Glad I'm not American!

Erm, only seen the first half of that so far, but seems he isn't making life easy for himself. The cops obviously have concerns and afaik have a right to ask him what he is doing. It is gonna get the cops backs up if you keep butting in with how they should be doing their jobs. Let them talk and then respond and life would be much easier.

Also, when was the last time any of us recorded ourselves whilst out taking photos, my initial reaction was that he was out there looking for a confrontation.
 
he was totally there to get this reaction, fair enough the cop is a little ott but that is his job, if the guy initially said what he was doing then he would not have had a problem.

I for one would rather anyone who could be doing something illegal etc was investigated.

If that guy had done something and the police officer hadn't done his job he would loose his job to say the least.
 
The cop was calm, fair and polite....tough crap for the guy being awkward with him. (though maybe that was because there was a camera in his face ;))
 
:agree: I've got to agree that the Guy appears like he just wants to provoke a negative reaction from the cops who were only doing their job.
 
Dogfish_magnet said:
:agree: I've got to agree that the Guy appears like he just wants to provoke a negative reaction from the cops who were only doing their job.
Click to expand...

Since when has the police's job been to hassle people who are obeying the law?
 
robmiller said:
Since when has the police's job been to hassle people who are obeying the law?
Click to expand...

Wasn't that the point the police officer was trying to make, he was trying to check if an offence had been committed?

.. and another +1 for me, the guy was just trying to provoke a reaction, his answers almost seem scripted (or well practised) just to get the reaction he did.
 
Would "yes officer, I'm a hobbyist/professional photographer and I though that this particular viewpoint would make a great photo in black & white. I trust that's no problem?" really have hurt him? :shrug:
 
robmiller said:
Since when has the police's job been to hassle people who are obeying the law?
Click to expand...

Were you watching a different video to me :thinking: The cop asks a question and gets attitude from the Guy, perhaps if he had answered the question as politely as it was asked he would have saved himself further questions......but then he would not have had some video to post on you tube.......it was also lucky he just happened to have that video camera switched on and recording at just the moment he took the photo in front of the cop that just happened to be there..........

Even better he could have gone to the cop first and explained that he was going to take a photo .....
 
I think the whole thing could have gone smoother if both parties kept their cool and didn't get an attitude with each other. However the photographer was correct, the officer had no reason to stop and detain him simply because he had a camera.

All suspicion arose from the officer seeing this guy shooting with a camera, in a public place, where photography is permitted. That's like stopping people with cars because the terrorists must have used cars to check out potential targets..
 
Dogfish_magnet said:
Were you watching a different video to me :thinking: The cop asks a question and gets attitude from the Guy, perhaps if he had answered the question as politely as it was asked he would have saved himself further questions......but then he would not have had some video to post on you tube.......it was also lucky he just happened to have that video camera switched on and recording at just the moment he took the photo in front of the cop that just happened to be there..........

Even better he could have gone to the cop first and explained that he was going to take a photo .....
Click to expand...

The cop leaps to an absolutely ridiculous conclusion (selling photos to Al-Qaeda? What the hell?) and the idea that you should have to walk on eggshells not to offend a policeman in order not to be arrested for nothing is a pretty terrifying one, sorry.
 
Nick T said:
Would "yes officer, I'm a hobbyist/professional photographer and I though that this particular viewpoint would make a great photo in black & white. I trust that's no problem?" really have hurt him? :shrug:
Click to expand...

Absolutely... what a prat. It's that type of video / approach that gives photographers a bad name; could not watch it past first few minutes... too boring.
 
Indeed, it was a ridiculous conclusion the Police officer draws, but surely there is no need to walk on 'eggshells' as you put, just be normal and polite. The difference here is the photographer was deliberality confrontational just to get his five minutes of fame on a Youtube video.
 
gingerweasel said:
I think the whole thing could have gone smoother if both parties kept their cool and didn't get an attitude with each other. However the photographer was correct, the officer had no reason to stop and detain him simply because he had a camera.

All suspicion arose from the officer seeing this guy shooting with a camera, in a public place, where photography is permitted. That's like stopping people with cars because the terrorists must have used cars to check out potential targets..
Click to expand...

A well thought out and extremely level response there Ginge. :thumbs:

Both the cop and the potential - insert big yawn here - 'Al Qaeda' henchman were clearly feeding each others frustration.

I'd like to slap both of them in the head with a large and rather dead halibut. :|

Oh, and as for 'I'm glad I'm not in America' - it doesn't matter, whatever erosions occur in the states will eventually come to the UK.
 
There are two sides to this story
The photographer was not doing any thing wrong but was ready as he was filming it so guessed something might happen. BUT he has done nothing wrong.
The Cop was over stepping the mark and quoted wrong info re the law and is very wrong for this, and was out of order in the way he was making it up as he went along, the pauses tells it all ‘what can I say next’ was what he was thinking…
I have to agree that unless we can take photos as photographers have in the past where will the history be for our children and their children with no photos of public life?
 
Hawker said:
Indeed, it was a ridiculous conclusion the Police officer draws, but surely there is no need to walk on 'eggshells' as you put, just be normal and polite. The difference here is the photographer was deliberality confrontational just to get his five minutes of fame on a Youtube video.
Click to expand...

I would always be polite to a policeman—out of self interest if anything—but it's pretty disturbing that it's become accepted that the power relationship is such that you need to massage a police officer's ego in order to stop him abusing his power against you.
 
Ive been stopped twice under section 44 of the AT act. It really is no big deal, it can be a minute of polite conversation or you can turn it into a big drama and make it hard for yourself.
I guess it just depends on how smart you are.
 
Bloke is clearly out for a reaction but the cop is out of line too, and seems like a bit of a paranoid jobsworth.

The whole thing should have been over in 30 seconds when the cop asked why the bloke was taking photos, the bloke politely replied for his own pleasure and the cop accepted that.

One thing this does highlight is the dangerous rise in legislation in the name of "anti terrorism" that can quite easily be misused or misinterpreted to criminalise innocent citizens - for example the banning of taking pictures of the polis, or the "possession of information that may be useful to a terrorist".

Personally, I think heavy handed anti-terror legislation has done more to cripple the british people than the atrocities that gave rise to it in the first place.
 
I mean this in the most sincere way but if I was a terrorist I would not be stood in the middle of a subway with my camera while the police were around.
 
Jaffster said:
I mean this in the most sincere way but if I was a terrorist I would not be stood in the middle of a subway with my camera while the police were around.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. Let's say your a terrorist :eek: and you've been given the job of snapping pictures of a sensitive target area. :naughty:
Would you either execute the operation in the most subtle and inconspicuous manner possible, say take the image on the move with a compact camera etc, or would you stop, brandish a larger dslr and then take your time?
 
Jaffster said:
I mean this in the most sincere way but if I was a terrorist I would not be stood in the middle of a subway with my camera while the police were around.
Click to expand...
No you use covert camera like this guy was to video it :)
 
They both just needed to take a step back. nobody who isn't out looking for a confrontation in the first place would be wired up for sound with a video camera hidden on them. All he had to do was explain why he was here and not just try to get a rise out of the officer. I got stoped before for taking photos and because i was polite to him and explained why i was there we had a god chat and he even wanted to see some of my other pictures.
 
Just watched the video and IMHO the guy was behaving like a complete nob to the cop :cuckoo:
 
I love how many Americanisums are used in this thread. 'Glad I'm not American' - ha!
 
I think both of them made it worse.
They're both being numpties and creating a hiarachy for themselves.
The difference being, one person didn't break the law, the other possibly did? (I don't know, is bullying in that way, by a police officer illegal over there? More the "we'll give put your name on the hit list" thing)
I think that they're both paranoid - "you're selling images to Al Quaida" from one party and the other already had a video rolling ...erm, why did he have the video rolling?
 
Get your hands out of your pockets when I am talking to you..... :cuckoo:
 
There is a Muslim convert from Bristol sitting in a cell at this moment and one part of the evidence stacked against him was for taking pictures of "The Galleries" (shopping mall) in Bristol. When police raided his home they found the pictures (he was also captured on CCTV) he was experimenting with explosives and was in possession of a suicide vest.
He was white, ex public school boy........a bit weird if you know what I mean.:suspect:

I'm sure it is illegal to take pictures on the underground and I saw plenty of signs coming back through Heathrow saying no photography. Don't know if that's the rule over there.

My lads father-in-law is a city cop and I can tell you they get a rough ride over there and have to watch their backs all the time. Getting a bit like that over here, no respect for law and order and very little respect for anything else.
 
alpina said:
Get your hands out of your pockets when I am talking to you..... :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Initially I thought both were being as bad as each other - one knowing the law but looking for a reaction from an officer who clearly didn't (but should have)... but when I heard that I thought, 'that's when I personally would have went to the 'dark side!' Hands out your pockets... no, I don't think so somehow...
 
alpina said:
Get your hands out of your pockets when I am talking to you..... :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

err, surely that comes from a personal safety point of view of the police officer, just in case the person has a weapon (knife/firearm) in his pockets.
 
retired said:
There is a Muslim convert from Bristol sitting in a cell at this moment and one part of the evidence stacked against him was for taking pictures of "The Galleries" (shopping mall) in Bristol. When police raided his home they found the pictures (he was also captured on CCTV) he was experimenting with explosives and was in possession of a suicide vest.
He was white, ex public school boy........a bit weird if you know what I mean.:suspect:

I'm sure it is illegal to take pictures on the underground and I saw plenty of signs coming back through Heathrow saying no photography. Don't know if that's the rule over there.

My lads father-in-law is a city cop and I can tell you they get a rough ride over there and have to watch their backs all the time. Getting a bit like that over here, no respect for law and order and very little respect for anything else.
Click to expand...

You're right, over here we're not supposed to photograph metros, undergrounds, train stations and some shopping centres. I know that the Metro Centre you're not supposed to take photographs.
 
Lets face it, its a sad reality police are over protective after 9/11 and the london bombings and any normal photographer taking shots would just be polite and cooperative not like the pratt in the video.....why was he videoing it anyway...obviously to air on youtube.
If I was stopped I would cooperate with the policeman fully and show my images, even if he was a total **** and then take it up with his employers later
 
Hawker said:
err, surely that comes from a personal safety point of view of the police officer, just in case the person has a weapon (knife/firearm) in his pockets.
Click to expand...

Did it sound like that to you?:shrug: Would he not have worded it differently?

Along the lines of "Keep your hands where I can see them"
 
Jaffster said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY2cCPW3H7g

Seems that us Brits aren't the only people who are frowned upon from the Police for taking pictures (apologies if it's been posted, did a quick look but didn't see anything).

Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

i have been stopped in a shopping mall by security for photographing
i stopped!

at a recent national trust visit i asked why no photography and they said it was not allowed since they had a lot of burglaries and the policy was blanket for all properties..inside..
i could take pictures from the property though...through windows

its best and easiest to comply with rules..:)
 
From the metro transit authority website:
Photography Guidelines

Only permissible in public areas, proof of fare required in marked fare required areas (station platforms of all rail stations and the Metro Orange Line)
No commercial photography without prior authorization and consent from Metro
Hand held equipment only, no tripods are permitted
No photography inside moving trains for privacy and safety reasons
No flash photography, especially into oncoming transit vehicles (rail or bus)
Photography must not interfere with passenger safety or movement at any time

Although it seems they do allow photography in certain areas of the subway I feel i must side with the police on this one, as others have said the guy was just out to provoke a reaction and get another video for his website.
The officer was polite and calm and a bit of cooperation from the photographer was all that was needed to diffuse this situation. I have to say it does annoy me when people go out of their way to antagonise police and further damage the understanding that most photographers are trying to build with them. The majority of officers are very receptive to our arguments surrounding photography in public places and would rather see an amicable solution, People behaving like this does nothing to help the cause.
I agree that there has been a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to law but i think for the sake of security a little inconvenience is worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top