I tried to take photos near the airport today.

[wack61]

Policing airports is nigh on impossible, they can stop a photographer easily enough because he/she has probably been stood there for 15 minutes thinking about it and setting up the gear.

Terrorists and protesters will just cut the wire and do whatever they're going to do, armed police are a token gesture to make the public feel safe, if a suicide bomber wanted to blow themselves up having someone with a machine gun 100m away won't stop them.

 

[fracster]

I suggest you look up the word "Patronising"!! You haven't a clue what a police state is, trust me we are nowhere near one here. A little co-operation with the police and less sarcastsic and flippant remarks will go a long way to help people get along. Then there are people who start getting sarky and start jumping up and down about their rights every time a police officer asks a question, which is their job by the way. They then start shouting about police states when anyone defends the police.

Damned well said Sir.

Some people who constantly mock and pour scorn on our police, really should go and work abroad for a while and deal with other police forces, you would be more appreciative when/if you came back.

 

[whiteflyer]

And of course make it easier to keep an eye on photographers, and ask anyone who is taking photographs from places other than the viewing area what they are up to.
Good security plan IMO.

You can see the whole airport from the viewing area, so no need to go anywhere else to get those terrorist related photos, but even when on the other side of the airport in Styal Park they just never seem to bother about photos being taken.

I think Manchester police just maybe a bit more enlighten as I've never heard of anyone having problems taking photos anywhere in Manchester.

 

[48thEagle]

As someone who regularly takes pictures of military aircraft, I have, on occasion, been visited by a member of the MOD police, and have to say, they have been among the most courteous, polite people I have ever dealt with.

They know who I am (car registration plates are so useful) and I respect the fact that they are there for a specific reason.

My hobby is military aviation photography, for me to do that, I need military aircraft, and the places I go to (Mildenhall and Lakenheath) don't ever give me problems, talking to an officer recently, their main concern at Lakenheath is people crossing the road from the Forest entrance, to get near the fence for photo's, other than that, it is a case of, they know where we are, they know why we are there.

They are a credit to their force, and I'd happily deal with them any day of the week.

 

[swanseamale47]

Maybe, maybe not. Wouldn't we rather the police did what we pay them for though?

Yes we would, but I don't pay the police to guard Bristol airport it's a business let them pay the police who guard them.
My 75 year old mother has had her door kicked in twice, no cops around then, maybe they were all at Bristol airport? Wayne

 

[Dangermouse]

Myself and Eileen visit our local airfield every waking hr we can, At first we had some funny looks but as the people have got to know us more, most of the pilots now come up to us and tell us when they will be flying in next so we can get some shots of them and as for security....I think we are it now lol

 

[Marc]

Yes we would, but I don't pay the police to guard Bristol airport it's a business let them pay the police who guard them.
My 75 year old mother has had her door kicked in twice, no cops around then, maybe they were all at Bristol airport? Wayne

I believe airports do pay for policing actually. It is awful that your mother has had her door kicked in, but I don't believe it's reasonable to expect a police presence on every street at every time. Armed Police are ever present at airports because they are a terrorist target.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Some people who constantly mock and pour scorn on our police, really should go and work abroad for a while and deal with other police forces, you would be more appreciative when/if you came back.

The way it is going is this country it wont be long before you cannot tell the difference.

 

[jeffrobjent]

I hope this thread didnt make me come across as one of those people with the '**** the police' attitude as that couldnt be further from the truth, I have plenty of friends in the force, I just wanted to share my experience.

 

[Marc]

The way it is going is this country it wont be long before you cannot tell the difference.

Not even close, but it's obvious you've made your mind up so I'll leave you to it.

I hope this thread didnt make me come across as one of those people with the '**** the police' attitude as that couldnt be further from the truth, I have plenty of friends in the force, I just wanted to share my experience.

Not really although I'd say your Blow up the Runway line was a bit of a silly thing to say.

 

[Gary.D]

Are you surprised? I mean, really?

lmao!

 

[fracster]

The way it is going is this country it wont be long before you cannot tell the difference.

Possibly thee most ridiculous post I have read on any forum for some considerable time.

Bravo, well done for disclosing your sheer ignorance and crass stupidity......

 

[BigLoada]

I have been in the same situation many times for being places I shouldn't. I think the best thing is just to be obliging, apologise for any inconvenience and move on. Its easy to go on about rights, but in the real world it often doesn't work like that, it usually gets their backs up more. They are only doing a job and I personally am glad they take stuff seriously, even if it means I miss a good shot.

 

[pxl8]

The fact of the matter is, police are there to do a job. If they didn't we'd all be on here complaining about how useless they were.

And part of that job is to consider if the person has a genuine reason to be there rather than treat everyone as suspicious. Innocent until proven guilty is something beaten out of most coppers at an early stage in my experience (loads of coppers on ex-wife's side of the family).

Yes, some have a problem, but the 99% majority are trying to do their job. If we are polite, courteous, and helpful, it would be a lot easier for them to do, and a lot less of an inconvenience for us.

Yeah, cos a terrorist wouldn't be polite, they'd be "Die capitalist pig" and all that

 

[Simmotino]

The point is, most police will do their job and be polite and contrite about it (that is how they are trained after all).

It's not until some jumped up photographer starts throwing attitude at them for doing said job that the 'harrassment' occurs.

As it is, we only ever get half the story, yet it is always the coppers' fault on here.

 

[pxl8]

True we've only got half the story but the half we do have describes the copper as suggestion terrorist/protest motives which was my point really. The "fault" is not considering innocent reasons in the first place and I would bet that most people who have dealt with the police for whatever reason have felt like they were under suspicion at the time.

I think part of the reason we hear of so many stories about coppers "at fault" has a lot to do with how someone, who is acting lawful and fully within their rights, is made to feel like they are in the wrong, powerless and almost bullied into submission.

I've not been stopped but if I were then the harder the copper pushed with bullying the harder I'd push back. If they were friendly and approachable I'd be the same.

 

[Marc]

True we've only got half the story but the half we do have describes the copper as suggestion terrorist/protest motives which was my point really. The "fault" is not considering innocent reasons in the first place and I would bet that most people who have dealt with the police for whatever reason have felt like they were under suspicion at the time.

I think part of the reason we hear of so many stories about coppers "at fault" has a lot to do with how someone, who is acting lawful and fully within their rights, is made to feel like they are in the wrong, powerless and almost bullied into submission.

I've not been stopped but if I were then the harder the copper pushed with bullying the harder I'd push back. If they were friendly and approachable I'd be the same.

Problem is, a lot of those who are "made to feel in the wrong" only do so because a police officer dares to ask them a question. Being overly defensive only exacerbates the issue and raises even more suspicion.

 

[Simmotino]

True we've only got half the story but the half we do have describes the copper as suggestion terrorist/protest motives which was my point really. The "fault" is not considering innocent reasons in the first place and I would bet that most people who have dealt with the police for whatever reason have felt like they were under suspicion at the time.

But that's just it. They may well have considered the innocent reasons, but they have a duty to also consider the less than innocent reasons, it's their job.

In explaining why they approached the OP, they would have explained that they had to consider the protestor/terrorist angle, which is the bit everyone jumps on.

 

[pxl8]

Problem is, a lot of those who are "made to feel in the wrong" only do so because a police officer dares to ask them a question. Being overly defensive only exacerbates the issue and raises even more suspicion.

But that's just it. They may well have considered the innocent reasons, but they have a duty to also consider the less than innocent reasons, it's their job.

Yes, the point I'm trying to make but one that's clearly being missed is how the coppers approach and ask. Instead of a stern "What are you doing?" why not a friendly "Good afternoon sir, I see you're taking photographs. Is it your hobby or are you a professional?"

Both will engage the "suspect" in conversation which is one of the main ways a copper will suss someone out but the latter won't leave a trail of disgruntled innocent members of the public ranting on the internet about unfair treatment, etc.

 

[Marc]

Yes, the point I'm trying to make but one that's clearly being missed is how the coppers approach and ask. Instead of a stern "What are you doing?" why not a friendly "Good afternoon sir, I see you're taking photographs. Is it your hobby or are you a professional?"

Both will engage the "suspect" in conversation which is one of the main ways a copper will suss someone out but the latter won't leave a trail of disgruntled innocent members of the public ranting on the internet about unfair treatment, etc.

Yes, I do get your point, but a lot of the time that part tends to get lost in the "victim's" translation. I agree it would be more helpful in the office did take that sort of approach but, like any human being, personalities play a part.

 

[Simmotino]

Yes, the point I'm trying to make but one that's clearly being missed is how the coppers approach and ask. Instead of a stern "What are you doing?" why not a friendly "Good afternoon sir, I see you're taking photographs. Is it your hobby or are you a professional?"

Both will engage the "suspect" in conversation which is one of the main ways a copper will suss someone out but the latter won't leave a trail of disgruntled innocent members of the public ranting on the internet about unfair treatment, etc.

I get what you are saying, honestly. My point is kind of connected with that in that we only get to hear about the part of the conversation that turns sour, and the question is why?

Nine times out of ten, I'll wager it's because the police officers' initial enquiry is met with a faceful of hostility and human rights garbage.

 

[seriousrikk]

Nine times out of ten, I'll wager it's because the police officers' initial enquiry is met with a faceful of hostility and human rights garbage.

Or... (Voice of experience... and exact transcript)

Photographer with camera on tripod, intenrltly doing what photographers do
Police Officer: What are you doing here
Tog: Um, *looks at camera* taking photos?
PO: I see that, what of?
Tog: *looks in direction camera points* That there bridge
PO: Why would you want to do that?
Tog *Shrugs* I like taking photos of bridges as night
PO: You can drop the attitude and answer the question (Yes, he really said that)
Tog: I did answer the question, photography is my hobby
PO: Oh, so you are a photographer then.

Now at this point I got lucky because I found the humour gene, and all went well. But stop here, you can clearly see the frustrating line of questions I was faced with.

My reply was: Well I thought this lot <Camera, bag, tripod, cable release etc> gave it away but it must be the fact that, apart from you two, I'm the only ***** here freezing his nads off on this riverbank when my sensible non-photographer wife is inside with a nice glass of wine.

Ended with a laugh and they moved on. But I was getting narked when he started asking silly and fairly obvious questions.

 

[Marc]

Or... (Voice of experience... and exact transcript)

Photographer with camera on tripod, intenrltly doing what photographers do
Police Officer: What are you doing here
Tog: Um, *looks at camera* taking photos?
PO: I see that, what of?
Tog: *looks in direction camera points* That there bridge
PO: Why would you want to do that?
Tog *Shrugs* I like taking photos of bridges as night
PO: You can drop the attitude and answer the question (Yes, he really said that)
Tog: I did answer the question, photography is my hobby
PO: Oh, so you are a photographer then.

Now at this point I got lucky because I found the humour gene, and all went well. But stop here, you can clearly see the frustrating line of questions I was faced with.

My reply was: Well I thought this lot <Camera, bag, tripod, cable release etc> gave it away but it must be the fact that, apart from you two, I'm the only ***** here freezing his nads off on this riverbank when my sensible non-photographer wife is inside with a nice glass of wine.

Ended with a laugh and they moved on. But I was getting narked when he started asking silly and fairly obvious questions.

But all that goes to prove that use of common sense wins. Like I said, even coppers have personality issues.

 

[Simmotino]

But I was getting narked when he started asking silly and fairly obvious questions.

Obvious to you, you knew what you were doing there. As you proved, a little civility goes a long way, and you were allowed to continue with what you were doing.

Proof, if it were needed, that the police are quite happy to allow innocent people who are willing to co-operate to get on with their lives.

 

[theMusicMan]

Personally I have had no issues with the police on the very few occasions I have been approached, they have always been friendly, polite and courteous, and I have always continued taking my shots. Many here are spot on... good manners and politeness goes a long long way.

However... isn't the other point here this: Simmotino states... "and you were allowed to continue with what you were doing" - when in fact, no permission was required, as the OP was doing nothing wrong and does not need the police (or anyones) permission to do what was a fully lawful act in the first place.

We don't need permission from the police to do what we are already allowed to do! It is all so unnecessary.

 

[Duncan.F]

Sorry I'm with the Police on this one. Taking photos around airports is going to raise attention and toggers need to be more prepared and more diplomatic! We do have all sorts of rights but they can change and vary according to circumstances. My advice if asked what you are doing by a Police Officer then respond politely and positively [with no wisecracks]. Show the pictures you are taking [and any others you have] offer ID. If that desn't work and you are told to move on, just move on.
If you think the Officer has behaved improperly then take his number and complain afterwards. Don't take the pi**, don't argue, don't get stroppy because you WILL come second! THe general ramp is ask, tell, warn, arrest!!
They are doing a difficult job, Officers in the front line don't always get it right but if they make the call.......

Dunc

 

[Marc]

Sorry I'm with the Police on this one. Taking photos around airports is going to raise attention and toggers need to be more prepared and more diplomatic! We do have all sorts of rights but they can change and vary according to circumstances. My advice if asked what you are doing by a Police Officer then respond politely and positively [with no wisecracks]. Show the pictures you are taking [and any others you have] offer ID. If that desn't work and you are told to move on, just move on.
If you think the Officer has behaved improperly then take his number and complain afterwards. Don't take the pi**, don't argue, don't get stroppy because you WILL come second! THe general ramp is ask, tell, warn, arrest!!
They are doing a difficult job, Officers in the front line don't always get it right but if they make the call.......

Dunc

A very well put post.

 

[dinorock]

i,m an ex soldier, and i lived oposite andover airfield for a few years ,no planes there its just a football field now but behind a fence so, i,m walking past trying to get a shot of a kestrel when, a car screeches to a halt and a police officer jumps out. and says what are you taking pictures of i point at said kestrel and he says not the brightest place to take photos , so i point again to my house which completely overlooks the field and tell him i can see the whole place from my bedroom window. i saw his point ,and he saw mine but we both agreed it wasnt a great idea, with a little after thought he was completely right. next point shortly after 9/ 11 a guy getting on a plane made a stupid remark about having a bomb in his luggage and got thrown off the flight , he didnt think he,d done any thing wrong:shrug:i always carry a spare memory card with me so i can show them some of the things i,m interested in get some nice comments so be nice to our police thiers is a difficult job that most of us would not like to do be polite, it,ll be ok

 

[Holden Caulfield]

polite, it,ll be ok

That.s what the Birmingham six thought:thumbsdown:

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Taking photos around airports is going to raise attention and toggers need to be more prepared and more diplomatic!

Sorry, why is using a camera around an airport liable to raise attention?

If I was a terrorist I was be more intrested in security shift patterns, levels of armed security and ingres and exit, all done with a note book and pencil

Bottom line is that you do not need a camera at all to carry out terrorist acivety.

Do you think the idiot who drove his jeep in to Glasgow airport used a camera ?

 

[Holden Caulfield]

police are quite happy to allow innocent people who are willing to co-operate to get on with their lives

Since when did the Police determine innocence and guilt?

I thought we had a juducial system based on trial by Jury for that type of thing

 

[Holden Caulfield]

We don't need permission from the police to do what we are already allowed to do! It is all so unnecessary

Bravo

 

[Eric Mc]

The general ramp is ask, tell, warn, arrest!!


Dunc

Unfortunately some officers seem incapable or unwilling to insert the word "listen" anywhere between those four!

 

[Marc]

That.s what the Birmingham six thought:thumbsdown:

A rather pathetic example. Something that happened over 30 years ago and has absolutely nothing to do with this scenario

Sorry, why is using a camera around an airport liable to raise attention?

If I was a terrorist I was be more intrested in security shift patterns, levels of armed security and ingres and exit, all done with a note book and pencil

Bottom line is that you do not need a camera at all to carry out terrorist acivety.

Do you think the idiot who drove his jeep in to Glasgow airport used a camera ?

If you see someone with a camera, how do you know what they're going to photograph until you ask them? And yes, the "idiot" who drove the jeep into Glasgow airport (Or at least someone involved in the planning) probably used a camera at some point.

No, you do not need a camera to carry out a terrorist attack, but they ARE used.

Since when did the Police determine innocence and guilt?

I thought we had a juducial system based on trial by Jury for that type of thing

They don't determine guilt, just suspicion or are you suggesting that the police are only allowed to question somebody where there's absolute proogf of guilt.

There will always be tension between the police and the general public as long as people react to being asked a question with MY RIGHTS! MY RIGHTS! POLICE STATE! The worst the police were guilty of in the OP's initial post was being a little impolite, but given the OP's wisecrack, I think even that was justified in this instance.

 

[pxl8]

If you see someone with a camera, how do you know what they're going to photograph until you ask them?

[snip]

They don't determine guilt, just suspicion or are you suggesting that the police are only allowed to question somebody where there's absolute proogf of guilt.

You've highlighted the heart of the problem right there. Having a camera is now considered suspicious all by itself. The met had that lovely poster telling us how cameras are suspicious items issued by Terrorist HQ along with the exploding vest and WMDs.

Granted that in the example for this thread there was reasonable cause given the location but that's not true of many other examples where just having a camera has triggered a response.

[YOUTUBE]RKl2sEN4yNM[/YOUTUBE]

Ok, it's a classic example of a PCSO on a power trip, thankfully not all are like that. But the impression I'm getting from this thread is that the police have a (diffifcult) job to do and we can make it easier buy co-operating with them and on the face of it that seems sensible. But at what point do we say enough is enough? Why should perfectly innocent people have to face questioning just because they have a camera in a public place and, as you said, "how do you know what they're going to photograph until you ask them?"

The result for most people being stopped and questioned/searched won't be to carry on taking pictures. They'll likely feel uncomfortable and/or given the feeling they should move along (as suggested above). It all adds up to a culture where photography in public is being treated as unacceptable because we're helping the coppers do their job?

 

[Marc]

The result for most people being stopped and questioned/searched won't be to carry on taking pictures. They'll likely feel uncomfortable and/or given the feeling they should move along (as suggested above). It all adds up to a culture where photography in public is being treated as unacceptable because we're helping the coppers do their job?

I don't think that's the case at all. It certainly doesn't project a culture where photography in public is being treated as unacceptable. If police in certain areas feel the need to ask a photographer what they are photographing then that shouldn't be a problem and, if everyone is courteous then there should be no reason for the photographer to feel they have to move along. BUT, if the photographer is immediately going to start getting arsey and ranting on about their rights, then they only have themselves to blame if things get heated IMHO.

I've seen that youtube example a number of times and it is a real pratt of a PCSO on a definite power trip. Very funny though!

 

[Maxam]

Point is that you still have the right to take photos if you are in a public area!
I agree the police have the right to come and ask what you are doing. And if they really want to they can stay with you whilst you take photos. But time and time again the police are moving on innocent photographers who (no offence) are not in the know of their rights and even some of those who are, get scared by two cops with guns.

I have taken many a photo at various airports and several times been asked what I was doing. Each time I explain I am a photographer and have the right to take photos of what I like. No crime has been committed. If it comes down to it, I have a website and plethora of information on "me" as a photographer built up over many years.

Of course it is possible to get permission from the airport if you write and ask permission first!

 

[Blue Moon 7]

That.s what the Birmingham six thought:thumbsdown:

That is a very poor analogy and in my opinion crackers.

We have had a number of threads on TP about similar incidents when the Police have moved people on for a variety of reasons (have a look at the recent one it was a decent discussion). As has already been stated there will always be tension between the Police and public because not all laws are popular. How many of us feel agrieved when stopped for speeding? I know I have done. Now, how many of us were actually speeding? I know I was! How many of us have thought "why didn't the Police do something" after a major incident. One of the problems is that we all would rather have preventative policing that stops incidents before they happen......But if we are the ones that are stopped we feel agrieved! Many crimes are prevented because the Police stop and question people.

I would rather the Police stop and ask me questions about what I am doing 100 times then have mass murder on our streets by any group.


Chris

 

[pxl8]

I don't think that's the case at all. It certainly doesn't project a culture where photography in public is being treated as unacceptable.

I should have worded that better as, thinking about it, it's more that people will feel awkward and uncomfortable about public photography. The ones that take the rights stance won't so much as those who do as they're told and go on their way with the feeling they've done something wrong. They'll tell their friends how they felt and think twice about taking their terrorist/data stealing/paedophile device out in public.

Let's face it, none of us want to be stopped and questioned every time we use a camera in public. We don't like the idea of passers by pointing and whispering as we're questioned by the police, it's a very effective deterrent.

 

[Marc]

I should have worded that better as, thinking about it, it's more that people will feel awkward and uncomfortable about public photography. The ones that take the rights stance won't so much as those who do as they're told and go on their way with the feeling they've done something wrong. They'll tell their friends how they felt and think twice about taking their terrorist/data stealing/paedophile device out in public.

Let's face it, none of us want to be stopped and questioned every time we use a camera in public. We don't like the idea of passers by pointing and whispering as we're questioned by the police, it's a very effective deterrent.

I use my camera in public and have never been stopped by the police, just a couple of times by security guards on allegedly private property and both of those whilst in the company of other TP reprobates! So I really don't think people are being stopped and questioned every time they use a camera in public. I certainly wouldn't feel like I'd done anything wrong if I was.

As far as the paedophile angle is concerened, that is something in the minds of those people who invest too much in the preachings of certain aspects of the media, *cough* Daily Mail *cough*!