[stevbike]

This happened to me too once before. There was a fountain in the mall. This was an outdoor type of mall. I wanted to practice trying to make the water silky with an nd filter.

To be fair, I went early in the morning before the shops opened. The mall cop came in this car with lights flashing and said I could not take pictures. He would not say why or what other than that was the 'rule'. I did not want to bother with dealing with it. But I asked him if I had come in later in the day and taken a picture of my family in front of the fountain whether that would have been ok. He said that would not be 'suspicious'. He also said a big camera also made it look suspicious. [This was my small k2000 but it had a rented 16-50 on it]

This was a while back but still a few years out of 9/11. I just attributed it to that and went away. I supposed that someone could put a bomb in a fountain and photographing it could be a way to prepare for it? But I would think putting something like that in an outdoor mall would not be that damaging...Oh well, such is life...

I used to be a be in security myself years ago. I was working at a local goverment building. I quess my job was to stop people from taking pictures of the place but it did not stop me from taking some in the early morning myself!! There was a lot of nice morning light on areas building thatr I liked. I should have told myself to stop!!!

Seriously, the guards have bosses that have given guide lines that what can and can not be done there. However, the little bit of power they get can get in to their heads. Chances are they are bored silly combined a little bit of power, they come across like the person you meet. Too bad that was not me there. I would have been fired by my bosses for being too friendly to you. I like my picture taking and Pentax too!!

When going into places, just check to see with the management of the property about what can and can not be taken with a camera. Chances are they will not allow it but you could see about doing a number of limited images with there blessing. Get a letter from them for proof and that should stop any power tripping mall cop and put them in there place.

[Blue]

Private property or not regarding the mall, they can't arrest folks for taking pictures (assuming they aren't in the dressing room, doing upskirt etc.). They can insist the person leave which the should do to avoid trespass which is a misdemeanor. The former is a civil suit. (Summary of things hashed earlier in thread)

[Jeff_H]

Wow. Harassed, interrogated, and detained for taking pictures of a ferris wheel at night. Boy, I'm so glad we all live in the most free country on the planet. I'm absolutely certain that this is exactly what every military man, woman, and family who has ever served and has sacrificed so much to preserve and protect; the right of some ******* in a costume to harass someone who's done nothing wrong.

Are any of you reading this familiar with Carlos Miller of Photography Is Not A Crime ?

[RioRico]

Morgan Manning: 'War on Photography' tramples rights

...it raises the question of whether law enforcement misconduct can fairly be attributed to a good-faith effort to promote public safety. I believe that in many cases, it is properly attributed to law enforcement's distrust and hostility towards photographers. Law enforcement officials are well aware that photographers (or anyone with a cellphone camera, for that matter) have the ability to expose police misconduct as in the Rodney King incident. Because the press and private photographers serve as a check on official authority, police have an incentive to limit the power of people with cameras.

Cameras *are* weapons -- weapons against "police misconduct", among other things. Photographers are thus armed and dangerous -- and endangered.

[bobbyscon]

Note: Every city, town, municipality, etc. is different and has different rules. When in doubt, call the local media or city official and they will almost always gladly answers questions. They'd rather deal with amicable questions than lengthy paperwork and a pissed off photographer.

I've never been to Chicago and don't know the pertinent laws there. However, my experience in other cities has been this: If you have a tripod and want to set it up on a public sidewalk/street/other venue, you need a permit. This rule generally is only enforced if you're blocking the way, but it's a rule. The reason I've been given, from both police officers whom I'm friends with, and from city officials, is that they want to track professional use of public areas. I used to get permits all the time for my video work. They were free. It was just a way for them to keep track in case something should happen. I had to prove I was insured. So, if someone tripped on my tripod, or my camera jib dropped on a car, they could hold me liable. Did I mind? No. There are so many lawsuit happy jerks out there that I understand the local municipalities need to cover themselves.

Now, more in reference to the ferris wheel situation: They would certainly let you in to the event, they want attendance numbers and don't want to turn people away simply because they're carrying backpacks or other items. Maybe someone should have mentioned as you walked in that you couldn't take photos. These cops were probably employed after hours as event security, but still retain full police authority. Happens all the time across the country. You're a guy, by himself, at an event full of families and children. Maybe some super paranoid mom complained about the guy in the corner taking photos of her precious baby as he innocently rode the ferris wheel. You've got a professional looking camera and a tripod. Again, tripod down, permit needed. If this is an event thrown by a private entity (did you go through a gate or small fence or anything?), then they can decide that you are not allowed to take "professional" photos there without paying them or at least getting their permission. The property could be public, but as soon as it's rented out by a private entity and closed off, it becomes private. Again, this is from police officers and local officials whom I trust and don't get BS'd by.

Private places open to the public: They make their own rules. You CANNOT enter a McDonalds, WalMart, mall, museum, zoo or aquarium and take "professional" photos. Corporate facilities (fast food, chain stores etc.) won't let you take photos at all. News media cannot enter a WalMart and just start filming. You can't enter a mall and start taking photos. Will they stop you with a little P&S in a mall? No, probably not. WalMart? Yes if security is bored. Bust out something that looks like it's professional and they will clamp down.

My experience on the subject: Broadcast Communications with additional studies in media law and ethics, co-owner of a videography company that did a lot of downtown shooting for marketing, wedding photographer in various states, employee of an open-to-the-public-but-we-prohibiti-professional-photography facility and captain of a local softball team with 4 police officers on the team.

Rant Over. Hope this post is helpful to someone, someday.

[pacerr]

I know of a family-owned and operated amusement park with carnival rides including a ferris wheel and older roller-coaster in the suburbs of a major city. It's been in business for many decades. In a business sense they certainly want to support family pleasures including photography. A while back they had to post signs prohibiting photography.

People were staging photos of alleged hazardous situations and personal injuries and threatening to instigate legal action if not paid off. Occasionally, some sleazy lawyer would actually start a law suit to up the ante for a settlement. This isn't something you can just ignore or you've set yourself up for serious results.

The courts are generally pretty astute about this sort of shake-down so it rarely goes that far (some folks ain't too bright -- a picture time stamped BEFORE the alleged mishap is sort'a curious. eh? But you still have to respond!) but you simply have to be willing to expend the time and money to respond to this sort of activity. That gets expensive in a hurry in both time and money; especially in a small business.

Posting a NO Photography policy does help eliminate some of the nuisance and provides a minimal first line of defense. But try to word a comprehensive policy that is meaningful in all circumstances which allows "good" photography and bans "bad" photography. One that would effectively serve the purpose of reducing your own vulnerability to such misconduct.

To an extent, YOU, the general population, have set a standard of acceptable conduct in your communities and courts that encourages frivolous law suits and B.S. settlements. You may have, or at least want, the "right" to photograph anything you see in public. A business/property owner has a right to protect them self from predatory activity as I've described. Stand up for reasonable property rights and fight against policies that encourage frivolous law suits in your community and you may see a return to an era of less restrictive policies -- if it's not already too late.

Individuals have an sphere of effective personal influence. For most of us, that effective sphere is within our local community. That's where you can begin to make a difference.

And don't blame the guys tasked with enforcing unpopular policies for the policy itself. Now if they're jerks about it as individuals, that's a different issue. But look at it from the "cop's" perspective. How do you intervene in a group taking suspicious "industrial" shots with a cell phone and ignore the guy with a "professional" camera making an abstract pix of a ferris wheel and keep your job?

H2

[ivoire]

After reading this scenario i emailed the mayors office in chicago for their policy as i live in the burbs. Heres their reply:

"Hello,

The City of Chicago really doesn't have a photography policy. Where and how one can shoot varies on a number of factors (is it private property, are you endangering public safety, etc.)"

Based on their reply, i think you were smart to walk away. With the cops gestapo tactics, you might have been harmed/arrested as it appears they can simply act first, make up a story, dish out whatever they like and their word will be taken above yours.

[straightshooter]

It was the village of Morton Grove

That actually explains a lot.

CW

[BillM]

Maybe some super paranoid mom complained about the guy in the corner taking photos of her precious baby as he innocently rode the ferris wheel

Some of those "paranoid" mother's and father's have had horrific experience
regarding their children being exploited in scenario such as this.
Cant understand why moderators have refused to mention.
Need go no further than site below to find out why parents,law enforcement might be "paranoid".


- Missing Children Website

[pacerr]

Simply put, we've transferred responsibility for sociopathic acts from an individual's behavior and intent to inanimate objects. To paraphrase a familiar quote, "Cameras don't "shoot" people, people do".

H2

[Clavius]

Some of those "paranoid" mother's and father's have had horrific experience
regarding their children being exploited in scenario such as this.
Cant understand why moderators have refused to mention.
Need go no further than site below to find out why parents,law enforcement might be "paranoid".


- Missing Children Website

As a parent myself, I'm very glad that I haven't had any such experience myself. And hopefully, me and my daughter will be spared of such in future too. If anybody is protective about his child, then it's me.

However, I seriously am unable to see how a guy with a DSLR can hurt my kid. Especially if he isn't taking fotos of her directly. Especially if my kid is in a ferris wheel and the photographer is on the ground.

Parents that reach levels of paranoya THAT high, should look for help.

[Clavius]

Simply put, we've transferred responsibility for sociopathic acts from an individual's behavior and intent to inanimate objects. To paraphrase a familiar quote, "Cameras don't "shoot" people, people do".

H2

LOL! +1

I like this one too, I think it also applies to this thread: I did lots of shooting, didn't kill anything.

[MRRiley]

Some of those "paranoid" mother's and father's have had horrific experience
regarding their children being exploited in scenario such as this.
Cant understand why moderators have refused to mention.
Need go no further than site below to find out why parents,law enforcement might be "paranoid".


- Missing Children Website

I feel for missing kids and their families as much as the next guy, but just because a predator MAY take a photo of a child is no reason to stop anyone and everyone from shooting photos that happen to include children in them while in public.

You have to remember that part of being "out in public" is that you and your children have "no reasonable expectation of privacy" Being out in public sort of precludes the idea of "privacy" doesn't it? If you want privacy, then keep your kids somewhere private that is shielded from casual view by the public. Then if you see some guy, in a tree across the street taking photos of your kids using a telephoto lens, you "might" have reason to be concerned and you "might" have legal recourse to make him stop.

The only time I think you and or law enforcement has a logical reason to be concerned about being photographed "in public" is if you notice the same individual photographer showing up in places or situations that it would not be reasonable for him to encounter you on a regular basis.

For instance...

You see Joe Photog on several occasions shooting photos of kids (including your own) while you are at a popular public park frequented by hundred or thousands of citizens. Is this a problem? Maybe, but probably not. Perhaps he happens to live next to the park and what you don't see are the hundreds of flower and squirrel photos he takes every time he is there.

There is NO reasonable cause at this point to think that Joe's behavior or activities are suspicious.

2 days later, you notice Joe Photog outside of your kids school, taking photos of your and other children going in to the school. That afternoon, you notice him again, taking more photos as the children leave school. Then the next Sunday, you see him again outside of your church, which happens to be across town from your home. He is again taking photos of children playing before going into Sunday School.

At this point it seems reasonable to find Joe's activities suspicious. Heck, at this point, even I would start getting suspicious. At this point the proper course is to contact the local police who can then investigate Joe's activities.

However, it is entirely possible, that the police could determine that Joe has still done nothing illegal.

Mike

p.s. Even on that website, I see no references to or cautions to parents about photographers taking photos of children in public.

[BigDave]

OK folks, we don't want parents to get scared for their kids, we will make this a given. However, he was shooting late in the day (8PM) and without a flash (he was going for the long exposures). In a common sense world, who could he "capture" in the image? Everyone was a blur. Yes, cops can be on a power trip too, and they can be paranoid also, but let's put some common sense into this too. I know common sense can be fairly uncommon sometimes, but unless the event/venue owners told the peace officers they "wanted the photographer out of there", then they were probably going too far. Sad to say, not much you can do about it, but such is the case sometimes.

Living in the NY area and going into NYC sometimes, the cops there can get "an attitude" sometimes, especially if it's a busy public event. Lot's of people that can get out of control. I am sure the same can happen in Chicago. Let's face it, they get stressed too and get edgy, but they can go too far. One of my students, a NY Corrections officer in fact, had a slight run in with a State Trooper when he was photographing a certain venue in my area. He even had his uniform in the car with him (though not on) and the trooper SAW it! The trooper told him he was not allowed to take pictures in that area, and when politely asked why, his answer was "because I said so". And this with a guy "on the team" so to speak!

Sad, but it is part of the world we live in today. Al Queda doesn't have to keep hitting targets to change the way we live. It is all part of terrorism. Now move along please!

[BillM]

OK folks, we don't want parents to get scared for their kids, we will make this a given. However, he was shooting late in the day (8PM) and without a flash (he was going for the long exposures). In a common sense world, who could he "capture" in the image? Everyone was a blur. Yes, cops can be on a power trip too, and they can be paranoid also, but let's put some common sense into this too. I know common sense can be fairly uncommon sometimes, but unless the event/venue owners told the peace officers they "wanted the photographer out of there", then they were probably going too far. Sad to say, not much you can do about it, but such is the case sometimes.

Living in the NY area and going into NYC sometimes, the cops there can get "an attitude" sometimes, especially if it's a busy public event. Lot's of people that can get out of control. I am sure the same can happen in Chicago. Let's face it, they get stressed too and get edgy, but they can go too far. One of my students, a NY Corrections officer in fact, had a slight run in with a State Trooper when he was photographing a certain venue in my area. He even had his uniform in the car with him (though not on) and the trooper SAW it! The trooper told him he was not allowed to take pictures in that area, and when politely asked why, his answer was "because I said so". And this with a guy "on the team" so to speak!

Sad, but it is part of the world we live in today. Al Queda doesn't have to keep hitting targets to change the way we live. It is all part of terrorism. Now move along please!

Very well put Dave,little common sense goes along way.Regrettably,the world
has changed since that horrific event almost 10 years ago.Imperative that
both perspective's be understood.Center for missing and exploited children
that I linked to above has no "rules" shown on site that offers guidelines
for photographers.Again,let common sense be ones guide.Call those people,
speak with them as I did.One will be horrified at some of things one will learn.