Slashdot Mirror
Police Restrict Public Photography
An anonymous reader writes "News.com is reporting that in Australia, recent attempts by a photo club to take pictures of industrial installations was met with police resistance. From the article: 'Club member Hans Kawitski was told not to photograph industrial installations and was ordered to inform members of the camera club to follow his lead. Liberty Victoria said its advice to photographers would be to ignore the directive. "The police have got no place making such warnings," president Brian Walters SC said.'"
The article mentions being 'hauled away by security' for taking photos inside Eastland shopping center. Well, that one's understandable. The shopping center is private property... can't take photos without the property owner's permission.
That the article fails to mention the difference between photots inside someone's property, and from outside the property, is poor journalism.
This is from a few weeks ago and more careful examination showed that it was a storm in a tea cup. A few people were warned by an individual officer. They were not stopped from taking photos and it is not police policy.
It was simply one police office making a comment.
It must be a slow news week.
"Do you think we could wipe out world hunger forever if scientists figured out how to make AOL's Free CD's edible?"-
He should have called the police, filed a report for false arrest and sued the company for destruction of property.
The actions of a private security force are not the responsibility of the government, and they are restricted by the same laws as the rest of us. This isn't the government cracking down on terrorist bogeymen, this is a private security force that needs to be informed they aren't cops.
Learn your rights, and stand up for them.
Now this is, of course, assuming your friend wasn't doing something illegal while taking the pictures like tresspassing, which is illegal and would get him in trouble. This would actually be what I would suspect, given my past experiences with such things. I've had a number of "rent-a-cops breaking the law" stories related to me in my life, most in person. Initally, it always sounds like the security force was in the wrong and, of course, I advocate standing up for one's rights as always. However it then usually comes out that the person involved was doing something they shouldn't have: Tresspassing, shoplifting, whatever.
Either way, my advice for the future: If private security tells you to stop taking pictures while you are on public land, tell them to get lost (do make sure you are on public land, not their property). If they try to detain you, get your cell phone out and threaten to call the police, while backing away. If they push the issue, make the call. If they do detain you and take your property, file a police report, and contact a lawyer about a civil suti. It IS illegal.
Security forces can temporarily detain a person only under very limited circumstances, such as if they are on the private property they are hired to protect, and they have witnessed the person comitting an illegal act (like shoplifting). Otherwise, they are just civilians in a silly uniform. If they try to grab you for something like taking photos on a public street, they'll lose their jobs at the very least.
Prior to WWII, back when Russia and Germany had relatively friendly relations, a lot of German 'tourists' visited the USSR and had their photographs taken by various strategic landmarks, such as bridges and tunnels. The photographs intentionally included the nearby signs, which provided important parameters such as clearance and maximum allowable load. Once this information was systematically compiled, the Germans had an unprecedented knowledge of their future enemy's infrastructure, enabling them to plan troop and weapon deployments with an incredible level of detail.
Procrastination Man strikes again!
Apparently it looks exactly like an innocent tourist video, which proves that it's really a cunning tradecraft terrorist video. Yep.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
1950s? In Poland, you will usually get your photos erased if you try to photograph a train station today. Sure, they no longer have the right to do so, but most of train guards and people don't realize this. And most folks get intimidated when apprehended by uniformed men who don't know it better.
The actual law was changed just a few years ago, too. And even though it no longer considers train stations "objects of vital military importance", shooting a photo of a lawn at a military training grounds can put you in trouble.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Because if it was private security, the first thing your friend should have done was call the police and have the security guards arrested for theft and/or destruction of personal property. It is not legal for them to do that. They can ask you to stop taking pictures and if you actually are on their property then you must comply, but they cannot take your film. Well, at least not without a court order.
Check out the Photographer's Right.
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
And having gotten you to the station, they can take a DNA sample, which they keep even if they subsequently release you without charge.
Prosecutors claimed that this was part of an ongoing economic jihad. I really wish I was joking.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Whilst I don't condone the boring nature of what they were doing, I thought this might interest people outside the UK or with medium term memory loss.
Plane-spotters 'ignored warnings'
"They were held in prison for almost six weeks, before being released on bail and allowed to return to Britain."
Brocklesby Park Cricket Club
It wasn't a "Police ban" or "restriction".
Some cops just warned them against it. They can photograph all they want and theres not a damn thing the police can do about it.
It's called a chilling effect.
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!
of course you can take photos of the Eiffel Tower at night... this is the sort of rubbish that helps no-one, it really annoys me! this is exactly the reason that this situation exists - someone reads an article that says "you cannot do XYZ" and then goes round telling people "you can't do ABC".
You're not allowed to PUBLISH photos of the tower at night - but even then, the policy is that amateur publication, such as displaying the image on your homepage on the internet, will be overlooked.
publication is NOT the same as photography!