A Long Way From Home

Crazy! The fact that you have been hassled twice indicates some level of coordination. I wonder if the DOHS is behind this? I’ve seen them watching people take pictures in the past. Especially around the Library Tower.

As you know, I am a photographer.

What you have to respect is that private security personnel are trained to look for people scoping the properties they are employed to guard.

In fact, it is one handful of the suspicious behaviors guards are told could be the precursor to a potential terrorist attack on their buildings. There is justification for this in that disrupted plots have produced photographs of potential targets the terrorists took themselves – thus the intense ‘no photos’ enforcement surrounding the US Bank Tower given its known target status.

So in order for security guards to 1) Do their job and 2) Not be accused of racially or ethnically profiling individuals they have to confront everyone. Add to that the occasional over-zealous security guard and it’s no wonder anyone with a camera on the street these days has similar stories.

It’s not a comfortable feeling because you know your intentions are harmless, but it’s not necessarily the guard’s fault either as they are simply doing what they are told to keep their job.

There are some things to keep in mind though.

Private property owners and public entities CAN control the commercial use of their property – the City of Beverly Hills for example litigates the unauthorized use of the famous ‘City of Beverly Hills’ signs on the edge of town (the commercial use of the ‘Hollywood’ sign is another example).

This is why productions and photo shoots must get property and sign releases.

This often applies even if they are shooting from public property – if you shoot a commercial image on Grand Avenue and you can see the Mellon logo, you better get a release.

Also, it never hurts to let people know what you are doing first by intentionally asking where their private property line ends. This may go against your grain but it’s an easy way for you to broadcast your intention to photograph and your knowledge of your rights.

“There is justification for this in that disrupted plots have produced photographs of potential targets the terrorists took themselves…”

I only remember the one case in Miami where this is true, but it’s debatable as to whether those guys are even terrorists. Most of the other high profile cases turned out to be mistakes like the middle eastern guy that was wrongly detained for having pictures of downtown LA, disneyland, etc. I’ll take your word for it that there have been such cases, but still it makes no sense to consider this particular behavior suspicious if only one out of a million photos (or less) are used for such nefarious purposes. It’s a complete waste of time and an unnecessary hassle for those of us that take pictures. If there has been a terrorist caught in such a manner I sure haven’t heard of it.

As far as security guards go, I don’t really care how they’re trained or what activities they have been told are suspicious. If I’m participating in a legal activity off their premises I would likely not be too interested in answering their questions.

Security guards frequently overstep their authority anyway. The guards at movie shoots will always say that you’re not allowed to take pictures of movie shoots even when they’re filming in a public area. Of course that is not true.

CALIFORNIA TERROR PLOTS FOILED:

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/sept05/caindict090105.htm

“How far had their plans gone? Pretty far. They’d surfed the web to identify and scope out targets, drawn up a list of possible locations for attack, conducted surveillance, bought weapons, and begun physical and firearms training. Armed with shotguns, they’d even staged nearly a dozen robberies of gas stations across Southern California from late May to July to finance their operations.”

“Editorial use” is why Police Departments have issued press passes for decades.

“Personal use” is a good defense if you actually get arrested, sued or have some real loss other than an unpleasant encounter with a security guard just doing his or her job.

I’m not saying ever give up your film or delete an image (although in a war zone you’ll have to make that decision for yourself and your family but chances are then you won’t be in a country with our Constitutional system either).

At home, it sounds like a good case for someone with the finances and diligence to press forward on Constitutional rights “for personal use”. Me, I just learned to play nice and ask where their property line ends so everyone can relax and still be thankful Los Angeles is not a town which requires a permit to put a tripod down.

By the way, in most sections of the Financial District this ‘line’ is clearly marked on the sidewalk with metal placards in the cement.

Of course, when in doubt on a legal issue, get an attorney’s advice and guidance.

Maybe you missed the recent news about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s confession about the various plots he planned and executed over the years for al-Qaeda. One of the operations targeted the Library Tower here in downtown. Casing a target is a key planning activity for acts of terrorism.

Since our society can’t bring itself to use profiling to identify likely threats (Israel does it all the time with great efficiency), we subject everyone to the same rules. Yeah, Eric, you don’t seem to fit the typical profile of tens of thousands of known terrorists. But, to serve the cult of political correctness, you get hassled by security guards for taking pictures. Just like when we board an airplane. My retired mother is considered as dangerous as the young Muslim guy praying loudly in the passenger lounge.

What’s more important to the authorities? Appearing fair or acting logically to protect us? Well, since we tell them through our elected officials what to do, they hassle everyone.

In every situation you find yourself in that you do not like you need to examine and acknowledge your contribution to that circumstance even if it is as simple as being there.

This is similar perhaps to the legal definition of ‘contributory negligence’.

In other words, in today’s post-global terrorism world realize that photographing high-profile buildings and critical infrastructure may prompt questions from a security guard and an escort to the end of their property line.

Incidentally, banks have practiced a ‘no-photos’ policy for as long as I’ve been photographing for money (almost 20 years). Security usually suspects anyone photographing a bank to be casing the place to plan a robbery.

These days the both the threats and the targets are much different…

Photographer’s rights aside, I think there is a bigger issue that’s being overlooked:

8th AND FIG IS NOT IN THE “JEWELRY DISTRICT”!!!

Glad to provide a bit of perspective here! :)

Yes, the real reason Eric got hassled – he was about to expose yet another Downtown geography faux pas!