| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/12/2006 02:16:13 PM · #1 |
I take lots of photos and wonder if you HAVE to show them the photos you have taken if they stop you in public... Are the allowed to ask you to delete them? What are the laws and are they different from place to place. Curious
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:20:14 PM · #2 |
photographers rights when stopped or confronted
posted by a lawyer. you should print this and keep it with your camera.i even have a few extras in my bag as well to give out to people that dont know what the laws are.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:20:30 PM · #3 |
I too wonder if you *have* to display them... I would suspect it depends on the situation. I'd guess (emphasize guess) that the rules that cover search & seizure pertain.
That said, I'd be more than happy to show them my photos, since I've got nothing to hide. I'd expect that being non-confrontational and cooperative would get me on my way much faster.
Actually, thinking back, I do believe this attitude helped me personally. I was questioned by the Chicago Police Dept. while taking pics near O Hare. I was a bit offended, but kept an upbeat, friendly, but firm attitude. They took personal information and did not allow me to continue shooting, but even gave me a ride back to my vehicle.
Message edited by author 2006-06-12 14:25:47. |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:22:09 PM · #4 |
In general, no, they have no right to look at your photos without a warrant or an arrest.
DO download, read, and print that handout. |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:26:49 PM · #5 |
| This doesn't mean that they won't ASK. They will use every tool available... |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:28:14 PM · #6 |
Photographers rights if stopped or confronted in the UK
just found this link for those of you that live in the UK.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:30:45 PM · #7 |
If you have nothing to hide, I'd show them, but you do not have to. If you did nothing wrong, chances are they will look at them and let you go on your way.
I suppose if you are bored you could refuse and see what happens, then post all about it here :) If you refuse to show them you'll give them a reason to want to see them. I doubt a good cop would simply let you go if you refused and they had someone complain about you. They'd probably hold you on suspicion of something until they got a warrant. I'd much rather walk away from something like that then turn it into a big deal.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:33:45 PM · #8 |
anyone have similiar canadian versions?
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:34:56 PM · #9 |
| As someone that just had this happen, at least the Sheriffs asked if they could see the pictures, but didn't demand to. As someone that had nothing to hide and wanted to put everyone at ease that I was NOT taking provocative or sensitive-type images, I was more than happy to allow one of the Sheriffs to view what I had taken. I would far rather make my name known in my community that I am NOT a photographer with wrong motives involved in what I capture. It all ended well and think that being co-operative goes a long way, and if anyone thought anything pics I had taken were not in line with decency or a parent wanted me to delete any shots, I would have been more than happy to do so. |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:43:24 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by ellamay:
anyone have similiar canadian versions? |
I've searched and can't find anything, but I do know many of the applicable laws are provincial rather than federal. Anyone else have anything for us Canucks? |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:44:40 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I was questioned by the Chicago Police Dept. while taking pics near O Hare. I was a bit offended, but kept an upbeat, friendly, but firm attitude. They took personal information and did not allow me to continue shooting, but even gave me a ride back to my vehicle. |
Wow... guess you were really lucky they didn't do a criminal background check on you before they let you go. :)
On a serious note, I had the same thing happen to me when taking pictures at my favorite landing approach at Sky Harbor International here in Phoenix. I'm guessing both of us are on somebody's watch list now. LOL!
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:45:22 PM · #12 |
My wife worked at a photo center in Montana several years ago, and when when she was developing photos some burning crosses came through. She contacted the police and her headquarters. Her headquarters then told her that in no way could the police have the photo's they did not belong to them. The police concured, and claimed that the only thing that her calling them did, was make them aware that something might be up. They also said they could do as the previous poster stated "ask for them creativly" and get the customer to volunteer the photos. Other than that they would need a search warrent to get the photos.
Bottom line is that they would need a great reason in order to get a warrent for the materials. Judges just don't hand out search warrents, however if you provoke them, then they might just have a reason to detain you.
For the most part the police are looking out for the intrest of the general public, and with terrorism a threat certian subjects might suggest a national security threat. I for one am glad that they at least approach people about it, because you never know when they will catch a suspect by just asking "what are you doing?"
Message edited by author 2006-06-12 14:47:44. |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:50:00 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Wow... guess you were really lucky they didn't do a criminal background check on you before they let you go. :) |
Shhhhhhh! ;-)
Originally posted by stdavidson:
On a serious note, I had the same thing happen to me when taking pictures at my favorite landing approach at Sky Harbor International here in Phoenix. I'm guessing both of us are on somebody's watch list now. LOL! |
What say next time we go together and tag team 'em! |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 02:57:23 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
On a serious note, I had the same thing happen to me when taking pictures at my favorite landing approach at Sky Harbor International here in Phoenix. I'm guessing both of us are on somebody's watch list now. LOL! |
What say next time we go together and tag team 'em! |
Going there would be fun. It is right at the end of one runway that has a great intersection with all sorts of street signs that make great foreground interest objects:
Airplane Landings and Airport
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 03:14:58 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by boomtap:
....and with terrorism a threat certian subjects might suggest a national security threat..... |
Any real terrorist that stupid would likely be caught in the visa questions where they ask you outright - with a Yes and No box :-)
Detailed building plans, stock & arial photographs of areas, airports and buildings are available in a number of places for almost everywhere of potential interest (try google maps to start with for arial pics of big chunks of land) without the need to visit the country. Even so, the might want to use a P&S that will attract no attention :-) |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 03:28:57 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by robs:
Even so, the might want to use a P&S that will attract no attention :-) |
Nothing says jihad like a white lens... |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 03:30:42 PM · #17 |
I was taking pictures of a refinery from public land when two jeeps of security guards came up on me and started questioning what I was doing. I politely told them I was taking photos of the lights and smoke from the refinery, but was using a WA lens and no specific details were visible. Certainly anyone driving along the main highway that goes right past there would get a more detailed image. While they agreed, they still wanted me to delete the photos. I politely declined (I had also read the Photographers Rights previously linked. They tried to intimidate me by saying they were going to call the police in to investigate. I said "feel free". They said the report would be going to the FBI. I said "fine". They said an agent would probably come knocking at my door. I said "OK". They asked again if I would delete the images and I said "no".
That was the last I heard, although I was detained for about 30 or 40 minutes while all this was going on.
It's ridiculous to me that they would bother harassing someone just because they were out in plain sight. If I wanted detailed shots, I would have taken them from closer to the plant - driving by, or from where they wouldn't have seen me with a long lens.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 03:34:08 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by robs:
Even so, the might want to use a P&S that will attract no attention :-) |
Nothing says jihad like a white lens... |
LOL. Exactly. I would think it would be the other way around.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 03:41:11 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by robs:
Even so, the might want to use a P&S that will attract no attention :-) |
Nothing says jihad like a white lens... |
LOL. Exactly. I would think it would be the other way around. |
Stop it already with that common sense :-)) Where was that web-site where you buy that army camo for the white lenses again? :-))
Actually the white lens cuts both ways. I was out taking pics of the marathon a few months back and it was elbow only room along the side of the road - once I trot out the white lens (the f4, which I think is the smallest of the whites) and 20D with grip, a firing path opened in front of me and stayed open for the best part of an hour. I was laughing inside, all the people standing on each other and maybe 2 sq meters just in front of me empty :-)
Message edited by author 2006-06-12 15:42:09. |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 03:43:27 PM · #20 |
I was stopped by military in Iraq, and they asked to see *all* my photos. They deleted a few shots of military tanks and other miltiary equipment.
No idea what my rights are, but I'm not about to say no to a bunch of guys with automatic weapons.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 03:54:08 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by terje:
I was stopped by military in Iraq, and they asked to see *all* my photos. They deleted a few shots of military tanks and other miltiary equipment.
No idea what my rights are, but I'm not about to say no to a bunch of guys with automatic weapons. |
I'm guessing the rules are a little different when you're taking pictures of military vehicles in a combat zone. |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 04:07:37 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
I was taking pictures of a refinery from public land when two jeeps of security guards came up on me and started questioning what I was doing. I politely told them I was taking photos of the lights and smoke from the refinery, but was using a WA lens and no specific details were visible. Certainly anyone driving along the main highway that goes right past there would get a more detailed image. While they agreed, they still wanted me to delete the photos. I politely declined (I had also read the Photographers Rights previously linked. They tried to intimidate me by saying they were going to call the police in to investigate. I said "feel free". They said the report would be going to the FBI. I said "fine". They said an agent would probably come knocking at my door. I said "OK". They asked again if I would delete the images and I said "no".
That was the last I heard, although I was detained for about 30 or 40 minutes while all this was going on.
It's ridiculous to me that they would bother harassing someone just because they were out in plain sight. If I wanted detailed shots, I would have taken them from closer to the plant - driving by, or from where they wouldn't have seen me with a long lens. |
You should have contacted their employer and asked him or her if it's the company's policy to harass private citizens that are simply going about their daily business. Then say that if it ever happens again that you will sue him/her personally, the company, and the security guards, both individually and collectively, for every dime you can get. Say also that you will take your story to the news media.
This kind of harassment is happening more and more often nowadays, and if we keep letting them get away with it, then it will continue to get worse and eventually become accepted practice.
Not all cops are 'just doing their job' either. They're just people after all, and people come in all types. Some are good, and some are bad. The problem is that bad cops have nobody to answer to. If a cop asks to see your photos, politely tell him, "Absolutely officer, just as soon as you show me a search warrant." If he's is just doing his job, then he shouldn't ask unless he has probable cause to suspect that you have committed a crime, in which case he should arrest you. Someone saying, "I think that person is taking illegal photos." does not constitute probable cause.
Just my $0.02.
Message edited by author 2006-06-12 16:08:41.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 04:08:01 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by terje:
I was stopped by military in Iraq, and they asked to see *all* my photos. They deleted a few shots of military tanks and other miltiary equipment.
No idea what my rights are, but I'm not about to say no to a bunch of guys with automatic weapons. |
Like they'd actually shoot you. the press is constantly shooting military equipment etc. during wars - including award winning shots of the military doing wrong over the years. The military is not all powerful over civilian photographers and they still have to obey the law. |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 04:16:25 PM · #24 |
Here in our town, maybe thought out Georgia, yes a police official has the right to view your pictures. If stopped by the police and they have probable cause to believe you may have taken inappropriate pictures they have the lawful right to search your vehicle and any contents in it or on your person. Of course you have the right to deny them the right to search but it will earn you a trip to police headquarters where you will be interrogated by a detective. You have the right to not to talk until you retain a lawyer under your Miranda warning but that will earn you time behind bars until your attorney arrives.
This information was given to me by a Lt. at the police department. So it's best just to show them your pictures. If any of the complaining parties wish for your to delete the pictures, do so. UNLESS you feel your Constitutional Rights are being violated. Then DO NOT delete the pictures and retain a lawyer.
Message edited by author 2006-06-12 20:47:16.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2006 04:16:56 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by terje:
I was stopped by military in Iraq, and they asked to see *all* my photos. They deleted a few shots of military tanks and other miltiary equipment.
No idea what my rights are, but I'm not about to say no to a bunch of guys with automatic weapons. |
Watch CNN or army recruting ads if you want to see pics of military equipment - anything secret is hardly going to be in the open. Besides, deleting individual images is pointless because it's just pretending again - just recover them once you get the card in a computer. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/04/2025 04:47:57 AM EDT.
