1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Defending our right to take photos in public, the Police on our side?

Discussion in 'News - Discussion' started by Spats, Jul 14, 2005.

  1. nanstallon

    nanstallon Well-Known Member

    There is definitely an anti-photography mentality about in this country; is it that we've become a very nervy, aggressive bunch? It used to be that people accepted they might get photographed; now I think you need to be pretty brave (or hard looking) to take photos in public places at all, let alone candid photography. At best you may get jeered at by drunken yobs; at worst it can get physical and the police would probably 'book' the photographer for 'behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace'.

    Not only the police like throwing their weight around; I've heard of people being ordered off railway stations for taking photos from the platform. I suppose these types have always been around - the ones who weren't prefects at school and need to make up for lost time! There just seem to be more of them these days.
     
  2. snapperlondon

    snapperlondon Well-Known Member

    I blame all those who have for the past 5 years said..."well if you've nothing to hide..."

    It is that kind of complaisency that has caused the problem!

    Most of us are law abiding citizens with nothing to hide, but the police still abuse their powers! Ask Mr Wolfgang and the many others who have been detained under terror laws, for example...yet the British public continues to allow the government a free rein! It's about time everyone woke-up and realised what is happening before it's too late!
     
  3. nanstallon

    nanstallon Well-Known Member

    I quite agree. The problem is that while the police etc are busy harassing harmless people, they are not doing the necessary work to prevent terrorist attacks.

    In Britain, there is a tendency to believe that making yet more new laws (either through Parliament, or just a security guard or policeman deciding its time to throw their weight around) and giving the appearance of getting tough and restricting people's freedom is an acceptable substitute for doing the actual hard work of enforcing the existing laws. Look at the total loss of control over who comes into the country and the way Britain happily doles out generous welfare benefits to extremists. In fact, this makes wonder what on earth it is about Western civilisation we are defending?
     
  4. snapperlondon

    snapperlondon Well-Known Member

    Exactly! New Labour is all about appearing to do the right thing, rather than actually doing it!

    I couldn't believe that after the London bombings, when all the London stations (including Waterloo) were swarming with police, that a terrorist suspect could simply leave the country on the Eurostar! "That can't be right", I said to my partner, "when we went to Paris on Eurostar in 1999 the security was really tight"...then I find out that there are no longer any customs officers at what is effectively a port, because the government wanted to save a bit of money!

    Great! After everything we've been told about hightened security, and within a week of a failed terrorist attack, anyone (including criminals and terrorists) can simply leave the country by train! Well done Mr Blair...I feel really safe now!
     
  5. nanstallon

    nanstallon Well-Known Member

    It wouldn't be quite so bad if criminals and terrorists could only go; but equally they can come in without let or hindrance.
     
  6. ermintrude

    ermintrude Hinkypuff

    Re: Defending our right to take photos in public, the Police on our si

    They were yesterday, I just came out of Goodge st tube and a man came pelting along behind me followed by another who was scraeming "GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR! GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR! GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR! GET DOWN ON THE FLOOR!" then pulled him down about three feet away from me, sirens came screaming up the other side of me and they detained him under the Terrorist Act, I have never been so scared he was going to blow up in front of me. But standing next to me was a japanese girl just taking pictures of it all on her digi compact.

    The look in his eyes was terrifying, and all I could think was whether it was another Jean Charles Menezes episode.
     
  7. snapperlondon

    snapperlondon Well-Known Member

    Re: Defending our right to take photos in public, the Police on our si

    Doubt he was a terrorist or the New Labour propaganda machine would have it splashed all over the media by now!

    Maybe he'd dared to shout "nonsense" at a government minister...that'll get you detained under anti-terrorist legislation! Or maybe he simply suggested that security men were being a bit harsh by roughing-up an old man, that one works too!
     
  8. Repton

    Repton Well-Known Member

    Do we actually have a right to defend?

    I know we all want the right - even feel it's inalienable - but not everyone likes being captured on someone else's camera - for many reasons. I don't think we, a shooters, should assume a right here - I wish we could.

    Over the right to shoot in places like buildings, arenas etc - yes I think we should have 100% rights to shoot any inanimate object.
     
  9. Tommy

    Tommy Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
    Photo by Done&rundleCams

    "What's that button do"?

    (Sorry, Jack. Couldn't resist :D)

    I was talking to a friend of mine the other day about this. She's French. She was telling me about the difficulties they have with photography. If there's anyone in your picture, so can't publish/sell it without their permission. If you take a photo of a building you can't publish/sell it without the owners permission. If you photograph an area of private land, your not supposed to publish/sell it without the landowners permission. God help you if you take a group shot on a lake with a mansion house in the background!
     
  10. miked

    miked Well-Known Member

    Here's a quote: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Now who said that?
    Benjamin Franklin - but don't mention this to George Bush or Tony Blair.
    MikeD
     
  11. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Yes, but he was a terrorist! ;)
     
  12. Stephenf

    Stephenf Well-Known Member

     
  13. Repton

    Repton Well-Known Member

    Now which end is the front?
     
  14. snapperlondon

    snapperlondon Well-Known Member

    So which end goes bang?
     
  15. Repton

    Repton Well-Known Member

    .and she's saying?????

     
  16. nanstallon

    nanstallon Well-Known Member

    Re: .and she's saying?????

    I suppose a country gets the government it deserves. That explains why Blair keeps winning.

    Anyway today's terrorist is tomorrow's statesman, with the British government as usual fawning and bowing and scraping; and no doubt stopping you from taking photos of him!
     
  17. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Morning Tommy,

    No worries mate :D..I am surprised how much mileage I have gotten from that
    picture and thanks for credit....although you could make it Jack Simpson :D

    :)

    Jack
     
  18. Tommy

    Tommy Well-Known Member

    I'll know next time. ;)

    So what-in-hell does Done&rundleCams mean anyway? Does it have anything to do with photovests?
     
  19. Repton

    Repton Well-Known Member

    Thank God /Allah/Vishnu/No God/other deities (gosh I'm inclusive!)

    I'm not the only one asking themselves that question. :cool:
     
  20. AlanW

    AlanW Well-Known Member

    Can't say I've noticed it up here in Scotland where I've been photographing around the streets of Edinburgh every weekend for the last 8 years or so without any trouble. It's just common sense to leave certain subjects alone - drunks being one of them - but then I tend to follow Elliot Erwitts motto and never use the camera to harm someone. . . althought I'm sure there are some married couples I've photograghed walking hand in hand along the street, which is fine except they might not actually be married to each other :eek:

    I suspect different forces have different ways of policing let alone dealing with photographers, certainly when the G8 was on here things tended to be under control until the Met showed up and wellied in, they certainly were on a much shorter fuse than Lothian & Borders!

    Alan.
     

Share This Page