NO TRIPODS - LONDON

fabs said:
FACT: Terrorists have used cameras to stake out potential targets

FACT: Not once have terrorists used anything bigger than a compact camera and certainly never a tripod.
Click to expand...

The first is plausible, the second is doubtful.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jun/05/news.terrorism

From earlier in the year says none of the larger recent attacks used photography but then why should then when all the images they need are online already?

It's even possible to get good information about what CCTV cameras see through an access request under the DPA and it won't cost more than a tenner.
 
pxl8 said:
The first is plausible, the second is doubtful.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jun/05/news.terrorism

From earlier in the year says none of the larger recent attacks used photography but then why should then when all the images they need are online already?

It's even possible to get good information about what CCTV cameras see through an access request under the DPA and it won't cost more than a tenner.
Click to expand...

Why is the second doubtful? :shrug:
 
I'm not 100% sure on this but I believe parts of london are illegal to photograph for any purposes other than tourist shots without prior written permission. That certainly covers trafalgar square although i'm not sure where else. (That prior written permission comes at a cost of £500 per hour btw!) So I guess there they do have a "legitamate" reason for cracking down on "professional" looking equipment.

http://www.london.gov.uk/trafalgarsquare/manage/guidelines_filming.jsp
 
Finn said:
I'm not 100% sure on this but I believe parts of london are illegal to photograph for any purposes other than tourist shots without prior written permission. That certainly covers trafalgar square although i'm not sure where else. (That prior written permission comes at a cost of £500 per hour btw!) So I guess there they do have a "legitamate" reason for cracking down on "professional" looking equipment.

http://www.london.gov.uk/trafalgarsquare/manage/guidelines_filming.jsp
Click to expand...

The only permanent restrictions are Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square.

There are also restrictions on all defense establishments, Crown owned factories, dockyards, mines, ships and aircraft, anywhere that stores munitions (surely these are all defense establishments :thinking:), any telecommunications office owned by a public telecommunications operator and all buildings owned by the Civil Aviation Authority.

Finall there's flexible restrictions which can be enforced by an order of the Secretary of State which can cover any Crown owned property (that is not covered above) and any railway, road, waterway and anywhere used for gas, electric or water works - I've yet to discover how you know what temporarily prohibited or how long the prohibitions can last :bang: not much good prohibiting the photography of a building if no-one knows its restricted, or for how long!
 
fabs said:
Why is the second doubtful? :shrug:
Click to expand...

On what basis do you claim as fact that terrorists have never used anything other than compact cameras. Sorry but I'd give that as much credability as a claim that terrorists never sneeze on a wednesday.
 
pxl8 said:
On what basis do you claim as fact that terrorists have never used anything other than compact cameras. Sorry but I'd give that as much credability as a claim that terrorists never sneeze on a wednesday.
Click to expand...

As already said, I can't say but it IS fact and you'll just have to trust me on it.;)
 
You could tell me, but then you'd have to kill me?

:lol:

Sorry, not convinced one bit.
 
pxl8 said:
You could tell me, but then you'd have to kill me?

:lol:

Sorry, not convinced one bit.
Click to expand...

Something like that. Do you really think that terrorists use DSLRs and tripods? Do you really think they would make themselves that obvious? So why are you so doubtful that my statement was true? (and I promise you that it is!)
 
So all dSLR users are terrorists and obvious?
there are thousands of people taking photos of major London landmarks everyday with SLRs - they fit right in!
 
You cant claim the negative only the positive. Only if you went and personally asked every terrorist if they had ever used an SLR and knew they werent lying could you possibly make such a claim. No member of the IRA, ETA, or any others? Its not just Al Qaeda.
 
fabs said:
As already said, I can't say but it IS fact and you'll just have to trust me on it.;)
Click to expand...

Can't you tell us why you can't tell us :)
 
fabs said:
Something like that. Do you really think that terrorists use DSLRs and tripods? Do you really think they would make themselves that obvious? So why are you so doubtful that my statement was true? (and I promise you that it is!)
Click to expand...

So the Security Services, etc. know the history of every print, negative, jpg, photocopy, etc. that's ever been seized? Someone has been pulling your chain mate.
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
So all dSLR users are terrorists and obvious?
there are thousands of people taking photos of major London landmarks everyday with SLRs - they fit right in!
Click to expand...

Er, they wouldn't want to draw attention to themselves.

Finn said:
You cant claim the negative only the positive. Only if you went and personally asked every terrorist if they had ever used an SLR and knew they werent lying could you possibly make such a claim. No member of the IRA, ETA, or any others? Its not just Al Qaeda.
Click to expand...

pxl8 said:
So the Security Services, etc. know the history of every print, negative, jpg, photocopy, etc. that's ever been seized? Someone has been pulling your chain mate.
Click to expand...

I was referring to specific cases, ie there are no recorded cases. No-one's been pulling my chain, I didn't hear this down the pub you know. I'm beginning to regret posting it now, if I'd said "I bet terrorists haven't used DSLRs and tripods, you probably would have believed me. I only posted it in response to a specific post anyway! Sheesh!!!:bonk:
 
fabs said:
I was referring to specific cases, ie there are no recorded cases. No-one's been pulling my chain, I didn't hear this down the pub you know. I'm beginning to regret posting it now, if I'd said "I bet terrorists haven't used DSLRs and tripods, you probably would have believed me. I only posted it in response to a specific post anyway! Sheesh!!!:bonk:
Click to expand...

Well you claimed a proven fact, which is indisputable. Not a "that we know of".
 
So on the basis that you don't know of any recorded cases of a terrorist using a SLR you are confident they never have and never will?

That's some interesting logic you're using there :thumbs:

We've got a guy called Ges staying with us at the moment, he's the only person I know called Ges therefore anyone called Ges must live at my house.
 
null hypothesis testing?

My stats lecturers would be so proud of me, maybe I should be doing my stats work instead of sitting here reading this?
 
pxl8 said:
So on the basis that you don't know of any recorded cases of a terrorist using a SLR you are confident they never have and never will?

That's some interesting logic you're using there :thumbs:

We've got a guy called Ges staying with us at the moment, he's the only person I know called Ges therefore anyone called Ges must live at my house.
Click to expand...

At what point did I ever say that terrorists never will use DSLRs???

My point was why were DSLR/Tripod users being singled out as security risks when the only recorded use of cameras in terrorist attacks were done using compact cameras/mobile phones.
 
fabs said:
My point was why were DSLR/Tripod users being singled out as security risks when the only recorded use of cameras in terrorist attacks were done using compact cameras/mobile phones.
Click to expand...

Yay better wording! ;)

I would hazard a guess to say "because they need to be seen to do something and there would be too much of a public outcry if they stopped average joe taking a picture with his camera phone"
 
pxl8 said:
I didn't have any recorded cases of you saying that they ever would :razz: :D
Click to expand...

Oh FFS!!! I've never known such a pedantic bunch! OK, here's a news report:

"Osama Bin Laden has just been spotted outside the Houses of Parliament with a D3 and 600mm f4. He approached a police officer to ask where the nearest Jessops was and whether they sell Rocket Propelled Grenades (Nikon fit!)"

:razz: :razz: :lol:
 
Originally Posted by fabs
As already said, I can't say but it IS fact and you'll just have to trust me on it.

tel48 said:
Can't you tell us why you can't tell us :)
Click to expand...

Please :D
 
So are all Range Rover owners being harrassed and questioned under the terrorism act because one was used in Glasgow? ;)

Those who use the terrorism act to harrass photographers with DSLRs are doing so out of fear, misunderstanding, and a lack of common sense. They are NOT responding to a possible documented or credible threat.

They might aswell say 'Well, a terrorist might have a bomb hidden in their leather jacket...so all those with leather jackets become potential terrorists"...it just plain silly.
 
What use are photos of public buildings to terrorists anyway? :thinking: and if they are of some use? why don't they just get the shots off the internet? :shrug:
 
Marcel said:
So are all Range Rover owners being harrassed and questioned under the terrorism act because one was used in Glasgow? ;)

Those who use the terrorism act to harrass photographers with DSLRs are doing so out of fear, misunderstanding, and a lack of common sense. They are NOT responding to a possible documented or credible threat.

They might aswell say 'Well, a terrorist might have a bomb hidden in their leather jacket...so all those with leather jackets become potential terrorists"...it just plain silly.
Click to expand...

There's you answer then. Put EVERYONE in jail......................except me! :D
 
Really, really hope you hear back, great story. Keep us informed.
 
Someone/We should create a list of hot-spot areas where the police try and stop you (in london, and the UK).

I live round the corner from the U.S. embassy, and you can't take photos in the surrounding area (a park, a few streets NOT IN EYESHOT of the embassy). I simply walk home if an officer stops me for taking photos, he has the right to follow me, but nothing else (though I have been stop and searched once!) once by my gates I was asked about taking photos (RIGHT OUTSIDE MY HOME!), I just go past, not letting the police officer in, asking if he has a warrant.-He says "no", -I say "well i'm not letting you in". He asks what my flat number is, I say, "im not telling you" and walk away to my stairwell. hehe

surprisingly, one of the areas where you can get away with taking photos of pretty much anything is around parliament! so many tourists means that they don't care.

anyway, back to the original point. I think a "hotspot" list/map would be usefull. I go around london at least once a week taking photos, and would be happy to contribute if others would find it usefull/help out...!
 
I got similar at Greenwich by the Maritime museum. Tripod on the ground and camera attached and security guard says "can't do that without permission". Camera in my hand and it's OK.

In their eyes tripod seems to be the benchmark between tourists and commercial photographers.

So I went to the admin office in the museum and tried to get a permit. Impossibble!

By contrast I visited Athens last month. Took my tripod everywhere and snapped away.

BTW - I have had the same tripod issue on the South Bank, by the GLA too.

This whole thing is madness!
 
steveophoto said:
I got similar at Greenwich by the Maritime museum. Tripod on the ground and camera attached and security guard says "can't do that without permission". Camera in my hand and it's OK.

In their eyes tripod seems to be the benchmark between tourists and commercial photographers.

So I went to the admin office in the museum and tried to get a permit. Impossibble!

By contrast I visited Athens last month. Took my tripod everywhere and snapped away.

BTW - I have had the same tripod issue on the South Bank, by the GLA too.

This whole thing is madness!
Click to expand...



Apparently its a health and saftey issue mostly. Who knows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top