Study the law, to challenge any Security Guards, Security Officers, and Peace Officers who misuse of authority and breach of public trust.
In California, anyone can file a complaint again anyone in security and security business at the official website of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Service's, BSIS.
If people studied the law, they can challenge Security Guards, Security Officers, and Peace Officers.
This an example of misuse of authority and breach of public trust.
In California, anyone can file a complaint again anyone in security and security business at the official website of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Service's, BSIS.
It's one thing to be free... but you have an obligation to be polite. You weren't polite and that takes away from the the important point you were trying to make.
SECURITY GUARDS ARE THE MOST FUCKED UP LOW LIFES ON EARTH.THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE LAW????EXACTLY RIGHT.sometimes they make up laws.iv been harassed by whole foods security at 2 L.A locations on and off for 8 years.They have vandalized my car twice.in march 1 punk guard followed me off the property and tried to question me.i told him "go fuck yourself "you aint no cop.GUARDS=SCUM
So this is one of those stupid Americans I keep hearing about.Did not the Nazis use that same excuse at Nuremberg tribunals,"I'm just doing my job".It turns out that that excuse fails to hold water.
This C.O.P. (Criminal On Patrol) is very UNEDUCATED, she needs remediation pronto! It's Not too late she can still be a PEACE OFFICER, if she wants.
Guide her camera man!! Tell her what she is doing is Noble and to keep her job? she should just go on about her business. The Law will trump her reason to keep her job!
Actually it is illegal to photograph potential military or terrorist targets. Not enforced but you could be charged under that statute, that might be what the plant owners were sighting. It sounds weird but i worked in a hotdog plant and that edict came down soon after 9-11, since there were possible threats against food manufacturing plants.
@BeAnBeAn22 You can from public spaces. You can be charged by RCMP/local law enforcement, but in order to be prosecuted they'd need the Attorney General's consent AND they'd have to prove, without doubt, that the photographs were to be used to cause harm to civilians, the government or the military. They wouldn't get very far.
Wow its like the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, no freedom at all!!!! I simply cannot understand how in a free country something as basic as taking photos or video can be considered such a threat!!!!
She can't necessarily make you stop recording her when you are both on public property, but when you are asked politely not to record her you should respect her request. Just keep it rolling and not pointed at her
I see no reason to respect their wishes when they don't listen to what the law is. If they are going to be so stubborn to say "I don't care about the law." Then I don't care about their wishes, since they do not respect the law.
FACT: Every other morning in Ormond Beach, Florida the skies are sprayed by military tanker jets arriving from the north. The ropy-smoky-aluminum-laced trails span horizon to horizon and fan out to form artificial cloud banks. Alzheimer's disease is a result of excessive exposure to aluminum.
She probably tried to stop them since I can see how a refinery is a potential terrorist target. Just a wild guess but if I had to bet money on something, that would be it.
lol, I love how you find all these spots to photograph that just piss off anyone with the thinnest thread of authority or self illusion of authority. You should go on a countrywide tour and try Hoover Dam as well as the White House but of course, check out the rules first as some places it might actually be illegal. England would be a good stop as well. They are big time hard asses about photography in public.
@MKrip808 yes I am a Brit and have seen so many terrible stories, what annoys me is when people actually give in to private security guards, its as if when given a uniform they think themselves important!!!! I have met a few great security people but many crap ones!
This gives all security a bad name. They simply don't have any interest or even a back bone to understand the law preferring to listen to what their employer tells them to do.
You go around looking for confrontations. She used the wrong words and you replayed it. Come to my job and record, i'll explain the trespassing law and if i have to ask you twice i'll cuff you ass, glendale galleria. try to record...i got the policy written and saved on my blackberry and tattooed on my brain. .. we got a policy. I'm not the unarmed guard either. ( X Got my eye on you kiddo... you will never ever be JimmyJustice nor make the news or show your face. I love it!
@12GaugeLosAngeles Constintution trumps "policy" on PUBLIC property. Someone could legally film the glendale galleria, as long as they were on public property such as a nearby sidewalk, basically what these guys were doing near the refinery. You cuff them, and you'll eventually be the one that ends up in trouble. Public photography/filming is protected under the constitution. The malls "policy" which you are evidently brainwashed with, only applies on the malls property
@THUMPBUMPDUDE Dumbass, i know the line of property... come try it, i dare YOU! There are clear indicators on the sidewalk that say you are on mall property, i know the law... you don't leave after the first request. i'm cuffing you, with as much force as you fight back with. Please try me chump, you won't we got off duty Glendale PD that would love to make your face meet the concrete. Though so... mall owner had a talk with us directly. I work the parking structure, 3rd and 4th floor. TRY ME!
@12GaugeLosAngeles you are a pathetic excuse for a human being. you should NOT be in any sort of a position of authority whatsoever, as it is clear the type of personality you have. clearly you've always felt or been made to feel inferior, and your mall cop (laugh) job lets you exert power upon regular moronic citizens. lol @ glendale galleria policy. Your policy means nothing on private property.
Shawn - Don't misunderstand me. I LIKE what your doing! But I'm just giving you a friendly warning to cease & desist from photo'ing and filming HPT's before it is too late. You already said FBI has visited one of your colleagues. You do know that YouTube will give up your IP address in a "NY minute" WITHOUT a FISA warrant. Then your personal ISP will also do the same ESPECIALLY if its AT&T who is nothing but a extension of the NSA.
@discarted - OK like said a word to the wise should suffice. AT&T is not the only ISP to give personal acct info without a FISA warrant. I thought I was clear about that. I guess not.
not it's a friendly warning and you like what doing. interesting. that's the exact opposite of what you were previously saying. but since you've been proving wrong on everything you've written you've changed your tune
@discarted - No not the exact opposite. You may have MISINTERPRETED my original motives as you just jumped to conclusions. My whole intention from the beginning was to give a friendly warning. I hurled no invectives or pejorative terms at you as you did to me. If you think I'm spreading misinformation go take my postings to your lawyer or law enforcement contact and see if he/she agrees with you. You are just arguing abt what's considered law & I'm just telling u wat govt. wants u 2 stop doing.
"First responding officers should be aware of suspicious factors that may indicate a possible terrorist threat...
...Photographs/diagrams of specific high profile targets or infrastructures; to include entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems..."
Source: FBI Terrorism Quick Reference Card
bsdvault-org/files/TerroristIndicators-pdf (replace dashes and any spaces)
@discarted - Read the posting... it says "entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems"- most of which you have already photo'd or filmed... I've already responded to your PM...
The FBI would not be sending this to law enforcement if it was LEGAL...
then why haven't i/we been arrested or anybody else for that matter. again, you should really do your research
you should know two photography book came out this year. one was of security cameras and how they're everywhere in this country. second one was of power plants
funny how those photographers weren't arrested or brought to gitmo
probably because it's not illegal to photograph those things
@discarted - Jeez you are being so dense! Those guys had a valid REASON to photograph security cameras and power plants. What was your VALID reason? BY your WERE detained by the transit cop at the subway - duh! You were released because you were convincing that you were legit I guess. The discretion is left up to the law enforcement to press charges. A group of middle eastern guys in NYC were arrested for photographing the GW Bridge.
@discarted you are so ignorant and arrogant, its the cops job to protect people you are such a democrat its not even funny let me guess you think the war we are in is stupid
but how was this guard protecting anybody? she lied, was then educated, but said she didn't care about the law, left, and then lied to her superiors by saying there was a physical altercation.
@discarted im not talking about the guard, she was a dumb fuck i agree with you on that and than lying to her superior is just stupid and immature, trust me im with you on that but just stop making a big deal about this dude the COPS were doing thir job, the security guard is just a dumbass, there was no PHYSICAL altercation at all but their was verbal and it wasnt her right to tell you to leave private property, it was your right to stay where you were but you are going to get questioned
We were on a PUBLIC SIDEWALK and can do whatever we want including exercising our 1st Amendment rights via photography. We can photography anything we see from public space, including BP's refinery.
Private security guards need to stay on private property and patrol the company's property. It's that simple.
They should not be on public property harassing the public.
SG's are not sworn peace officers and have no more authority over the public than any person.
@discarted You do realise the only way you got away with that shit is because you are white ( or at least not middle eastern looking) If an indian or an arab tried that shit they would be in gunatnmo bay
@keepinmyhustle You are an idiot making a statement like that. This has nothing to do with protecting "people", it's about being untruthfully told that you can't exercise your democratic rights.
Men fought and died to protect those rights and you just want to give them away.
@ozzirt "Men fought and died to protect those rights and you just want to give them away."
To be fair though he ( the guy in the video) only did that because it was a female security guard -- if it happened to be a bodybuilder ( for example) I doubt he would be keen to "fight" for his rights.
@Spookysr Ok and what exactly was that vaild reason - it's had to tell from the video - If he had a valid reason maybe he should have made himself more clear.
They didnt give an explaination or show an ID- But I agree with your last statement - if they looked middle eastern they probably would have been tazer and arrested
@discarted - Well if you looked at my download link to the Patriot Act on pg 37 and then looked at my FBI Terrorism Quick Reference Guide for ALL US Law enforcement (including the LA Sheriff's Dept) you will see that the FBI say something is "suspicious" or a "possible terrorist threat" if it is LEGAL. Yes the PA may be unconstitutional but Bush made it and Obama is not doing away with it (yet). You need to stop taking photos of subways, refineries, & bldg egress. Expect more visitations soon.
@discarted - I really don't understand what you don't get... Who cares if you deem it a "law" or not. The Dept. of Homeland Security doesn't want you to photograph or videotape a list of infrastructure things called HPT's... If you do you get scrutinized as an accessory to terrorists. Somehow you think "oh what the hell I'll do it anyway". If it were me I would stop doing it. No debate. A word to the wise should suffice.
@discarted - I sure hope you have a valid reason for doing so. Misinformation or not I'm sure your going to have ANOTHER run in with security or law enforcement. Please post the outcome. I wish you luck and I hope your logic wins out when they start quoting the Patriot Act to you. Good luck Shawn ( I mean it too).
@discarted - "going out to photograph some HPT's right now; possibly the subway or a refinery."
May we know your reasons for photoing these things? What's so frickin' important about that damn refinery? Is there a story there? Where can I read about it.
@Spookysr NOTHING is "illegal" about TAKING ANY SORTS OF VIDEO OR PHOTOS FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY. PERIOD. It doesnt matter WHAT it is. A cop should be aware of people taking pics of a refinery..and question that person as to what/why they are there. Get their information, etc...but he CAN NOT erase any pics/video or confiscate the camera. PERIOD. The "patriot act" does not say that public photgrpahy is ILLEGAL.
@HenryChinaski405 - NO since 911 the Patriot Act makes it illegal as he could have been casing the joint for an intl terrorist group like Israelis, et al. A refinery is a HPT as it can be blown up real good...
@Spookysr OK "illegal" is a subjective term when it comes to the Patriot Act. All of this stuff is very complex and needs to be interpreted by a lawyer. But I don't think it would have been put in the PA if it were not something not wanted by the govt for us to do. Why keep testing the PA? Is it fun or something? Why not just take pictures of things NOT frowned on by the govt? I'm sure its a target rich environment out there.
@HenryChinaski405 "NOTHING is "illegal" about TAKING ANY SORTS OF VIDEO OR PHOTOS FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY. "
Not after 9/11 Henry... there is a specific lists of things YOU CAN'T and Shawn (Discarted) has done most of them and doesn't seem to know why things have changed in 9 years. Yes we are SCARED of another attack from tangos (terrorists). According to the alphabet soup last month its about to happen again and soon. Can you see why we get super-paranoid when guys are filming HPT's?
@Spookysr ----There is NO LIST of things that are "ILLEGAL" to photograph on public property. AGAIN...if it can be seen with your eyes, from PUBLIC PROPERTY, you can photgraph it. Its that simple. IF the photographer is deemed to be suspicious, of course the REAL police should investigate. Not some half-wit $8.50 an hour security guard that has no idea what she is babbling about.
@HenryChinaski405 - Sigh... "INFRASTRUCTURES: entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems". Did I say ILLEGAL? I thought I said items that the Patriot Act prohibits anyone from photographing WITHOUT A VALID REASON. Shawn still hasn't said what his VALID reason was. If you have permission from the target entities or are doing a VALID news media story I don't see a problem.
@HenryChinaski405 - If you can "see with your eyes" up some girl's skirt on a public sidewalk, is that LEGAL to photograph? The public is entitled to an reasonable expectation of privacy EVEN in a public place. You can not invade a person's privacy at your own will in a public place. If the wind accidentally opens a PUBLIC porta-potty door is the person inside a valid public target? Can you aim your camera inside a private residence from the public sidewalk? The laws are not cast in stone.
WE the people of United States of America who don't want another 911 on our soil. I mean what reason would anyone want to take pictures of infrastructure items from public property? Art? News worthiness? OK but I don't think anyone sees that in Shawn's work yet. He hasn't presented us any valid reason why he does this work. Why a refinery? Is there something newsworthy or artful about it? Inquiring minds want to know.
@HenryChinaski405 - Henry did you know that there is NO LAW on the books to pay your federal taxes but they can still arrest you for tax evasion? Welcome to the world of FEDERAL government. Its not the same as local states and municipal law. Bush has fixed things so that they can drop kick you into a unknown location WITHOUT habeas corpus. Obama has not rescinded it yet. You and Shawn seem to be hung up on what's LAW or not. That's not how it works for the feds. Try & argue in federal court too.
@Spookysr I will hand it to the SECURITY GUARD...she was on top of things, saw the guy and went out to investigate. But she shouldnt have run her mouth and made any demands. She SHOULD have taken a description of the guy, his vehicle, etc..and turned it over to the REAL authorities if she deemed it to be a threat. She should have taken HIS picture.
@HenryChinaski405 - She prolly diddn't see him at all. Her dispatch center most have seen him on the perimeter CCTV system and sent her out to investigate. When they saw the camcorder on the PZT (zoom lens) they must have added that he was not allowed to film or photo a refinery plant as it is a Homeland Security HPT. But she obviously didn't know how to explain that and got nervous and started doing her PC routine.
@HenryChinaski405 - Maybe but you don't have to reduce it to race and ethnicity. That bears NO factor in being a good SG. Most "good" personal body guards for celebrities are Black.
After 9/11 Homeland Security has made it illegal to photograph or videotape ANY "high profile target" from ANYWHERE - that includes from public areas. A highly explosive petroleum refinery would qualify. You could have been detained and questioned on the basis of anti-terrorism. Especially if you look or sound middle-eastern (including Israeli). What was your mission at the refinery?
The minimum-wage SG was just sent out by her incompetent mgmt with no REAL instructions on how to deal with you.
When she said "I don't care about the law" she was just using semantics with you. She was using her own extemporaneous lexicon to deal with difficult people. What she SHOULD have said that "I don't care about YOUR INTERPRETATION of the law...". When the Harbor Ptrl said you accosted her she probably said you VERBALLY accosted her not PHYSICAL. Either you are embellishing or the HP was. All they want to do is make a living w/o self-appointed Don Quixote's like yrself frm making it harder.
@discarted - Are you kidding me? You haven't heard about the PATRIOT ACT I and II? You need to be a little less arrogant and a little more flexible in your "JOB" whatever that is...
"produce the actual law prohibiting photography of "high profile targets" that you keep barking about. it's illegal, "
tinyurl-com/y45npch
Do a PDF search on what you want...
A list of HPT's?
FBI Terrorism Quick Reference Card:
"C. Photographs/diagrams of specific high profile targets or infrastructures; to include entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems."
@discarted - PATRIOT ACT LAW - tinyurl-com/y45npch
Do a PDF search on what you want...
A list of HPT's?
"C. Photographs/diagrams of specific high profile targets or infrastructures; to include entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems."
where? it's 1500 pages long. pull the exact words that state photography is against the law.
since you're youre so knowledgeable of this topic we want to invite you to write an article for our blog
it receives plenty of traffic so i'm sure our readers would love to be educated about photography laws from someone who clearly knows what they're talking about
Thats the state of SECURITY GUARDS IN LA. Half of them are ghetto fools who have NO FUCKING idea what they are doing, the others are sleepy Mexicans who barely speak English.
She has NO RIGHT to enforce ANY refinery policies while he is on a public street. You can film ANYTHING you want from PUBLIC PROPERTY. Its that simple. This retard thinks that she can enforce a "LAW" on a public street? Typical stupid LA area security guard.
@HenryChinaski405 - You know you could have posted the SAME information without all of the racist crap. In these hard economic times a SG is all anyone can do without a proper college education. This applies to white guys too. Some ppl don't have the time and money to run around with a camera harassing minimum-wage SG trying to do their job with little or no support from their arguably incompetent management. Why not just move away as instructed and use a telephoto lens or something?
@SaberTanker22 - What from doing her job? These ppl make about $8-9 bucks an hour with NO medical... They get 1-hour of training. Most times their supervisor is a $15/hour jerk who is just coasting and has no clue how to handle a difficult trespasser or scoff-law. They should have fired her supervisor for sending her out there with NO real information for the photog.
@Spookysr lol the way security deal with jerk like that is just smack them a few time - and if they dont get the message smash the camera - until there was someonelse filming it then he would have no evidence
It's so funny when people try to say what the law is when they have no idea what it is or even what the laws in that particular jurisdiction are called. This security guard can certainly ASK them to stop taking photos, but she can't FORCE them in the name of the law. She really backed down quickly once she realized you knew what you were talking about and started to take pictures of her.
@lhiggs - However, it is illegal to take pictures or record a PRIVATE citizen on the public street if they ask you to stop. She was a private citizen. I think Discarted's real knowledge of the "law" is debatable. In this case he 'seems' to not be familiar with federal law regarding "high profile targets". I sure would like to know why he was their "casing" the place... Is he Israeli or a sympathizer of sorts?
@lhiggs - They should give ALL SC and cops "que cards" to read as they never say what they're supposed to and tend to adlib and give people the wrong information. Shawn prolly means well but just is not up to date on post 911 rules & regs on photography law. The cop in the subway was RIGHT but was not good at explaining things.
Exactly never argue law with people. She should have just remove the from the premise and if they have a problem they can call the cops. In the highly unlikely event the cops show up she should just get them done for disorderly conduct.
@badpanda84 - She should have done EXACTLY what she did. Deliver the management's directive and then left the scene in her truck while calling in reinforcements. Obviously she was not trained in post 9/11 Homeland Security Laws by her management. But she did use her radio which is S.O.P. in any private security department.
@badpanda84 - She only spoke with Shawn for about a few minutes then gave up. She clearly did not know about the PATRIOT ACT which she was trying to quote. But evidently Shawn (aka Discarted) doesn't know about it either. Shawn does not know that I am actually on his side. I don't want to see him get rendered in the stupid over-reactive system our CIA has illegally setup under the Bush Admin. But if he keeps it up he will find out soon enuf''. I'm not on his side if he is Mossad...
@badpanda84 - I don't think discarted is an idiot at all. I think he is very bright. I think he has no respect for authority and likes to test the limits of their authority. Why do you think he's an idiot? BTW the Harbor Patrol did show up but I am not sure of the outcome. We have to ask Shawn that.
@Spookysr Well he was behaving like an idiot - Security deal with people like that all the time - For example " You cant kick me out because I'm drunk - I have rights"
You will be surprised how often I've heard "I'm a lawyer you cant touch me"
had some idiot trying to walking into a store naked and the threathen to sue me for not letting him in.
@Spookysr OK even if he is very bright I think his intellgence is misdirected.
he could be using his intellgence to do something abit more useful than deliberily starting trouble with security. And beside not all security handle things that way he's just lucky that he didnt encounter some security who would just arrest him on the spot
@badpanda84 - OMG I agree with you 100% - I personally KNOW of security people who are EXTREMELY violent and have NO REGARD for guys like this. And they are not worried about being sued either. Ever hear of XE/BLACKWATER? Xe (and others) is being hired to protect sensitive "infrastructure" areas due to the recent warnings from Washington of another impending 911 attack. Many of them are ex-"whatevers" and prolly used to pull wings off of flies when they were kids... NO JOKE!
@badpanda84 Just a random thought, but since when is security is allowed to make an arrest? On public property no less? I know laws change all the time and I'm sorry if this is coming off as being a smart ass but is this is something new that kind of freaks me out.
@patch0482 the laws may be diffrenet in the states but anyone can make a citizens arrest- If you say see someone break into a house you can detain them until the cops come - Of course security can arrest people and throw them into the back of a paddywagon
"Of course security can arrest people and throw them into the back of a paddywagon"
Of course not, because private security =/= law enforcement. Without probable cause, and proof of a crime being committed, I'd say unlawful detention lawsuits would fly and in fact have for such acts by members of private security [if I remember correctly].
@travelsonic ' Without probable cause, and proof of a crime being committed"
Security dont give a shit about that because as you pointed out they arent cops. but if they were to call the cops they would prboably get them arrested for trespass
", I'd say unlawful detention lawsuits would fly and in fact have for such acts by members of private security [if I remember correctly]."
Maybe the was one or two cases like that but they are very rare.
@patch0482 of course without know the exact sitution if that was say a miltary base or critical infrastrure it might not have been guards by regular security guards.
It may be illegal to photograph some sites because of anti-terrorist laws. I think the fear is that those pics will be used for planning an attack. Just look into it no need for extra trouble if you can avoid it.
As long as you are taking the picture from a public place, it is legal, no matter what. There are some exceptions but very few and they are usually military related.
They were on a public street so the photographers were not breaking any crime. As for pictures, all you have to do is look up "google Earth" or google map and you can see a satellite picture of anything really. This Security lady obviously is not aware of the law. If the photographers were on the property than it would be illegal and trespassing, but they weren't.
@duckduck222 - Ex-Vice President Cheney had Google Earth defocus (dodge) out his personal residence on the web. A lot of USA defense contractors and other sensitive infrastructure sites are now planning on doing the same thing. Google Earth does show a lot of unwanted detail. I did it for CIA HQ in Langley VA recently and it was like an awesome helicopter tour of the campus. Who knows when the aerials were taken though. It works better in MS Bing Maps.
should of just got the photos you wanted and left. instead of sit there and go on and on about the law. she was just doing her job. it would of been a lot easier that way.
@discarted but why would anyone what to take a picture of a refinety - if it was say a celberitley or a famous landmark I could understand - but a refineaey
@badpanda84 - I, like you, are very sensitive to such suspicious behavior. He says "shots we like - done here" but will go to extreme lengths to get them. Either he's testing the system for the ACLU, is trying to bait them into a personal injury lawsuit, or worse. Would you like me to send you some recent intel on the WORSE stuff? I call it that as if you are born in AMERICA you should not do anything to hurt her for the sake of some misplaced loyalty to a so-called "homeland" or for money.
@Spookysr - Oops stop the presses BadPanda! I decided to read through most of the older postings and he ADMITS to doing this for ACLU and writing articles about it. OK now I'm not so worried about what he's up to. If he's telling truth I'm all for him. I think the ACLU does a great service for us. If Shawn is testing the system to expose it's incompetence then that is a good thing. He's like a troubleshooter. I think that's cool. Just stay safe Shawn! You've only seen the good ones so far.
i'm a PE, and i'm pretty sure a security guard ranks higher on the "important jobs" list over photographer. a mean a photographer....haha a job with virtually zero challenge
have security guards shown the atrocities in rwanda, chechnya, romania, bosnia, darfur, india, WWII, vietnam, iraq, afghanistan, new orleans and so on?
has a security ever won a pulitzer for doing their job?
no they haven't
instead they harass people and threaten them with unlawful arrest without even knowing the law
"haha a job with virtually zero challenge"
if it's so easy why don't you try documentary/conflict photography
i think they would rather be PE instructors so they don't have to grade papers. plus, they'll get to wear tight sweatpants and look at teenagers in skimpy clothing all day long. two things photography can't offer them
why are you here anyway in the middle of the day? shouldn't you be in gym class right now teaching teenagers jumping jacks?
What is the law on her parking on a bridge? Why is she policing a public space?
More reason to keep the cameras rolling everyone.
superlativeOFgood 2 months ago
Study the law, to challenge any Security Guards, Security Officers, and Peace Officers who misuse of authority and breach of public trust.
In California, anyone can file a complaint again anyone in security and security business at the official website of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Service's, BSIS.
airforcemax 3 months ago
If people studied the law, they can challenge Security Guards, Security Officers, and Peace Officers.
This an example of misuse of authority and breach of public trust.
In California, anyone can file a complaint again anyone in security and security business at the official website of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Service's, BSIS.
airforcemax 3 months ago
It's one thing to be free... but you have an obligation to be polite. You weren't polite and that takes away from the the important point you were trying to make.
solaroven 3 months ago
@solaroven Seemed polite enough to me. It is impolite to disturb people for no reason.
superlativeOFgood 2 months ago
SECURITY GUARDS ARE THE MOST FUCKED UP LOW LIFES ON EARTH.THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE LAW????EXACTLY RIGHT.sometimes they make up laws.iv been harassed by whole foods security at 2 L.A locations on and off for 8 years.They have vandalized my car twice.in march 1 punk guard followed me off the property and tried to question me.i told him "go fuck yourself "you aint no cop.GUARDS=SCUM
diagreen 4 months ago
So this is one of those stupid Americans I keep hearing about.Did not the Nazis use that same excuse at Nuremberg tribunals,"I'm just doing my job".It turns out that that excuse fails to hold water.
bozolazic 4 months ago
This C.O.P. (Criminal On Patrol) is very UNEDUCATED, she needs remediation pronto! It's Not too late she can still be a PEACE OFFICER, if she wants.
Guide her camera man!! Tell her what she is doing is Noble and to keep her job? she should just go on about her business. The Law will trump her reason to keep her job!
johnnyboypdq 4 months ago
Actually it is illegal to photograph potential military or terrorist targets. Not enforced but you could be charged under that statute, that might be what the plant owners were sighting. It sounds weird but i worked in a hotdog plant and that edict came down soon after 9-11, since there were possible threats against food manufacturing plants.
phookadude 4 months ago
@phookadude Maybe, then you should call the police, not send your security guard minions to tell people to stop.
superlativeOFgood 2 months ago
shes more worried about her job than the law, even if it means her job must suppress the law.
Doesn't that sound like a traitor?
ScopedOUT2 5 months ago
shes more worried about her job than the law.
ScopedOUT2 5 months ago
it seems that you tried to be a cop and just didnt make it. now you have to be an asshole to authorities.
sudcaliforniano360 6 months ago
@sudcaliforniano360 2 years of pree law and you think you know every thing lol yhis guy has a point but diesnt need to be a dick
Bone3h3ad 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Bone3h3aD I bet I know more than you.
sudcaliforniano360 6 months ago
yo man I just researched but in CANADA were not allowed to take pictures of factories.
BeAnBeAn22 6 months ago
@BeAnBeAn22 You can from public spaces. You can be charged by RCMP/local law enforcement, but in order to be prosecuted they'd need the Attorney General's consent AND they'd have to prove, without doubt, that the photographs were to be used to cause harm to civilians, the government or the military. They wouldn't get very far.
BTPhotography1 6 months ago
good job man. fuck these rent-a-cops. you are a smart one and not a prick
BeAnBeAn22 6 months ago
Wow its like the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, no freedom at all!!!! I simply cannot understand how in a free country something as basic as taking photos or video can be considered such a threat!!!!
miked3038 6 months ago
@miked3038 it is a threat if your a crooked fucker that doesnt want to get caught doing something that'll get u in deep shit.
k0rps3gynd3r 6 months ago
so if an arabic person took pics of WTC the day before the attack and was caught on cctv you would be livid no one took action
marknagle57 7 months ago
@marknagle57 hey dumbass - it is perfectly legal to take pictures in public.
rarelibra 5 months ago
She can't necessarily make you stop recording her when you are both on public property, but when you are asked politely not to record her you should respect her request. Just keep it rolling and not pointed at her
fsimmer1123 7 months ago
@fsimmer1123
I see no reason to respect their wishes when they don't listen to what the law is. If they are going to be so stubborn to say "I don't care about the law." Then I don't care about their wishes, since they do not respect the law.
whoarentyou 6 months ago
FACT: Every other morning in Ormond Beach, Florida the skies are sprayed by military tanker jets arriving from the north. The ropy-smoky-aluminum-laced trails span horizon to horizon and fan out to form artificial cloud banks. Alzheimer's disease is a result of excessive exposure to aluminum.
ThingsBetweenTimes 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I've asked you..." ???
ThingsBetweenTimes 7 months ago
No wonder she has a shit job. She doesn't have the ability to think for herself or think about what she's actually saying. Very low IQ.
Makie1977 7 months ago
the second part of this video... /watch?v=lSxChVNQBSE&feature=feedrec_grec_index ...really makes the ones filming this look like dumb asses
VirbiusMoon 7 months ago
She probably tried to stop them since I can see how a refinery is a potential terrorist target. Just a wild guess but if I had to bet money on something, that would be it.
tvercetti1 8 months ago
I like how she illegally parks her truck to atemt to stop someone who is not violating the law.
HipieGirl1786 9 months ago
she dont care a bout the law, she just want her nails and her hair did.
oh you fancy huh. no no ur not.
newcaramrod 9 months ago
The best example of a sheeple. Follow orders.
Tzimnewman3 10 months ago
yo its the law bitch! pimp slap hoe
wickedjuggaloz480 10 months ago
shes one fat bitch.
paul1967uk 11 months ago
The ending was really weird it was edited to look like she got run over lol
j1mf1eld 1 year ago
lol, I love how you find all these spots to photograph that just piss off anyone with the thinnest thread of authority or self illusion of authority. You should go on a countrywide tour and try Hoover Dam as well as the White House but of course, check out the rules first as some places it might actually be illegal. England would be a good stop as well. They are big time hard asses about photography in public.
MKrip808 1 year ago
@MKrip808 yes I am a Brit and have seen so many terrible stories, what annoys me is when people actually give in to private security guards, its as if when given a uniform they think themselves important!!!! I have met a few great security people but many crap ones!
miked3038 6 months ago
@thumpbump-you are an idiot.and someone who will get your ass beat and you will wonder why?(hint-read first sentence)
wccoffee1 1 year ago
dumb nigger security
futurecop10 1 year ago
this is why fat bitches should not be allowed to do security, she looks like she should lock up her appetite
MrJhondoejr 1 year ago
He should have said I am looking for EPA violations. Don’t bother me
samten10a 1 year ago 2
The security officer was wrong due to the fact that they were standing on public right of way not on the refinery's property.
radioman1967 1 year ago
gay video
Has1b 1 year ago
This gives all security a bad name. They simply don't have any interest or even a back bone to understand the law preferring to listen to what their employer tells them to do.
Tzimnewman3 1 year ago
You go around looking for confrontations. She used the wrong words and you replayed it. Come to my job and record, i'll explain the trespassing law and if i have to ask you twice i'll cuff you ass, glendale galleria. try to record...i got the policy written and saved on my blackberry and tattooed on my brain. .. we got a policy. I'm not the unarmed guard either. ( X Got my eye on you kiddo... you will never ever be JimmyJustice nor make the news or show your face. I love it!
12GaugeLosAngeles 1 year ago
@12GaugeLosAngeles I live 10 mins from the glendale galleria been trying to work security there
cheezequeso 1 year ago
@12GaugeLosAngeles Constintution trumps "policy" on PUBLIC property. Someone could legally film the glendale galleria, as long as they were on public property such as a nearby sidewalk, basically what these guys were doing near the refinery. You cuff them, and you'll eventually be the one that ends up in trouble. Public photography/filming is protected under the constitution. The malls "policy" which you are evidently brainwashed with, only applies on the malls property
THUMPBUMPDUDE 1 year ago
@THUMPBUMPDUDE Dumbass, i know the line of property... come try it, i dare YOU! There are clear indicators on the sidewalk that say you are on mall property, i know the law... you don't leave after the first request. i'm cuffing you, with as much force as you fight back with. Please try me chump, you won't we got off duty Glendale PD that would love to make your face meet the concrete. Though so... mall owner had a talk with us directly. I work the parking structure, 3rd and 4th floor. TRY ME!
12GaugeLosAngeles 1 year ago
@12GaugeLosAngeles you are a pathetic excuse for a human being. you should NOT be in any sort of a position of authority whatsoever, as it is clear the type of personality you have. clearly you've always felt or been made to feel inferior, and your mall cop (laugh) job lets you exert power upon regular moronic citizens. lol @ glendale galleria policy. Your policy means nothing on private property.
Sanguinarian13 1 year ago
@12GaugeLosAngeles Someone is taking their mall cop job too serious. I see four feet tall teens working there with their sheriff "wannabe" attitude.
Do you work for IPC INTERNATIONAL by any chance?
RSSJ91 1 year ago
shes turning into satan!
twizy123 1 year ago
"please stop"
hagnuj 1 year ago
just another rent a cop trying to act like the police officer she can't become
ScAAshby23 1 year ago
bitch should be fired
mpctheg 1 year ago
Ayyyyyyyydooooooooooonnnnnnntttttttccccccccaaaaaaarrrrrrrrreeeeeeeaaaaabbbbbbouuuuuuuttttttttttttttttthhhhhhheeeeeelllllllaawwwwwwwww...
gregtube88 1 year ago
wow you can use windows movie-maker.
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
@DarkKnightBob1o1
that's hillarious
discarted 1 year ago
Shawn - Don't misunderstand me. I LIKE what your doing! But I'm just giving you a friendly warning to cease & desist from photo'ing and filming HPT's before it is too late. You already said FBI has visited one of your colleagues. You do know that YouTube will give up your IP address in a "NY minute" WITHOUT a FISA warrant. Then your personal ISP will also do the same ESPECIALLY if its AT&T who is nothing but a extension of the NSA.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
well, if i was truly concerned that would be an issue but i'm not.
don't have an att account either
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - OK like said a word to the wise should suffice. AT&T is not the only ISP to give personal acct info without a FISA warrant. I thought I was clear about that. I guess not.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
not it's a friendly warning and you like what doing. interesting. that's the exact opposite of what you were previously saying. but since you've been proving wrong on everything you've written you've changed your tune
how long are you gonna debate me on this?
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - What debate?
Spookysr 1 year ago
@discarted - No not the exact opposite. You may have MISINTERPRETED my original motives as you just jumped to conclusions. My whole intention from the beginning was to give a friendly warning. I hurled no invectives or pejorative terms at you as you did to me. If you think I'm spreading misinformation go take my postings to your lawyer or law enforcement contact and see if he/she agrees with you. You are just arguing abt what's considered law & I'm just telling u wat govt. wants u 2 stop doing.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
done here.
your comments speak for themselves as much as you tried to reinvent your own history
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - I can like what your doing AND question what your doing concurrently... It doesn't contradict me.
Spookysr 1 year ago
"First responding officers should be aware of suspicious factors that may indicate a possible terrorist threat...
...Photographs/diagrams of specific high profile targets or infrastructures; to include entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems..."
Source: FBI Terrorism Quick Reference Card
bsdvault-org/files/TerroristIndicators-pdf (replace dashes and any spaces)
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
where in there does it say it's illegal to photograph "high profile targets"
will you finally define a "high profile target"
when you gonna write that article for us, or you gonna puss out?
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - Read the posting... it says "entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems"- most of which you have already photo'd or filmed... I've already responded to your PM...
The FBI would not be sending this to law enforcement if it was LEGAL...
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
then why haven't i/we been arrested or anybody else for that matter. again, you should really do your research
you should know two photography book came out this year. one was of security cameras and how they're everywhere in this country. second one was of power plants
funny how those photographers weren't arrested or brought to gitmo
probably because it's not illegal to photograph those things
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - Jeez you are being so dense! Those guys had a valid REASON to photograph security cameras and power plants. What was your VALID reason? BY your WERE detained by the transit cop at the subway - duh! You were released because you were convincing that you were legit I guess. The discretion is left up to the law enforcement to press charges. A group of middle eastern guys in NYC were arrested for photographing the GW Bridge.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
just because they were arrested doesn't mean much. just another example of some jackass cops not knowing the law and unlawfully arrested people
i'm done here.
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted lol if was the case and you did get arrested what are you going to do.
say "its not fiar that cop was being a jackass"
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 But he didn't get arrested???
What IF - what IF the sky fell down?
ozzirt 1 year ago
@discarted you are so ignorant and arrogant, its the cops job to protect people you are such a democrat its not even funny let me guess you think the war we are in is stupid
keepinmyhustle 1 year ago
@keepinmyhustle
very far being a democrat. try again.
but how was this guard protecting anybody? she lied, was then educated, but said she didn't care about the law, left, and then lied to her superiors by saying there was a physical altercation.
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted im not talking about the guard, she was a dumb fuck i agree with you on that and than lying to her superior is just stupid and immature, trust me im with you on that but just stop making a big deal about this dude the COPS were doing thir job, the security guard is just a dumbass, there was no PHYSICAL altercation at all but their was verbal and it wasnt her right to tell you to leave private property, it was your right to stay where you were but you are going to get questioned
keepinmyhustle 1 year ago
@keepinmyhustle
We were on a PUBLIC SIDEWALK and can do whatever we want including exercising our 1st Amendment rights via photography. We can photography anything we see from public space, including BP's refinery.
Private security guards need to stay on private property and patrol the company's property. It's that simple.
They should not be on public property harassing the public.
SG's are not sworn peace officers and have no more authority over the public than any person.
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted You do realise the only way you got away with that shit is because you are white ( or at least not middle eastern looking) If an indian or an arab tried that shit they would be in gunatnmo bay
badpanda84 1 year ago
@keepinmyhustle
Moreover, based on recent events in Times Squares should everyone who parks their car be detained and questioned before they are free to go?
Should people be required to show their papers in order to even enter Times Square?
What isn't suspicious and grounds for detainment in the name of the "war on terror"?
Walking down the street? Talking on a cellphone? Texting? Driving a car? Uhaul?
You're riding that slippery slope toward the erosion of our civil liberties
Enjoy it
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted what is suspicous? that fact that ur faggot ass is takin pics of a refinery
keepinmyhustle 1 year ago
@keepinmyhustle
projecting again?
you shouldn't hate yourself so much
any time
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted i dont trust me lol you just an over dramatic faggot
the end
keepinmyhustle 1 year ago
@keepinmyhustle
big man hiding behind the internet
you ever say that to somebody's face?
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted hahahah yep all the time actually
keepinmyhustle 1 year ago
@keepinmyhustle
then post a video of yourself doing it tough guy.
discarted 1 year ago
@keepinmyhustle You are an idiot making a statement like that. This has nothing to do with protecting "people", it's about being untruthfully told that you can't exercise your democratic rights.
Men fought and died to protect those rights and you just want to give them away.
ozzirt 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozzirt "Men fought and died to protect those rights and you just want to give them away."
To be fair though he ( the guy in the video) only did that because it was a female security guard -- if it happened to be a bodybuilder ( for example) I doubt he would be keen to "fight" for his rights.
badpanda84 1 year ago
@Spookysr Ok and what exactly was that vaild reason - it's had to tell from the video - If he had a valid reason maybe he should have made himself more clear.
They didnt give an explaination or show an ID- But I agree with your last statement - if they looked middle eastern they probably would have been tazer and arrested
badpanda84 1 year ago
@discarted - Well if you looked at my download link to the Patriot Act on pg 37 and then looked at my FBI Terrorism Quick Reference Guide for ALL US Law enforcement (including the LA Sheriff's Dept) you will see that the FBI say something is "suspicious" or a "possible terrorist threat" if it is LEGAL. Yes the PA may be unconstitutional but Bush made it and Obama is not doing away with it (yet). You need to stop taking photos of subways, refineries, & bldg egress. Expect more visitations soon.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
suspicious and illegal aren't the same unfortunately. too bad for you. keep spreading misinformation and interpreting the law to your viewpoint.
going out to photograph some HPT's right now; possibly the subway or a refinery. not sure yet.
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - I really don't understand what you don't get... Who cares if you deem it a "law" or not. The Dept. of Homeland Security doesn't want you to photograph or videotape a list of infrastructure things called HPT's... If you do you get scrutinized as an accessory to terrorists. Somehow you think "oh what the hell I'll do it anyway". If it were me I would stop doing it. No debate. A word to the wise should suffice.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@discarted - I sure hope you have a valid reason for doing so. Misinformation or not I'm sure your going to have ANOTHER run in with security or law enforcement. Please post the outcome. I wish you luck and I hope your logic wins out when they start quoting the Patriot Act to you. Good luck Shawn ( I mean it too).
Spookysr 1 year ago
@discarted - "going out to photograph some HPT's right now; possibly the subway or a refinery."
May we know your reasons for photoing these things? What's so frickin' important about that damn refinery? Is there a story there? Where can I read about it.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr NOTHING is "illegal" about TAKING ANY SORTS OF VIDEO OR PHOTOS FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY. PERIOD. It doesnt matter WHAT it is. A cop should be aware of people taking pics of a refinery..and question that person as to what/why they are there. Get their information, etc...but he CAN NOT erase any pics/video or confiscate the camera. PERIOD. The "patriot act" does not say that public photgrpahy is ILLEGAL.
HenryChinaski405 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 - NO since 911 the Patriot Act makes it illegal as he could have been casing the joint for an intl terrorist group like Israelis, et al. A refinery is a HPT as it can be blown up real good...
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr OK "illegal" is a subjective term when it comes to the Patriot Act. All of this stuff is very complex and needs to be interpreted by a lawyer. But I don't think it would have been put in the PA if it were not something not wanted by the govt for us to do. Why keep testing the PA? Is it fun or something? Why not just take pictures of things NOT frowned on by the govt? I'm sure its a target rich environment out there.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 "NOTHING is "illegal" about TAKING ANY SORTS OF VIDEO OR PHOTOS FROM PUBLIC PROPERTY. "
Not after 9/11 Henry... there is a specific lists of things YOU CAN'T and Shawn (Discarted) has done most of them and doesn't seem to know why things have changed in 9 years. Yes we are SCARED of another attack from tangos (terrorists). According to the alphabet soup last month its about to happen again and soon. Can you see why we get super-paranoid when guys are filming HPT's?
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr ----There is NO LIST of things that are "ILLEGAL" to photograph on public property. AGAIN...if it can be seen with your eyes, from PUBLIC PROPERTY, you can photgraph it. Its that simple. IF the photographer is deemed to be suspicious, of course the REAL police should investigate. Not some half-wit $8.50 an hour security guard that has no idea what she is babbling about.
HenryChinaski405 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 - Sigh... "INFRASTRUCTURES: entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems". Did I say ILLEGAL? I thought I said items that the Patriot Act prohibits anyone from photographing WITHOUT A VALID REASON. Shawn still hasn't said what his VALID reason was. If you have permission from the target entities or are doing a VALID news media story I don't see a problem.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 - If you can "see with your eyes" up some girl's skirt on a public sidewalk, is that LEGAL to photograph? The public is entitled to an reasonable expectation of privacy EVEN in a public place. You can not invade a person's privacy at your own will in a public place. If the wind accidentally opens a PUBLIC porta-potty door is the person inside a valid public target? Can you aim your camera inside a private residence from the public sidewalk? The laws are not cast in stone.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr-- WHO is "we"??
HenryChinaski405 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HenryChinaski405 - WHO is "we"??
WE the people of United States of America who don't want another 911 on our soil. I mean what reason would anyone want to take pictures of infrastructure items from public property? Art? News worthiness? OK but I don't think anyone sees that in Shawn's work yet. He hasn't presented us any valid reason why he does this work. Why a refinery? Is there something newsworthy or artful about it? Inquiring minds want to know.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 - Henry did you know that there is NO LAW on the books to pay your federal taxes but they can still arrest you for tax evasion? Welcome to the world of FEDERAL government. Its not the same as local states and municipal law. Bush has fixed things so that they can drop kick you into a unknown location WITHOUT habeas corpus. Obama has not rescinded it yet. You and Shawn seem to be hung up on what's LAW or not. That's not how it works for the feds. Try & argue in federal court too.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr I will hand it to the SECURITY GUARD...she was on top of things, saw the guy and went out to investigate. But she shouldnt have run her mouth and made any demands. She SHOULD have taken a description of the guy, his vehicle, etc..and turned it over to the REAL authorities if she deemed it to be a threat. She should have taken HIS picture.
HenryChinaski405 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 - She prolly diddn't see him at all. Her dispatch center most have seen him on the perimeter CCTV system and sent her out to investigate. When they saw the camcorder on the PZT (zoom lens) they must have added that he was not allowed to film or photo a refinery plant as it is a Homeland Security HPT. But she obviously didn't know how to explain that and got nervous and started doing her PC routine.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr AAAAND...Im damn right about what I say about security guards in LA...my description of them fits a VAST MAJORITY of them.
HenryChinaski405 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 - Maybe but you don't have to reduce it to race and ethnicity. That bears NO factor in being a good SG. Most "good" personal body guards for celebrities are Black.
Spookysr 1 year ago
After 9/11 Homeland Security has made it illegal to photograph or videotape ANY "high profile target" from ANYWHERE - that includes from public areas. A highly explosive petroleum refinery would qualify. You could have been detained and questioned on the basis of anti-terrorism. Especially if you look or sound middle-eastern (including Israeli). What was your mission at the refinery?
The minimum-wage SG was just sent out by her incompetent mgmt with no REAL instructions on how to deal with you.
Spookysr 1 year ago
When she said "I don't care about the law" she was just using semantics with you. She was using her own extemporaneous lexicon to deal with difficult people. What she SHOULD have said that "I don't care about YOUR INTERPRETATION of the law...". When the Harbor Ptrl said you accosted her she probably said you VERBALLY accosted her not PHYSICAL. Either you are embellishing or the HP was. All they want to do is make a living w/o self-appointed Don Quixote's like yrself frm making it harder.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
what law is that? you are absolutely wrong.
do the research and learn the law before you leave completely inaccurate comments here. it breeds misinformation.
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - Are you kidding me? You haven't heard about the PATRIOT ACT I and II? You need to be a little less arrogant and a little more flexible in your "JOB" whatever that is...
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
nope, never heard of it.
but lets see you produce the actual law prohibiting photography of "high profile targets" that you keep barking about. it's illegal, right?
i'll give you the heads up before you're disappointed though.
that law doesn't exist
now i'm off to do my job for a japanese magazine on public fashion
probably photograph some "high profile targets" while i'm out too
discarted 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@discarted
"produce the actual law prohibiting photography of "high profile targets" that you keep barking about. it's illegal, "
tinyurl-com/y45npch
Do a PDF search on what you want...
A list of HPT's?
FBI Terrorism Quick Reference Card:
"C. Photographs/diagrams of specific high profile targets or infrastructures; to include entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems."
Spookysr 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@discarted - PATRIOT ACT LAW - tinyurl-com/y45npch
Do a PDF search on what you want...
A list of HPT's?
"C. Photographs/diagrams of specific high profile targets or infrastructures; to include entrances/exits of buildings, bridges, power/water plants, routes, security cameras, subway/sewer, and underground systems."
Source: FBI Terrorism Quick Reference Card
Spookysr 1 year ago
@discarted - THE PATRIOT ACT I & II
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr
where? it's 1500 pages long. pull the exact words that state photography is against the law.
since you're youre so knowledgeable of this topic we want to invite you to write an article for our blog
it receives plenty of traffic so i'm sure our readers would love to be educated about photography laws from someone who clearly knows what they're talking about
discarted 1 year ago
@discarted - You don't have a search engine in your Adobe Acrobat?
Try Page 37.
Spookysr 1 year ago
That actually is illegal...
ghjkla1 1 year ago
@ghjkla1
what's "actually illegal"?
would love to know
discarted 1 year ago
Thats the state of SECURITY GUARDS IN LA. Half of them are ghetto fools who have NO FUCKING idea what they are doing, the others are sleepy Mexicans who barely speak English.
She has NO RIGHT to enforce ANY refinery policies while he is on a public street. You can film ANYTHING you want from PUBLIC PROPERTY. Its that simple. This retard thinks that she can enforce a "LAW" on a public street? Typical stupid LA area security guard.
HenryChinaski405 1 year ago
@HenryChinaski405 - You know you could have posted the SAME information without all of the racist crap. In these hard economic times a SG is all anyone can do without a proper college education. This applies to white guys too. Some ppl don't have the time and money to run around with a camera harassing minimum-wage SG trying to do their job with little or no support from their arguably incompetent management. Why not just move away as instructed and use a telephoto lens or something?
Spookysr 1 year ago
..........
sakkurae 1 year ago
Comment removed
badpanda84 1 year ago
lol at women........
BmwM3E46Power 1 year ago
Wow this refinery should hire real security. This women has no idea what she is doing.
tristatenews 2 years ago 2
AS A american i want to say this word your fired lady haha.
SaberTanker22 2 years ago
@SaberTanker22 - What from doing her job? These ppl make about $8-9 bucks an hour with NO medical... They get 1-hour of training. Most times their supervisor is a $15/hour jerk who is just coasting and has no clue how to handle a difficult trespasser or scoff-law. They should have fired her supervisor for sending her out there with NO real information for the photog.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr lol the way security deal with jerk like that is just smack them a few time - and if they dont get the message smash the camera - until there was someonelse filming it then he would have no evidence
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - Now I agree with Discarted... that is just plain wrong!
Spookysr 1 year ago
It's so funny when people try to say what the law is when they have no idea what it is or even what the laws in that particular jurisdiction are called. This security guard can certainly ASK them to stop taking photos, but she can't FORCE them in the name of the law. She really backed down quickly once she realized you knew what you were talking about and started to take pictures of her.
lhiggs 2 years ago
@lhiggs - However, it is illegal to take pictures or record a PRIVATE citizen on the public street if they ask you to stop. She was a private citizen. I think Discarted's real knowledge of the "law" is debatable. In this case he 'seems' to not be familiar with federal law regarding "high profile targets". I sure would like to know why he was their "casing" the place... Is he Israeli or a sympathizer of sorts?
Spookysr 1 year ago
@lhiggs - They should give ALL SC and cops "que cards" to read as they never say what they're supposed to and tend to adlib and give people the wrong information. Shawn prolly means well but just is not up to date on post 911 rules & regs on photography law. The cop in the subway was RIGHT but was not good at explaining things.
Spookysr 1 year ago
Comment removed
lhiggs 2 years ago
The more somebody talks, the dumber they look. And this lady talks a lot.
charlie52707 2 years ago
Exactly never argue law with people. She should have just remove the from the premise and if they have a problem they can call the cops. In the highly unlikely event the cops show up she should just get them done for disorderly conduct.
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - She should have done EXACTLY what she did. Deliver the management's directive and then left the scene in her truck while calling in reinforcements. Obviously she was not trained in post 9/11 Homeland Security Laws by her management. But she did use her radio which is S.O.P. in any private security department.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr Yeah call for reinforcement to presumably remove the idiot from the premises. Not to sit there for hours arguing law
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - She only spoke with Shawn for about a few minutes then gave up. She clearly did not know about the PATRIOT ACT which she was trying to quote. But evidently Shawn (aka Discarted) doesn't know about it either. Shawn does not know that I am actually on his side. I don't want to see him get rendered in the stupid over-reactive system our CIA has illegally setup under the Bush Admin. But if he keeps it up he will find out soon enuf''. I'm not on his side if he is Mossad...
Spookysr 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - I don't think discarted is an idiot at all. I think he is very bright. I think he has no respect for authority and likes to test the limits of their authority. Why do you think he's an idiot? BTW the Harbor Patrol did show up but I am not sure of the outcome. We have to ask Shawn that.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr Well he was behaving like an idiot - Security deal with people like that all the time - For example " You cant kick me out because I'm drunk - I have rights"
You will be surprised how often I've heard "I'm a lawyer you cant touch me"
had some idiot trying to walking into a store naked and the threathen to sue me for not letting him in.
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - LOL - now that's funny brother... I feel your pain BTDT...
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr OK even if he is very bright I think his intellgence is misdirected.
he could be using his intellgence to do something abit more useful than deliberily starting trouble with security. And beside not all security handle things that way he's just lucky that he didnt encounter some security who would just arrest him on the spot
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - OMG I agree with you 100% - I personally KNOW of security people who are EXTREMELY violent and have NO REGARD for guys like this. And they are not worried about being sued either. Ever hear of XE/BLACKWATER? Xe (and others) is being hired to protect sensitive "infrastructure" areas due to the recent warnings from Washington of another impending 911 attack. Many of them are ex-"whatevers" and prolly used to pull wings off of flies when they were kids... NO JOKE!
Spookysr 1 year ago
@badpanda84 Just a random thought, but since when is security is allowed to make an arrest? On public property no less? I know laws change all the time and I'm sorry if this is coming off as being a smart ass but is this is something new that kind of freaks me out.
patch0482 1 year ago
@patch0482 the laws may be diffrenet in the states but anyone can make a citizens arrest- If you say see someone break into a house you can detain them until the cops come - Of course security can arrest people and throw them into the back of a paddywagon
badpanda84 1 year ago
"Of course security can arrest people and throw them into the back of a paddywagon"
Of course not, because private security =/= law enforcement. Without probable cause, and proof of a crime being committed, I'd say unlawful detention lawsuits would fly and in fact have for such acts by members of private security [if I remember correctly].
travelsonic 1 year ago
Comment removed
badpanda84 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@travelsonic "Without probable cause, and proof of a crime being committed"
True but they dont give a shit about that because as you pointed out they arent police.
" I'd say unlawful detention lawsuits would fly and in fact have for such acts by members of private security "
That dosent happen very often,
badpanda84 1 year ago
@travelsonic ' Without probable cause, and proof of a crime being committed"
Security dont give a shit about that because as you pointed out they arent cops. but if they were to call the cops they would prboably get them arrested for trespass
", I'd say unlawful detention lawsuits would fly and in fact have for such acts by members of private security [if I remember correctly]."
Maybe the was one or two cases like that but they are very rare.
badpanda84 1 year ago
@patch0482 of course without know the exact sitution if that was say a miltary base or critical infrastrure it might not have been guards by regular security guards.
badpanda84 1 year ago
haha she has no idea what shes talking about.
neoc03 2 years ago
The company should build bigger walls or something if they don't want the public to see or take pictures from a public place.
duckduck222 2 years ago
It may be illegal to photograph some sites because of anti-terrorist laws. I think the fear is that those pics will be used for planning an attack. Just look into it no need for extra trouble if you can avoid it.
ungrandote 2 years ago
As long as you are taking the picture from a public place, it is legal, no matter what. There are some exceptions but very few and they are usually military related.
mysticblade803 2 years ago 4
@mysticblade803 yeah but its a refineary so its possible that may be one of the expection - as it would be critical infrastructure.
badpanda84 1 year ago
They were on a public street so the photographers were not breaking any crime. As for pictures, all you have to do is look up "google Earth" or google map and you can see a satellite picture of anything really. This Security lady obviously is not aware of the law. If the photographers were on the property than it would be illegal and trespassing, but they weren't.
duckduck222 2 years ago
@duckduck222 - Ex-Vice President Cheney had Google Earth defocus (dodge) out his personal residence on the web. A lot of USA defense contractors and other sensitive infrastructure sites are now planning on doing the same thing. Google Earth does show a lot of unwanted detail. I did it for CIA HQ in Langley VA recently and it was like an awesome helicopter tour of the campus. Who knows when the aerials were taken though. It works better in MS Bing Maps.
Spookysr 1 year ago
should of just got the photos you wanted and left. instead of sit there and go on and on about the law. she was just doing her job. it would of been a lot easier that way.
Aaron3636 2 years ago
We tried but we were there less than five minutes before she confronted us. The just really isn't enough time to get the shots we wanted.
discarted 2 years ago
@discarted but why would anyone what to take a picture of a refinety - if it was say a celberitley or a famous landmark I could understand - but a refineaey
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - Amen brother...
Spookysr 1 year ago
@discarted Of course if a an arab or middle eastern guy was taking pitcure of a refinerary tehy would have probably got the cops and tazered him.
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 - I, like you, are very sensitive to such suspicious behavior. He says "shots we like - done here" but will go to extreme lengths to get them. Either he's testing the system for the ACLU, is trying to bait them into a personal injury lawsuit, or worse. Would you like me to send you some recent intel on the WORSE stuff? I call it that as if you are born in AMERICA you should not do anything to hurt her for the sake of some misplaced loyalty to a so-called "homeland" or for money.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@Spookysr - Oops stop the presses BadPanda! I decided to read through most of the older postings and he ADMITS to doing this for ACLU and writing articles about it. OK now I'm not so worried about what he's up to. If he's telling truth I'm all for him. I think the ACLU does a great service for us. If Shawn is testing the system to expose it's incompetence then that is a good thing. He's like a troubleshooter. I think that's cool. Just stay safe Shawn! You've only seen the good ones so far.
Spookysr 1 year ago
@discarted - "The just really isn't enough time to get the shots we wanted."
Wanted for what?
Spookysr 1 year ago
@discarted
shots we like
done here
discarted 1 year ago
wow another video by an idiot
SucceedsAtWill 2 years ago
wow, looks like another security guard just got out of his GRE exam. let's hope this time you passed
discarted 2 years ago
i'm a PE, and i'm pretty sure a security guard ranks higher on the "important jobs" list over photographer. a mean a photographer....haha a job with virtually zero challenge
SucceedsAtWill 2 years ago
have security guards shown the atrocities in rwanda, chechnya, romania, bosnia, darfur, india, WWII, vietnam, iraq, afghanistan, new orleans and so on?
has a security ever won a pulitzer for doing their job?
no they haven't
instead they harass people and threaten them with unlawful arrest without even knowing the law
"haha a job with virtually zero challenge"
if it's so easy why don't you try documentary/conflict photography
discarted 2 years ago
why don't you try getting a job an adolocent with a cell phone can't do
SucceedsAtWill 2 years ago
i think they would rather be PE instructors so they don't have to grade papers. plus, they'll get to wear tight sweatpants and look at teenagers in skimpy clothing all day long. two things photography can't offer them
why are you here anyway in the middle of the day? shouldn't you be in gym class right now teaching teenagers jumping jacks?
maybe your school district should be notified
discarted 2 years ago