dmr
Registered Abuser
First of all ... can we tawk? Please, gang, please keep this civil and on topic! Please don't get this thread locked too. It was highly contrary to my intent on posting the original. 
Anyway, a group of Omaha photographers met last Saturday by the building in question, to photograph and to see what happened. They were on public property across and down the block from the building in question. Yes, they were soon visited by FNB's security.
One of the photographers (the one to the right with the tripod, who was the one who had the office call with the attorney) asserted his right to be there and security left them alone.
Here's a brief video of the confrontation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91NQ1HdlniY
Anyway, a group of Omaha photographers met last Saturday by the building in question, to photograph and to see what happened. They were on public property across and down the block from the building in question. Yes, they were soon visited by FNB's security.
One of the photographers (the one to the right with the tripod, who was the one who had the office call with the attorney) asserted his right to be there and security left them alone.
Here's a brief video of the confrontation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91NQ1HdlniY
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Excellent news. The more of this sort of thing, the better.
But how can you expect it not to go bad, given the previous conflict between those who are constitutionally opposed to running away, and those who constitutionally in favour?
Cheers,
R.
But how can you expect it not to go bad, given the previous conflict between those who are constitutionally opposed to running away, and those who constitutionally in favour?
Cheers,
R.
dmr
Registered Abuser
At the risk of sounding like Devils Advocate, I am starting to question some of the reports I've heard regarding these incidents here, thinking that there may be some exaggeration and sensationalism going on.
I'm wondering if the security people have standing orders to "check out" anybody they see shooting the building, but not to prohibit, and not to escalate things, and to back off if there is no imminent threat. The guard in the video clearly backed off immediately when the photographer reminded him that he was shooting from public property.
I'm wondering if the security people have standing orders to "check out" anybody they see shooting the building, but not to prohibit, and not to escalate things, and to back off if there is no imminent threat. The guard in the video clearly backed off immediately when the photographer reminded him that he was shooting from public property.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
This does indeed sound very likely. Take a polite inquiry as a threat, and either run or start a fight, and you're setting yourself up for trouble (and those who come after you). Respond politely, and the odds are quite high that it will be resolved satisfactorily.
Some seem unable to understand the middle ground between running and starting a fight.
Cheers,
Roger
anselwannab
Well-known
That has to be the most boring video on youtube. Even the sideways view doesn't add tension. I wonder what people that come across that with out the background think.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Excellent to see. Thanks for the new thread on this dmr.
An excellent example of how one can politely deal with this situation. This is exactly what works for me in nearly every case.
An excellent example of how one can politely deal with this situation. This is exactly what works for me in nearly every case.
bmattock
Veteran
The video is pretty much what I expected it might be.
I think sometimes people fail to realize that the job of a night watchman is not what it was - a career choice. With few exceptions, security guards are either on their way up, or on their way down. I say this having worked as one for a couple years in my callow youth in a variety of places (including sad to say, Omaha). They are paid at or close to minimum wage, and they are of every kind of disposition and temperament you can imagine, the whole gamut - including cop wanna-be's and those who either never made it to the 'real' police or did and got turfed. In other words, they are often not the pick of the litter.
Given that, when the building owner or management puts out a directive that says "no photography allowed," some guard interpret it one way, some another. Some think that means they are to patrol and aggressively stop people taking photos of the building, others simply restrict photography from inside the building. They're generally not cops, not lawyers, and have no more of a legal background that most of the general population.
This is an invitation to abuse. Add to it a population that, as mentioned, is generally ill-informed about what rights they do and do not have, and it can become downright dangerous.
Every situation is different. Sometimes it is better to walk away. Sometimes it is better to stand your ground. It takes some ability to read the situation and tailor your response to it, I think, together with a confidence and assertiveness that you are perfectly legal in what you are doing. Coupled, of course, with a willingness to accept the consequences of having to prove yourself in the right with what might turn out to be a long legal process.
I think sometimes people fail to realize that the job of a night watchman is not what it was - a career choice. With few exceptions, security guards are either on their way up, or on their way down. I say this having worked as one for a couple years in my callow youth in a variety of places (including sad to say, Omaha). They are paid at or close to minimum wage, and they are of every kind of disposition and temperament you can imagine, the whole gamut - including cop wanna-be's and those who either never made it to the 'real' police or did and got turfed. In other words, they are often not the pick of the litter.
Given that, when the building owner or management puts out a directive that says "no photography allowed," some guard interpret it one way, some another. Some think that means they are to patrol and aggressively stop people taking photos of the building, others simply restrict photography from inside the building. They're generally not cops, not lawyers, and have no more of a legal background that most of the general population.
This is an invitation to abuse. Add to it a population that, as mentioned, is generally ill-informed about what rights they do and do not have, and it can become downright dangerous.
Every situation is different. Sometimes it is better to walk away. Sometimes it is better to stand your ground. It takes some ability to read the situation and tailor your response to it, I think, together with a confidence and assertiveness that you are perfectly legal in what you are doing. Coupled, of course, with a willingness to accept the consequences of having to prove yourself in the right with what might turn out to be a long legal process.