Rant Why I hate the police (more photography woes)

[Krazeh]

And if you think that is OK for people to fuck about our police force just because it is there rights then fine but to me anyone do that is a waste of space plain and simple.

If she actively hunted out some police officers to fuck about then I'd kinda agree with you but I highly doubt that's what happened. If the police want to harass/fuck about people who are doing nothing more than using a camera in public then I have zero sympathy when they get the tables turned on them.

 

[Scouse]

Yep, she wasn't running around trying to find police to film. She was (by the looks of it) filming at a protest of some sort...


Edit: ... and even if she was, that's still not illegal.

 

[ECA]

It's about as logical as a policeman saying hey you, in the suit.
I don't like your jacket because it makes me uncomfortable, can you take it off?

"um no, I like it and it's perfectly legal".

Well under anti terror legislation you could be using that suit jacket to hide a bomb or gun, so I'm going to confiscate it.

it's just total fucking derp.

 

[rynnor]

I figure she was filming because the protestors were worried about police harassment.

Painting protestors as terrorists itcseems she was right to be worried.

 

[Tom]

So you all think if it is not illegal it is fine? You should show no consideration to other peoples feeling or respect there wishes because what you are doing is your right?

There's a difference between being a member of the public and being annoyed at some daft sod shoving a camera in your face, and being a police officer and attempting to use your position to bully others into submission.

Yes it can be annoying to have someone follow you around with a camera, but unless it's harassment, you just ignore them.

 

[Mey]

To be fair to you Big G I didn't think about that it'd probably be more reasonable to take the memory card, only ever seen it done to people filming (camera phone) / antagonising a situation with random pointless remarks about the officers.

 

[Scouse]

Really really fascinating article on the beeb about an artist who's eyes only see greyscale.

Give it a read and tell me waht you think (particularly Krazeh, Shagrat and soze) - well woth it - it does relate to this thread too, btw

 

[Shagrat]

That's interesting. Strange to think that someone experiences the same things as me but in greyscale, amazing piece of tech as well, he can "see" untraviolet!! awesome.

I think in all these incidents with the police the issue really does seem to be one of education. In a lot of instances the person with the camera knows the law better than the copper/pcso and instead of stepping back and getting a heads up from someone senior/techy they just plow in with im a copper, i know whats best and it all just goes to shit, ends up on youtube and makes the police force look like a bunch of arseholes.

unfortunate really as its an easy situation to avoid...

 

[Scouse]

The issue really does seem to be one of education

This I agree with completely.

The issue is a lack of it.

makes the police force look like a bunch of arseholes

It does. Because they are. A bunch of uneducated arseholes, bovver boys and thugs...

 

[ECA]

I'm 100% sure the relevant video is somewhere in this thread already, but the person doing the filming got a payout from the met for being cunts.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/19/police-payout-student-arrested-filming

 

[Tom]

"The case was due to be heard at the high court, but the Met recently settled with her solicitor Beth Handley, from Hickman and Rose, agreeing to pay the student a considerable sum. The force did not accept liability and refused to apologise."

How typical. "We've done nothing wrong and we won't apologise but if you go away we'll give you a load of taxpayer money".

 

[Scouse]

Good on the girl for having enough gumption to not lie down and take it and for doing something about it. And being sensible enough to keep videoing and find witnesses.

Shame on our cops. Fucking thugs.

 

[ECA]

To be fair, in a few of the videos in this thread, including that one - the offending douchebag is a PCSO - someone too dim to get recruited but with love of throwing authority around.

 

[rynnor]

It does. Because they are. A bunch of uneducated arseholes, bovver boys and thugs...

They exist to protect the government from the people.

As a secondary role they investigate emotive crimes to prevent the mob from rising up because the people might get a taste for it...

 

[rynnor]

Talking of heavy handed 'justice' the kid who played crabb in the harry potter films got 2 years today because he had previous.

His previous came about because the police grabbed him for taking pictures in london and found pictures of his marauana plant on his camera...

Without that he would have gotten community service - waste sending him away for that.

 

[Nate]

What was his current offence?

 

[Raven]

Being a rioting, thieving scumbag.

 

[Scouse]

Looks like Section 44 is dead in the water following the European Court of Human Rights ruling that it was unlawful (and the obvious public protests, videos like posted in this thread etc. etc.)


Anyone who has a pop at the ECHR is a being a bit of an ignorant and short-sighted twat IMO. Hopefully they'll see this as some of the good it does.

Be wary of our government wanting an opt-out - they simply (and obviously) want to legally be able to be more facist.

 

[ECA]

Scouse - wouldn't a UK written constitution afford us more protection than the ECHR? ( and specifically one more suited to us culturally )

I know more about the rights of someone subject to arrest in the US than I do about my rights if I'm arrested in the uk.....

 

[Scouse]

Nope. A written constitution would omit things we take for granted unless they were specified.

It's a real danger IMO. It could be written in such a way as to make it look like we've obtained the world in writing, whereas it actually takes it away from us.


Remember - the ECHR was set up after WWII (based on the The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950) to protect everyone from Nazis and Facism.

It was set up in a climate where even the politicians and the rich had had to face the horror of war - so they demanded the best protection for everyone (in the knowledge that only that sort of protection would be useful to them - you can't do protection defined by how rich you are) - and got it.

As war in Europe fades into distant memory the ruling classes have decided that us scrubbers are inconvenient and dirty little oiks who require more of the stick. The stick is effectively Facism. An almost inevitable consequence of our economic system.

They find it decidedly inconvenient to find that the law that was set up to protect everyone prevents them treading on us. So there's a campaign in the media (using extreme cases - like Abu Hamza) to trash the reputation of the ECHR.

More fool us when we believe it

 

[ECA]

As opposed to the current situation, where nobody has a clue and the police make shit up so people do whatever they want?

 

[Scouse]

Police will always make shit up. At least with the ECHR we have legal recourse when our police, government and legal system conspire to fuck us over.

Evidenced by the ECHR finding Section 44 to be illegal.

Section 44 was an obviously facist piece of legislation designed, by our government, to fuck the UK population over. It was widely being used as such. It no longer is.

I'd rather have Abu Hamza free than 100,000 people abused by our police, no?

 

[Chilly]

Well british law is set up so the default position for anything is legal until specifically legistated against (or decreed by the executive in the case of things like drug bandings). I quite like it that way and I quite like a vague set of principles that can be interpreted by an intelligent and experienced judge or set of judges for any particular situation. I think the small number of bullshit results the ECHR has produced are simply a cost of doing business. Our courts are exactly the same, most of the time things works out fine, but the occasional innocent goes to jail and the occasional murderer goes free. It's simply how any efficient and reasonable system has to work, you can't have 100%.

 

[ECA]

By the way, which fascist political party enacted section 44?

 

[Wazzerphuk]

It makes me piss myself picturing Scouse thinking of government meetings:

"Shall we introduce this legislature for the previously stated reasons? Or shall we do it because we're FACISTS and all we want to do is FUCK THE PEOPLE?"

It's fucking hilarious at times, but equally pathetic.

 

[Scouse]

I don't think like that at all. I think human nature is naturally facist and we need to guard against ourselves.

You could laugh at me, or you could look at the evidence of a law (Section44) how it was used (against the people) who enforced it (the police) who wrote it amidst opposition (the government, opposed by people who think like me) and what it was struck down by (the ECHR - which stands up for human rights, even if that human is a despicable piece of shit like Hamza).

It's not rocket science...

 

[ECA]

Or you know, if we had a written constitution with a bill o rights, that had a line in that said we couldn't be subject to unreasonable search and seizure it would have lasted less time than it takes to change ed milibands adult diapers.

 

[Scouse]

Define "unreasonable". Labour did when they introduced Section44. The law passed as "reasonable".

However, it wasn't reasonable. It was a stick used to beat the british public. And the ECHR struck it down.


A written constitution is a nightmare waiting to happen. We don't need it.

 

[DaGaffer]

Or you know, if we had a written constitution with a bill o rights, that had a line in that said we couldn't be subject to unreasonable search and seizure it would have lasted less time than it takes to change ed milibands adult diapers.

Living in a country with a constitution that gets in the way of pretty much everything that actually needs to be done, I'm not a fan. They always seem to come with a shitload of unintended consequences attached (like "the right to keep and bear arms" for instance).

 

[ECA]

That's more down to the system being corrupted by horrific campaign finance regulations than a constitution however. ( not sure where you live but directing that comment at the us ).

Also sidenote, not sure how the 2nd amendment is never crucified on the whole militia thing:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.