Posted on Apr 29, 2016
I saw a video of a guy videotaping the entrance to a Navy base. What does this do to our security protocols? How do we handle this?
21.9K
84
51
6
6
0
I understand, and support their 1st amendment right of the press. I know that the Supreme Court has decided that if someone is on a public sidewalk they can film in any direction they want, and that no person or entity has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place.
What does this do to our security protocols, and how to we professionally deal with these situations?
What does this do to our security protocols, and how to we professionally deal with these situations?
Law
Constitution
Human Rights
Rights
Photography
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 23
It means that security at bases shouldn't rely on what is publicly seen from the street. That should just be the public facing facade.
Otherwise does that mean we arrest people who take pictures with their kids in front of the White House? That's an awful direction for our country to take. It just means security should be more nuance than what you see at the gate.
Otherwise does that mean we arrest people who take pictures with their kids in front of the White House? That's an awful direction for our country to take. It just means security should be more nuance than what you see at the gate.
(18)
(0)
7
7
0
As an MP on base, we have observed that kind of activity. While still observing constitutional rights, WE have the right to investigate. There is nothing wrong with sending MP's to politely ask questions about why they are taking photos/video. On one occasion, it was actually a camera crew doing a report for school or something similar. If the response is given politely and the answer is sensible, "have a nice day. We appreciate your cooperation and we hope you understand why we approached you."
If it gets ugly and they are combative, try to get the license place/ID as normally and log it in. Depending on clues, intuition etc, it may be something to share with local PD and local fusion center.
No rights have been violated, our presence and vigilance is observed by would be bad guys, and we have done our job.
If it gets ugly and they are combative, try to get the license place/ID as normally and log it in. Depending on clues, intuition etc, it may be something to share with local PD and local fusion center.
No rights have been violated, our presence and vigilance is observed by would be bad guys, and we have done our job.
(7)
(0)
5
5
0
Most installations have signs posted about this very thing. That being said it is normally OK for the gates to have photos taken for news and personal use (I was here). If there are no signs about photos being prevented then nothing can be done. As a 25 yr MP I have dealt with this quite often. Before 9/11 many CONUS Army posts were open (no fences) and people took photos of a lot of things that they shouldn't have. When in doubt though, report it.
(5)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I've done it, something similar, for B-roll footage purposes, and let the gate guard(s) know what I was up to so they wouldn't think I was a weirdo out there, up to no good and whatnot. It's a slippery slope, and could be taken out of context if you don't announce what you're up to. Personally, I would HOPE somebody approaches him and see what he's up to. If he's innocent, he has nothing to hide.
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
SSG(P) (Join to see)
I think if there is video of him videoing, then we are aware of what he was doing. This not something new. I would be more concerned of someone who was not out in the open.
I think if there is video of him videoing, then we are aware of what he was doing. This not something new. I would be more concerned of someone who was not out in the open.
(4)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
That is the most likely thing to do that meets the Constitutional muster. If you want to make an issue, use your phone and take pictures and video the individual identifying his face and features. In all probability, if the person is there for the wrong reasons, they will take off ASAP.
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
IMO, notify the MPs or SP about this person and have them monitor that situation
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
Report it to the Military Police and/or Public Affairs, they may have already coordinated with Public Affairs and/or what their doing may be perfectly legal. Doesn't hurt to report it just in case their crossing a line.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
I believe that all citizens have a responsibility to report activities that they may believe COULD be associated with future terrorist acts. The First Amendment here is moot from your perspective. You have an obligation to report the activity to appropriate authorities. Those authorities have the obligation to investigate and to determine whether the individual was only exercising his First Amendment Right or was conducting surveillance in support of a planned or potential attack.
Every successful attack on US soil since 9/11 has been preceded by suspicious activities that were observed by others who out of apathy or fear of ridicule failed to report to appropriate authorities. Report it.
Every successful attack on US soil since 9/11 has been preceded by suspicious activities that were observed by others who out of apathy or fear of ridicule failed to report to appropriate authorities. Report it.
(2)
(0)
PO1 Joe StMartin
While generally agree with what you're saying, I would be remiss if I didn't say something about one thing. The First Amendment (and the Bill Of Rights) should never be considered moot. Especially when our citizens are acting legally. That however should not stop us from notifying security whenever we see something that seems out of place. Even notifying the gate guard of what is going on would be a good first step.
(0)
(0)
LT John Stevens
PO1 Joe StMartin - By moot I was say that it was not a consideration in answering the question. Yes, the individual taking the Video has a right to be there and probably has the right to be taking the video. Military personnel other than official security personnel have no right nor do they have a duty to interfere in any way in the individual taking the video, contrary to what some others said. The First Amendment in no way prohibits military personnel from reporting a potential security threat to the proper authorities. Thus, the First Amendment, in this case, under these circumstances is moot.
I do agree with you however, that from a broader perspective our Constitutional Rights are never moot and should never be abridged lightly or without due process.
I do agree with you however, that from a broader perspective our Constitutional Rights are never moot and should never be abridged lightly or without due process.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Got a smartphone? Quietly snap a pic and mail it to your security office. #SeeSomethingSaySomething
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Before i retired, I used to see regularly NCIS reports about local base entrances being video taped. It really spiked post 9/11. When in doubt notify base security/local law enforcement. Vast majority of the time it's something innocuous, but you can never be to careful these days.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SSG(P) (Join to see)
18 U.S. Code--795 (a)
Whenever, in the interests of national defense, the President defines certain vital military and naval installations or equipment as requiring protection against the general dissemination of information relative thereto, it shall be unlawful to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of such vital military and naval installations or equipment without first obtaining permission of the commanding officer of the military or naval post, camp, or station, or naval vessels, military and naval aircraft, and any separate military or naval command concerned, or higher authority, and promptly submitting the product obtained to such commanding officer or higher authority for censorship or such other action as he may deem necessary.
Therefore, if I understand correctly, it's only specifically defined (by the President) installations or equipment that requires protection against general dissemination. That is good input though, I never would have known that.
Thanks SGM!
Whenever, in the interests of national defense, the President defines certain vital military and naval installations or equipment as requiring protection against the general dissemination of information relative thereto, it shall be unlawful to make any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of such vital military and naval installations or equipment without first obtaining permission of the commanding officer of the military or naval post, camp, or station, or naval vessels, military and naval aircraft, and any separate military or naval command concerned, or higher authority, and promptly submitting the product obtained to such commanding officer or higher authority for censorship or such other action as he may deem necessary.
Therefore, if I understand correctly, it's only specifically defined (by the President) installations or equipment that requires protection against general dissemination. That is good input though, I never would have known that.
Thanks SGM!
(0)
(0)
GySgt Carl Rumbolo
SSG(P) (Join to see) - No, it is not a violation of US code - there is no law that prohibits the use of video or photographic equipment from public lands outside a military installation.
(0)
(0)
GySgt Carl Rumbolo
Try this one....I assume someone is on there way to arrest everyone at google right now:
Overhead imagery and a MAP.....omg...national defense is just shot to shit...no security at all
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Norfolk+Naval+Shipyard/@36.9418249,-76.3215408,2224m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x89baa2ee44d378f9:0xa66efa23cae55192
Overhead imagery and a MAP.....omg...national defense is just shot to shit...no security at all
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Norfolk+Naval+Shipyard/@36.9418249,-76.3215408,2224m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x89baa2ee44d378f9:0xa66efa23cae55192
Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google