my invisible text
Categories
  • TIMELINE

Photographers Beware

<<

Alex Pirozek

4 Star Contributor

Posts: 463

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:00 pm





Post Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:09 pm

Photographers Beware

I probably don't need to say too much on this subject (Section 44) rubbish other than it was always going to come to this, the police are so thick at times it make me so angry that they can't see past their noses at the bigger picture. (hot)

Hopefully this lot are a minority and as yet I've not had any issues but it can't been long for the law of averages to catch up.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/feb/2 ... ror-arrest

Al
<<

Phill Fenton

User avatar

Premium Member
Premium Member

Posts: 11084

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 11:04 pm





Post Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:01 pm

It's daft isn't it? There is a paranoia these days about taking photos in public places.

Only recently I went to a shopping centre to survey a shop front. Within a few minutes of taking photos I was stopped by two security men. After I explained my reasons and showed my business card to prove I was a signmaker going about his lawful occupation I was allowed to leave but was told I would need to get permission from the shopping centres management in future if I ever needed to take any photos.

On the other hand, the shopping centres CCTV system is what had alerted their security staff to the fact I was taking photos - yet they had never sought my permission to film me on CCTV.

We are living in a police state these days :shake:
<<

Hugh Potter

User avatar

Premium Member
Premium Member

Posts: 8488

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:43 am

Country: United Kingdom (uk)




Post Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:16 pm

that's a good point about the cctv Phil!
<<

Ian Johnston

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 1398

Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:59 pm

Country: United Kingdom (uk)




Post Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:41 pm

Phill wrote:It's daft isn't it? There is a paranoia these days about taking photos in public places.

Only recently I went to a shopping centre to survey a shop front. Within a few minutes of taking photos I was stopped by two security men. After I explained my reasons and showed my business card to prove I was a signmaker going about his lawful occupation I was allowed to leave but was told I would need to get permission from the shopping centres management in future if I ever needed to take any photos.

On the other hand, the shopping centres CCTV system is what had alerted their security staff to the fact I was taking photos - yet they had never sought my permission to film me on CCTV.

We are living in a police state these days :shake:


The same thing happened to me the other day too,

Regards, the CCTV they have sought your permission. On or near the entrance it says by law. That CCTV is in use and who it is controlled by, If you don't want recorded don't go in
<<

David Rowland

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 9788

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:58 pm





Post Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:08 pm

yep... that is daft.... but the reporter was being deliberately an ( oh i swore ) by saying only 3 sentences, he should have given more info on sct 44 and been more freindly.
<<
User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 14363

Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 2:36 pm





Post Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:16 pm

I think the photographer was a prat, the cpo asked for his details, so if he had given them to her no problem, if you have nothing to hide, whats the issue?
Now look at this from the other angle, human rights? do you want to give them to terrorists? if the photographer had been one, then he would have been able to walk away, had he reacted like the photographer.
It's fine saying he was not an obvious terror suspect, but they seldom are.
If you want to prevent more atrocities, does it really do any harm to tell a cop who you are?
get real

Peter
<<

Alex Pirozek

4 Star Contributor

Posts: 463

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:00 pm





Post Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:53 pm

There's always two sides to every story and although you can see the recording for yourself i can't help thinking anger against the CPO and police. I do believe however that maybe a different attitude could have been taken towards the CPO that might have resulted in a different outcome & if it was me i would have probably been very nice to the lady CPO :lol1: :lol1: .........but i wasn't there.

I do remember when i was a lad and being stopped by the police for little issues :o :o :o a good attitude helped no end.

I would imagine until you are on the receiving end (positive or negative outcome) your views will be effected one way or the other. This goes for most issues i believe.

But if you watch the other one with the Italian art student you can't help thinking that the police over reacted on that one.
It is obviously an issue as a while back 2000-3000 photographers protested down London against the Police and their frequent use of Section 44 against them. :o
<<

Phill Fenton

User avatar

Premium Member
Premium Member

Posts: 11084

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 11:04 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:38 am

The point here is - what was once an innocent pastime (photography) is now almost treated as a crime. Fair enough - walk through a shopping centre with a gun or sword in your hand and you deserve to be apprehended - but brandishing a camera should not justify the same degree of suspicion.
<<

John Childs

User avatar

Premium Member
Premium Member

Posts: 6591

Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 11:19 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:54 am

I'm with Phill.

Just 'cos they get a yellow coat with the job doesn't mean that they are entitled to disturb me going about my lawful business.

There are too many officious jobsworths in this country.
<<

David Rowland

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 9788

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:58 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:35 am

so no more photographing signs from now on!
<<

Karl Williams

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 4225

Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:31 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:48 pm

Yes John I agree with you about to many jobsworths, But as Pete said, just giving your details shouldn't be a problem. The thing is we all say police should be fighting real crime and yes they can be annoying, But look at the risks we all take today in just walking down the road with the threat of terrorism. Many planned attacks have been avoided, and this may have happened just by one of these jobsworths taking someones details.
<<

Earl Smith

User avatar

4 Star Contributor

Posts: 328

Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:32 am





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:30 pm

Something else has been missed here. He is taking photos of Father Xmas. And who hangs around Father Xmas?.... Kiddies. The Police tell him about terrorist acts maybe because its less offensive that accusing someone of taking pictures of children. Maybe the police have had a recent problem?
Either way he was a prat and looking for trouble by not giving his name. Then the police can move on to more important things.
I think everyone in the UK should be given ID cards. The Police stop you and you show the card. End of problem.
Earl
<<

Shane Drew

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 11424

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:22 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:56 pm

Peter Normington wrote:I think the photographer was a prat, the cpo asked for his details, so if he had given them to her no problem, if you have nothing to hide, whats the issue?
Now look at this from the other angle, human rights? do you want to give them to terrorists? if the photographer had been one, then he would have been able to walk away, had he reacted like the photographer.
It's fine saying he was not an obvious terror suspect, but they seldom are.
If you want to prevent more atrocities, does it really do any harm to tell a cop who you are?
get real

Peter


I totally agree with Peter. This story is a beat up. I'm a keen photographer, and take photos in all sorts of places, for business and pleasure, at airports and anywhere.

If an officer comes up and asks you what you are doing there, the best thing to do is be polite, answer the questions and all will be sweet. As soon as you start getting belligerent, the cops will start thinking you have something to hide, and rightly so.

My son and I were taking photos from a ladder on the fence line of Brisbane airport so our photos didn't have barbed wire in them. We got a visit from the federal police and my son just about fainted :lol1:
I got down from my ladder and answered all the questions politely and without any aggro. Turns out they had been on alert for trouble and seeing me get ladders out of my van rang some bells at the security station.

As the officers left, they wished us well, but asked that we not get so close to the fence. My son thought we were going to jail :)

That said, when I was coming back from the UK, I took a photo inside Heathrow to show my son, and a female security officer nabbed me and told me that I would be arrested if I took a photo again.

She was rude and arrogant, but she was right. I later saw a sign that no photography was allowed in the terminal. Although I think the rule is stupid, fact of the matter is that she had authority on her side, so I was in no position to protest.

The journo is trying to make trouble, and I think he needs a swift clip under the ear and told to grow up.
<<

John Childs

User avatar

Premium Member
Premium Member

Posts: 6591

Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 11:19 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:13 pm

Being asked my name by the police whilst hanging from a ladder over the security fencing of an airport is to be expected, and not a problem. Being harassed whilst going about my reasonable lawful business, by people whose only power is conferred on them by a yellow jacket, is.

Sure, none of us want to see atrocities, but there must be limits, or will you not be happy until we are all chipped, tracked, and our every utterance monitored and recorded?

The terrorists really are winning aren't they?
<<

Alex Pirozek

4 Star Contributor

Posts: 463

Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:00 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:52 pm

Yes John I agree with you about to many jobsworths, But as Pete said, just giving your details shouldn't be a problem. The thing is we all say police should be fighting real crime and yes they can be annoying, But look at the risks we all take today in just walking down the road with the threat of terrorism. Many planned attacks have been avoided, and this may have happened just by one of these jobsworths taking someones details.


To be honest i don't believe the risk is greater now due to ...."Terrorism" now than when the IRA was in full swing or even the Cold war. The only difference is the technology and information available to people.
I would rather take my chances and keep my liberties than give them up just like that because once they've gone you will not get them back!

The people that say "If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear" really frighten me!!

Any of you that have read "Brave new world" by Aldous Huxley or the George Orwell book "1984" will understand where we are all going.

My belief is that the real terrorists are in power and all these measures are being put in place to protect them from us when the masses finally wake up to what is actually happening.

Remember "Everything is NOT OK"
<<

Phill Fenton

User avatar

Premium Member
Premium Member

Posts: 11084

Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 11:04 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:17 pm

There are important principles at stake here.

We shouldn't meekly accept the gradual erosion of all our civil liberties, yet this is what is happening.

For example:- We can no longer smoke in public, make number plates, rewire an electrical socket at home, carry old signs in our vans without being a registered "waste carrier". etc. etc. so many once commonplace activities have now been "criminalised" by increasing legislation - all justified as being for the common good - but in reality giving more and more control over our lives to the politicians, police and bureaucrats.

I remember when I went on my honeymoon to what was then called Yugoslavia, a communist country. I remarked to a local how surprised I was at the lax rules on selling alcohol to underage drinkers. There was no such law there. he laughed and told me that was because "they" were living in a free country not like westerners. That was 30 years ago, and even then they saw western values as over regulated and oppressive.
<<

David Rowland

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 9788

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:58 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:26 pm

I think John Simpson have the right idea... run away!
<<

John Gregson

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 1296

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 2:41 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:58 pm

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-New ... 0029?f=rss

Similar story, you can't even take family photo's now :evil:
<<

John Childs

User avatar

Premium Member
Premium Member

Posts: 6591

Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 11:19 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:45 pm

John Gregson wrote:Similar story, you can't even take family photo's now :evil:

See.

Give somebody a bit of power and they will always, always, ALWAYS, abuse it.
<<

Shane Drew

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 11424

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 12:22 pm





Post Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:41 pm

John Childs wrote:. Being harassed whilst going about my reasonable lawful business, by people whose only power is conferred on them by a yellow jacket, is.



point is John, they don't know if you are going about your lawful business unless they ask questions? Or do we expect our 'defenders of the public' to be mind readers too?

Nothing wrong in being polite if the authorities require some clarification.

I wholeheartedly agree that civil liberties are being eroded by politicians and civil libertarians, and not being able to photograph your own children is nothing short of stupid, but that is the problem with society today, common sense went out the window when fear of litigation and lack of morality became to norm in our daily life.

Add corrupt politicians, police and lawyers to that mix, and you have a recipe for fear, injustice and intimidation, which is evident in all levels of authority everywhere. Welcome to the 21st century I guess. :evil:
<<

Harry Cleary

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 7257

Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:32 pm





Post Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:49 pm

I remember myself and a friend making the crossing from Newhaven to Dieppe at 6am one morning years ago, there had been a bombing incident in London the previous day, we were picked out (quite reasonably imo) from the passenger list for 'closer inspection', body searched and questioned. One of the officers was an extremely polite man, while the other had jumped to the conclusion that we were Irish, we were guilty of something.
Because I live on the border here I was quite used to the situation but my mate wasn't. It was funny after it, but extremely scary at the time and the tension was unbelievable. But as is usually the case the polite, professional policeman got the work done, verified with our local Garda stations who we were and we went on our way but not before the other officer caused us to miss our ferry and left an extremely bad taste in the mouth.
Surely this is one of those cases where a kind of social contract comes into play? 99.999% of people will be going about their lawful business and the majority of those will have the same concerns as the police and will co-operate. It must also be the responsibility of the police to use their common sense, professionalism and more importantly manners when intervening. Jobsworths will always cost more than they are worth, in more than economic ways. :D Just my tuppence worth.
<<

Nigel Hindley

User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 1284

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 4:30 pm





Post Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:23 am

Fascinating stuff, you can see it from both sides. Knowing a policeman was abusing his power would tend to lead to a 'you don't have the right' type of argument and obviously this will wind up the policman.

Re the cctv, would we have the right to view the images of us if we thought it abused our rights?

I took around 40 photos in Dublin airport today and after seeing this cant believe I wasn't stopped.

Nigel
<<
User avatar

5 Star Contributor

Posts: 14363

Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 2:36 pm





Post Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:36 am

John,
What happened to the copper who clipped you round the ear when you were a kid because he believed you were up to no good? That was far worse than just asking a question, and more to the point, had you not told him where you lived, he would have given you another clip round the ear.... :D

Peter

Return to Say Hello & Off Topic Chat



Who is online

Registered users:
No registered users

 

About
Contact
Board Rules
Membership
Terms & Conditions

 

Signapp - iPhone & iPad
Signapp - Android
Vehicle Wrap Training
Vinyl Application Training
Vehicle Wrap Accreditation
UK Sign Group
Site Membership
Advertising
Videos
British Signs & Graphics Assoc.

 

 Facebook
 Twitter
 Youtube
 Linkedin

 

Who is Online

In total there are 67 users online ::
2 registered, 0 hidden and 65 guests
[based on past 5 minutes]

Most users ever online was
370 on Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:02 pm

Registered users:
No registered users

Copyright © 2000 - 2019 Robert Lambie