Long Beach police confirm policy: Detain photographers for pics 'with no apparent esthetic value'

[Newsjock]

Source: Long Beach Post

Police Chief Jim McDonnell has confirmed that detaining photographers for taking pictures "with no apparent esthetic value" is within Long Beach Police Department policy.

McDonnell spoke for a follow-up story on a June 30 incident in which Sander Roscoe Wolff, a Long Beach resident and regular contributor to Long Beach Post, was detained by Officer Asif Kahn for taking pictures of a North Long Beach refinery.

... McDonnell says that while there is no police training specific to determining whether a photographer's subject has "apparent esthetic value," officers make such judgments "based on their overall training and experience" and will generally approach photographers not engaging in "regular tourist behavior."

This policy apparently falls under the rubric of compiling Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR) as outlined in the Los Angeles Police Department's Special Order No. 11, a March 2008 statement of the LAPD's "policy … to make every effort to accurately and appropriately gather, record and analyze information, of a criminal or non-criminal nature, that could indicate activity or intentions related to either foreign or domestic terrorism."

Read more: http://www.lbpost.com/life/greggory/12188

[Sinistrous]

1. That gives me chills.

[ZombieHorde]

2. This is just fucked up. The police are not on our side. nt

[Gormy Cuss]

3. Untrained cops as art critics. Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. *eyeroll* n/t

[supernova]

4. This is worrisome

While I don't condone photogs who "stalk" famous people every minute of the day, I don't like the police deciding what has "esthetic value," and acting on it.

[yarn_chick]

5. What does this have to do with the papparazi? Out in public you can take whatever

pictures you want. The police have absolutely no right to detain anyone and decide whether or not the person in question can keep the pictures they took.

As it is the police are using the specter of terrorism to excuse this blatant violation of the constitution.

This looks like a case for the ACLU to look into

[mrdmk]

6. Being a photographer today is difficult to say the least!

The rule of thumb I use is, do not take pictures of private property, unless you want a hassle...

[dtexdem]

7. And, hey, that means for taking any pictures at all in much of Long Beach.

;-)

Well, true, the beach front can be a great vista. But those apparent islands with palm trees out there -- those are actually disguised oil platforms (and that is no joke, although in the greater scheme of things, I guess it is).

[tawadi]

8. Very "Orwellian"

Very scary. :-(

[Monk06]

9. It's a good thing Lewis Baltz lives in Switzerland.

[WinkyDink]

10. This cop thinks because it's "policy" that makes it LEGAL?! Bwahahahaha! He needs a huge lawsuit.

[Bandit]

11. Well you KNOW that any pictures of the police in action will have NO esthetic value

:shrug:

[GliderGuider]

12. When I drove through Russia in 1968 it was illegal to take pictures of bridges

I understood that even as a young tourist I could be arrested for it. No matter how small or scenic it was, a bridge was a potential enemy target, and was off limits to photography.

Welcome to the Brezhnev era in the "Union of Sociable States of America".

[justabob]

13. wow

I tromp around taking photos all over town, find all kinds of things interesting. Much of it wouldn't be considered pleasing or artistic in any way.... This chills me to the core.