Stand your ground: You are allowed to take photographs from a public place

[Ilie Pandia]

Here is an interesting YouTube clip with six photo journalists set out to test the policy on taking photographs from a public space.

This is from UK, and of course you need to get familiar with the law in your country, but this clip shows that you have the right to take any photos you want as long as you are doing that from a public place, even if private security has a problem with this :)

FJH9F7Hcluo

And this was an awesome setup! If you plan on doing the same I think is a very good idea to have have friends filming the whole thing, possibly from afar so that their record cannot be illegally sized.

[Fred Steeves]

Good find Ilie, thanks for that. It was reminding me of David Icke's infamous "Hassle Free Zone". No one likes to be hassled of course, but hell man, it's even getting to be quite the hassle just to stay in the hassle free zone.(LOL)

So then, as long as there has to be hassling going on, we may as well hassle the hasslers while we're at it. http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/images/smilies/newadditions/smile.gif Wouldn't want them to miss out on the joys of being hassled either now...Would we?

Cheers,
Fred

[Ilie Pandia]

I think this quote says it all....





"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate." - Noam Chomsky

[ulli]

I think this quote says it all....





"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate." - Noam Chomsky

This is also what Brian O'Leary always pointed out,
and a typical example of the narrow spectrum was always CNN's Crossfire debates.
I could always sense how fake they were..like televised wrestling matches.

Private security companies are the pinnacle of the corporate take-over
that our planet is suffering.
What I would love to see is that photographers in every city on earth go out and push back at this as far as possible, while staying within their rights.

With paranoia gone over the top in the ranks of security personnel one asks oneself
who the real threat to security is.

Thanks for that video, Ilie.

[Ilie Pandia]

"This is for security reasons", "This is to prevent surveillance and possible terrorist attacks" are all misleading of course.

If I were to take surveillance photos or videos of that place I can do that from very far away with no problems, or with hidden cameras that nobody will ever notice.

Just as "for national security" actually means to "protect the interests of our private benefactors"

[Patrikas]

"This is for security reasons", "This is to prevent surveillance and possible terrorist attacks" are all misleading of course.

If I were to take surveillance photos or videos of that place I can do that from very far away with no problems, or with hidden cameras that nobody will ever notice.

Just as "for national security" actually means to "protect the interests of our private benefactors"


Great video Illie,
i was also thinking about the corrporate google and street view would give anyone who chose to run it a pretty good view of any area in question

[spiritguide]

Glad to see some law enforcement folks are properly educated in protecting civil rights. Testing the system should be a constant ongoing endeavor as if ignorant some might get educated. This should be done at the local level periodically for educational purposes.

:peace:

Maybe this thread can be used by members to upload personal videos of standing ground regarding civil rights. This could be educational and a service to the population as a whole in preserving their rights.

[Cjay]

Those who assert authority beyond their legal rights need to be reminded of their limits. Thanks, Ilie, that was quite entertaining, although troubling to see how ignorant/arrogant the security personnel are.

[Bongo]

I found it very amusing when one of the security guards asked for his ID, haha

[Arrowwind]

As someone who does not like their photo taken, and there are few that exist of me, I would mention that people also have the right to request that they or thier property not be photographed.

Notice that the security guards were polite and did not take cameras. People have the right to take photos and other people have the right to request them not to....until they change the law.

But it is true that if you are in Washington, say like at the Jefferson Memorial or some such place they well carry you away for dancing.

[Hip Hipnotist]

As someone who does not like their photo taken, and there are few that exist of me, I would mention that people also have the right to request that they or thier property not be photographed.

Notice that the security guards were polite and did not take cameras. People have the right to take photos and other people have the right to request them not to....until they change the law.

But it is true that if you are in Washington, say like at the Jefferson Memorial or some such place they well carry you away for dancing.

I would certainly respect your request to not be photographed.

Many others would not -- for a variety of reasons -- legal or otherwise.

The best defense against being photographed is to wear a mask. Unfortunately I'm not being sarcastic. And unfortunately you might also be detained for wearing a mask. After all, there was a robbery in the area six months ago and the suspect was wearing a mask sort'a just like the one you're wearing. So take off the mask, without using your hands -- or I will taser you. Now! Do it!!

ZZZZzzztd!!!

Whoops.

Went off by mistake.

ZZZzzzzzst!!!

But that wasn't.

Okay, now I am being ( slightly ) sarcastic. ;-)

[Ilie Pandia]

As someone who does not like their photo taken, and there are few that exist of me, I would mention that people also have the right to request that they or thier property not be photographed.

Notice that the security guards were polite and did not take cameras. People have the right to take photos and other people have the right to request them not to....until they change the law.

But it is true that if you are in Washington, say like at the Jefferson Memorial or some such place they well carry you away for dancing.

Hi,

Taking photographs is a secondary issue here. The purpose of the video was to test if the private security guys think they make the law, and apparently they do :).

Between kind people, a gentle request of not being photographed should suffice. No need for tasers, violence or being sued.

One of the "property managers" explained it quite well: "If you want to make money of out this then there is a different process you need to go trough, but if you just want to take photos for yourself or an exhibition come with me and you'll take some great shots!" (not exact quote) - That is fair enough! :)

[Arrowwind]

I didnt stick with the film long enough to see taser stuff. Of course that is not right and neither is harrassment to prevent photo shoots on public streets.... but I assure you, in my position that I dont want to be photographed, I have been harrassed, by family members no less to have my photo taken.

It seems that just because you have this wonderful power of photography, and that people love family portraits and other types of photos they assume they have the right to harrass to take photos.... so equally, I guess some people feel the right to harass to prevent photos. Surely many acts by the paparazzi should be illegal.. stalking is not right even on public property. Just because you are on public property and the person wanting to photograph you is on public property does not mean that they should. Where to draw the line?

Capturing someone's image is a form of posession of something/someone that you do not own and I feel that if the person being photographed does not want such a photograph to exist they should have the right to legally have the image confiscated... but not through harrassment nor violence.

[Arrowwind]

I guess part of the issue here is that those being requested not to photograph by polite means are not complying. They think they have a right. The question here to me is do they have a right? Why is it that becasue we have these new fangled tools that we feel that we have a right to use them as we wish with no concern for privacy, safety or cost to another?

[boja]

All we need to do now is to get this film prime time coverage on the mainstream media, so that EVERYBODY knows the situation.

Sadly, I don't believe this will happen.

There's a lesson here :- If you want to take pictures in a "public" place, do it covertly.

It may not be the right thing to do, but it's the least hassle. (So long as you don't get caught).

[spiritguide]

If you don't want to be recorded still picture or otherwise, the suggestion in this contemporary world is to stay home with the blinds closed and your computers buried in a draw. The modern state of electronic surveillance is pervasive. CCTV at all public venues, casinos, stores and traffic intersections which record 24/7 and do not ask for permission. With the advent of facial recognition software it is getting worst. Oh, other means are drones and satellites also watching and recording. Individual choice in this matter of pictures is mute as the governments do it whether or not the public likes it, and they do it with your tax dollars also. All things in this dualistic world can be used for good or evil and the sooner we realize it is the decisions of the heart that matter we will entertain diatribe of the duality of things instead of the one we feed. IMHO

:peace: