Harassed by security guard in mall..

[css9450]

For what its worth, the official policy of Simon-owned malls (there are a lot of them where I live) reads as follows:

"No photographs or video recordings of any kind for commercial use. Video is acceptable for non-commercial and non-disruptive purposes."

 

[olifaunt]

No need to argue with the poor security guy. He's just doing his job. Just say "My apology, officer!" and move on. It happens to me so often (being escorted out of a shopping center, a public park, police pulling over my car and asking me to leave the neighborhood when I took pictures of trees!) that I'm not even spending a minutes of my thoughts on it anymore. The worst experience I ever had was at the National Mall in DC: I took pictures of trees and monuments at the National Mall in DC when armed military police on ATVs surrounded me and asked me to leave. I once passed by the White House -- on a public street and not even taking pictures! -- when a sniper in full camouflage came out of the bushes, pointed a sniper rifle at me and asked me to leave. Not to mention all the paranoid mothers in parks who shouted at me, thinking their kids are in grave danger because there was a camera dangling around my neck!

In all of these situations except the mall it sounds like you were doing something completely legal (in U.S. law) and their orders for you to leave were actually a violation of your civil rights.

 

[willie_901]

Malls are private property and can set their own policies on photography on the site...
...

This applies. Unless there is signage, photograph until a mall employee tells you to stop. By the way, they can not take your camera nor touch you. If you refuse to stop, they can – and will – call the police and have you arrested for trespassing. In rare cases they can permanently ban you. This also applies to outdoor areas that are technically private property.

I read a hearsay where a restaurant in mall permitted photography in their dining area. Supposedly this was after mall security told the photographer to stop outside of the restaurant.

 

[Pherdinand]

what's a "mall"?
🙂

 

[css9450]

Some malls don't really have any security at all...

 

[View Range]

I was stopped taking pictures of the architecture inside the Getty museum in Los Angeles. The guard politely explained that they feared the visible security equipment would be compromised by details in the images. They had no problem with me taking as many pictures as I wanted outside or of the artwork inside.

 

[olifaunt]

I was stopped taking pictures of the architecture inside the Getty museum in Los Angeles. The guard politely explained that they feared the visible security equipment would be compromised by details in the images.

What? Did they really think infinite recursion of images within images would cause the security cameras to explode?

 

[Huss]

Harrased? Since then asking not to take pictures of business property became harassment?

he told me if i wanted to take pics to use my phone. did u miss that part?

 

[markjwyatt]

I was stopped taking pictures of the architecture inside the Getty museum in Los Angeles. The guard politely explained that they feared the visible security equipment would be compromised by details in the images. They had no problem with me taking as many pictures as I wanted outside or of the artwork inside.

Probably because people are doing things like this (Getty Village entrance). The funny thing is I did not intend to capture the camera. I just found the vine (color, layout) intriguing so made the shot. As I post-processed it I discovered the camera (which they tried to hide with the intriguing vine).


Vine On Wall by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

 

[robert blu]

It's a camera, not a gun!

But I cannot understand why very oft it is allowed to take pictures with a phone and not with a camera...which logic?

robert

 

[markjwyatt]

what's a "mall"?
🙂

It's a set where they make movies like "Mall Cop".

 

[Huss]

Of course many respondents here have missed the point that the security guard told me it was ok to take pics with my iphone...

 

[css9450]

Of course many respondents here have missed the point that the security guard told me it was ok to take pics with my iphone...

With a thread title "Harrassed by security guard...", I think most people are going to figure that's the main point, not the phone thing.

 

[peterm1]

agreed! Yes, though of course, because I don't want to spoil my time, nor that of the poor security guy, I'd try not to be very confrontational and for a buddy like conversation, but certainly I'd also try to make my point explaining why he effectively is discriminating against a few without any logic and real basis that would justify that. Injustice should not be simply accepted out of laziness, justice always should and must be fought for.

Although some other folks here got bent out of shape at the idea of being "pushed about" (and I have to admit that if the security guy was all officious and pompous that would be an issue for me too) I indicated that my preference is to do what you have said Kuuan - not be confrontational whenever possible.


I see this approach as not being one of weakly giving in to unreasonable officialdom. But rather I see it as using my Emotional Intelligence to try to manipulate the guy into doing what I want and getting what I want out of the encounter if possible. 😉

In any event it is not a bad first approach to try remembering that most people in those jobs are more than likely just poorly trained, poorly paid working stiffs who are afraid of losing their jobs and are doing what they are doing because they think it is expected of them. If approached in the right way they may be willing to be more reasonable - but if approached confrontationally they are more likely to "dig their heels in". At least I find this approach works more often than not here in Australia where the culture is somewhat laid back. It might not work quite so well in USA where there seems to be a more confrontational culture between men, or in Europe where in some countries "rules MUST be followed" no matter how dumb those rules are in the specific circumstances. For example such rules may have been devised to following incidents where sleazy guys have tried to photograph up women's skirts on escalators etc and the mall owners find it easier to implement a blanket ban on photography. Though if this is so, I have to admit it boggles my mind that the same malls have exceptions for iphone photography.

 

[KenR]

Know the rules

Know the rules

I once tried to use a tripod in Rockefeller Center in NYC and was told by the security guard who magically appeared that tripods are forbidden on their property. Knowing that they don't control the public sidewalk, I politely asked where their property ends and where the public sidewalk began. He pointed to a marker on the ground - I moved my setup a few feet over the imaginary line and took a few shots. He stood there watching me, so I smiled and thanked him as I left. So-so shot.

 

[Richard G]

What's with the sexist generalisations about 'bored women' ... it's 2019 people!

Exactly. Thanks.

 

[Richard G]

Of course many respondents here have missed the point that the security guard told me it was ok to take pics with my iphone...

There is an illogicality there but that is seldom the point in these situations. In a way the smartphone may end up being the get out of jail free card, hopefully not literally, for us more serious photographers.

But I once had the whole of the shaded wading pool at the municipal pool to myself and my two children. I had my Coolpix, and my Leicina Super 8 loaded with Kodachrome. A nice young man came over and told me that I could not film or take photographs unless every person in shot gave their written permission. I told him that's fair, but the only people in shot will be my two children, for whom I am the legal guardian, equal with my wife, not present. Still he insisted, the rules are the rules. So I signed the forms on behalf of my two children and made a very nice little movie.

 

[PRJ]

Me being the smartass that I am, I would have whipped out my IPhone and started taking pictures through the eyepiece of my camera. That probably would have annoyed him....

 

[Brian Atherton]

I have experienced similar issues here, in my home, London. Sometimes the security staff are borderline psychopaths, aggressive and obnoxious, sometimes they are decent and friendly, and one can have a conversation with them.

The issue, increasingly in London (and other cities and towns in the UK), is the privatisation of previously public spaces, often without any consultation prior to the redevelopment. Many areas one would assume are still public, have been bought and extensively remodelled, becoming privately owned space while allowing the public access ‘at the owner’s discretion’ and under the owner's rules, which invariably don’t allow photography.

Also, often I am amazed that people object to the use of a ‘proper’ camera but take no notice of someone using a mobile phone; it’s almost as if the mobile phone has become invisible.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I've been finding that carrying acamera in hand, rather than on a strap around my neck, leads to much less attention. And if you can get over using a viewfinder, so much the better.