photography is not a crime


Oso

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 13:41
If anyone thinks that England is a police state, they should visit the 3rd world and emerging countries, then they will know what a police state is like.
If you can find this book, written by an English man "Once a Jolly Hangman" read it and if you can contact the writer, ask him what a police state is like.
Its plain common sense, if for some reason you are stopped, co-operate and you'll find that you will part with smiles on both sides.
I have lived in England for 8 years and I have the greatest respect and admiration for the ordinary Bobby

Oso
Last Edited by Oso on 19/07/2012 - 13:41

ChrisA

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 14:06
Oso wrote:
If anyone thinks that England is a police state, they should visit the 3rd world and emerging countries, then they will know what a police state is like.
If you can find this book, written by an English man "Once a Jolly Hangman" read it and if you can contact the writer, ask him what a police state is like.
Its plain common sense, if for some reason you are stopped, co-operate and you'll find that you will part with smiles on both sides.
I have lived in England for 8 years and I have the greatest respect and admiration for the ordinary Bobby

Oso

I don't think anyone *really* thinks that we live in a police state.

However, freedoms are being eroded, a little at a time, and it's not a good thing.

It's not the ordinary bobby that's the problem, incidentally. It's the minority of nasty ones that get the rest a bad name.

Also, it takes two people at least to cooperate. 'Doing what they tell you' is not the same thing.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.

gartmore

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 15:03
OldTaffy wrote:
Most of us, if put in this situation, have two options: have a calm open discussion, or make a scene/issue of it.

I found myself in such a situation a few weeks ago. I have been photographing 'street furniture' of various sorts - a London cabbie has a very good web-site: Bollards of London and I sometimes send him photos of interest from other places. I noticed some unusual looking ones outside the entrance to the local Crown Court, and squatted down with my K-x to photograph them, when immediately a security guard came rushing out, waving his hands and telling me to stop taking photographs (I have a good image of one of his hands ).

I politely explained what I was interested in. He calmed down, thought it rather amusing, and explained that the 'bollards' were really ashtrays on posts because no smoking was allowed inside the Court. We had an amiable chat for a minute or two, and he merely wanted to be sure that I was not going to photograph anyone visible inside, through the plate glass doors. Fair enough. I then took a few photos of the 'bollards' making sure that I chose a viewpoint that showed no person inside. End of hassle.

I was always outside the building, on the ordinary street pavement, and could have made a big fuss about my rights etc etc. It was just easier not to do so. Was I being compliant with a police state? Well, that must be your opinion not mine.

Martin

I dont know what the situation is in England but in Scotland quite a large and, if you dont work for the press you may not know, that quite a large area outside courts can be part of their precincts. Taking photos or filming in them can get you into serious trouble with Contempt of Court etc.
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -

dougf8

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 15:47
I'm all for public freedom to photograph in public but you have to be an olive short of a picnic to expect not to be challenged outside a court, or barracks, air bases etc etc
Lurking is shirking.!

paulgee20

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 16:05
Extract from Court Photography Regulations: -

It is a criminal offence to take a photograph in law court, and an additional offence to publish any photo taken in a court. The penalty is a fine of up to a maximum of £1.000. This restriction extends beyond the court room itself to anywhere in the building and to “the precincts of the court” i.e. the surrounding area. The extent of “the precincts of the court” is not defined anywhere and the authorities often turn a blind eye to photography outside the court building.

Tribunals of Inquiry are not covered by the prohibition on taking photographs in court, and it is up to the individual tribunal to decide whether it will allow photographs of the proceedings.
K5's (2)both gripped, K10d gripped, Pentax 28-90 f3.5, Sigma 18-250mm, Sigma 150-500mm. Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro, Sigma 10-20 f.4-5.6.EX DC, Hoya 135 f2.8, Take on 28mm f2.8 Pentax AF360 flash, 2 fill in slaves. 30 metre remote release, Rt angle viewfinder, Giotto NOT 3261B Tripod with Manfrotto 808Rd4 ball head, Manfroto 4861RC2 monopoly, shoulder stock, various filters etc, Panasonic SET HBS HD Video cam, Tamrac Explorer 8x backpack and a sore back.....
-------------------------------------------------------
Photography is an index for measuring futility and pride.......

Paul

:wink
http://s743.photobucket.com/home/pg20_photos/index http://www.flickr.com/photos/pg20

greynolds999

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 16:12
I suppose the way I feel about it is that it doesn't help when photographers get angry and annoyed and say "there is no law against me doing this" because it doesn't help the cause.

There is no law saying I cannot push to the front of a bus queue or leave a door to slam in someone's face. I don't do it because it isn't polite or civilised.

The problem today is people have become too obsessed with their "rights" and forgotten about courtesy and consideration.

Yes, there are many cases where security guards and the police goo too far. But has nobody here ever over-reacted?
My Photobucket

Frankie

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 18:19
ChrisA,
Thanks for posting the link to the newspaper article. I got my answer from a bystander "I was only metres away from this man when he was arrested and the police acted incredibly professionally and instead of co-operating he kicks off why??? ".
Photographers do need to have the general public on side, if they want to maintain their rights to photograph whatever, whenever.
K5 + 18-135mm kit lens

Don

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 19:06
Frankie wrote:
ChrisA,
Thanks for posting the link to the newspaper article. I got my answer from a bystander "I was only metres away from this man when he was arrested and the police acted incredibly professionally and instead of co-operating he kicks off why??? ".
Photographers do need to have the general public on side, if they want to maintain their rights to photograph whatever, whenever.

the general public likely won't care about photographers rights until they are in Rodney King's position..... by then it may too late... anybody near by with a camera will likely be too afraid of the authorities to bother pulling out the camera..
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Last Edited by Don on 19/07/2012 - 19:07

judderman62

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 19:20
Quote:
]I haven't watched i[/b]t. I refuse to give such people more hits on YouTube.

I feel people like that go out of their way to paint the police in a bad light and protest too much.

In which case you are in no position whatsoever to comment
- -
Mike

Pentax K5 / Pentax K5 11/ Pentax K200D / Canon Rebel T1 i / Canon 650D / Pentax MX-1 / Fuji XF1 /Fuji X 10 / Canon EOS-M / Canon G10/ Pentax Mz-7 x 2

Frogherder

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 19:41
There are a few important aspects to remember :-

1- Rights are earned, or have been earned (by the British at least) over centuries.
2- In Britain we have the right to do anything that is not specifically banned. I understand that in many parts of the world the exact opposite is true.
3- The 'bedfellow' of 'rights' is 'reponsibility'.
4- Respect for others is another bedrock of our society. This applies to public and police alike.


Without siding with either protagonists in this incident it is apparent that at least one of the above is missing.


regards
Bernard

dougf8

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 19:46
1a (fought and died for and should not be given up easily)
Lurking is shirking.!

InFESTation

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 20:22
Without seeing the lead up it is only half the story, the only thing I thought after watching that was what a tool, shame whatever charges were dropped.

As far as going about G4S, how they are still in operation is another rant altogether.
Pint o' rough & a game o' darts anyone

Don

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 20:31
I disagree with the assumption that the guy being a jerk is in the wrong... the most fundamental of Human rights in ANY democracy, is the right to free from unwarranted stops and searches and arrests for law abiding citizens. You're free to exercise your right to be a jerk.... arresting a person for being a jerk about an unlawful stop and search makes the person in authority, who INSTIGATED the encounter in the wrong... and it is wrongheaded of any to think there is cause here to take a way a persons civil liberties... this thread in definitely showing some wrong headed thinking..
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Last Edited by Don on 19/07/2012 - 20:37

greynolds999

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 20:50
It's not the point that he was being an idiot which is the problem. It's that after he was arrested (which is when the film begins) he is holding something in his hand which could be a detonator, laser, etc and refuses to let the police see it.

And you don't have the right to act like an idiot in certain situations. You have a responsibility to act like a reasonable member of society if you want reasonable treatment.

I find it equally baffling that so many people assume the police are in the wrong with no evidence whatsoever.
My Photobucket

Don

Link Posted 19/07/2012 - 20:55
greynolds999 wrote:
It's not the point that he was being an idiot which is the problem. It's that after he was arrested (which is when the film begins) he is holding something in his hand which could be a detonator, laser, etc and refuses to let the police see it.

And you don't have the right to act like an idiot in certain situations. You have a responsibility to act like a reasonable member of society if you want reasonable treatment.

I find it equally baffling that so many people assume the police are in the wrong with no evidence whatsoever.

I consider an innocent person being arrested for refusing to consent to an illegal search, after a false accusation to be evidence the cops were 100% wrong and abused their authority. Probable cause is needed. Had somebody phoned in a bomb threat minutes before they approached this guy, I'd be 100% on the side of the police.
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Last Edited by Don on 19/07/2012 - 20:56
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.