Even though it was hot and nasty today, I went out to shoot photos, and for some reason thought the Romeo Rd. bridge over the DesPlaines River and the BNSF would be a good place to photograph trains (it actually is…)
To make a long story short; After I decided I couldn’t take the heat anymore, I headed back to my car, parked at the “Centennial Trail” lot on the north side of the bridge. As I approached, I noted a pickup truck, and a Jeep by my car. As I got closer a man with a uniform on was motioning me toward him. He turned out to be a Refinery Security Supervisor (The Citgo Refinery is clearly visible from this bridge as it is less than 300 yards from where I was) he had a security guard with him. The supervisor inquired as to what I was doing, and then very patiently explained his reasons for, as he put it “detaining me for a few minutes”. He also patiently explained that he understood my rights as a photographer, and then he explained his responsibilities as security for the refinery. Which made perfect sense to me. Since the place is a large potential target, they routinely investigate anyone who looks “suspicious” and standing on a bridge with a camera. (He noticed me as he drove across the bridge)
To cut to the chase, the Romeoville Police showed up, as requested by refinery security, asked me the usual “What are you doing here?” type questions, ran my name, and then let me go. The officer asked if he could see my camera, and I showed it to him, and showed him the photos I had taken the night before from that same spot. He stated “Well, all I see here are photos of barges, and trains” The officers and security guards thanked me for my cooperation, and went on their way, and I went on mine, as I had to go pick up my children. The whole matter was handled professionally, I gave my answers in a reasonable tone, and that was all there was to it.
You’re supposed to scream and rant - throw your photog’s rights paper at them - call the ACLU - call Jesse Jackson - give the refinery the finger - call the cop a pig - and then post it all on trains.com!!!
Just goes to show that if you cooperate, explain to them your situation, and do what they say, there will be no problem. Maybe one of the more sucessful Security vs Railfan stories I have heard.
I suppose one could question that aspect of it, but, I could have left I suppose, but why make escalate a situation? Anyway, this bridge is fairly close to the refinery, as well as a power plant, and I can see their concern. I look at it this way: If I were in the refinery security supervisor’s shoes, I would have done what he did.
I’ve been visited by county sheriff’s deputies a couple of times when out photographing trains. When I show them my retired military ID card, point out my military veteran license plate, give them a business card showing that I’m in a model railroad club, and explain why I’m there, they have always been courteous to me and explained that they were called by the railroad because of past vandalism incidents to railroad property, even though I have not been on railroad property.
OK, I am sure this will be to the ire of some on here.
But, although I would have handled it exactly the same way, does anyone else find it a little troubling that you could be “detained.” I found the comments about Jesse Jackson and the ACLU amusing, but, well I will not go into the legal end of things.
I will, however, note that it concerns me that a security gaurd that does not report to an elected official feels as though he can “detain” you.
I think we may have a semantics difference here. Detain can have different meanings. Here are two that popped up quickly in a web dictionary search.
To keep from proceeding; delay or retard.
To keep in custody or temporary confinement: The police detained several suspects for questioning. The disruptive students were detained after school until their parents had been notified.
In this case, I believe the guard was using the first meaning, in other words he was apologizing for detaining i.e. “delaying” the original poster.
I don’t believe he was implying that he was detaining i.e. “keeping in custody” the original poster.
I don’t have any problem with the event and think it was handled well by all parties. It’s nice to see reports of this type that work out well when people are reasonable. Fact of life is that we’re going to have to deal with this for a long time.
I agree. In fact I find it outrageous that they feel they can detain you without cause for an investigation. I find it sad that so many people find this acceptable.
One by one, little by little our freedoms slip away until one day we are all prisoners in our own country afraid to venture forth.
So Tim, what would have happened had you followed the advice given by people here who are totally uninvolved with this incident and therefore will suffer no consequences?
What if you would have said “No way!” and told the security guard you were not about to have your “rights” violated? You would have driven away and then what?
It is easy to be courageous and righteous when you’re sitting at a computer hundreds of miles away.
Those refinery security guards work closely with the Romeoville police, I’ll bet, and may even have been given the authority by the village to do just what they did.
That’s true. It is always more difficult to stand up for your legal rights in person, which is exactly what people who want to curtail them are counting on.
If the security guard is a sworn peace officer and friend of the court then it was all right. If he wasn’t, he was out of line by going off-property and interfering with a citizen doing nothing wrong on a public roadway.
Don’t mis-interperet what I said. I, too, most likely would have cooperated, but, I would have politely asked them by what authority they were operating, just to put things into perspective.
My experience with regular police and railroad police has been this take pictures leave footprints…mind your p’s and q’s.99 percent of the officers are level headed.An officer stopped by Deshler today and asked if we had any trouble last night.Since i wasn’t there I didn’t know someone was causing trouble.If people cause trouble other railfans really don’t want you around.then he says well if there are any problems just call us.[banghead]
I think both of you handled the matter rather well, But I wouldn’t hold it against them they were just doing their job When I was in the Coast guard right after 9/11 I would have done the same thing to you as the gov’t felt power plants, bridges, and refineries were and still are prime targets if you had pictures of the refinery or bridges by themselves they probably would have taken you in for questioning look at it this way if you were in their shoes and someone blew up the bridge or refinery and found out that they saw someone taking pics of it and they were part of the attack you would feel pretty bad if you hadn’t done something about, just consider it a small price to pay for taking pics
I’m still not convinced Tim’s rights were “violated”. The refinery security people may have been doing exactly what they were empowered to do.
Let’s put the shoe on the other foot.
How would you react if a stranger parked their car in the public street in front of your home and looked through the windows all day with binoculars – or a telephoto camera? In the police biz, this is known as a “suspicious person” call.
Police departments get them all the time.
So according to what some of you say. you just ignore the guy because you don’t want to trample his rights? Baloney. Even though he may be within his “rights” wouldn’t you want to know what he was doing, and call the police to investigate? And perhaps have the police ask him to leave?
That’s not much different than what the refinery guards did – except he wasn’t ordered to leave.