More security hassling photographers

This made me laugh... The security woman gets so wound up

youtube link

oh my aching sides, a little bit of power with a small brain

brain?

Flash mob anyone?

Johnx wrote
Flash mob anyone?
The same thought popped into my head with a chuckle

Hilarious. Just like all the other security guard confrontation videos out there, but directed by Shane Meadows!

I've just telephoned Golden Wonder at Scunthorpe and nobody was available for comment.
However the very nice lady on the switchboard has taken my telephone number and has promised to get somebody to give me a call back.

The video sums it up really or the securuty staff clearly they do not have a clue either in what powers they think they have,the law or how to deal with people

I did laugh at it though.
I have been hassled a few times in this way but by the yellow jackets and once by a police officer but we wong go into that one.....

I thought the photographer was unnecessarily belligerent, looking for trouble.
The Security guard was typically ignorant, but would you do a job like that if you had anything about you?
I'm fairly sure the company is within their rights to stop the photographer shooting their property, even if he is on a public footpath. An individual can ask you to stop shooting them and companies have trade marks and copyrights on their side also.
I would be interested to find out the exact law here, but I'm not interested in an argument. This was just my opinion

No, they are not. I shot a lot of listed buildings for English Heritage and they provided a handbook that covered what could and could not be done. If we are on publicly accessible land then we can basically shoot anything or anyone.

Having said that, common sense tells us that we don't try to photograph a 20 stone aggressive drunk who doesn't want to be photographed. Not without being able to run fast anyway....

'You've asked more than twice' - LOL

Hats off for to the guy for keeping such a cool head

I'm not sure about factories, but shops have a right to use the public footpath outside their premises to display goods.... flowers, boxes of fruit, signs etc. I seem to remember that it extends to the CL of the road? It's also getting very close to causing an dangerous obstruction to the entrance and the tog seemed to be taking the film purely to cause provocation.

I'm against security guards stopping togs photographing buildings like we have had in London, but in this case I'm on the side of GW.

I think all this nonsense stems from the furore regarding paedo's taking photos of kids, then people taking it upon themselves to report parents for taking innocent photos of baby having his/her first bath as suspected paedos too. This seems to have been the precursor to the authorities trying to impose a further law stating that you could not take photos of people on official duties (police officers, troops, etc), although the government tried to "clarify" (politico-speech for making a total b**ls-up of things) this by saying that it would still be okay to photograph the Trooping Of The Colour, or the Sentry Box outside Downing Street... Correct me if I'm wrong here, but if I was a member of a terrorist organisation, surely detailed photos of Buckingham Palace and No.10 would be like manna from Heaven?...

As for the recent case of the numpty security guard at Braehead Arena (Renfrew), if I'd have been the guy asked to delete the photos I'd just taken of my child eating an ice cream within the confines of that mall, I'd have deleted the photos - then used file recovery software when I got home!

Adolf Hitler may be long gone, but it seems that he kind of lives on inside a fluorescent jacket with the word "SECURITY" emblazoned on the back of it!

Thanks John,
Just to back that up:
link

Still think he was looking for trouble

Excellent link, Mark!!

And another link. http://www.photographersrights.org.uk/

We deal with enquiries regarding photography and filming on the streets of Glasgow and this is our standard reference.