|
|
| My "encounter" with MTS "Security" in San Diego (504016) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (504017) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Wed Oct 17 21:58:31 2007, in response to My "encounter" with MTS "Security" in San Diego, posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 21:53:50 2007. Wow, YOU got questioned, now thats something else right there! At least you enjoyed your time snappin' away. BTW, drop me an e-mail, I will teach you how to post photos in 1-2-3. |
|
|
| (504019) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 22:00:22 2007, in response to My "encounter" with MTS "Security" in San Diego, posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 21:53:50 2007. I didn't realize that you took train pictures. You should post some for sure.So what would have happened if you DIDN'T have your ID? Which way do you think the supervisor was leaning? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (504021) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Wed Oct 17 22:03:04 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Wed Oct 17 21:58:31 2007. what about homework, junior? |
|
|
| (504022) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Wed Oct 17 22:05:02 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by South Ferry on Wed Oct 17 22:03:04 2007. I do it in school, this year, I got a short schedule, with the minor classes. |
|
|
| (504025) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by South Ferry on Wed Oct 17 22:06:36 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Wed Oct 17 22:05:02 2007. then ask for more homework 8c)I'll leave it to monorail to dismantle your reply, tho.... way 2 easy. |
|
|
| (504026) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 22:06:44 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 22:00:22 2007. Good question..I Dont want to even know.. THATS why i carry the pass.. |
|
|
| (504032) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Oct 17 22:14:48 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 22:00:22 2007. I was just going to ask that. I wouldn't have pulled out the pass so fast. I would have waited until (if) the supervisor said it was against the rules, and THEN pulled out the pass. That way you know if he's just changing his tune because you work for a transit authority. I would have first shown him a print out of the rules. But I'm glad it worked out for him in the end. |
|
|
| (504036) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 22:18:17 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Oct 17 22:14:48 2007. Well the supervisors attitude was very nice even though he asked whats the problem his tone was very plesant.I would have asked for the person to get one anyway just to be a ballbuster but its all good no harm no foul.. |
|
|
| (504046) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 22:32:33 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 22:18:17 2007. Private security rarely knows what the laws are regarding photography. I've often been told that I wasn't allowed to take pictures. I once took a picture of a building in downtown LA from the sidewalk and a security guard came out and walked to the corner to tell me that I wasn't allowed to take pictures of her building. It's madness!So do you show your id to employees out there and talk about the job? Or maybe you've already left your application and resume? ;) |
|
|
| (504051) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by North-Easten T/O on Wed Oct 17 22:46:51 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 22:32:33 2007. I am suppise that his Girl Frind let him take any photos, Rail your such a BUFF under cover.Robert |
|
|
| (504052) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Oct 17 22:47:58 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 22:32:33 2007. A few years ago I took a photo of a bus on 42nd Street near Grand Central. When I had finished taking the photo and was beginning to continue walking down the street, I was accosted by a private security guard who said that I couldn't take photos of so-and-so building.The problem was... the security guard came out of the building behind me, so how could I be taking a photo of his building? I just kept walking along without saying anything. |
|
|
| (504062) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Wed Oct 17 23:03:41 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by The Port of Authority on Wed Oct 17 22:47:58 2007. Security guards are becoming notorious for trying to stop photography of the buildings they work for. Many here probably saw this story before but click here for the encounter one photographer had in San FranciscoThe photographer writes: Yesterday I was shooting some photos of One Bush St. (the building where Bush and Market Streets intersect) when their security guard came out of his little glass jewelbox lobby hut to ask me to stop taking photos of the building. He said it was illegal. I moved to the sidewalk and continued taking photos and he again asked me to stop. When I told him I was on a public street sidewalk he said that actually they owned the sidewalk and that I was going to have to stop taking photographs. The photographer, who is well known at Flickr and BoingBoing, made some waves: Update: Boing Boing picked up this story and of course from there the traffic goes nuts. There is now a photo contest to shoot photos of the building and a meet up planned on Saturday at noon to shoot the building. The final result of all this is that building management ended up reassuring photographers that there was no policy against photography of the building. It takes perseverance and a photographer with determination but the fight can be won. |
|
|
| (504064) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:09:07 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by BMTLines on Wed Oct 17 23:03:41 2007. I don't know how it is in NYC, but in LA some of the buildings DO own the sidewalk. They have these little plaques on the sidewalk similar to the building cornerstones that and state something to the effect that they own the sidewalk and are allowing pedestrian access, but they can revoke that right at any time. |
|
|
| (504069) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Wed Oct 17 23:13:51 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:09:07 2007. Oh, come on! That's ridiculous!...I guess they expect that everyone is driving everywhere there and no one might need to walk past the building. |
|
|
| (504078) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:22:49 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Nilet on Wed Oct 17 23:13:51 2007. I've only seen it downtown. I don't know if they really can reclaim their easement. Probably not.I thought that I had seen those in NYC as well. No? |
|
|
| (504080) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Wed Oct 17 23:34:26 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:09:07 2007. Many tall downtown office buildings have "set-back" restrictions due to the zoning laws of that area. So in fact what seems like sidewalk can indeed be private property. For example, many of the plazas and outdoor seating areas fall under these kinds of rules. Often in exchange for such "open space" the building is allowed to be taller than would otherwise be the case. In such cases while the open space is said to be open to the public, many buildings retain the ability to remove persons who they feel do not belong - for example homeless persons.While I'm not commenting on that particular building, such a situation is not unheard of. There is nothing in the zoning laws that prevent taking photos. Mike |
|
|
| (504082) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:35:33 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Michael549 on Wed Oct 17 23:34:26 2007. That makes sense. Thanks! |
|
|
| (504090) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Oct 18 00:14:33 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:09:07 2007. Many properties in NYC extend out into the sidewalk. First they have a vault space under the sidewalk which is their property, as is the sidewalk above the property. However if they do not enforce the closure on a regular basis then they loose the right to do so.This is the reason why you can see many sidewalk cafes. They actually do own that part of the sidewalk. With larger buildings you will see brass lines embedded in the sidewalk with a plaque stating who the owner is and that they can revoke access rights. In some cases the entire street is privately owned. Rockefeller Plaza is one of these. They close the street once a year (when they put up that giant Christmas Tree) to keep their ownership of that street active. The actual property owner, IIRC, is Columbia University. ROAR |
|
|
| (504095) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Thu Oct 18 00:29:33 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Oct 18 00:14:33 2007. Thanks for the info. |
|
|
| (504107) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Thu Oct 18 02:31:59 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:09:07 2007. There's a bank in Forest Hills, Queens, on the corner of 108th Street & Queens Boulevard, which has such a plaque on the sidewalk, showing the property line of the bank. |
|
|
| (504108) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Oct 18 02:35:41 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Oct 18 00:14:33 2007. I politely disagree with some of your points.Many properties in NYC extend out into the sidewalk. First they have a vault space under the sidewalk which is their property, as is the sidewalk above the property. However if they do not enforce the closure on a regular basis then they loose the right to do so. They may own the vault space but not necessarily the sidewalk above it; in fact I doubt very much their property extends to the public right-of-way. Of course I won't dispute that it's possible. This is the reason why you can see many sidewalk cafes. They actually do own that part of the sidewalk. Many of those are set up through a permitting process and not necessarily fee ownership of the cafe space. YMMV depending on locale. With larger buildings you will see brass lines embedded in the sidewalk with a plaque stating who the owner is and that they can revoke access rights.. As often as I've heard this, I'd like to see that someplace. In some cases the entire street is privately owned. Rockefeller Plaza is one of these. They close the street once a year (when they put up that giant Christmas Tree) to keep their ownership of that street active. No, it's so that public access isn't continuous over a statutory period of time and ripens into a public easement. In our land laws, if a pattern of use is broken, the clock of continuity must start all over agein. If they own the property in fee, public access won't adversely affect the ownership but could remove your right to hinder that access. The actual property owner, IIRC, is Columbia University. GO LIONS!! ROAR LOL your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (504109) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Thu Oct 18 02:39:22 2007, in response to My "encounter" with MTS "Security" in San Diego, posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 21:53:50 2007. And you're a pretty imposing fella, dude. That security guard musta been shaking in his west coast boots. ;-) |
|
|
| (504119) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Oct 18 03:07:30 2007, in response to My "encounter" with MTS "Security" in San Diego, posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 21:53:50 2007. Those rent-a-cops have been a real hassle on Metro North here in CT as well. Twice I've phoned city or MTA police since they were breaking more than 4 laws while detaining me. I'm glad you managed a smooth sail on it but am also curious how it would have turned out if you didn't pull out your get outta jail free card. Oh yeah, keep having fun on your vacation!your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (504122) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Oct 18 03:10:00 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Fred G on Thu Oct 18 03:07:30 2007. Oh? Which 4 laws? |
|
|
| (504149) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Oct 18 06:46:56 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Nilet on Thu Oct 18 03:10:00 2007. The ones they broke.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (504163) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Thu Oct 18 07:46:06 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Fred G on Thu Oct 18 06:46:56 2007. Can you be a little less specific? |
|
|
| (504235) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by kp5308 on Thu Oct 18 10:15:49 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Easy on Wed Oct 17 23:09:07 2007. When I bought my apartment building back in Reading PA, the previous owner had a lien placed on the property by the city cuz' he didn't pay for all new curbing when they decided to repave the streets on both the side & front of the building. Even though the city made the requirement (the curbing did indeed need replacement) the homeowners were forced to pay for it, if the city deemed it necessary.In this particular instance, ownership begins at the curb. Any sidewalk issues are the resposibility of the property owner. Also I was liable for water/sewer pipe issues to said curb. I doubt it's like that everywhere, but some cities/townships do consider the sidewalk YOUR property & YOUR problem. |
|
|
| (504258) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Thu Oct 18 10:43:36 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by Fred G on Thu Oct 18 02:35:41 2007. They may own the vault space but not necessarily the sidewalk above it; in fact I doubt very much their property extends to the public right-of-way. Of course I won't dispute that it's possible.They do *NOT* own up to the curb, but they do (usually) own 5 to 10 feet in front of the building. The vault is (and must be for liability reasons) fully on their own property. If they do not enforce the property line on the sidewalk, perhaps with a garden or something, then after a year or so they will no longer be permitted to enforce it (ie keep people off of it) but they will still sure as heck have to pay taxes on it, and if somebody gets hurt there, or perhaps a sidewalk door caves in or something, they will sure as little fish be responsible for it. As often as I've heard this, I'd like to see that someplace. Take a look around Rockefeller Center, Columbia university, and other such places. For I have surely seen it in many locations. ROAR |
|
|
| (504260) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Thu Oct 18 10:47:05 2007, in response to My "encounter" with MTS "Security" in San Diego, posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 21:53:50 2007. *CLAP CLAP CLAP* |
|
|
| (504272) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Thu Oct 18 11:16:19 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by kp5308 on Thu Oct 18 10:15:49 2007. I doubt it's like that everywhere, but some cities/townships do consider the sidewalk YOUR property & YOUR problem.In NYC it the sidewalk is considered YOUR problem but it is not your property. My property line actually ends at the base of the steps leading to my front door. There is a front yard that extends further but it can be "recaptured" at any time by the city without compensation as it is not my property. For this reason I refuse to put up anything other than the cheapest chain link fence I can find, unlike my neighbors who have spent $$$$$$$$$ on brick and stone. As for the sidewalk I am responsible to maintain and repair it but I do not own it. I actually consider this a violation of the fifth amendment since the city is effectively confiscating my property (money and concrete) for public use without compensation. |
|
|
| (504293) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by kp5308 on Thu Oct 18 12:10:19 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by BMTLines on Thu Oct 18 11:16:19 2007. Ya know the saying about fighting city hall.....There is also "selective enforcement" of the sidewalk maintainence language. Reading's code stipulates sidewalks must be provided for public passage adjacent to city streets, along with a 24 hr. time period for snow removal from said sidewalk. I don't consider it a Fifth Amendment issue, considering the full disclosure of this requirement as a consequence of property ownership within the city. What burned me up was the selective enforcement of the maintainence. |
|
|
| (504296) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Thu Oct 18 12:18:52 2007, in response to Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego, posted by kp5308 on Thu Oct 18 12:10:19 2007. I don't consider it a Fifth Amendment issue, considering the full disclosure of this requirement as a consequence of property ownership within the city.I know - still I consider it a de-facto violation of my rights, albeit not a de-jure violation... In effect it is a form of real-estate tax since the money/labor (time = money) you spend on sidewalk maintenance is taken/used by the government. Just one example of how municipalities and the feds find to circumvent the constitution. |
|
|
| (1095368) | |
Re: My ''encounter'' with MTS ''Security'' in San Diego |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Fri Aug 19 14:33:26 2011, in response to My "encounter" with MTS "Security" in San Diego, posted by Railman718 on Wed Oct 17 21:53:50 2007. Holla at the 2007 Flashback necropost... |
|
|
