Picture Paranoia at Walmart

With cell phones, nearly everyone walks around with a camera--and uses it, but for those of us who keep our peripherals separate, we get singled out and our motives questioned.

Perhaps I should gaffer tape a rotary phone to my camera (in keeping with its vintage), see what happens.
 
Just tell them it 's not a camera, it's a phone. And then put the camera up to your ear and start talking.

Just kidding.

Not much can be argued about private property rights in the US. The funny thing about Walmart is that many stores will permit RVers to park their rigs on Walmart property. I suppose they figure it's good for business; if groceries and supplies are needed, they're right there.

Perhaps you should try taking pictures in Walmart's parking lot using a disposable film camera that you just purchased at Walmart. Keep the receipt. Then you can argue to the guard that Walmart actually condones this activity, given the fact that they sell the cameras right inside the store.

Although the logic breaks down when you're talking ammunition from the sporting goods section. ;)
~Joe
 
While private entities have the right to restrict behavior on their properties. The willingness of "normal" people to point out "inappropriate" behavior only shows how easily Orwellian style society could start.
 
camera.bear said:
I advised him that I would leave once my party returned to the car.
Click to expand...

Technically, if they had wanted, they could have had you arrested or cited for trespass at that point.

However, I'm glad they let you wait and glad you did. It's an unpretty situation, but you seem to have handled it well. It is a shame the way things are today. About all I can do is to try to keep exercising my rights to shoot from public property.

Everything else is going away - and it's a shame, because no one has ever shown how it has protected a single person. It's all protection from a theoretical threat that has never hove into view.
 
bmattock said:
Technically, if they had wanted, they could have had you arrested or cited for trespass at that point.
Click to expand...

While technically and theoretically possible, that is absurd. Only the most foolish law enforcement agent would consider such a thing if the only reason was because an individual was "reported as being possibly scarey or annoying". Neither of those are a crime under any circumstance, nor is either of them worthy of investing tax-payer money enforcing. Get real... please.

Edit: Here's the actual law of trespass for places open to the public (like a Walmart parking lot. It appears that they can ask you to leave but the threat of arrest is still at least 24 hours away.

Private Property open to the general public​


L.A.M.C. 41.24 (d)
applies to property open to the public, such as mini-malls, offices, businesses, etc. Under this section, the property

owner, agent or tenant can tell a person to leave and not return
ONLY if the request is rationally related to the type of services
performed or the facilities provided. Under this section, a person
can be asked to stay away for 24 hours. If a person refuses to leave
or returns within 24 hours, he or she can be arrested for a violation
of L.A.M.C. ​
​
​


​
​
41.24 (d).​
 
Last edited:
So, parking lots are private property too?

I have never been harassed about taking photographs in my life... but it seems that streak may end soon if these idiots continue to proliferate.

My first reaction, however, would have been to recommend the security idiots to frisk anyone coming into the store. They should know better than anybody the damage that can be done by people wielding dangerous cellphone cameras.

In any case, Wayne, it seems that you handled the situation well by not baiting these idiots into feeling like heroes. Now... it's time to send a formal complaint to the store manager, and to headquarters and everywhere you can.

At least, that's what I'd do.
 
Tried to photograph a US flag

Tried to photograph a US flag

Just before Inauguration Day, one of our local mega-shopping malls was decked out in red-white-and-blue patriotic bunting on each of three shopping levels. Over the open atrium they had hung a truly gigantic US flag from the ceiling. I liked the scene with afternoon light coming coming through the skylights. I raised a digicam out of my briefcase bag and took two quick wide-angle shots of the scene. Immediately two grinning rent-a-cops accosted me and said I couldn't photograph in the mall for "security reasons". I was surprised at how angry I became. I tried to extract from them what the security rationale was, but they merely repeated the phrase, mantra-like. At least they didnt try to tell me to delete the two photos.
 
Gumby said:
Only the most foolish law enforcement agent would consider such a thing if the only reason was because an individual was "reported as being possibly scarey or annoying". Neither of those are a crime under any circumstance, nor is either of them worthy of investing tax-payer money enforcing. Get real... please.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, if often comes down to your word against theirs.

Judge... they were reported by several individuals as exhibiting suspicious behavior. Asked them to stop and leave the premises. Suspect declined. Then refused repeated requests to vacate premises (violating L.A.M.C. 41.24 (d) - refusal to leave). Became beligerent, resisted arrest and we were forced to detain.

Photographer... well sure.. when you listen to it that way. I said I would leave when my party came back.

Judge... so you refused to leave when asked and then became belligerent?

Photographer... no, I just said I had to wait.

Judge... any witnesses to support you?

Old woman... that's the vagrant judge. Taking pics of my fanny (US version.)! Throw the book at him.

etc.
 
Last edited:
The annoying thing is, an actual criminal would hide the camera (or more likely, a video camera) in a bag, or in his hat. Or, surreptitiously take pics with his cellphone while holding it to his head and talking.

So, now that everyday activities terrify people, does that mean that the terrorists have won?
 
Gumby said:
While technically and theoretically possible, that is absurd. Only the most foolish law enforcement agent would consider such a thing if the only reason was because an individual was "reported as being possibly scarey or annoying". Neither of those are a crime under any circumstance, nor is either of them worthy of investing tax-payer money enforcing. Get real... please.

Edit: Here's the actual law of trespass for places open to the public (like a Walmart parking lot. It appears that they can ask you to leave but the threat of arrest is still at least 24 hours away.

Private Property open to the general public​


L.A.M.C. 41.24 (d)
applies to property open to the public, such as mini-malls, offices, businesses, etc. Under this section, the property

owner, agent or tenant can tell a person to leave and not return
ONLY if the request is rationally related to the type of services
performed or the facilities provided. Under this section, a person
can be asked to stay away for 24 hours. If a person refuses to leave
or returns within 24 hours, he or she can be arrested for a violation
of L.A.M.C. ​
​
​


​
​
41.24 (d).​
Click to expand...

I'm looking for the news story we talked about on RFF some time ago, but it was nearly identical - a man was sitting in his car in a parking lot taking photos, and a woman shopper objected, claiming he was taking photos of people's rumps and crotches (clothed, of course, they were in public). He was arrested. Sorry, can't find it at the moment.

In any case, it's far from absurd. In Denver, where I grew up, we used to have 'car cruises' on Friday nights up and down Colfax Ave on the west side of Denver. The cops ended that by simply beginning to enforce the law on trespass on kids who pulled over in parking lots to watch the fun, and getting merchants to agree to press charges. Hundreds were arrested over the six months or so it took to shut it down, maybe thousands.

They do the same thing in Detroit now - cruisers on Woodward prior to the official cruise.

So yes, people get arrested for being in parking lots all the time on trespass charges. Not absurd at all.

And read your cite more carefully. "If a person refuses to leave or..."
 
antiquark said:
So, now that everyday activities terrify people, does that mean that the terrorists have won?
Click to expand...

To some extent, yes. The cowards who demand that all of use should lose our civil liberties so that they can feel safe have done this to us. Remember their cringe-cry (the opposite of a battle-cry), "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." These are the people I'd like to introduce to their teeth. Cupped in their hands.
 
I want to thank everyone for the insights and the support. Today will be interesting when I go to the Walmart and pick up the film I dropped off for developing prior to this incident. Crazy world. :bang:
 
bmattock said:
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."
Click to expand...

One of my co-workers likes to tell me stories of his childhood in Vietnam. The communist party had a policy of "all watches all". That is, everyone kept an eye on their neighbors, and if anyone saw something suspicious, it was their duty to report it to the authorities.

Sounds familiar...
 
Where I live we have a program called "Neighborhood Crime Watch", so the crooks come during school hours and break into houses with no cars in the driveway because the adults are working.
 
antiquark said:
One of my co-workers likes to tell me stories of his childhood in Vietnam. The communist party had a policy of "all watches all". That is, everyone kept an eye on their neighbors, and if anyone saw something suspicious, it was their duty to report it to the authorities.

Sounds familiar...
Click to expand...

Governments that do not trust their own citizenry have to employ such means. Likewise, if a government does not trust its citizens, citizens have no good reason to trust their government.
 
rogue_designer said:
Unfortunately, if often comes down to your word against theirs.
Click to expand...

If it gets that far, you are right. That's why it never gets that far. We hear all of the stories of folks being accosted, threatened with being arrested, and even a few arrest stories. There are a few steps between "being taken downtown" and the judge. At thise steps there is the liklihood of cooler and more dtached heads realizing that unless a real crime occured the charges are rediculous. How many amateur photographers have been convicted of trespassing... I've never heard of one.
 
bmattock said:
In any case, it's far from absurd. In Denver, where I grew up, we used to have 'car cruises' on Friday nights up and down
Click to expand...

Ever heard of Van Nuys Blvd, or Sunset Blvd. My childhood hood. Same issue. But LAPD didn't play around with chicken-sh!t trespass laws, the city enacted a "no cruising" law. A person is not allowed to go up/down htose streets more than twice on the nights designated as "crusie nights". The reason was because of drugs, violence, dangerous street racing, and vandalism. Does photography in a Walmart parking lot generally result in violence, dangerous street racing, and vandalism?

EDIT. Denver, eh? I though the mad-men of Denver carried six-shooters and settled their own debts. ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom