Rant Why I hate the police (more photography woes)

[old.user4556]

You have to see this.

Photographer films his own 'anti-terror' arrest | UK news | The Guardian

Despite the met chief publically announcing that it's not against the law to take photos in public places, despite Home Office publications and circulations to police departments, despite massive amounts of negative press for the police, depsite the increasing erosion of freedom and civil liberties; the fucking useless two braincell police force are still routinely stopping and arresting photographers for .... nothing. The beauty is that said photographers know the law and know their rights, so now the police just make things up to facilitate an arrest.

How can these twats continue to get away with this? What the fuck is next?!

"You're acting suspiciously with that notepad and pen"
"You're acting suspiciously with that laptop"
"You're acting suspiciously with nothing"

So the police can just fabricate something from nothing and arrest you? When I saw the above video clip, I was absolutely gobsmacked; I couldn't believe it. The country is a diabolical disgrace and is grossly incompetent right to the very top of the government. Some killers and rapists walk free, photographers are getting arrested for being innocent.

The UK is a toilet.

You've also got this one:

'You're filming for fun? I don't believe you' | UK news | guardian.co.uk

 

[Tom]

They arrested him for refusing to give his details when the officer told him he suspected him of committing an offence—so it isn't a wrongful arrest, but in truth he was arrested because he argued with those officers.

Taking photographs in a public place, unless you're getting in people's faces, or shooting up skirts, is not in any sense anti-social behaviour.

I hope he makes a formal complaint, I would, and I'd have done exactly what he did in those circumstances.

 

[rynnor]

'You're filming for fun? I don't believe you' | UK news | guardian.co.uk

Shit - this ones by my office - I have seen the police hassling people there before tbh.

Its very close to Paddington Green Maximum security Police Station that handles all the terrorists so they are probably a bit hyper.

The Policeman in that one is just being an arsehole tbh.

 

[ECA]

Best part about this: The two ***** in the video? PCSOs.

 

[mooSe_]

I fail to see how camera positioning can be considered 'anti-social'

 

[old.user4556]

That's why it's absolutely absurd and complete beggars belief.

 

[Ch3tan]

Idiots, I hope the officers involved and the sergeant lose their jobs for incompetence and lies.

To be honest we need flash mobs of photographers turning up near police stations just to see how they handle it.

 

[old.user4556]

Free plug for:

I'm a Photographer, not a Terrorist

and the Facebook group:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Im-a-Photographer-Not-a-Terrorist/128534046017

 

[Chilly]

he was saying all the same shit that the armchair lawyers who are getting loans revoked and pretending they are not subject to the government as long as they write their name differently.

He was OBVIOUSLY going on a fishing trip to get busted. He knew more of the applicable law than the officers involved, probably another journo.

did you hear the bit about "someone on the street complained" ? Same old shit, half the story yet willing to dish out judgement.

 

[old.user4556]

Chilly, you have to know your rights and stick by them; what other choices have you got? As a photographer myself, you know you're immediately villified when you whip a camera out. It's not a case of going out on a fishing trip to get busted, it's a case of being on high alert / the defensive.

It gets back down to the simple fact that taking photos in a public place, is not an offence nor is it breaking the law. The Police are misusing and abusing their powers against Joe Average and professional photographers.

It looks like he was holding a Leica in the video, not the sort of camera you blow a fortune on for a petty wind up of old bill.

 

[DaGaffer]

he was saying all the same shit that the armchair lawyers who are getting loans revoked and pretending they are not subject to the government as long as they write their name differently.

He was OBVIOUSLY going on a fishing trip to get busted. He knew more of the applicable law than the officers involved, probably another journo.

did you hear the bit about "someone on the street complained" ? Same old shit, half the story yet willing to dish out judgement.

Sorry but so what? That's exactly what a good journalist should be doing. The second clip with the Italian girl, that little PSCO fucker was twisting everything the girl said. Particularly ironic was the bit about "we're suspicious because its an iconic building". We'll maybe that's why people take photos of it dumbass.

 

[old.user4556]

Here is a how a journalist does it, notice the clear difference in public "knowing rights" stance of my first post and journalist testing the system:

Video: A few photographs add up to a minor terror alert | UK news | guardian.co.uk

I love the utterly fucked up "you can photograph the top, but not the bottom" nonsense. Fucking brainless morons.

 

[Raven]

Those who voted Labour should fucking die.


Who else brought in these wanker "laws"?

 

[Bugz]

Raven this is about police officers misusing a terrorist act.

What has people voting for labour got to do with it?

Seriously - shut the fuck up with your stupid labour-hating comments. It is sooooo annoying.

 

[Ch3tan]

Just as many people rant about tories on these forums Bugz, it's a law that was bought in under a Labour government, under a Labour home Secretary. It's been misused under Labour guidelines.

 

[Raven]

Raven this is about police officers misusing a terrorist act.

What has people voting for labour got to do with it?

Seriously - shut the fuck up with your stupid labour-hating comments. It is sooooo annoying.

Misusing a law which is so ambiguous that it is pleading to be misused? Riiight ok.

Shitty vague law + fail at everything so join the police force cock knockers = waste of public money/dick head shit kickers on a power trip.

 

[Bugz]

How do we know tories wouldn't have done the same? IIRC, they would have done the same - just made it more aware to police officers the exceptional circumstances in which it can only be used.

Besides, it's a law that has valid intentions for the safety etc. The fact it is being misused says more about the lack of education some police officers have in that field than the fact 'all people voting labour should die.

I've noticed the tory-bashers too. It's part of living in the england! But Raven's obsession with bashing labour appears in every thread!

 

[Ch3tan]

Good tbh, it reflects the mood of most people I know with any political opinion.

 

[Raven]

It has fuck all to do with safety, its all about control. If you are stupid enough to allow them to tell you what to do (even when you are breaking no moral laws) then you should be treated as such, a muppet. Whats the point in freedom when you are not free.

The government are using all sorts of stupid reasons to control us and people are to fucking stupid to see it.

 

[Bugz]

I seriously don't think the grass will be that much greener on the other side.

We only have to look at Obama/Bush for that feeling.

Besides, someone on this forum summed up the politican stance in Britain perfectly a couple of months back. Whilst there use to be a lot of divergence between policies of labour/tories - now they seem to occupy the same fields but nitpick the in particulars.

 

[Ch3tan]

Yes there is not much difference, but to continue to let Labour stay in power is a mistake, they are too comfortable and stopped listening to anyone but them selves long ago. Change in politics is good.

 

[Mey]

Actually bugs in the video posted (the newest one) they weren't even using the Anti-terror laws so pipe down. They are using laws brought in that require people to provide their name and address if they are "involved" in anti-social behaviour.

The actual power they were using is section 50 of the Police Reform Act. Granted the use of the terminology "anti-social" is relatively loose, you can't really make a judgement without seeing the manner in which they were behaving prior to being stopped by the officers.

"s. 50 Persons acting in an anti-social manner
(1) If a constable in uniform has reason to believe that a person has been acting, or
is acting, in an anti-social manner (within the meaning of section 1 of the Crime and
Disorder Act 1998 (c. 37) (anti-social behaviour orders)), he may require that person
to give his name and address to the constable.
(2) Any person who -
(a) fails to give his name and address when required to do so under subsection
(1), or
(b) gives a false or inaccurate name or address in response to a requirement
under that subsection,
is guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not
exceeding level 3 on the standard scale."

Alternatively they could of just waited untill the guys got in the car and then stopped the car and required him to show them his driving licence and insurance documents, thus getting the details they wanted. But once you start going down that route it becomes very dodgy ground.

 

[SilverHood]

Hah, these guys didn't play ball and the police bullied them. Here in the US, they sue the police force, the city, the state and the government. It only takes a handful of payouts for the cops to get the message.

 

[Embattle]

Funny how the only cases you tend to see are the bad ones.

 

[nath]

Funny how the only cases you tend to see are the bad ones.

As opposed to what, the successful catches or the times when photographers take pictures of landmarks with police nearby and don't get harassed?

If it's the latter, well it's obvious. The news doesn't report the thousands of Toyota's that brake properly when required but it's pretty relevant to know that a fair few don't.

As to successful catches with these laws, I'd be *very* interested to see what terrorists have been apprehended with the use of the "why are you taking photos here buddy?" law.

 

[Embattle]

Naturally I'm referring to the latter and the willingness of certain members of this forum to keep trying to hang their own flag to other flags to increase the weight of their argument.

 

[Chilly]

I'm more annoyed that a PCSO is actually allowed to demand anything of me. An unpaid, partially trained pseudo-cop is not something I want running around with a warrant card.

 

[Ch3tan]

Naturally I'm referring to the latter and the willingness of certain members of this forum to keep trying to hang their own flag to other flags to increase the weight of their argument.

So it's okay for police to go round harassing members of the public because of poor training? The stop and search laws in this country are ridiculous, and the police have not been trained properly. The more incidents like this, the better chance someone will wake up and take some responsibility.

And if anyone thinks action like this stops terrorism.... well, good luck in life!

 

[Jupitus]

The laws, whether vague or not, are being either misinterpreted or abused by the police frequently enough for it to have come into the public eye.

The government, that's Labour Bugz, are in power and therefore have a responsibility to the public to either clarify the law or prevent the abuse. They aren't doing so hence labour = assholes.

 

[Embattle]

So it's okay for police to go round harassing members of the public because of poor training? The stop and search laws in this country are ridiculous, and the police have not been trained properly. The more incidents like this, the better chance someone will wake up and take some responsibility.

And if anyone thinks action like this stops terrorism.... well, good luck in life!

Well since you have made the assumption that I think it is perfectly fine for police to do this, perhaps make an assumption about you and that you believe all police do this sort of thing.