Is it just my town?

when I was approached by a jobsworth from Golden Square who threatened me with having my camera confiscated by Cheshire Police and having images deleted
Click to expand...

The best plan when this is suggested is to take up their offer of calling the police or call them yourself.

Confiscating a camera would be illegal and even the police can only do it with either a court order or an arrest. Deleting images is destruction of property and would be illegal whoever did it.

If the photographs were taken as part of an illegal act (very unlikely) deleting them would also be the crime of destroying evidence.


Steve.
 
It's merely a power trip these security guys are on. As said in the comments, they wouldn't move on a bunch of paps if there was an even on there, but will confront a lone elderly man taking a few simple snaps. It is pathetic. I'd have called the cops myself if they put a hand near me, doesn't sound like they did touch him, but they were very wrong in their approach. They certainly would not have any right to confiscate nor delete anything.

This is why they're security and not cops. They seem to know F all about the law.
 
Cagey75 said:
It's merely a power trip these security guys are on. As said in the comments, they wouldn't move on a bunch of paps if there was an even on there, but will confront a lone elderly man taking a few simple snaps. It is pathetic. I'd have called the cops myself if they put a hand near me, doesn't sound like they did touch him, but they were very wrong in their approach. They certainly would not have any right to confiscate nor delete anything.

This is why they're security and not cops. They seem to know F all about the law.
Click to expand...

Er...less of the 54 year old "elderly man" in future please :D I'm going off this forum already!!
...just kidding - thanks for the input guys.
 
wa1 said:
Er...less of the 54 year old "elderly man" in future please :D I'm going off this forum already!!
Click to expand...

I thought you said it wasn't you? ;)
 
Southdowns said:
I thought you said it wasn't you? ;)
Click to expand...

Yes, but the chap in the article is quoted as being the same age, 54. Absolutely, blinkin' youngsters wet behind the ears having the cheek to call a 54 year old 'elderly' :razz:
 
Photodiva said:
Yes, but the chap in the article is quoted as being the same age, 54. Absolutely, blinkin' youngsters wet behind the ears having the cheek to call a 54 year old 'elderly' :razz:
Click to expand...

Ah yes, but no-one knew wa1 was 54 until now :)
 
I think I'm about 54 (I'd have to work it out) and I feel old!
 
wa1 said:
http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk...avy_handed_treatment_at_Golden_Square/?ref=mr
Click to expand...

OMG Another cry baby photographer

as for this?

As a keen photographer he had experiences of other shopping centres in Hull and Leeds where photographers are encouraged to take pictures of the building.
Click to expand...

every shopping center i have come accross do NOT allow photogrpahy.. I thought we where all aware of this?

getting a bit fed up of all these sob stories.. starting to get embarresing.. so a security guard got it wrong.. jeeze ...
 
Photodiva said:
Yes, but the chap in the article is quoted as being the same age, 54. Absolutely, blinkin' youngsters wet behind the ears having the cheek to call a 54 year old 'elderly' :razz:
Click to expand...

Quoted where exactly? The OP didn't mention his age at all ... by his response it seems it was his own story ...

And um OP, yeah, sorry about the elderly remark, I did scan my brain for other words ... I'm not exactly a teen at 37 here - my Dad is in his 60's and I don't call him elderly, apologies. ... ;) I was trying to add a bit of drama.

Kipax, you're so 'ard ... . Security guards get it wrong ALL the time. They're rarely trained near enough. I know some, personally - they admit the training they get is a doddle. They have zero clue about the law most times and tend to pick on people when they're bored. Simple as.

A guy was photographing a building ... do you want it to go on like this? When you have to call ahead to every location, asking permission to take a few snaps? The photos don't even seem worth any trouble, but that's just it, they're no harm to anyone! What have they got to hide?
 
Last edited:
Adding a bit of basic law around what people are allowed to do around a building, where they can photograph for example, would hardly extend the security guard training much or even notes for that particular job as the security is usually contracted out and is a key part of the role in the security of a building isn't it?

You wouldn't ever catch a police officer not knowing the in and outs of every law would you, oh hang on....
 
I carry a copy of the police guidelines on photography just in case. Touch wood I've never had to get them out yet.
 
SThornton said:
I carry a copy of the police guidelines on photography just in case. Touch wood I've never had to get them out yet.
Click to expand...

I also carry these guidelines- in actual fact mine are laminated to preserve them :lol:

Never had to use this document in anger, but I don't take photographs in shopping centres, If you do then you're just asking to be approached by a minimum wage security guard, who know it all and I personally can do without the conflict

Best advice, avoid these places, unless you're shopping :lol::lol:

Les :thumbs:
 
Lez325 said:
I also carry these guidelines- in actual fact mine are laminated to preserve them :lol:

Never had to use this document in anger,
Click to expand...

Do you actually think they would help?
I could pull out a laminated piece of paper containing a list of things I am allowed to do that I have just made up.
If someone showed you a self made printout would you actually take it seriously?
 
For all of those that are saying "in a shopping centre" its not, at least its not under cover like the rest of the centre, its outside of golden square shopping centre, i walk through there often and it never occurred to me that it was a part of golden square, it isn't obvious.

Also the fish market and the barley mow are a part of Warrington's heritage, i would imagine the people of Warrington wouldn't be happy to know that they couldn't take a photograph of a part of their towns history if they wanted to.

And to answer the original question, most people in Warrington have an attitude, so its no surprise that the security guards also have one.
 
SThornton said:
I carry a copy of the police guidelines on photography just in case. Touch wood I've never had to get them out yet.
Click to expand...

don't those relate to - in a public place - so irrelevant to on private land like a shopping centre anyway ?
 
big soft moose said:
don't those relate to - in a public place - so irrelevant to on private land like a shopping centre anyway ?
Click to expand...

They relate to police powers, which don't extend to confiscation except in specific cases, or ever to destruction of property. The point of carrying them is to inform people, including the police, what the powers are. So for example, if threatened with having the police confiscate your camera and delete your shots, you could show the guards that wasn't going to happen.

Whether or not that's the best way to handle it is another matter, but no, the guidelines are relevant no matter where the incident occurs.

Also, the police aren't interested in enforcing private contracts, which is the only basis on which the guards can stop you taking pictures. Even trespass, unless it's aggravated trespass, is a civil matter and nothing to do with the police.
 
Southdowns said:
Even trespass, unless it's aggravated trespass, is a civil matter and nothing to do with the police.
Click to expand...

TRue to an extent - but the police do frequently get called to assist landowners who have tresspassers who won't leave/desist

they can't charge you with trespass but they can remove you from the land/premises (and its pretty easy for tresspass to become agravated - by threatening behaviour for example )
 
True Pete, though I think refusing to leave does constitute aggravated trespass anyway doesn't it?
 
Not as such

Refusing to leave licenced premises (ie a pub, resteraunt etc) is a specific offence under the licencing act.

Elsewhere the operative legislation is S61 of the Criminal Justice and public order act which provides that the police can tell trespassers to leave (under certain circumstances - mainly revolving arround the landowner having already taken reasonable steps )

Refusing to leave could be an agravating act of itself - but not always , it largely depends on the manner in which the person refuses, and their intend while on the land.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top