inside building at the show

Gary - guess just going to have to type everything said out again as can't find what said before.

First, I think maybe I led you to a misconception that I arrested people taking pictures, and that is not exactly the case. I arrested people who had taken pictures when a complaint was made, or a bench warrant or an arrest warrent was issued by a judge. As I said anyone can file a complaint and thus once made a Peace Officer or Police Officer has to react to the situation. In most cases the situation with picture taking, it was escallated because of a Priviate Security Guard working for the company, show sponsor or vendor. Security usually tried to inforce POLICY where Peace Officers inforce LAW. And I concur, I know of no laws except around govt facilities and especially military bases, concerning no taking of pictures. Now where I would get involved is when a Security Guard tried to enforce policy and the person would get into a hassel with the security guard or the owner, and the police would get called. At that point if a complaint was made, then I would have to detain, not arrest, the person and take them to a magistrate. At that point, depending on the complaint and what went on, the magistrate would order the person released or put in jail or bonded out. A few times, the security officer, owner and the person would all go to see the magistrate when things got out of hand. That made for even more fun, more complaints and even law suits. The times I got called into court to testify it would normally be to tell the judge and jury what I saw, the person was taking a group photo, a scenry photo, a sports shot or did it appear the photo was a close up portrait type of the other person. The latter seemed to be the determining factor if the case went any further.

Now with children, as far back as 1985 when I went thru the Police Academy, we were taught that normal operating policy was that if we saw someone specifically targeting a child taking facial pictures and the child was under 14, we should advise the person not to take the pictures and ID the person, and I guess it is even stricter today because of the preditors and porno, because I notice the TV News usually blanks out childrens faces if they are 14 and under, unless they have been adjudicated to strand trial as an adult. But again we are talking usually about published pictures and now just someone taking home photos or news shots. I do remember that at the schools, the sports team members, band, cheer leaders, etc., to participate had to have parents concurrence that photos could and probably would be taken of their children at events. The case of the video taping of the kids doing the vandalism and it being thrown out and the homeowner who taped them being charged with takeing the juveniles picture without parent concernt is just beyond me, and when I get a chance I want to look up what law(s) they might be charging them under, because if that's the case, all these security video camera are sure in violation all the time.

As a side note, most of the time if an actual arrest was made at the scene because of a photo being taken, it was because of the fight that had ensued between the persons.

If you and most of us on this net are like me, I love to take pictures of the various rocks, minerals, slabs, jewelry, etc., but have pretty well made up my mind if a sign is posted, or a person says NO, I back off as don't want the hassel, don't want to have to stick around to explain things, don't want my pictures deleted, etc. After the pictures being deleted at the AGTA in Tucson in 2008, and being told NO in Las Vegas, San Diego, Denver and at recent shows here in San Antonio, I just make sure I ask first and/or get the camera pass from the show host at the door, and then still ask each person if ok to take the picture.

I really think the copyright thing has gone overboard. I will bet 95% of the web-sites that say copyrighted are NOT, and I am sure most people don't copyright every piece of jewelry, it would cost a fortune. Plus according to copyright laws, if the design, or item is changed 10%, it is no longer a copyright violation.

The more I think about our discussion, I think we have hit on some valid points for all of us out here that like to take pictures of our hobby and pasions and especially you also in teaching photography.

Wonder if the no photos is a big town big show mentality, or the same thing ocurrs in small towns and small shows. I don't remember anyone complaigning at Quartzite or Deming.

Willy