to be that way.

I try to be polite, but there's a line. At some point, there WILL be compliance, one way or another.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

I think something else of value to add to this thread is what a photographer should do when he/she IS within their rights and gets approached by an officer going too far.

Please don't argue, raise hell or resist. It won't go in your favor and most of the time a judge won't look kindly on it. Cooperation is in your best interest.

This is not to say that you did anything wrong in the first place or that you can't fight it.. you absolutely can and should.

But there's a right way to handle that and getting into it with a police officer isn't it.


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 24, 2013)

Like I said until people live it,they have no idea what police face daily and they run into some of the lowest form of human life along the way.A simple traffic stop for a tail light out can be deadly. If I am not breaking they law to take photos of something or someone, I still will do it respectfully.If I am asked by police to stop even if I am legally allowed,I am not going  to whip out a i Can do list.I am going to respectfully say yes sir and be on my way.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

DarkShadow said:


> Like I said until people live it,they have no idea what police face daily and they run into some of the lowest form of human life along the way.A simple traffic stop for a tail light out can be deadly. If I am not breaking they law to take photos of something or someone, I still will do it respectfully.If I am asked by police to stop even if I am legally allowed,I am not going  to whip out a i Can do list.I am going to respectfully say yes sir and be on my way.



That's the best thing to do. But also remember that if your rights were violated, you can take that to court after the fact. And a judge WILL take into consideration that you were cooperative at the time of the incident.  

Politely ask the officer for name and badge number.. they are required to give it. You can contact their division and speak to their patrol supervisor to try and resolve it.. OR if you prefer, you can get an attorney and allow your attorney to handle any communication with the department, assuming you don't just take it to court.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 24, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> I'm not trying to "call you out" or anything like that, but I am curious as to exactly what you mean by that.
> 
> I guess I'm out of the loop, because I honestly don't know which lawsuits you are referring to.
> 
> ...


Didn't think you were!  I wasn't referring to any particular group or lawsuit, but rather that some of these larger special interest groups are able to get the political machine to pay attention because their pockets are deep enough to take a case to the supreme court if they choose.  99.9% of the problems that arise with individuals (the ones legitimately doing nothing illegal) are because they don't have the means to adequately defend themselves.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 24, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> I think something else of value to add to this thread is what a photographer should do when he/she IS within their rights and gets approached by an officer going too far.
> 
> Please don't argue, raise hell or resist. It won't go in your favor and most of the time a judge won't look kindly on it. Cooperation is in your best interest.
> 
> ...


:shock:  Sorry, what?????  If I'm doing nothing wrong, why would I stop doing it?  Let's assume that I'm a PJ working for a major daily (rumour has it there might be one or two of those left in North America) and I am photographing an event, and doing so completely legally, because I have actually researched and know the aspects of law that effect my job.  As part of that, I take (or may have taken) a photo which Constable Bloggins doesn't like and he decides to tell me to stop, go away, etc, etc....  I should just walk away and stop doing my job?  :lmao:


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 24, 2013)

tirediron said:


> ShooterJ said:
> 
> 
> > I think something else of value to add to this thread is what a photographer should do when he/she IS within their rights and gets approached by an officer going too far.
> ...



I think thats a little different. if polite and have identified your self and who you work for and why your there doing a job, I would think the officer would understand and give you the green light. Unless he/she turns in to dick mode then your not going to win, then as shooter said name and page number please. You can use the law against them for violating your rights.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

If you're a Photojournalist, then you have press identification to present ... however, in the United States, even if ID is presented a police officer CAN ask you to leave if he/she deems it neccesarry.  The press pass wouldn't grant you the power to challenge an officer on the street.

I'm sure Canadian laws differ in some regards, but if you look at the ACLU, even they will tell you.. don't challenge police misconduct on the street. 

If your rights get violated, legal action is the way to go.

I'm not defending police misconduct .. I'm offering realistic advice to photographers on how to handle it without causing themselves more grief.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

Think of it like this ... here in the forum the moderators are the "police". It's clearly stated in forum rules that a moderators decision cannot be contested or argued with at the time a decision is made.. however, if a member feels the moderator was wrong, there are resources available to the member to report that.

It's much the same on the street.

Police officers have to handle every situation objectively.. they're human and sometimes they're wrong in what they do. But if we "backed off" because a citizen said so, we wouldn't be doing our jobs.  

If I see a guy with a camera lurking on a public street and taking pictures of kids coming out of school, it's my job to find out what he's doing. Technically, he's not breaking a law because he's on a public street... but does that mean it's harmless?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 24, 2013)

If you're working media you should have an ID or credentials to verify your purpose. And as we've all probably seen on the news during breaking coverage, the authorities may move the TV reporters and camera operators to a further location for safety reasons, so even they may be asked to move as appropriate, to keep an area clear.  

I've worked doing home visits in neighborhoods that are on the local news with shootings, drug busts, etc. - the police have enough to do without babysitting photographers. As mentioned you have legal recourse if needed. What is anyone taking pictures of that they need the pictures so bad that they'll stand there and argue with an officer?? There's an appropriate course of action to follow if you feel an officer was overzealous and that you have a legitimate complaint.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

vintagesnaps said:


> If you're working media you should have an ID or credentials to verify your purpose. And as we've all probably seen on the news during breaking coverage, the authorities may move the TV reporters and camera operators to a further location for safety reasons, so even they may be asked to move as appropriate, to keep an area clear.
> 
> I've worked doing home visits in neighborhoods that are on the local news with shootings, drug busts, etc. - the police have enough to do without babysitting photographers. As mentioned you have legal recourse if needed. What is anyone taking pictures of that they need the pictures so bad that they'll stand there and argue with an officer?? There's an appropriate course of action to follow if you feel an officer was overzealous and that you have a legitimate complaint.



Exactly ... and arguing with the officer will probably get you arrested.  If that happens, there will be no consequences for the arrest.  A judge could rule in your favor regarding your right to be there .. but they will still uphold the legitimacy of the arrest itself because you resisted.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

Best course of action .. get the officers name, badge and/or cruiser number .. walk away .. call your attorney and sue the living chit out of them.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

Me personally, as a cop... I won't have a photographer leave unless..

A) His/her presence interferes with my job

Or

B) His/her presence puts them in danger

If they aren't in danger or interfering .. happy shooting.


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 24, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> But there's a right way to handle that and getting into it with a police officer isn't it.



Quoted for truth...


----------



## tirediron (Jun 24, 2013)

vintagesnaps said:


> ...What is anyone taking pictures of that they need the pictures so bad that they'll stand there and argue with an officer?? There's an appropriate course of action to follow if you feel an officer was overzealous and that you have a legitimate complaint.


What difference does it make why someone wants the images?  If they're somewhere they're not restricted from being, why is it reasonable that they should leave and then have to debate the issue after the fact?


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

tirediron said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > ...What is anyone taking pictures of that they need the pictures so bad that they'll stand there and argue with an officer?? There's an appropriate course of action to follow if you feel an officer was overzealous and that you have a legitimate complaint.
> ...



I agree that it isn't right .. and you don't have to walk away. But if you choose not to, you can be arrested.  

It's like I said about the forum and it's moderators, the rules clearly state that members don't challenge a moderators decision even if they feel it's wrong. They CAN take action and report it.. but arguing with the moderator isn't tolerated.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 24, 2013)

Touche!   Fair comment, to a point.  The difference is, TPF is a privately owned enterprise, and can set basically any rules it likes (within certain limits of course) whereas in the public vs. public servant (and it matters not a whit whether they're police, road-workers, or toll-booth attendants) situation, both are governed several layers of laws, and both have certain rights and neither party can make things up as they go along.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

We don't make it up as we go along. The rules which govern the police are clearly stated.  Any attorney, judge, ACLU rep or police officer in the US could tell you the same thing.

Officers make decisions on the fly every day.. if people are encouraged to argue with those decisions, we're going to have a lot more problems than just upset photographers.  

I wouldn't treat someone unfairly like that. I'm a police officer but I'm also a level headed and nice guy.. but there are other officers who are idiots, or just flat out on a power trip ..

That doesn't change the fact that they're a police officer and the law requires citizens to follow their instructions. 

I've seen a lot of departments sued and a lot officers lose their jobs because someone handled it the right way.  What I haven't seen, is anyone tell a police officer off and that's that.

EDIT: I DO understand where you're coming from and it would make me angry too. It's not right for any officer to treat someone that way when acting within their rights. My goal here is to help honest photographers effectively handle misconduct.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 24, 2013)

Since the article posted seems to be an opinion piece, I looked up a news article about what originally happened. Apparently media need prior permission to take photos in Union Station in Toronto (I'm not sure if the photographer had permission or not, I would think the paper or the reporter would have gotten it taken care of ahead of time). 

But apparently he saw a couple leaving the scene, the woman was crying and they told the reporter they didn't want to talk to him - so he ran ahead of them and took their picture, and the guy smacked him... that's how/why the police got involved. Not that the guy should have smacked him, and he may have been allowed to take photos there, but the article said the station was crowded that time of day, maybe it would have been a better decision to go take someone else's picture... Sounds like it was a mess of a situation. 

I've had co-workers a couple of times that no sooner had left a home visit than the police went in for a drug bust in the same apt. building - they'd been watching the place the whole time. You never know what might be going on that you aren't even aware of. Good example about someone taking photos in front of a school, the person might be on public property on a sidewalk, but you don't know if it's someone's grandpa taking pictures the first day of school, or the neighborhood creep using the camera as a premise to hang out and try to abduct a child (or any of dozens of possible scenarios). You just don't always know the whole story or why you might be getting asked to leave an area. 

Certainly there have been situations where a security guard or police officer may not have handled something properly, and I can see why that would make someone mad if they feel like they have a right to be someplace; with 'everybody' having a camera there seem to have been plenty of overreactions. It doesn't seem like arguing with an officer would end well or that the photographer would accomplish what they set out to do. I just think the end result would be better going thru proper channels.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

I'm still learning photography .. I have a long way to go and I find a lot of value in this forum and the experience that can be drawn on here.

I don't have a lot of advice to give to other photographers about the art, but I always like to contribute something useful if I can.

What I do have experience with is nearly a decade in law enforcement .. so by all means, if anyone has a problem or question concerning the police, please feel free to message me about it.

If you're in the right I'd be happy to give you some resources you could use. I don't condone misconduct by officers.. I believe in my promise to serve the public and I have no issues with helping someone stand up for their rights.

One day I'll be more useful in photography but for now I'll contribute this to the photography community.  Lol


----------



## tirediron (Jun 24, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> We don't make it up as we go along. The rules which govern the police are clearly stated. Any attorney, judge, ACLU rep or police officer in the US could tell you the same thing.


That's the way it should work. Unfortunately it doesn't always.



ShooterJ said:


> That doesn't change the fact that they're a police officer and the law requires citizens to follow their instructions.


 Now this may be a difference between US and Canadian law, but in Canada, the requirement is to obey the lawful and reasonable direction of a peace officer. In other words (exaggerated example used for illustration) if I'm walking along the street and Constable Bloggins instruct me to help change a flat tire on his police car, while there's nothing actually illegal about that, it is unreasonable and I'm under no obligation to assist. Arresting me for failure to comply would not go well for the constable. On the other hand, if he tells me that I can't proceed past intersection 'X' because there's a fire down the street, that's both lawful and reasonable, and failure to comply would not go well for the me.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not suggesting that photographers (or anyone else) should be exempt from the law, in fact, the 'anything for the shot' type of PJ is probably the lowest form of pond-scum I can think of. What does bother me greatly is the attitude of many groups of public servants who have a "I've got a badge/license/SuperSpy Secret Decoder Ring so therefore I am right!" attitude.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

I agree... and it's the same in the US. Citizens are required to follow instructions within reason.  I wouldn't be permitted to arrest someone for not helping me change a tire. Lol

And you're correct, there are an unfortunate number who feel their job gives them more power than it really does and that's a problem.

There are those of us who try to combat that within our departments.

Oh, and you CAN make a complaint directly to internal affairs .. at least in the US. Those people LOVE to eat police officers for breakfast.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 24, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> ... Those people LOVE to eat police officers for breakfast.


Mmmmm... Sugar-frosted Cop-O's!


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

tirediron said:


> ShooterJ said:
> 
> 
> > ... Those people LOVE to eat police officers for breakfast.
> ...



I'm gonna have to remember that one. Lol


----------



## rexbobcat (Jun 24, 2013)

Idk. Many of the police here are kind f incompetent. 

I think part of it comes from the mentality that "well hell, I barely passed high school so I guess I'll just go into the police force." 

This is something I have actually heard people say. And these aren't people who can't succeed elsewhere because of circumstance. These are people who don't succeed by choice of laziness.

I could trust the police force more if most of the people in it are there because they want to do something for the good of the public, instead of being there because they heard you don't need a college degree.

Not saying that it's like this everywhere, but it seems to be prevalent in the area.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 24, 2013)

rexbobcat said:


> Idk. Many of the police here are kind f incompetent.
> 
> I think part of it comes from the mentality that "well hell, I barely passed high school so I guess I'll just go into the police force."
> 
> This is something I have actually heard people say. And these aren't people who can't succeed elsewhere because of circumstance. These are people who don't succeed by choice of laziness.


I don't think that's too common anymore; I'm sure it still occurs, but not very often.  Much like judges giving people a choice between jail and joining the army.  These days, most law-enforcement, military and similar organizations expect at least a basic university degree.


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 24, 2013)

Not too much of that in my department .. they do require a degree and the interview/entrance process is geared towards determining intelligence and problem solving skills, particularly under stress. 

Of course .. I don't work for Sheriff Andy either ... we're metro, with three divisions blanketing a population of over half a million. Not the kind of job people work due to laziness.. lol


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 25, 2013)

ShooterJ said:


> If you're standing on a highway snapping pictures, I might check it out.. if you're photographing near odd places, I might check it out... but I always allow a photographer the chance to tell me what he/she is doing ... and I've never taken any kind of action against one. I ask my questions, politely thank them and tell them to have a nice day.



Unfortunately, way too many people see this as some form of harrassment. These would be the same people who whine because you weren't around to keep them from being mugged, too...


----------



## ShooterJ (Jun 25, 2013)

Yeah.. damned if we do, damned if we don't.  People complain when we show up and when we aren't around.  Guess you just kind of get used to it after a while... this job doesn't make you popular. Lol


----------

