This is Officer Malara, Arlington County Police Department, working a private detail commissioned by the occupants of 3701 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA.
Officer Malara stopped to take information from a friend and I on the grounds that he observed us taking photographs in a “high security area.” And by “taking photographs in a ‘high security area’” I mean being in possession of a camera while walking down the street opposite several blocks of non-descript office buildings, less than a block from the Virginia Square-GMU Metro station.
Unfortunately, that we weren’t breaking any law, nor were we disobeying any posted warning became a moot point once we were asked for identification (unlike public photography, failure to comply with a request for identification by a police officer is grounds for detention). So, we provided the information that was requested of us, were asked to delete any photographs that we had taken of the facility at 3701 (the photo above was the first that I’d taken), and off we went.
Could we have plead our case on the scene? Sure. Would it have done any good? Doubtful. Once you’ve been stopped and asked for identification, your options are more or less limited to compliance or a free ride to the county jail. Being harassed for photography in public sucks, but it sucks a lot less than being booked. More importantly, I had plans to meet family and friends for lunch at the Old Brogue, and wasn’t about to cancel on account of this nonsense.
So, what to do? I chose to file a complaint (PDF) with the Arlington County Police Internal Affairs Section (IAS). The following were submitted to IAS on 11 May 07:
A summary of my requests:
- A bunch of administrative information (I.e., chain of command, badge numbers, etc.).
- A copy of any related report filed within the Arlington County Police Department containing my name or identifying information.
- A copy of the policy or code section granting officers the authority to question and/or request information from individuals engaged in photography.
- A comprehensive list of locations within Arlington County that 1) may not be photographed and 2) display no indicators to this effect.
On 11 Jun 07, following several discussions with my investigator, I received the following in response:
A summary of the outcome:
- Aside from the flurry of paperwork generated by my complaint, I have no “record” in Arlington County.
- My information was provided to the security official at this installation.
- I now have the name and phone number of said official, who will soon be in possession of his very own FOIA request.
- These types of policies are, in theory, under review per the chief’s directive.
- I now have a copy of the Arlington County “Terrorism Intelligence and Prevention” policy, which grants police the right to stop persons in possession of dangerous things like cameras and binoculars.
- As expected, there exists no comprehensive list of locations within Arlington County that 1) may not be photographed and 2) display no indicators to this effect.
I lack the motivation to address the points in these responses one-by-one. But suffice it to say that, while I agree with the intent of this policy, I believe the implementation to be flawed. The intent, of course, is to protect . . . something. The implementation, on the other hand, does nothing more than perpetuate fear, and impose a hardship on law-abiding citizens.
These policies, containing vague terminology and lists of items that might at some point be used by someone to do something bad, exist so that the police can find just cause to stop people who legitimately give them the creeps. And to the extent that one of these policies might one day prevent someone from doing something really bad, I’m fine with them. But, as the chief points out in his response, meeting one of the criteria on such a list does not a suspicious person make. Officers are urged to “exercise appropriate discretion.” And in this case, I find it very hard to believe that exercise of appropriate discretion would yield that two young men, casually walking down a busy public street taking photographs, who happen to be opposite some unmarked but supposedly high security facility, qualify as suspicious.
Further, setting aside the issue of officer discretion, the most disturbing aspect of this incident is the simple fact that we had no way of knowing that we were acting in a manner that might have been so much as considered suspicious. If the subject in question is devoid of any type of external marking or warning sign, one should have no reason to suspect that it cannot be photographed (or approached while in possession of photographic equipment). And it follows that one should certainly have no reason to suspect that photographing such a subject might land one’s name on a list, or in a database. Reasonable, law-abiding people tend to avoid these types of things when it can be helped. Thus, my request for a list of locations within Arlington County that are unmarked, but at which photography is either prohibited or discouraged according to some (public or private) policy. Of course, such a list does not exist. Catch-22.
The absurdity of this type of situation is clear: We’re being penalized for violating poorly documented, questionably legal (an argument that I’m certainly unqualified to make) and arbitrarily enforced policies. We’re not being told what is expected of us. And to the extent that we are able, we need to take a stand. We need to know our rights, document the fact that we’ve been wronged, and work for change. And if we fail to enact change, the very least that we can do is make it such a pain in the ass to harass photographers that those who would otherwise jump at the chance will think twice, if for no other reason than to avoid a mountain of paperwork and an internal affairs investigation.
UPDATE1: For those who have expressed interest, I’ve compiled of list of sites where further discussion on this topic can be found. If I’m missing one (or more), please submit the link in the comments over there, as opposed to here.
UPDATE2: See my comment below regarding guidelines for discussion–they are few, and should not be unexpected. No racial slurs. No name-calling. No wishing other participants harm. And please don’t re-submit antagonizing comments because you think you’re being censored–I’m approving anything that doesn’t meet the criteria that I’ve just listed, as quickly as I’m able. Some type of site-wide, formal discussion policy to come . . .
UPDATE3: There’s some dispute in the comments as to the state of “stop and identify” laws in Virginia and Arlington County. It’s too much to cover in an update, so I’ve written more on the subject here.
Share This
71 comments ↓
Keith, I congratulate you on remaining patient through this whole thing. Even during our photowalk conversation, you were remarkably calm. I, on the other hand, would have been furious with the sheer idiocy and vagueness of the supposed “rules”, and with Malara’s obvious lack of powers of judgment. If he mistakes two obvious Americans taking a photowalk with DSLRs in hand for terrorists, and forces them to delete architectural photos from their cameras, he’s about as bright as a piece of rotten lumber and shouldn’t be on the force.
What’s more, what right does an off-duty officer working for a private security firm have to ask you for identification? I am so sick of all this stupid “security”. I’m fed up with it, and with rude idiots working security details. America would be safer without all of them.
Thanks for the email, Keith. Here’s why I’m so worked up about this:
- DC Photo Rights group on Flickr
- Photography banned in downtown Rockville
Photography Voter is a great place to stay informed on these constant infringements upon our rights. I think you should submit your article there.
I’ve been keeping up on the situation(s) in Maryland–some interesting things happening up there.
And thanks for the pointer to Photographyvoter.com. First time that I’ve come across this particular site. Very cool!
Looking through the amount of time and effort you put into this incident….It leads me to believe you have a lot of time to waste. I will just point out a few areas that you neglect to address….1) Remember Oklahoma….those were a couple of guys who just fit in, I’m sure they scouted out the building for days, took pictures….guess the security in the area missed that one….but they didn’t hold up anyone for a dinner date. 2) Let’s put up signs all over the County letting people know (announcing) which buildings have high security concerns. That’s about as ubsurd as the comment Raoul makes about having any security…..3) I’m sorry that you had a less than positive experience with ACPD, but if officers/security guards identify 1/1000 people stops for ANY and all suspicious activity….then it’s worth it. 999 people with a little time removed from thier life isn’t going to hurt them any more than waiting for the next train at the Metro. 4) Taking pictures in the County, anywhere, isn’t illegal, the police can’t take your film, camera, nor can they make you erase any pictures. I guess it really comes down to what was said between you and Detective Malara. None of us will never know exaclty what that was…because we weren’t there and your recollection of what exactly happened has changed over time due to your obsession with an incident that took all of 5 minutes. Sorry for any SP errors, I wasn’t going to spend any more than 5 minutes on this….. I suggest if you call the officer in charge of the detail to get any further information.
Actually good to see alert officers in Arlington doing their best to protect everyone, without discrimination. There once was a building in Oklahoma………..
There needs to be a schedule photographer’s meet up on that street corner as a show of force. Who do these imbeciles at DARPA think they are?
Believe: it happens not only at the USA. The same thing has happened with me here in Brasil. But it was more ridiculous: someone - i don´t know who - call the police because i was taking pictures of a old couch wich was abandoned near Jaú River (a river wich name is also the name of a town). The most incredible: that place is in front of the Jaú´s Photoclub (http://www.confoto.art.br/salao_jau41/expo.htm).
Gatsby…. That you are so willing to give up your rights to conduct lawful activities in public is your perogative, but to surrender my rights on my behalf is not your privilege. It is also not up to you to determine if any stop by the police when I am conducting a lawful activity is “worth it” What is a person is sitting in front of a restricted building looking at a map and glancing around while he is on his cell phone trying to find out how to get to his job interview. A 10 minute stop by a suspicious police officer for possible surveillance, could cost the guy the job and impact the financial security of his entire family. That is too big a price to pay.
Do you not realize that any “bad guy” wishing to do something to any given facility already knows it is there. Ever heard of Google… or the yellow pages??? These installations should be clearly marked so that casual citizens are accorded appropriate warning. Then if the police see someone skulking around with a camera taking photos they will have a reasonable suspiscion that maybe the they are up to no good. I’m sure you’ll counter, that signage gives a clue to clandestine installation’s. So don’t mark clandestine installations! However if authorities then swarm a couple of photographers shooting on an unremarkable street that is an intelligence indicator in and of itself. Cops warning people not to take pictures”here” is just as good as a sign. All the bad guys have to do is watch which building the cops point to when explaining “you cant take pictures of that building” Bang, cover busted.
p.s. The bad guys in Oklahoma didnt need to sit around taking photos even though they may have. They could get all the photos they wanted of the building at the library or online. Also, if you want detailed plans of any building all you have to do is go to the county building commission.
So, if they have no documents that would address your request for a list of unmarked photo-restricted facilities how do they know where they are themselves?
So I would have told the guy to back off basically.
No way in hell would I have complied. YOU ARE
A SPINELESS WIMP! By not fighting back you
simply took it up the you know what and allowed
yourself to be harrassed. Congrats!
“Actually good to see alert officers in Arlington doing their best to protect everyone, without discrimination. There once was a building in Oklahoma………..”
And no one here is saying that if the police see a camera attached to a truck full of explosive fertilizer they should do nothing. Simply arguing that if photography is limited then it should be publicly posted so that those who do not want to run afoul of unpublished laws can avoid any problems. here is a major problem with telling someone you committed a violation, but refusing to disclose what that violation was. Furthermore, making you expedient release contingent on the destruction of legally acquired photographs taken in a public place is very concerning.
I guess blog writers are into censorship now too. Funny.
I liked the part were someone called you a name.
The point they were trying to make is this would not be
an issue had you stood up and asserted your rights.
By not doing so you become,IMHO, part of the problem
istead of part of the solution. Is that better? Or is your
ego still bruised from the name calling?
How about a group photo excursion? Gather up, oh, a dozen should do it but even as few as 4 or 5 ‘photographers’ in the area on various sides of the street and opposite corners of the nearby intersections. Have one person take a photo then carefully wait for Deputy Dog to move towards photog #1 then photog #2 should start taking pictures, then photog #3 and so on. Make the junior Gestapo boy dizzy trying to cross back and forth stopping and questioning us “Homelanders”. It’s a real shame I don’t live near the area or I would bring my camera. And a tripod! Set up like we’re going to be shooting a street fashion show and try not to giggle too much.
I, for one, can’t wait to give up more rights in exchange for the naive illusion of safety and protection.
Congratulations, terrorists, you’ve won.
[…] KWM » Do not photograph 3701 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA The absurdity of this type of situation is clear: We’re being penalized for violating poorly documented, questionably legal (an argument that I’m certainly unqualified to make) and arbitrarily enforced policies. […]
Do not photograph 3701 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA…
Account of an incident that took place outside of a nondescript government facility in Arlington, VA. The irony: The address of their super secret location is now being covered by the Washington Post, Wired, and lord knows who else….
[…] brief round-up of coverage and commentary related to my recent post on 3701 N. Fairfax […]
For Mike in Reston….did you read what I wrote? Nothing any of the people taking pictures is illegal! The fact that the officers working the detail and the security guards have noticed someone taking pictures of the building and thier call of whether or not it is suspicious is the concern. Not every single person taking pictures is stopped by the police in the area of 3701 Fairfax Drive……If you stop on the side of the road by the pentagon, your license plate will be run, every background check will be conducted in a matter of seconds, to determine if you are a potential threat…..then they send a unit out to stop you, or follow you for the next several hours.
I’ve never surrendered my rights or been intimidated by an officer because everything I do, I do with the knowledge that it is within the law. I don’t speak for anyone else’s rights…..speak for yourself. Your example of a 10 minute stop costing a person thier finacial security is …..not even realistic, come on.
As far as the photos….and getting the information from google or the yellow pages….? The photos document the routines of the personnel working in the building as well as the routine of the security working the site. It’s a real time issue.
As far as the call for photographers goes on Saturday…..I hope you all have fun taking pictures of the building and the cop working the site…..I’ll be enjoying the weekend at the beach. This is one of those issues that shouldn’t really raise the back hairs……..not one person stopped for taking photos has been arrested for taking pictures…however through public records….over 100 people have been arrested by officers stopping subjects in and arround the site…..FYI.
Hey, I have an idea. Why don’t we stick people like Gatsby in prisons, where they’ll be perfectly safe from annoying outsiders and terrorists alike. They can sleep well at night knowing they’re well guarded, and that no one around them is in possession of dangerous objects like cameras or binoculars. They can also rest easy in the knowledge that they can’t break the law there, since there isn’t much to do but sit around all day.
Me, I’d like to take my chances in the land of the free, if the government would only stop “protecting” it and give it back to me and the rest of the real Americans. I grew up in communist Romania under constant surveillance. I do not want to see the same thing happen here in the US.
Gatsby, get a life and stop trolling.
I think that one should not speak of things that one knows nothing about and clearly there is a lack of intelligence and education that abounds on this site ! The mind reels that you have nothing better to do then complain about tedious bullshit. Clearly the comments of Gatsby are so over your ehads that you cannot comprehend his point. Again your ignorance shows when you speak with a lack of knowledge. Re-read his points and engage your brains ! Extra security measures are there for a reason..who did you lose on 9/11?
Gentlemen, I pray that one day I will have the amount of free time that you obviously have. There are so many more productive and positive activities that you can do on a Saturday afternoon to help your fellow citizens, -this isnt one of them. If you would like me to make you a list, then I’d be more than happy. Here are some ideas: homeless shelter, animal shelter, garbage clean up, big brother programs- get the idea? You are the same morons who would quickly blame the evil police for not taking action, if something were to occur. What rights do you think you’ve given up? This is where you idiots are confused, and caught up with false information and ideas. It is not illegal to take a photograph of the building, and the police are not stopping you from taking pictures, or are they going to erase your camera memory, or arrest you, or anything else. It is however and indicator of suspicious activity. That is a fact. If you are doing nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about. What it boils down to, is that you retarts have a fear of the police, and you may actually end up having to engage in a friendly conversation with one of them. Oh my God, how horrible and scary that must be for you. Yeah, I can really see why you’d be offended and upset. Although I have not met him, I have done a little research on Det. Malara. I’m sure that all of you are aware that he was once shot while on duty one night, several years ago by a mentally disturbed person on N. Quincy street, -while serving and protecting people just like you. Perhaps the next time there is a real emergency in Arlington, you guys should try and handle it yourselves and see what it is like. No wait, I forgot, you’re too busy taking cute pictures and circle jerking each other on a Saturday afternoon. You should spent a few minutes one day and thank Det. Malara for his bravery and efforts, and then spend a few more minutes feeling ashamed of yourselves. Get a life!
It doesn’t matter what you think about 9/11, or what you think about police, or what you think about Oklahoma City.
What I remember from history class is that freedom and censoring of the press was usually the first to go (yes, photographers are considered the press–amateur or professional).
It may not bother you that some photographer in DC was harassed for taking photos. But what happens when this all escalates? How will you feel when you’re stopped on the street because “suspicious bags” are not allowed in a certain area, and your Dooney & Burke purse is considered by that officer to be a “suspicious bag”? And don’t think it’ll stop there.
Paranoia - baseless or excessive suspicion of the motives of others.
[…] Do not photograph 3701 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA […]
Raul, Go back to Romania. Freedom isn’t free….however it appears as if you think it should be. You get what you pay for….if we have to give up a little freedom….and I’m not talking about censorship, but a brief interview (not Mike in Restons idea) which is done everyday for hundreds of reasons. Do you believe that every time a police officer stops you, your freedom is in jeopardy? There goes the legal system….I believe you and Mr. McGee are slightly paranoid with the thought that all are rights are on the way out with this tip of the iceberg, because of Mr. WRM’s report above.
I hope all you read Max above and do something useful with your time on Saturday. Let’s protest and take pictures outside a federal building because we don’t like the police stop……have you considered the attention you are bringing to this site and the potential threat you could be assisting.
As an American, and a supporter of the Arlington Police, I know I will never serve with any of you in the service, because it’s obvious many of you have never been involved in a threatening/dangerous situation, nor will you allow yourself to be in an area where one will include you. Arlington is lucky to have the police force they do…check the numbers and compare to ANY area around…..I feel safe allready.
Max- SHUT THE #$#%$ UP! SHUT UP! ENOUGH!
GET A LIFE YOURSELF YOUR COMMENT WAS LONGER
THAN ANYONES FOR SOMEONE WHO “DOESN’T HAVE TIME”
Go to wired.com moron. They were called over FROM
ACROSS the street. If the security guard is that paranoid
he needs drugs. Maybe this guy is so tramatized by the incident of him being shot he shouldn’t be on duty any more (I MEAN THAT TOO)!!
It is not illegal to take a photograph of the building… It is however and indicator of suspicious activity. That is a fact….
Actually BULL %$$# it is NOT a fact that taking a picture
of a building is suspicious. It’s the manner and which its being done and by who (read ARAB TERRORISTS). Stop being a facist and blaming Americans for being tourists. These guys were not out to pick a fight you MORON. They were just out on the town with cameras, LIKE NORMAL AMERICANS. Go read Ferenheight 451 you facist. You SICKEN me.
I appreciate all of the comments and the debate. That said, I have no interest in providing a forum for hate speech (this has only happened once, and resulted in the only comment here that’s been deleted or otherwise altered), nor do I wish to see this regress into a common name-calling thread. Please keep the debate civil and on-topic. Thanks!
Sorry! This guy Max however even contradicted the police chief’s own assertion! Even the police chief said photographing in and of itself is not PER SE suspicious.
I know Max is “just expressing his opinion” however, it is an INVALID one that is able to be proved a falsehood. He also
made the assumption that we all are scared of the police.
Rediculous.
The USA have turned into some North Korea or former USSR.
Very sad. And most Americans still believe this is the biggest democracy in the world! This place is a big joke!
Anyone planning a day of photography at this building? If enough of us are there taking pictures what will they do about it? What if we don’t carry identification? Taking pictures is not a crime, so if we were approached, we could simply WALK AWAY from the police w/o any fear of retribution. This IS America.
Hey Johnnie K….you have got to read the news or get out and see the difference between the United States and the countries you compared us too. That’s really an insult to our County. Obvioulsy you don’t agree with how this democracy works….is this a capitolist country…yes, land of oportunity, probibly why you are here. If the United States is a big joke…..go home…you won’t be missed. You must have skimmed the topic….or just confused….maybe a translation problem.
Activist….Anyone planning on attending the party on Saturday will be disappointed….I’m sure the police and/or DARPA is aware of this issue by now and are preparing for the weekend. If 2 or 50 people show up…..the security staff (guards/police) are not going to do anything. They are not going to ask for identification, tell you to stop taking pictures, or ask you to leave. I would bet that they have made some policy changes due to the amount of chatter that has been moving over the internet, any odds……? Have a wonderful Saturday for those of you still planning on attending.
Keith,
Thank you for bringing this all to light and for behaving in the most productive manner possible. Your rational and well articulated complaints are a credit to photographers and freedom loving people everywhere. This is how we all must behave if we wish to reverse the trend of fear.
Live free or die!
Apostrophe
So what happens if you’ve got a camera attached to your cellphone/wifi card and automatically post pictures online as you take them in real time?
I’m sorry “officer”, but I can’t delete those photos; they’re not stored locally. They’re out there already, probably already being downloaded by others right now.
If information about DARPA buildings is on the internet,
stopping the same building from being photographed does
not provide extra security.
Like with the fake security provided for flight travel,
the benefit is marginal but the cost great.
Criticizing these fake security measures seems to be
unpatriotic for some people, as if believing something
made it true.
Keep Calm and Carry On.
Stephen, you make a good point. The Paparazzi know that getting the pictures off to their publishers as quickly as possible reduces the risk of some body guard ripping open the camera and exposing the film, or stealing your memory card. Intimidation doesn’t prevent those pictures from getting out.
Gatsby, what difference does it make in the scenario you described. If 20 Japanese Tourists show up and burn through 10 rolls of film each and the staff doesn’t say anything the pictures are still taken and that’s what started the whole issue anyway. There’s no reason for one guard to be an ass to an individual but then be nice to a whole group of photographers. Finally, don’t be insulted. That’s what freedom is for. If you don’t like what other people have to say buy some ear plugs or an iPod. Your feelings are really irrelevant 500 years from now when we’re all dead. I’m not being rude. I’m just getting in touch with my French Colonial Roots. Freedom of expression at work. It’s a beautiful thing.
I’m pretty curious to find out where Max, Mike, JD and Gatsby are posting their comments from. Keith, you have access to their IP addresses, would you kindly locate their origin? I bet they’re working for the security firm that covers that building, or for the local police force, or or are in some way financially tied to this. Otherwise they wouldn’t be making those ridiculous arguments.
Is this the building in question?
http://tinyurl.com/2mdqm5
Links to Microsofts aerial view in local.live.com.
[…] the blog of Keith: this incident about a non-descript area in Arlington, well-traveled and near the train station, that police […]
reminds me of what happened to us when we touring Berlin before the wall came down… lost a roll of 24 great architectural photos when a guard didn’t like us taking a photo of one of the older, non-official buildings. Exposed film sucks… at least with a CF/SD memory card there is sofware that could recover deleted images/files - unless they start confiscating the whole camera.
thanks for keeping us up to date on this, i am amazed at your patience as you trudge through the bureaucracy of filing forms, notifying the public and contacting public officials…
Dear Gatsby,
Please throw the shovel away. Remeber when in a hole STOP SHOLVELING!
If DARPA was so secured, please don’t draw so much attention to you. Hence the guards and their reaction. I really hope the BRAC closes them out. Move them into a base if its essential. Gatsby is you REALLY want to discus COOP or DR stuff here then lets go ahead. If you think you know anything about undercover operations then I challenge you. I understand your concern but in reality you can google the damn information about DARPA. I too want to protect my nation but not at the sacrifice of my freedom and not by a false sense of security. Let be smart about this if you care and find a solution. The whole issue here is how much freedom are we willing to sacrifice to “FEEL” protected.
You should study a little more about how the NAZI party took control over Germany, it is kind of scary.
Enjoy
When will you Americans realize that your government is continuosly taking away the VERY FREEDOM it claims to protect, in order to protect it!
The terrorists have already won, in one day they turned the LAND OF THE FREE into a jail, where everyone is a suspect and your freedom is a threat to the establishment which was put there to protect it.
Hey Raoul, isn’t part of the fun of these discussions the anonymity. Why would the broker of this site give you that information when he has tabled just above that it will not be published. I do work in the county and I drive by this building almost everyday coming into work. I know several people that work there, so I get my information from a source instead of speculation. Try it some time. I can guarantee that Keith has made his point and not another person will be stopped and questioned like he was, from this day forward. Not to say that Ofc. Malara did anything other than follow his duty directives. I think Brian said it best above…..”And no one here is saying that if the police see a camera attached to a truck full of explosive fertilizer they should do nothin”…. the police are there to stop that car is REALLY suspicious, because not to do so would be negligent. They in turn will need to stop other vehicles and persons that are truley SUSPICIOUS and not just snapping off a few pictures here and there. They’re not perfect (Rauol must be), but thier heart is in the right place. I am pro-cop because I hear what they go through, and many of us don’t have a clue……I don’t want to see any rights pulled from my bag…I will read up on the Nazi take over of Germany (URAUDIRS), thanks for the heads up. I think that’s a little over the top, but I’ll check it out. And last….hey Andy….you forgot to take your meds….Oh my….
Gatsby first off I respect what you say and your opinion. Yes I sometimes express myself with too much dark humor and cynical remarks not very kind at times. My point is my life experience. I’m very familiar with the area since I’ve been living in NOVA for the last 18 years. My background is in security working with various programs within law enforcement and the intel community. Sometimes local jurisdiction get sucked in with the hype and forget their basic duty. Like any human element they become wanna be. My dad was a federal agent first BNDD then DEA. His house was broken into constantly and my mom lived in fear that we were a potential of being abducted, especially when Pablo Escobar was at it highest, hence look at what happen to Larry Seal. My brother is currently in the middle of the desert serving with the 82nd very proudly. When I went to NYC several years back I saw the signs about filming and photographing through the Brooklyn tunnel. I said WOW that i a really false sense of security. Since network security is one of my specialties, my first thought was obs focus. Everyone know where the Hoover bldg is and they allow to be photographed.
Andy freedom is a perception. Terrorist have not won, I still fart where ever I want to. Yes the USA is not perfect but there are not many countries that are tolerant of multi culture. Don’t get hype by the media. Many people in the US are kind and welcoming, there are some from the old school tat think different but they are entitled to their opinion. Acceptance of many is a sociological issues not a political one. I accept that there are things that need to change in this country but I’m not trading it to move somewhere else. I rather fix things here than give up. There very few other countries that might be appealing but until when. Name any country and I’ll point out its deficiency. We are as perfect as any other country, we are still human, we get cut and we bleed. That sums it up and I hope you get the point.
URAUDIRS, I did not mean in any way to make a judgment of American people but of the American Government, as an outsider looking in I think I can take an objective view. I thought freedom to an American was an inalienable right; freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of movement, freedom to assemble, freedom to bear arms, freedom of thought, freedom of the press, political freedom, freedom to take photographs in public places. These seem to me to be very tangible. But since 9/11 it seems to me that the government has eroded many of these freedoms and the purpose is supposed to be to protect these freedoms. It seems ironic to me. Yes every country can improve, and many countries are worse than the USA but that’s the point I was making the freedom of Americans has decreased since 9/11 not increased therefore the terrorists have managed to take something away that you owned, freedom.
Andy….well put,and URAUDIRS you are correct as well….but look in the middle of both of your points…..the government hasn’t taken away any of our freedoms….they are just subject to a higher price. I guess one must decide just how improtant the freedom of life is compared to the others.
Andy I agree and JD your are right. There is another element to this. Money. After 911 the Federal Government influence and created incentives for assist local government for 911 initiatives. A lot of local government and politician took advantage of this means to increase their local income. What eneded up happening was the some local goverment “Arlington County” got federal grants to “improve in security” and in most cases paper security and the false sense of security. I can’t blame the entire federal government for this but mainly local governemtns taking advantage and providing very little in return. Believe when I say I have seen this happen in the FBI as well as DHS. Not until USDOJ puts some of these folks behind bars will it stop. The best they do is shut the program down but no one is accountable. This is a human/people problem having some integrity to really helping out. My opinion social behavior is a big problem when money and greed have a lot of influence.
This is awesome can anybody hire the Arlington County Police Department to protect their secret organization? WOW
Are their requirements to get access to this for hire protection? Drug dealers, Counterfeiters, Prostitution rings could all use protection.
I will bet dollars to doughnuts (Pun Intended) that Officer Malara or Sargent Ken Dennis (Coordinator for this detail) has NEVER seen the “secret” part of this private company’s work.
OK here’s the plan:
We will start a company called the PWP, no not parents without partners “Prostitution With Protection” and say we do “secret work” (this is true)then we then hire the Arlington County Police Department and ask them to make sure that no one photographs our customers or the building. Maybe we could throw in a secret password to access the building.
I see this as the police whoreing them self’s out for money without regards to what they are protecting.
Heres the conversation with Sargent Ken Dennis (Coordinator for this detail) when opening the account for PWP.
What does your company do? We provide Secret services to military officials and government officials and others.(All True)
What are these services? They are secret. (True)
How much does it pay?
You know, I can see this building from my front yard. I’m in on making a point about the absurdity of “secret” policies.
[…] einem solchen Fall weiss Keith McCammon zu berichten. In der US-Stadt Arlington hat er das falsche Gebäude fotografiert - eines der […]
I didn’t read all the points made here because they seemed to turn into personal attacks at one point. I would like to point out a few things here:
1. if you are taking pictures of a government facility that is of high security regardless of it being marked as such, you should be questioned at the very least. And said facility shouldn’t need to be marked, because it is in fact - a high security facility (marking it LOWERS its security, part of its security is that it is relatively unknown in that area, despite the publishing of the address via the web)
2. asking for a list of places you can’t take pictures is like asking for a list of all the secure places in the area along with the addresses. They wouldn’t be very secure if you could request this information that easily. This list could, as easily as you avoid it, become a “target” list for someone who wishes to do a lot of damage. I’m glad that lists like this do not exist.
3. The “genius of the and” to use Jim Collins’ idea, doesn’t apply here. you can either have security or large-scale personal freedom. You do not get to complain about someone stopping you while taking a picture in front of the DARPA building and then within the same breath turn around and talk about how easily security was breached and the things around us were blown up, decimated, etc etc.. (note, I’m not saying you said these things, I’m merely pointing out the double-edge to freedom vs. security) So - make your choice. Do you wish to be occasionally hassled in a somewhat routine manner, or do you wish to have freedom to do what you wish but at the potential cost of your life? I personally am willing to sacrifice safety for personal freedom, but that’s not a call I can make on a “universal” scale. Sometimes, we can’t just do what we want to, and we have to be willing to accept that. The officer wasn’t cruel to you, he didn’t take your camera (unlike some military and secret service protocols), he simply told you where you stood and what he’d like you to do. For you to make a “freedom of speach” issue out of this seems a bit idealistic. I did notice that people mentioned the Oklahoma city bombing, I would go further and mention specific high security military installations (try to get close to air force 1 and see what happens - they don’t even question you BEFORE they shoot….). Or go find the local CIA facility around you and take some pictures and see if anyone questions you, or go to certain areas on a military base and see what happens, or go to a place that manufactures aerospace and military equipment and complain when they don’t let you snap a picture. (they often collect cellphones at the door now - cameras are a no go) Sometimes things are off limits.
The real question I have - why is a high security building just sitting in a commercial area - I’m surprised it isn’t in the country somewhere surrounded by a laser grid and robotic attack dogs or some such nonsense…
Did you place an inquiry with the police department about what policies might apply to your incident, before you filed a complaint?
If not, I think that would have been advisable unless you are simply wanting to stir the pot.
Don’t expect any cop to be exactly right in every circumstance because cops unfortunately are human. I haven’t met any yet who set aside a certain portion of their time just to be a jerk.
If your incident is all you have to complain about you have had a very sheltered life.
Its kinda funny….this is a DARPA building, according to a search on the Internet. So this is a web site on the Internet about not photographing the very building where the people who first really created the Internet currently reside. Its like they are hunkered down in there, scared to their last wits because this whole Internet thing has gotten out of hand, become a global beast unable to be contained by the masters that created it.Awesome.
[…] the land of conscientious comes this story about a guy in VA who got questioned by police just for walking past a non-descript office building […]
[…] Keith McCammon unwittingly took a picture of that building, he was launched on an odyssey that has so far involved an Arlington police officer, the chief of police and the defense of the […]
Some concerns I have in all of this is that some of you seem all too willing to give up your civil liberties in order to maintain “freedom” (or rather, an illusion of freedom) and rhetoric being used wherein those that disagree with the “greatness” of the U.S. and her domestic policies should “go back to where you came from” because they don’t simply accept or agree with the consensus or any other U.S. policy. I believe it is one of our own Founding Fathers who said something to the effect of “those that give up their liberty for security deserve neither.” I do believe that this post or any of the actions leading up to or resulting from this post are NOT a waste of time. It is correct that liberty is not free and we, the people, must continually fight for it and alert others when it is threatened (I didn’t say taken away because by that time it is too late). We must continually let our elected officials and those in charge know that we will not allow our civil liberties to be threatened. If it means such “time wasting” actions such as those taken in this blog, so be it. If it means speaking against such policies and laws with our written and spoken words, or with votes, so be it. What makes the U.S. great is the civil liberties afforded by the the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the due process amendments. What makes the U.S. greater is those of us willing to fight tooth and nail to preserve those rights, whether in the military or amongst the citizenry against our foreign and DOMESTIC enemies. Now, a cop doing his job and enforcing laws that ask us not to photograph secure areas is not an enemy but a vague policy or law that restricts a photographer and violates the 1st Amendment and those that create and uphold this policy are our enemies. If one goes to a courthouse, there are signs posted everywhere restricting photography and cell phone use for security and other concerns and a person violating these signs should be reprimanded or even detained if necessary. When there there are no signs posted anywhere in a public area, there should be and is an implicit assumption that photography or any kind of free speech activity including cell phone use is not restricted. This is my country for better or for worse, so, telling me to go back where I came from because I don’t care for my liberties being threatened in exchange for security means nothing but telling me that I am wrong for fighting for that which is rightfully mine, namely the rights and privileges afforded by the Constitution tells me that those that would implicitly try and shut the rest of us up by asking us to leave are not true Americans or patriotic in in the least.
I’m pretty sure I know the place you took a photo of. My friend knew you couldn’t take pictures of it though, weird.
I would go further and mention specific high security military installations (try to get close to air force 1 and see what happens - they don’t even question you BEFORE they shoot….). Or go find the local CIA facility around you and take some pictures and see if anyone questions you, or go to certain areas on a military base and see what happens, or go to a place that manufactures aerospace and military equipment and complain when they don’t let you snap a picture.
I’m sorry, but you seem unable to understand the issue. He was on a public sidewalk!!! How does that relate to sneaking around in a top secret facility?? Are you trolling are really just not getting it?
You people all act as if this is the first time the country has been threatened by enemies. Every generation had its boogieman that the people in power used to erode our rights. And anytime someone complains about it someone trots out the tired excuse of freedom versus security. They used that excuse to lock up Asian-Americans during WW2. We all look back and wonder how they could be so irrational and then we are doing similar things today. In 30 years we’ll look back and tell our kids about “terrorist hysteria” of the 00s.
from the original article it sounds like he wasn’t even taking pictures of the building, he just had his camera on him.
I understand the need to have heightened security at some facilities, and I also understand why limiting or forbidding photography could be a part of that. Note that this doesn’t mean that I agree that such photography is necessarily a security threat, or that limiting photography at all will make a facility more secure in all instances, just that I can see why such a policy could be considered necessary. For example, I can see why you might want to forbid photography of the flight line at an Air Force base but I don’t see what good it would do to forbid photography of the Brooklyn Bridge.
But I digress….
I think the point of forbidding photography isn’t that it really does much to increase security in and of itself (anyone who wants to take pictures in order to do harm will get the pictures covertly anyway if they really need them), but rather it provides the means for security personnel to interact with people that they feel are suspicious. You probably can’t justify demanding identification from every weirdo who walks past the DARPA building in Arlington. But you can justify it if they’re breaking some regulation, such as taking pictures where it is forbidden.
This doesn’t mean that I agree with the policy in all instances, especially not this one, just that it makes pretty good sense.
Unfortunately, as with EVERY “policy”, there will be people who overreact or take it two far. Should the OP have been bothered when he wasn’t even taking pictures? No. The cop was obviously being a bit overzealous. (I don’t ascribe to malice that which I can ascribe to stupidity, incompetence, or one simply being a jerk in general).
The problem is that, in the US culture of litigation, you HAVE to treat everyone the same. If an arab male with a “I heart Osama” t-shirt was taking pictures of the facility, would the cop have been wrong to investigate it? I am, obviously, being a bit hyperbolic here. Picture, instead, someone acting legitimately suspicious while taking photos. Not just taking them, but doing things that we would all look at and say “hmm…that guy seems up to something.” Do we investigate him a bit further? I think so. So what do we do when that guy gets an attorney and sues the .gov because the cops let the two white guys wearing “Bush-Cheney 2004″ t-shirts walk right on by even though they were also possibly taking pictures?
I don’t know if it was a case of an overzealous officer or of an attempt to apply the policy equally to everyone to avoid problems. But I absolutely do not see this as a purposefult erosion of anyone’s rights and chalk it up 100% to beaurocratic BS. I have worked for and around government for quite a while, and rarely do I see things that are legitimate attempts to deny someone their rights. 9 times out of 10 it’s a case of .gov employees or policy makers trying to legitimize their job or stay out of trouble.
By being polite and cooperating, involving the medai, and writing the appropriate letters and following up with management the OP is doing exactly what he needs to do: bring the situation to the attention of those in power. They have absolutely NO idea of how their policies are being carried out and how they are affecting the average citizen. Unless those citizens inform them, the only information they get is from their own people, who have a vested interest in making themselves look good.
It’s not facism, it’s typical .gov dysfunction. As I said, I never ascribe anything to malice if I can ascribe it to incompetence.
The officer does not have the legal right to make an arrest. See the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Hibel v. The Sixth Judicial Court of Nevada, and Terry v. Ohio. If the individual is asked to identify himself, and he chooses to do so, simply stating his name is enough. He is not required to produce documentation. If he chooses to refuse, he is within his rights to do so, UNLESS the state has a specific “stop and identify” statute in place. Currently , only 24 states have them. Virginia is NOT one of them. Hope this helps.
Look at what had unfolded here: if the officer didn’t stop to confiscate the picture, the court hearing would’ve never taken place and all of these people wouldn’t be so curious about this un-photographic landmark.
All this did was raise everyone’s attention to a place that the gov’t was trying to keep secret.
Hey Ron Summers, Arlington has a “Fail to Identify” code, and now VA has one too. The Arlington statute states that a person MUST provide name, Date of Birth, and address. And this information must be verified by ACPD in some way. So, yeah, you do HAVE to give the police your information. And now VA has a similar code, although I do not know what you have to give to satisfy that one.
Any “Fail to Identify” code is a law that breaks the law and thereby nullifies it’s self from the start. Go read the laws the land was founded on.
Wow…some astounding comments here. Sorry, people, but the old “get a life” argument isn’t going to work here. Your idea of what is a “valuable” use of time is irrelevant to this. If the author of this site chose to dedicate his time to this and you don’t like that…well, deal with it.
Anyway, here is the thing that I think jumped out at me the most in reading the response you received:
From the Chief’s response:
“…this immediate area is a government installation which hires off-duty police officers..”
followed by
“On the date in question, Detective Malara was working this assignment…”
Okay, so this guy who stopped and IDed you for breaking…no laws, only meeting ONE criteria from some vague “suspicious activity” list…wasn’t even on duty? Yet was wearing his uniforming and obviously trying to get YOU to think he was a cop? I dunno much about police work, I’ll admit, but this really rubs me wrong. Can cops just switch into cop-mode anytime they want during off-duty time, or did you basically get tricked into giving up your ID and SSID to someone who wasn’t even on duty and was basically working as a security guard?
I’m also seeing some weak arguments here along the lines of “What rights did you lose, whimp? None, you didn’t go to jail!”. That may be true, but the author of this page was still hassled and made to feel that he was doing something illegal by someone who appeared to be an on-duty police officer. I realize this didn’t “take away” any of his rights, but honestly where do we draw the line? If he’d been arrested? If he’d been tasered? You can call me over-dramatic and wishy-washy all you want, but I’m just not okay with the idea of someone being hassled by the cops for NOT breaking the law. I hate to make a slippery slope argument because I know technically it’s a fallacy, but nevertheless part of me still wonders what will happen if we let even the supposed “small” things like this slide…at the very least it’s our job as citizen’s to do our best to keep tabs on things like this. I don’t believe these silly “hush up and don’t worry about it, they’re catchin bad-guys!” arguments are going to help the situation in this country.
Keith,
Congratulations on handling the encounter with the Police officer (off-duty, mind) and the out-of-bounds comments here in a patient and rational manner. The world needs more of that.
And I would like to thank you for taking the time to investigate this matter more thoroughly, and bring it to the attention of the authorities. Many people do not realize that it is through vague, loosely-worded, not-well-documented “restrictions” that most repressive govts. work. Is there a law against XYZ? No, or course not! But there is a general policy which advises against xzy and allows room for discretionary action.
And that is how the population is kept in line - via a generalized fear of taking action that “could get us in trouble - but I’m not sure.”
It seems to me that in all but very few cases, if there is legitimate cause for concern, the govt, (who employs really good lawyers and speech-writers) should be able to adequately explain why. If not, I question its value.
Or maybe I shouldn’t. After all, lots of people in Germany had clean consciences for years after WWII because they made sure they never asked, and the govt. made sure they never told. Ignorance might be bliss, after all.
“(unlike public photography, failure to comply with a request for identification by a police officer is grounds for detention)”
There is no law on the books stating that you are required by law to carry identification with you in public while on foot. This is not grounds for detention except under very unusual circumstances. Unlike most Europeans, you have civil rights that the government is hard pressed to violate if you know them well and exercise them.
Good job pressing the county on this nonsense. I would have demanded that the officer explain why he needed ID or arrest me and that would have ended it. Of course, I’m a lawywer so I know more about the complete lack of basis the officer had in this situation.
There is no security concern with someone photographing this building. Anyone casing the security of particular building could rent an apartment in the large building across the street and do so unobserved.
[…] been a good deal of commentary related to my July complaint. Thanks once more to everyone who weighed in with an opinion, either here or elsewhere. I’ve […]
The irony of these two statements is just too good:
“The absurdity of this type of situation is clear: We’re being penalized for violating poorly documented, questionably legal (an argument that I’m certainly unqualified to make) and arbitrarily enforced policies.”
“UPDATE2: See my comment below regarding guidelines for discussion–they are few, and should not be unexpected. No racial slurs. No name-calling. No wishing other participants harm. And please don’t re-submit antagonizing comments because you think you’re being censored–I’m approving anything that doesn’t meet the criteria that I’ve just listed, as quickly as I’m able. Some type of site-wide, formal discussion policy to come . . .”
Look….things transition. A cop saw something out of the ordinary, checked it out, and you went on your way because you behaved reasonably. What more do you want really? You talked to a cop for a minute biiiiig deal.
You’re own words in “Update2″ ring strikingly similar to the official response you got from the chief. Mr Pot, I have a kettle for you to meet.
[…] happens all the time: You’re happily snapping away in public[1], and the police, federal law enforcement, or private security approach and demand that you delete some or all of […]
you know what the police are controlling this county and basically have a key to the city to do whatever the hell they want and to all those talking about terrorism and all that bs you probly are the cops, look their is no terror and that sh@$ its all a set up to install this observation watch on the public because then they can monitor whta we are doing, hence the cameras everywhere now, and the new smart chip thing it s all going to hell
Leave a Comment