Photographer's rights in Nebraska ...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Morris said:
There is. It's human interaction, man-management, social skills. There's nothing "snivelling" about being polite.
Click to expand...

How is bowing to an illegal demand not snivelling whether one does it politely or rudely? One need not be rude to exercise their legal right. One can be rude and do this, but one can do it just as easily in a polite fashion.


Roger Hicks said:
There is also the point that once he exceeds his authority, a security guard is no longer a security guard. He's a security danger.
Click to expand...

Very much so. Over here they say "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". But when people are ignorant of the law and are placed in positions of 'authority' we are all in danger.


Gumby said:
Why is there any interest at all in teaching the guard a lesson? Isn't the goal to get a photograph or two... not to be an agent in social reform? Perhaps there is a loss of context?
Click to expand...

I am simply after the picture. Hopefully some guard will look into it so the next photographer won't have to deal with it, but I don't expect I'll do much except give them a good chuckle. Worst part is how it can ruin a perfectly good day out.
 
Last edited:
Gumby said:
Why is there any interest at all in teaching the guard a lesson? Isn't the goal to get a photograph or two... not to be an agent in social reform? Perhaps there is a loss of context?
Click to expand...

Because if you don't, he'll do it again, and the general climate of fear and deference to authority -- or pretended authority -- will be reinforced.

Do you want to live like that?

Cheers,

Roger
 
Roger Hicks said:
Because if you don't, he'll do it again, and the general climate of fear and deference to authority -- or pretended authority -- will be reinforced.

Do you want to live like that?
Click to expand...

Roger... one or two ingorant (meaning 'uneducated'), badge-heavy or overly testonerone-laden, poorly trained, or rude cops/rent-a-cops really doesn't cause me to worry about a general decline of society.

EDIT: I totally agree with what Fred just said.
 
Last edited:
FrankS said:
Hi Andrew. Yes you are correct, that it all revolves about what the law is. The best leagal opinion we have in this thread, is the attourney's advice to the original poster in post #1.
Click to expand...


howdy Frank
ah of course...a lawer is responcible for the conflict here 😀

how often would it be true that someone goes to a lawer and either pays them or is an introductory consultation with the hopes of getting paid with future work...and suprise suprise they give advise that supports your complaint to them in the first place. it doesnt mean there isnt a counter argument that is stronger. If it is actualy a bank then i am not surprised photograhy isnt allowed, not that they can prevent stealth photography....
 
sepiareverb said:
As a long time New Yorker I think this is much easier to do in NYC where folks are much more able to do as they please than in many places (like Omaha?).
Click to expand...

I'm surprised to hear this... I had the opposite impression (I know little to nothing about NYC). Omaha is a fairly easy-going town. This experience is likely to be a "one-off" experience. Why it takes on such magnitude baffles me.

And like you, this has only happened to me a few times.... and never (1) got into a brawl, (2) had to contact PR people (in a situation that wasn't a professional shoot on private property), or (3) had to educate anyone beyond simply answering the question "why are you taking pictures?"
 
When challenged "What are you doing?" I always politely say "I'm taking photos, that's what I do".

And carry right on and ignore them like they asked a stupid question, and I answered them in a civil manner.
 
Gumby said:
Roger... one or two ingorant (meaning 'uneducated'), badge-heavy or overly testonerone-laden, poorly trained, or rude cops/rent-a-cops really doesn't cause me to worry about a general decline of society.
Click to expand...

Dear Ed,

If it were only one or two, I'd agree. If it had ever been thus, I might agree. But as there are quite a number of photographers in this thread alone saying that they have been approached by security guards, and as I for one do not recall this attitude until 10-20 years ago, I don't agree.

Edit: (Not directed at you, but a general observation). I find it puzzling that in response to an original post which I should have thought most photographers would regard as good news, there are those who seem to be saying, "Oh, no, we shouldn't pay any attention to the law as set by the legislature. Law as set by minimum-wage security guards is much more important, and should be allowed to flourish and prosper."

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
As far as photgraphing any item be it a building or icon (Mickey Mouse for example) that is protected by a copyright it is not illegal to photograph either one...it's what you do with the photo later that may become an illegal act...
If, later I give a copy of this photo to a friend I'm still within the law...If I sell the same image then I'm in trouble...
Don't let anyone throw "Copyright Infringement" at you to get you to stop photographing...it that were the case Disneyland wouldn't allow any cameras into their parks...
 
Roger Hicks said:
Now that Morris is on ignore, as not being worth the effort of countering, I'll try to return to the topic.

There seems to be an extraordinary sub-text here, that the security guard will beat you senseless or gun you down as soon as you refuse to obey his every whim. How likely is this?
Click to expand...

About as likely as the security guard will just leave you be after replying, "I'm within my rights" and keep photographing after stepping 10 paces away from him.
 
Chicken Little said:
Civil liberties has been lost forever. Not only is film dead, but so are our photographic rights.
Click to expand...

[this posting expired before even posting -- it is not referenced elsewhere]
 
You're right, Fred, this topic is fueled (if not mostly artificially created) by male posturing. But I wish you left your posts when you decided to bow out.
 
nextreme said:
About as likely as the security guard will just leave you be after replying, "I'm within my rights" and keep photographing after stepping 10 paces away from him.
Click to expand...

That's when he beats you senseless or guns you down?

This is what puzzles me. What is actually likely to happen?

Most of the time, if you explain politely what you are doing, an amicable settlement -- which will never happen if you run away.

Occasionally, a further altercation.

Even then, what happens? Is he really stupid enough to assault you? Especially when you ask to be taken to his leader, or for the police to be called?

If this is 'male posturing', well, I never knew I was so macho.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Fred,
I'm sorry you deleted that last one.

It was the most intelligent post in this whole thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Takkun
Surveillance culture, an article in The Atlantic
Replies
18
Views
922
jsrockit
jsrockit
x-ray
People I Met Along The Way
5 6 7
Replies
124
Views
16K
The Accumulator
The Accumulator
N
Advice for "Security Guards"
Replies
1
Views
906
willie_901
willie_901
Bike Tourist
Photographers' Rights
Replies
4
Views
1K
blw
blw
MIkhail
Photographer's rights
Replies
7
Views
1K
Chris101
Chris101
Back
Top Bottom