Here we go again

Argee
Posted 16/05/2010 - 15:41 Link
dougf8 wrote:
Ray, I refer to photography of course. Carrying a camera is not reasonable cause. I'm a bit unsure what you mean when you say I'm 181 years too late.
I was fairly sure that you were, hence the tounge-in-cheek question regarding the alternative. Your later post correctly confirmed that the basis of the current policing methods arrived in 1829. Before that, under the Frankpledge system, you were guilty of whatever the locally-elected bobby thought you were. I wouldn't be surprised if, on the second day of the new rules, Robert Peel's diary entry read "The job's not what it used to be," because that's been an almost daily cry for at least the last 40 years!

You're right, in general terms, regarding your point that a camera is not - in itself - a cause for suspicion. However, this suffers from individual interpretation, as we've seen so frequently of late. The problem is that you can't use a "blanket" policy regarding stop and search - either for or against - without further problems.

Since we've had the smoking ban in for some time now, why do we still need "No Smoking" notices up - it's understood, isn't it? Well, no - it can't be, otherwise they'd be removed. There's no other notices about "understood offences" that I can think of, but perhaps there should be, especially in the case of photography, due to the increase in problems.

I've yet to have a problem, so it's hard for me to be totally objective about it.

Ray
Z1, K10D, D-BG2 Grip, DA 1:3.5-5.6 18-55mm AL, DA 1:3.5-6.3 18-250mm ED AL(IF), AF540FGZ Flash, FA 1:1.7 50mm, DA 1:2.4 70mm Limited, Wireless Remote (Did I offend you? Click here).
George Lazarette
Posted 16/05/2010 - 15:46 Link
We have "No Smoking" signs because the law says we should, in perpetuity. It's another example of poor drafting by a government that believed that governance was about passing laws.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Argee
Posted 16/05/2010 - 15:53 Link
George Lazarette wrote:
We have "No Smoking" signs because the law says we should, in perpetuity.
I should have quoted The Smoke-free (Signs) Regulations 2007, but my point was a general one, trying to tease out the common-sense angle and relate it to the photographic issues mentioned.

Ray
Z1, K10D, D-BG2 Grip, DA 1:3.5-5.6 18-55mm AL, DA 1:3.5-6.3 18-250mm ED AL(IF), AF540FGZ Flash, FA 1:1.7 50mm, DA 1:2.4 70mm Limited, Wireless Remote (Did I offend you? Click here).
George Lazarette
Posted 16/05/2010 - 17:14 Link
Yes, I don't disagree with your general point. Dougf8 has also eloquently spoken of the increasing number of laws that threaten our liberty, and which often we are unaware of.

Somebody once said that in Britain, everything is permitted unless specifically forbidden, and in Germany everything is forbidden unless specifcally permitted.

We seem to be moving in the German direction.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.



Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo