View Full Version : Harassment of photographers.
There have been a lot of cases recently where people have been harassed by the police for taking photographs in public places. The police even use anti terrorism legislation to arrest, detain, fingerprint and take DNA from people who have committed no crime.
Taking a photograph in a public place is a common normal activity, it is not grounds to suspect someone is a terrorist or a paedophile, it is not against the law.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/headlines/5024297.Police_used_terror_legislation_to_stop_ex_ RAF_engineer_in__Kidlington/
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/Dad39s-fury-after-paedophile-photo.6108909.jp
There have been a lot of cases recently where people have been harassed by the police for taking photographs in public places. The police even use anti terrorism legislation to arrest, detain, fingerprint and take DNA from people who have committed no crime.
Taking a photograph in a public place is a common normal activity, it is not grounds to suspect someone is a terrorist or a paedophile, it is not against the law.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/headlines/5024297.Police_used_terror_legislation_to_stop_ex_ RAF_engineer_in__Kidlington/
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/Dad39s-fury-after-paedophile-photo.6108909.jp
......but terrorists and paedophiles can come in all disguises.
"..Taking a photograph in a public place is a common normal activity, it is not grounds to suspect someone is a terrorist or a paedophile, it is not against the law."
It is against the law of "New" Labour
"There are no legal restrictions on photography in a public place and no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place".
The section above in quotes is extracted from Hansard's record of a House of Lords session on 16th July 2008.
"There are no legal restrictions on photography in a public place and no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place".
The section above in quotes is extracted from Hansard's record of a House of Lords session on 16th July 2008.
True, as I said, there is no law against taking photographs in a public place.
But when people see that it is grounds for being suspected as a terrorist or a paedophile they are going to be deterred from taking photographs, people are going to be reluctant to take holiday snaps in a public place, the government gets the result they want without having to pass legislation.
changilass
26-Feb-10, 17:57
So how would you stop paedophiles taking pics of kids?
How would you stop terrorist taking photos of their next target?
Tubthumper
26-Feb-10, 17:58
Fred, one of the pieces you linked to was about a security guard. The police took no action. Have you considered that perhaps the guard is obsessed with preventing paedophiles from taking snaps of kids. Maybe he thinks there's a government conspiracy to prevent them from being brought to justice, and is doing all he can. Just like the bloke in Aberdeen that got lifted.
'Police were swarming all over the place' is the reason the guy in the other link took photos. Perhaps they were doing more than just swarming.
Precisely what is it that the Government is trying to acheive? Is that you seeing things again, Fred?
True, as I said, there is no law against taking photographs in a public place.
But when people see that it is grounds for being suspected as a terrorist or a paedophile they are going to be deterred from taking photographs, people are going to be reluctant to take holiday snaps in a public place, the government gets the result they want without having to pass legislation.
What is the result the government wants?
So how would you stop paedophiles taking pics of kids?
How would you stop terrorist taking photos of their next target?
I don't think there is a way to stop paedophiles taking pictures of kids, or to stop terrorists talking photos of their next target. Not unless you want to make cameras illegal that is, prevent the millions of people who enjoy photography from taking photographs just in case.
Even then, the paedophiles and terrorists would find a way.
now heres a question.. my dad is coming over in july.. we are going all over the country.. and spending 4 days in london.. he cant wait to get a pic of Scotland Yard. and all the buildings big ben parliment the palace.. are we going to be arrested as terrorists? could you see it.. two young children, a husband and wife and the granfather hauled off for taking photos while on holiday.
now heres a question.. my dad is coming over in july.. we are going all over the country.. and spending 4 days in london.. he cant wait to get a pic of Scotland Yard. and all the buildings big ben parliment the palace.. are we going to be arrested as terrorists? could you see it.. two young children, a husband and wife and the granfather hauled off for taking photos while on holiday.
I've told ya brandy dangerous gal :lol:
changilass
26-Feb-10, 18:11
I doubt it Brandy, but what may happen, is that someone asks you why you are taking them and what you are all doing there.
If you simply tell them then I guess you will be ok, if however, you all get uppity and refuse to answer, then you may get hauled off.
Just how I personally think it will play out - could be totally wrong.
Fred, one of the pieces you linked to was about a security guard. The police took no action. Have you considered that perhaps the guard is obsessed with preventing paedophiles from taking snaps of kids. Maybe he thinks there's a government conspiracy to prevent them from being brought to justice, and is doing all he can. Just like the bloke in Aberdeen that got lifted.
'Police were swarming all over the place' is the reason the guy in the other link took photos. Perhaps they were doing more than just swarming.
Precisely what is it that the Government is trying to acheive? Is that you seeing things again, Fred?
If you read my post you will see I said there have been a lot of cases, not just two, those are just the two latest or there wouldn't be a problem. Notice both were reported on the 26th, that's two reports in one day.
Obviously the government wish to stop people taking photographs in public places.
but saying that fred.. nearly everywhere is a public place.. you walk outside and you are in public.
now heres a question.. my dad is coming over in july.. we are going all over the country.. and spending 4 days in london.. he cant wait to get a pic of Scotland Yard. and all the buildings big ben parliment the palace.. are we going to be arrested as terrorists? could you see it.. two young children, a husband and wife and the granfather hauled off for taking photos while on holiday.
I would be very wary about photographing the Houses of Parliament.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/jerome-taylor-i-was-questioned-over-my-harmless-snapshot-1833130.html
Scotland Yard sounds risky too.
but saying that fred.. nearly everywhere is a public place.. you walk outside and you are in public.
Precisely.
changilass
26-Feb-10, 18:31
If the government were so against folk taking pics then how come we have a very busy photography section with loads of pics taken out in public??
Tubthumper
26-Feb-10, 18:34
If you read my post you will see I said there have been a lot of cases, not just two, those are just the two latest or there wouldn't be a problem. Notice both were reported on the 26th, that's two reports in one day. Obviously the government wish to stop people taking photographs in public places.
Oh dear. Two cases in one day, one which had nothing to do with police or government. The other may or may not have been a legit request to protect operational security.
What's your take on the enthusiastic guard - was he right or wrong??
If the government were so against folk taking pics then how come we have a very busy photography section with loads of pics taken out in public??
Surely it is because all the coppers are out catching real criminals like motorists etc
If the government were so against folk taking pics then how come we have a very busy photography section with loads of pics taken out in public??
But how long for?
Tubthumper
26-Feb-10, 18:39
Oh -my - God!
Fred, are you really that far down the road that you think 'they' are out to stop us taking snaps altogether??
changilass
26-Feb-10, 18:40
Ohh for crying out loud Fred, now you are extracting the urine.
The section has been there long enough that if the government didnae like it , they would have closed it down by now.
Come out from your bunker into the real world - they won't get you, honest.:lol:
It's just another psychological impression-making scam, a bit like the placing of anti-tank blocks outside the entrance to Dounreay. Does anyone in their right mind think that "terrorists" (aka Muslims with backpacks) are going to sail across on the ferry and then drive their tank up to Dounreay?
We could then have threads about being stuck behind slow-moving tanks.
The "terrorists" could stop outside Jim Bews to ask directions: "Hey, infidel, which way to that nuclear weapons plant?"
The tank blocks are like the Dounreay police with their sub-machine guns - keep the masses thinking that there is some sort of imminent danger that the politicians are going to save us from.
Taking photos is no problem.
Ohh for crying out loud Fred, now you are extracting the urine.
The section has been there long enough that if the government didnae like it , they would have closed it down by now.
Come out from your bunker into the real world - they won't get you, honest.:lol:
If people don't want to take the risk of taking pictures in a public place in case they are suspected of being a terrorist or paedophile then expect to see no pictures taken in a town or which have children on them.
changilass
26-Feb-10, 18:54
Can't say I am that worried, so will continue to take pics, thanks all the same.
well i for one plan on taking lots of pics while on holiday! i always end up with several hundred! mostly of kids.. my kids! im not going to stop taking pics. if they want to waste their time talking to us... more power to them.. my dad will talk their ear off.. asking them 50 billion questions! he is awe struck at the thought of coming over.. then lets not start on the questions the kids will start asking the police.. then i will prob. start nattering away to them all the while my hubby just stands back shaking his head in horror.. as we basically turn said police persons into long lost cousins.. we are southerners.. we dont get upity we get chatty! *grins* and you can not out polite a southerner *laughs* we can tell you to go to hell and make you look forward to the trip!
changilass
26-Feb-10, 18:57
lol good on you Brandy, have a great time when it comes round.
North Light
26-Feb-10, 18:57
There continues to be a lot of confusion about the rights of an individual with respect to photography in a public place, also about the powers the Police have to stop you taking photographs in public places, and if stopped what information you are obliged to give them.
Guide to Photographers Rights
http://www.sirimo.co.uk/2009/05/14/uk-photographers-rights-v2/
Good Detailed Information on a Photographers Rights
http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.html
Campaign Site
http://photographernotaterrorist.org/
It's just another psychological impression-making scam, a bit like the placing of anti-tank blocks outside the entrance to Dounreay. Does anyone in their right mind think that "terrorists" (aka Muslims with backpacks) are going to sail across on the ferry and then drive their tank up to Dounreay?
We could then have threads about being stuck behind slow-moving tanks.
The "terrorists" could stop outside Jim Bews to ask directions: "Hey, infidel, which way to that nuclear weapons plant?"
The tank blocks are like the Dounreay police with their sub-machine guns - keep the masses thinking that there is some sort of imminent danger that the politicians are going to save us from.
Taking photos is no problem.
Bloody hell Stavro I thought you were in Pakistan? When did you get off the ferry? :lol:
Bloody hell Stavro I thought you were in Pakistan? When did you get off the ferry? :lol:
You know ducati, I'm tired after that journey, dodging the cruise missiles as well. Anyone know where I can park my tank for the night? Thought I'd take a few snaps tomorrow. :eek:
George Brims
26-Feb-10, 19:56
"..Taking a photograph in a public place is a common normal activity, it is not grounds to suspect someone is a terrorist or a paedophile, it is not against the law."
It is against the law of "New" Labour
Aye, well it happened to me under old Edward Heath's government, so it is not new and not confined to one political party or the other. I suspect it has much more to do with the sensitivity of police forces to getting caught out misbehaving. Google the May 1 "disturbances" in LA a couple of years ago. That's costing the city a fortune in lawsuits.
George Brims
26-Feb-10, 20:04
On the other hand, there are the likes of this weirdo.
http://www.knx1070.com/pages/6445657.php?
One of the reasons he was convicted was people remembered him taking pictures of girls on the beach.
northener
26-Feb-10, 20:47
There have been a lot of cases recently where people have been harassed by the police for taking photographs in public places. The police even use anti terrorism legislation to arrest, detain, fingerprint and take DNA from people who have committed no crime.
Taking a photograph in a public place is a common normal activity, it is not grounds to suspect someone is a terrorist or a paedophile, it is not against the law.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/headlines/5024297.Police_used_terror_legislation_to_stop_ex_ RAF_engineer_in__Kidlington/
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/Dad39s-fury-after-paedophile-photo.6108909.jp
I'm with you on this one, Fred.
There's been a number of 'innocent' snappers who've been confronted for taking innocuous foties. I'm all for security, but there appear to be elements within the police force (and corner shop commandos as in the Sutherland case) who use this legislation to suit their own ends.
Its a sad state of affairs when everyone is assumed to be a 'Paedo' unless proved otherwise.
PC Jobsworth in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAUan2DXBsk
You know ducati, I'm tired after that journey, dodging the cruise missiles as well. Anyone know where I can park my tank for the night? Thought I'd take a few snaps tomorrow. :eek:
You be careful at Forss - that bridge is only Class 12.
And there was me thinking the rumble outside was the grit lorry!
PC Jobsworth in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAUan2DXBsk
So taking photographs of a Christmas fancy dress parade is now classed as anti social behaviour. They can take you to the police station and hold you for eight hours, fingerprint you take your DNA for it.
luskentyre
27-Feb-10, 09:12
Obviously the government wish to stop people taking photographs in public places.
Guess what Fred? Even if the next Government is a Tory one, that very same Police Officer will still be in a job. Still why lets facts get in the way of a little paranoia eh?
PC Jobsworth in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAUan2DXBsk
I think his problem was that dodgy beard and having his face in shadow like that. Highly suspicious.
FRom Lancashire Coppers:
"The constabulary does not routinely stop people taking photographs in a public place but the manner in which he was positioning his camera, and the way it was making some members of the public feel, could be construed as anti-social or indecent.
The gentleman refused to co-operate on three occasions and so officers felt they had no choice but to make an arrest in order to make further inquiries into his actions."
FRom Lancashire Coppers:
"The constabulary does not routinely stop people taking photographs in a public place but the manner in which he was positioning his camera, and the way it was making some members of the public feel, could be construed as anti-social or indecent.
The gentleman refused to co-operate on three occasions and so officers felt they had no choice but to make an arrest in order to make further inquiries into his actions."
Did they say if any members of the public made a complaint?
I'm sure when I watched the video the police woman who approached him said she was doing it under section 44 of the Terrorism Act and that they had to take the details of anyone taking photographs. It wasn't until the end when he was being arrested that anti social behaviour was mentioned.
Did they say if any members of the public made a complaint?
I'm sure when I watched the video the police woman who approached him said she was doing it under section 44 of the Terrorism Act and that they had to take the details of anyone taking photographs. It wasn't until the end when he was being arrested that anti social behaviour was mentioned.
' and the way it was making some members of the public feel'
thirsaloon
27-Feb-10, 22:03
I got stopped by the police and was asked why I was taking a photograph from the precinct looking up Traill Street in Thurso a couple of years back, had to show the photographs as well! :eek:
Anyone else been stopped locally?
northener
27-Feb-10, 22:06
Yup, got dragged out of the wimmins toilets in Wick and had me Polaroid confisticated.
Fascist peeegs.:(
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.