Right to Privacy at the Range?

[mohavesam]

A great family-oriented range here in MI has recently spent a bunch of money erecting a well-engineered roof over the shooting stables. This prompted me to go home and 'google-earth pro' that range. What I found was a pretty clear set of photos, I could even make out what color & style clothing was worn by the shooters out on the then-open lanes!

I figure if this is what is available on a free website, would my "By-the-People, For-the-People" gubmint be able to snap our portraits at will from above?

Not that I didn't get the true meaning of the movie "Enemy of the State", and I don't own a tinfoil hat (yet); But I do remember Gene Hackman's line: "Don't look up".

What say ye? Should we have an expectation of privacy at a private business, as in a membership-only range?

 

[Andy Taylor]

Should we have an expectation of privacy at a private business, as in a membership-only range?

In this day and age realistically the answer is no. Cameras are everywhere. The info that is available for free on the net is mindbogling, nevermind what you can get if you spend a little money. And then there is the government.

 

[Amici]

Originally posted by mohavesam:What say ye? Should we have an expectation of privacy at a private business, as in a membership-only range?

In terms of membership; yes.

In terms of what you do outside, in the open, where anyone in a plane, balloon, parachute or tower can see you? Hardly.

 

[deadin]

I guess you could start wearing a balaclava when at the range.

(That should really go over well.)

 

[GatorFarmer]

Family Fun Shooter's Corral?

Anyway, wear a hat. It keeps the hot brass off. A floppy hat will keep it from going down your neck as well.

 

[rburg]

Privacy? As stated, not if anyone can see you from outside the property.

Funny event. A lady, nice looking and a Parole Officer lived up the road and around the bend. Its the bad area near where I live. She was a little upset about the drug dealing a few doors away, so she told them to stop. They got mad and pulled some vandalism. So she installed some video cameras, filming the drug deals as they went down.

Then she took them to the Mayors office for a private viewing. Of course the locals paid the dealers a visit. They got mad and broke into her house, stealing only the video stuff! Then the father of 2 of the little urchins had the nerve to go to a city commission meeting and complain about her invading their right to privacy. New right. You can deal drugs without interference from busy body neighbors.

Then they won the first round, she moved away. She won the 2nd round. They became her "clients" on a professional basis. She violated them multiple times. Can you say "back to the big house?" Most POs have a heart, and will cut the criminals a little slack for minor transgressions. Unless they've already wronged them. Then the no-slack policy gets enforced with a passion.

 

[oldRoger]

Privacy? I may have upon occasion infrequently to be sure, taken a wizz in back of the garage. Friend of mine sent me aerials of the house, I could read the name on the mower parked in back of the garage.

My advice wear clothing while you are at the range, it's the only privacy you will get.

Privacy you say? Where would that be?

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Originally posted by rburg:
Most POs have a heart, and will cut the criminals a little slack for minor transgressions. Unless they've already wronged them. Then the no-slack policy gets enforced with a passion.

I always like a story with a happy ending!

 

[riverman1]

I can't believe anyone would leave home whithout their tin foil hat <)

 

[DCC]

Originally posted by riverman1:
I can't believe anyone would leave home whithout their tin foil hat <)

+1 on the "<)"
and I thought it was a question about nosey guys who look over your shoulder to see what you're shooting?
no foil hat required where I shoot but I am getting more concerned about number of cameras used to monitor us these days while we go about our lawful business...

DCC

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

I agree that the proliferation of cameras and recording technology is making life easier for Big Brother.

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

You have no legal expectation of privacy outside your home/hotel room or business that you own and sometimes the concealed areas of your vehicle.

 

[Gatofeo]

I was a reporter from 1985 to 1997.
At that time, there was no expectation of privacy outside the person's home, motel room, residence of a family member or friend, or any other place in public view.
A few times I was covering events (art fair, sporting event) when someone demanded my film because they were in the photo.
They were in public. Sorry, but no.
The Supreme Court has upheld the right to photograph or videotape anywhere that is open to the public.
Private property, such as nudist camps or Elks lodge meeting halls, is another matter -- unless the event is open to the public.
If the local Elks have a rummage sale, and you take photos in it, they cannot demand your camera or film. They can kick you out but they cannot confiscate.
Frankly, they cannot legally confiscate under any situation. That's the role of the police, if you have trespassed or otherwise broken the law.
Even though the range is private property, if it does not display a sign barring photography then it has no case. Your 1st Amendment rights do not expire on private property, unless you willingly agree to limit them, as in agreeing not to take photos.
With the proliferation of pocket cameras and cameras in cellphones, good luck on enforcing this!
An exception to all of the above: Some sex offenders, as part of their parole or sentence, may be banned from photographing children or adults to whom they are attracted.
This is really not applicable to the average person but may be a condition of their release.
Basically, if someone demands your camera, film or digital card, you're protected by the 1st Amendment.
If you haven't violated a NO PHOTORAPHY sign, or agreed to take no photos, they have no right to take your property.

 

[Folterung]

This prompted me to go home and 'google-earth pro' that range. What I found was a pretty clear set of photos, I could even make out what color & style clothing was worn by the shooters out on the then-open lanes!

Have you seen Google Streetview? Even worse, you can see inside people's homes and backyards....

 

[mohavesam]

I believe the range does have a sign stating 'No Photography Allowed". Maybe they need one visible from straight above?

 

[tomf52]

I once read that the technology was in place for the government to be able to read a license plate from 30,000 ft in the air.

 

[BarbC]

There is no privacy. You have the illusion of privacy because you're blissfully unaware.

Were you at the Obama inauguration? Find Waldo

 

[Andy Taylor]

I am the Chief of Security in a casino. You should see some of the stuff the surviellence
salesmen market to me. It really begs the question, If I can get this, what do the government guys have? For example

www.avigilon.com

Take the guided tour then look at the smaple footage.