Stand your ground, photographers rights.

Many security personnel are employed as agents for the property owners & are working under direct instruction from the property owners in relation to photography. It is often the property owner who doesn't know where the boundries lie & it can be quiet frustrating for the security officer when instructed to "move on" people from the property even though they (security officer) know that the owner is overstepping their authority & have no right to interfere with a photographer on public property outside the boundaries of the premises involved.

BreitlingFan wrote in post #12917439
Security personnel had concerns, so they called the police.

Who obviously have nothing better to do than explain to the security droids that the photographers can shoot what they want from a public area.

When I was in London last time, there was a great looking "long building" (near Pimlico for those that know London) that had the classic very-red painted doors. I was on public property outside a gate (70-200 lens) and was about to shoot a photo when a security guard came half jogging over and told me "you're not allowed to photograph the building" (he was acting like a bit of an ass and you could tell he wasn't very nice).

I knew my rights, I knew I could've said "I'm on public property, I can take a photo" but I chose not to deal with the guy and just apologized and left. I have a feeling he'd probably put himself in front of my camera and say "I'm on public property as well", he was that kind of guy.

I got my photo later somewhere else. I guess moral of the story is, just be nice, and if truly necessary, stand your ground (but stay nice!).

hollis_f wrote in post #12921504
Who obviously have nothing better to do than explain to the security droids that the photographers can shoot what they want from a public area.

And education occurs, and maybe it won't be a problem in the future.

A positive outcome, yes?

I have to laugh at some of the descriptions of security personnel. Many of the descriptions are more fitting of a mall security guard than they are descriptive of the people in the video.

I also get a good chuckle out of how many photographers believe security personnel are going to know that law. They're not cops...

BreitlingFan wrote in post #12921984
I also get a good chuckle out of how many photographers believe security personnel are going to know that law. They're not cops...

They're puppets. They're hired to protect the buildings being ran by uneducated owners/managers (Not a new thing really) when it comes to laws and personal rights outside their business.

BreitlingFan wrote in post #12921984
I also get a good chuckle out of how many photographers believe security personnel are going to know that law. They're not cops...

No, they're not cops. But they seem to enjoy acting like cops. And the security droids themselves obviously believe that they know the law, the one that says that nobody's allowed to photograph their building.

I understand that security guards have to do what they are told, but it is the way that they carry out their instructions that bothers me. If they are required to ask me to move I am fine with that, but they should expect me to have to comply with their request. If they are required to call the police if I don't move I am fine with that, but they should expect the police to actually do anything.

What really needs to be done is educate the property managers and security directors on what they can and cannot do, then maybe they will stop instructing guards to do things that are outside their authority.

hollis_f wrote in post #12922137
No, they're not cops. But they seem to enjoy acting like cops. And the security droids themselves obviously believe that they know the law, the one that says that nobody's allowed to photograph their building.

Yeah,, put these types in a uniform, their grey matter shrinks and egos inflate.

hollis_f wrote in post #12922137
No, they're not cops. But they seem to enjoy acting like cops. And the security droids themselves obviously believe that they know the law, the one that says that nobody's allowed to photograph their building.

I don't see them acting like cops, I see them acting as security guards.

In some of the cases shown, it's pretty clear that the security guards simply told the photographers to move past a certain point to be on public property. Once they did that, it was over. So, those cases, it would appear as though the security guards did know what they were talking bout.

I understand the propensity for photographers to view that video and say that the security guys were out of line but, really, they weren't. In fact, at least one of the videographers was out of line by lying to a security guard by stating that she hadn't filmed him when she, in fact, had...

MattPharmD wrote in post #12922259
If they are required to ask me to move I am fine with that, but they should expect me to have to comply with their request. If they are required to call the police if I don't move I am fine with that, but they should expect the police to actually do anything.

If they should expect you to move, why would they call the police?

BreitlingFan wrote in post #12922358
I don't see them acting like cops, I see them acting as security guards.

In some of the cases shown, it's pretty clear that the security guards simply told the photographers to move past a certain point to be on public property. Once they did that, it was over. So, those cases, it would appear as though the security guards did know what they were talking bout.

I understand the propensity for photographers to view that video and say that the security guys were out of line but, really, they weren't. In fact, at least one of the videographers was out of line by lying to a security guard by stating that she hadn't filmed him when she, in fact, had...

Completely agree.

It's easy for people to get defensive and loose perspective when they feel that something they value (in this case photography) is being threatened.

The police officers in this video performed exemplary, and most of the security guards did nothing more than their job. One even offered to help the photographers find the best spots and angles. what more do people want?
The only ones who were out of line AND breaking the law, was the people who made the video.

As for security guards in general..
Instead of just bashing them on the internet, people should do something to help them. Most of these guys simply do what they are told and truly believe that it is the right thing.
One could argue that they should take the time to study the law, but why would they? Many of them follow a manual with specific guidelines for dealing with these types of things. I have seen a few of these manuals and most have some mistakes. But why should the guard, who is simply doing his job, question what he is being told?

If you wan't better security guards, work towards a system like ours.
Here, you can't just take a job as a security guard. You need training and a licence. They know the law because it is a legal requirement.
Sure, you can still find bad ones, but in such cases, it is the person and not the uniform.

BreitlingFan wrote in post #12922366
If they should expect you to move, why would they call the police?

I think he meant to write "but they should NOT expect me to have to comply with their request".

Having worked the security industry for the past 7 years until I recently got sick of dealing with having to do exactly this sort of "enforcement" I have a bit of a perspective from the security guards point of view.

As a security guard almost every company out there has specific rule regarding photography on the premises we are assigned to "protect". These rules apply to the property owned by the company or property owner and do not extend beyond the property lines. I have had to ask many a film crew from local news agencies to please move the equipment onto public property as well as photographers.

I did make a point to inform the clients I worked for when they inevitably complained about people taking pictures on their property that I did everything I was legally allowed to do in asking them to move onto public property. Once they have moved into public space there isn't a darn thing I, as a security officer, can do about it other than sit and watch them as they work to insure that nothing "suspicious" occurs to my clients property. And of course write down the pertinent information regarding who, what, where , when and how.

If a guard is doing more than this then technically they are breaking the law by unlawfully detaining or otherwise impeding the photographer and if the photographer were to call the police and file a complaint the guard would be receiving a citation.

Security guards have exactly the same powers as the general public. They are not police. They are civilian contractors hired to patrol property, observe and report on suspicious activity as well as monitor security, fire and other alarm systems for the purposes of testimony in court if a crime or other emergency occurs. Nothing more.

moose10101 wrote in post #12922508
I think he meant to write "but they should NOT expect me to have to comply with their request".

This... guess I should proof read.

Every time I see a video like this I am torn. I understand that a right not exercised will disappear but, the people who make these videos are almost always asses. The photographers were being intentionally vague. To me, that sends up a red flag. I spent 20 years fighting terrorists and insurgents and I know that if something doesn't feel right, it probably isn't. Every security guard should have called the police if he didn't have a warm fuzzy about the situation. I would also expect that every company that these guards represent took video of these photographers, just in case.

Bob