Photography Ban on Glasgow Subway?

Mile

Mile

Suspended / Banned
Messages
76
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
Some recent madness in the works that I see hasn't a thread (or perhaps haven't seen).

The story: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...otography-on-underground-set-for-outright-ban

Amateur Photographer (AP) can exclusively reveal that Glasgow Subway passengers will be told they must ‘not take photographs, or make video, audio or visual recordings on any part of the subway'.

The ban is contained in Section 12.1 of proposed byelaws drawn up by the system's operator, Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT).

The new rules add: ‘The only exception to byelaw 12.1 is if a passenger has the written permission of SPT in relation to the activity.

‘The passenger must be carrying the permission, show it to an officer on request, and comply with any conditions of that permission.'

The crackdown will apply to all parts of the underground system, including trains and areas owned by SPT, even above ground.

Transport bosses say the byelaws are designed to ‘make sure that travelling on the subway is easy, safe, secure and comfortable'.
Click to expand...

Those new laws: http://www.spt.co.uk/cms/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Proposed_Byelaws.pdf

The common sense: http://www.pictureoursubway.co.uk/

Anyone in Glasgow has until June 15th to voice their disapproval to SPT.

Once again, such a stupid rule that needs stomped out. (Or will they be turning off their CCTV should it come in so as not to break their own laws? ;) )
 
I expect they've given themselves written permission, so technically won't be in contravention of the regulation.
 
Again another stupid rule :(:razz: to them.

Are we turning into a police state :shrug:

I wonder who are theses little Hitlers are,who keep coming up with these idear
 
Last edited:
Mile said:
Once again, such a stupid rule that needs stomped out. (Or will they be turning off their CCTV should it come in so as not to break their own laws? ;) )
Click to expand...

Won't they have written permission for their own cameras?
 
to be honest its more of another daft article in AP - the subway is private land that the operator allows the public to use so they have a perfect right to make whatever byelaws they wish

don't like , don't use it - simples

A police state would imply the state taking away rights on public land (and indeed taking away rights on your own land) which isnt what is happening here.

Also AP arent 'exclusively revealling' anything - SPT have them on their website :cuckoo:
 
You would only have to ask the station staff and I am sure they would be quite happy for you to take what shots you want, as long as you didn't get in the way of the staff or travelling public (such as setting up tripods). Also no flash they affect the drivers and can look like they had been a problem with their trains collection shoes.

The same rules apply actually to the "big railway" on Network Rail stations such as Glasgow Central ETC you really need to ask permission before photographing any trains that are on the platforms, by signing in at the station managers office. Can't say I have ever had a problem taking shots on any mainline station around the country usually the staff are very friendly and under standing as long as you act within the rules.

Tim.
 
Yes, how dare they interfere with our rights to do what we like on their land....I am a little disappointed with AP, they haven't exclusively revealed that I have banned photography without permission in my front room.

Is it such a big deal? No, if you want to take photos, ask them, simples.
 
Last edited:
Bernie174 said:
Yes, how dare they interfere with our rights to do what we like on their land....I am a little disappointed with AP, they haven't exclusively revealed that I have banned photography without permission in my front room.

Is it such a big deal? No, if you want to take photos, ask them, simples.
Click to expand...

+1 lol
 
I don't think these sort of bans are really anything to do with erosions of right, more erosion of freedom.

Thirty years ago I took photos in all sorts of 'private' places - railway and bus stations, on trains and buses, in shopping centres and art galleries. It's quite possible that photography wasn't allowed in these places, but nobody bothered about it if it was.

What we have now is a change in culture where owners of these places are asserting their rights to prohibit photography, it seems usually for reasons of commerce or paranoia.

That, for me, is what the real problem is - an erosion of freedom and an increasingly restrictive society.
 
Last edited:
simonblue said:
Again another stupid rule :(:razz: to them.

Are we turning into a police state :shrug:

I wonder who are theses little Hitlers are,who keep coming up with these idear
Click to expand...

How is it a police state? It's a private landowner setting their own rules (which they are entitled to do). It's nothing to do with the police. Or the state.

Not that I agree with their policy, just saying...
 
I agree. The Glasgow subway is private property and the owners can ban/restrict photography if they want to. There's no erosion of a 'right' that never existed.

I'm more concerned about the proliferation of CCTV surveillance, and the state's real motives in wanting to capture and store details of internet activity, email and other forms of electronic communication.
 
I think we need to appreciate why we need permission prior to photographing places like railways station/underground station. Once you explain your reasons then more than likely permission will be granted. A lot of it is done for our safety.
 
simonblue said:
Are we turning into a police state :shrug:

I wonder who are theses little Hitlers are,who keep coming up with these idear
Click to expand...

Godwin bingo! I win!
 
Sorry i just feel this is another stupid rule against cameras :razz:

How much of a problem is it,( lot of it is done for our safety) rubbish,what about people not looking where their going on their moblie,people with headphone stuck in their ears etc.

It is private property,but wonder if they get any state funding ?
 
The new bye laws are in the consultation stage and objections can be lodged before 15 June.

Law in question:-
12.1 Passengers must not take photographs, or make video audio or visual recordings on any part of the
subway.
12.2 The only exception to byelaw 12.1 is if a passenger has the written permission of SPT in relation to the
activity. The passenger must be carrying the permission, show it to an officer on request, and comply
with any conditions of that permission.

Passenger means any person in the laws.

Permission is possible.
 
Bernie174 said:
Yes, how dare they interfere with our rights to do what we like on their land....I am a little disappointed with AP, they haven't exclusively revealed that I have banned photography without permission in my front room.

Is it such a big deal? No, if you want to take photos, ask them, simples.
Click to expand...

Bernie soon that will be the only place,you can take photos your own front room :D
 
simonblue said:
Bernie soon that will be the only place,you can take photos your own front room :D
Click to expand...

Sorry, talk about panicking!

I've never had a problem taking a photo. Anywhere.

Why are we worried about being stopped taking photos in some grimey underground?? There are plenty of other photo opportunities out there.
 
odd jim said:
Sorry, talk about panicking!

I've never had a problem taking a photo. Anywhere.

Why are we worried about being stopped taking photos in some grimey underground?? There are plenty of other photo opportunities out there.
Click to expand...

I dont know why,but i am kind like taking photos in grimey places,they kind of draw you in. :)
 
neil_g said:
not really anything new is it, doesnt the london underground have similar rules already?
Click to expand...

With a permit yes, without maybe:

Can I take photographs or film on the Tube?

As London Underground is private property, anybody wanting to film or take pictures on the Tube must seek prior permission from the London Underground Film Office and obtain a valid permit. There are different types of permits available and they start at £50.

We realise that on occasions our customers may wish to take an ad-hoc photograph whilst passing through a Tube station. Although this is acceptable, please be advised that this would be at the Tube station’s discretion providing additional camera equipment (including flash and tripods) are not used.

Full details of the requirements for filming in London Underground stations can be found online as well as a photographic gallery of all available locations.

https://custserv.tfl.gov.uk/icss_cs...000000000000006402&kbname=SDB&newTabtext=Tube
 
desantnik said:
Godwin bingo! I win!
Click to expand...

You missed the double pointer with the Joseph Goebbels comment, before it was deleted, though! :p :lol:


Scratch that - that particular gem was on the Olympic Torch thread!!
 
Last edited:
well its private underland :lol:

Photography has been banned on the underground for years, they don't stop tourists taking snaps and never will but they won't let you set up a tripod etc. I've seen a few photographers in the underground but they have an SPT employee with them.


big soft moose said:
to be honest its more of another daft article in AP - the subway is private land that the operator allows the public to use so they have a perfect right to make whatever byelaws they wish

don't like , don't use it - simples

A police state would imply the state taking away rights on public land (and indeed taking away rights on your own land) which isnt what is happening here.

Also AP arent 'exclusively revealling' anything - SPT have them on their website :cuckoo:
Click to expand...
 
I feel naughty after taking these :|

298601_2601448317061_1280424365_3090942_814375850_n.jpg


314306_2601049907101_1280424365_3090649_1800310901_n.jpg
 
People seem to forget that those in charge are responsible for safety. Someone who is there purely to take photographs is more likely to cause obstructions or accidents, therefore it makes sense to issue permits where they can let people know what they can/can't do and where they can/can't go. If they breach those rules, they can be asked to leave. Quite frankly, cmments about Police states and 'hitlers' are ridiculous and pretty typical of those who, when they read something that says they can't do something, immediately jump up and down screaming about erosion of rights without even considering why the rules are there.

As for cctv, do people think it's there because someone enjoys watching people get on and off trains?
 
Gronk08 said:
You would only have to ask the station staff and I am sure they would be quite happy for you to take what shots you want, as long as you didn't get in the way of the staff or travelling public (such as setting up tripods).
Click to expand...

Probably not.

SPT Proposal said:
12 Filming and recording

12.1 Passengers must not take photographs, or make video audio or visual recordings on any part of the subway.

12.2 The only exception to byelaw 12.1 is if a passenger has the written permission of SPT in relation to the activity. The passenger must be carrying the permission, show it to an officer on request, and comply with any conditions of that permission.
Click to expand...

[emphasis added]

which probably means writing to them in advance.
 
odd jim said:
How is it a police state? It's a private landowner setting their own rules (which they are entitled to do). It's nothing to do with the police. Or the state.
Click to expand...

Well the State has delegated them powers to create by-laws under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2005. They're proposing a fine of up to £1000 for breach of the proposed bylaw, enforceable in the courts.

Recourse to such state-backed sanction is not a right that most private landowners enjoy.
 
Musicman said:
Well the State has delegated them powers to create by-laws under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2005. They're proposing a fine of up to £1000 for breach of the proposed bylaw, enforceable in the courts.

Recourse to such state-backed sanction is not a right that most private landowners enjoy.
Click to expand...

Railways are one of only a few places in Scotland that have enforceable trespass laws attached to them. This is nothing new
 
fabs said:
People seem to forget that those in charge are responsible for safety. Someone who is there purely to take photographs is more likely to cause obstructions or accidents, therefore it makes sense to issue permits where they can let people know what they can/can't do and where they can/can't go. If they breach those rules, they can be asked to leave. Quite frankly, cmments about Police states and 'hitlers' are ridiculous and pretty typical of those who, when they read something that says they can't do something, immediately jump up and down screaming about erosion of rights without even considering why the rules are there.

As for cctv, do people think it's there because someone enjoys watching people get on and off trains?
Click to expand...

And people on mobiles,or using their I-pad,or walking around with their I-pods,with headphone in their ears,taking no notice of when they going are not a safety risk ?
A lot of pertty bylaws just tend to **** people off,and don't add to any safety issues.
It's seem to me,that this is just part of the trend,let have a go at photographers, they must be such a public nuisance :(
As for people,being ridiculous about worrying about rights,are all ways put down,hasn't not history taught as anything :(
 
simonblue said:
As for people,being ridiculous about worrying about rights,are all ways put down,hasn't not history taught as anything :(
Click to expand...

you seem to be labouring under the impression that a right is being eroded here. As you do not have a right to take photos on private land anyway that isnt the case.

photography on private property is by permmision of the owner only , and the owner has a perfect right to withdraw that permission
 
big soft moose said:
you seem to be labouring under the impression that a right is being eroded here. As you do not have a right to take photos on private land anyway that isnt the case.

photography on private property is by permmision of the owner only , and the owner has a perfect right to withdraw that permission
Click to expand...

A lot of are railway systems,we're build with public money and still receive some state funding.
 
thats as may be , but they are operated by private companies and are therefore considered private land in the eyes of the law.

If you wanted to protest that as an 'erosion of rights' then the time to do that would have been during the mass privatisations in the 80s

However even that misses a key point that not everything which is funded by the state is public land - ministry of defence land being a classic case, but also school grounds, hospitals, police stations etc - there are loads of places that are owned by the government or its various agencys but do not qualify as 'public land'
 
private land and they are interested in the privacy of their customers.
the same reason you can't take proper photos in a shopping centre.
snaps of your kids...why not but of all the signs and etc, well I've had to and expected to ask permission. it was always allowed for professional purposes
 
fabs said:
People seem to forget that those in charge are responsible for safety. Someone who is there purely to take photographs is more likely to cause obstructions or accidents, therefore it makes sense to issue permits where they can let people know what they can/can't do and where they can/can't go. If they breach those rules, they can be asked to leave. Quite frankly, cmments about Police states and 'hitlers' are ridiculous and pretty typical of those who, when they read something that says they can't do something, immediately jump up and down screaming about erosion of rights without even considering why the rules are there.

As for cctv, do people think it's there because someone enjoys watching people get on and off trains?
Click to expand...

Agreed - need to see how it pans out in practice. Some of the platforms in Glw underground are very narrow and it could be that photographers are being controlled to ensure certain conditions are met such as no tripods. Similarly there could also be a ban on the use of flash. I cannot see there being a blanket ban.
 
big soft moose said:
If you wanted to protest that as an 'erosion of rights' then the time to do that would have been during the mass privatisations in the 80s
Click to expand...

I did.
 
Musicman said:
I did.
Click to expand...

Did it help ? :shake:

also you've missed the point that even prior to privitisation British Rail land wasnt public land per se in the context of 'photographers rights' (obviously it was owned by the govt/tax payer , but that didnt confer the right to go where you like on it and take photos wherever you wated)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top