Photography in public - are the days numbered?

Sparkles33

Sparkles33

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,226
Name
Nattelie
Edit My Images
Yes
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/06/law-to-stop-eveyone-everything

Interesting article that I stumbled upon.

So...how long is it going to be, until people are going to prison, for upto two years, for taking a photograph in a public place?
Apparently the sentence for breaking a new version of an ASBO will be upto 2 years. I can see a lot of police officers taking advantage of this, given the stories about photography in public, how long before there's an influx of "you're annoying me...you know what? You're nicked!" kind of stories. Agenda 21 much?
 
Is it just me or does that article cynically ramble nonsense more than it actually makes a point?

P.S. Where did the forum 'shrug' smiley go? I wanted one at the end of that last sentence and it's buggered off!
 
Wait and see ...
 
I photographed lots of people a couple of weeks ago as part of my LRPS panel. Some of that was inside a large private shopping centre where their security politely asked what I was doing, quick explanation and off they went happy - I carried on shooting

One of my sets of photos required reflections of passersby in a marble wall, how delighted was I when two people came along in high viz jackets which reflected nicely - yep, Police Officers. I got my shots, we exchanged a 'Hi' and they didn't stop walking

So how long before we can't take photos in public? Well - never is my considered thought :)

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
I photographed lots of people a couple of weeks ago as part of my LRPS panel. Some of that was inside a large private shopping centre where their security politely asked what I was doing, quick explanation and off they went happy - I carried on shooting

One of my sets of photos required reflections of passersby in a marble wall, how delighted was I when two people came along in high viz jackets which reflected nicely - yep, Police Officers. I got my shots, we exchanged a 'Hi' and they didn't stop walking

So how long before we can't take photos in public? Well - never is my considered thought :)

Dave
Click to expand...

Exactly this. :)
 
DG Phototraining said:
I photographed lots of people a couple of weeks ago as part of my LRPS panel. Some of that was inside a large private shopping centre where their security politely asked what I was doing, quick explanation and off they went happy - I carried on shooting

One of my sets of photos required reflections of passersby in a marble wall, how delighted was I when two people came along in high viz jackets which reflected nicely - yep, Police Officers. I got my shots, we exchanged a 'Hi' and they didn't stop walking

So how long before we can't take photos in public? Well - never is my considered thought :)

Dave
Click to expand...
Blunt Yorkshireman in talking common sense shock!
 
Uncle buck said:
It's the Guardian!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

My first thought too.

Some people will always feel threatened by what they can't control, and try to restrict the freedoms of others through their personal power. I'm very grateful that we have the liberty and laws protecting it that we do. A great grandfather of mine was arrested for preaching in the street in Bristol (you might feel that was justified if you hate street preachers) and received 6 weeks in jail as a result - things have changed considerable in a relatively short space of time.
 
If you don't like the Guardian stance try reading this.
A lower burden of proof and conduct “capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any person” rather than the definition used for ASBOs, which is conduct causing (or likely to cause) “harassment, alarm or distress” will mean a lot more being issued.
That's without abuse. Remember all the problems with the Anti-Terrorism legislation - it was even used against Landsbanki to get depositors money back!
 
DG Phototraining said:
I photographed lots of people a couple of weeks ago as part of my LRPS panel. Some of that was inside a large private shopping centre where their security politely asked what I was doing, quick explanation and off they went happy - I carried on shooting

One of my sets of photos required reflections of passersby in a marble wall, how delighted was I when two people came along in high viz jackets which reflected nicely - yep, Police Officers. I got my shots, we exchanged a 'Hi' and they didn't stop walking

So how long before we can't take photos in public? Well - never is my considered thought :)

Dave
Click to expand...
The voice of sanity :thumbs:
 
Uncle buck said:
Here is a candidate for abusing the "new law"
http://www.gloucestercitizen.co.uk/...investigated/story-20397472-detail/story.html

Click to expand...


Some of these guys don't deserve the description "officer".

It is actually quite worrying, so thanks for posting. No matter how carefully any new legislation is worded, there will always be some "officers" who will push the definition of nuisance or annoyance to include anything or anyone they don't like, including photographers. Could be described as the "I don't like your face, sonny" Act......
 
I am frequently annoyed by my buses and trains being late. It certainly causes me nuisance and significant inconvenience.

Will I be able to serve an ASBO+ on TfL and Southern Railways?

This seems like a very low bar for what may end up in someone spending time inside.
 
Last edited:
It's difficult for an officer to know the exact extent of every law, so they do over exert their authority on occasion, but to be told I was lucky that I didn't get knocked out would mean my very next visit would be to the local station to make a very serious complaint.
 
PistolPeteUK said:
It's difficult for an officer to know the exact extent of every law, so they do over exert their authority on occasion, but to be told I was lucky that I didn't get knocked out would mean my very next visit would be to the local station to make a very serious complaint.
Click to expand...

I think you may want the other thread. ;)
 
DG Phototraining said:
I photographed lots of people a couple of weeks ago as part of my LRPS panel. Some of that was inside a large private shopping centre where their security politely asked what I was doing, quick explanation and off they went happy - I carried on shooting

One of my sets of photos required reflections of passersby in a marble wall, how delighted was I when two people came along in high viz jackets which reflected nicely - yep, Police Officers. I got my shots, we exchanged a 'Hi' and they didn't stop walking

So how long before we can't take photos in public? Well - never is my considered thought :)

Dave
Click to expand...
Phil V said:
Blunt Yorkshireman in talking common sense shock!
Click to expand...
RaglanSurf said:
The voice of sanity (y)
Click to expand...

All well and good, but has nothing at all to do with a proposed new set of laws...
 
MagicMynx said:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/06/law-to-stop-eveyone-everything

Interesting article that I stumbled upon.

So...how long is it going to be, until people are going to prison, for upto two years, for taking a photograph in a public place?
Apparently the sentence for breaking a new version of an ASBO will be upto 2 years. I can see a lot of police officers taking advantage of this, given the stories about photography in public, how long before there's an influx of "you're annoying me...you know what? You're nicked!" kind of stories. Agenda 21 much?
Click to expand...

The point of ASBO was to bypass having to pass laws. So it's not illegal to beg, but you can be given an ASBO and then imprisoned for breaching it - 2 years for a legal activity. The new one just removes beyond reasonable doubt.

Another odd one the Tories are pushing is the draft Deregulation Bill, sec 51 allows a minister to repeal any law he sees fit without parliamentary oversight.
 
hollis_f said:
Apparently the Lords have thrown it out (probably no draconian enough for them).
Click to expand...

The complete opposite I would imagine, its the lords that have been preventing this and the previous government from enacting draconian legislation.
This is one of the reasons the government want it abolished, they have no control over it and cannot prevent it blocking bad legislation that they (the government of the day) want enacted, its also why this and the previous government have been flooding the lords with their own supporters.
To my mind its better to leave it to those who are there out of duty rather than those given peerages for brown nosing and supporting the political elite.

The legislation again is one thats open ended and left to the interpretation of those enforcing it, as such it could have been used for any purpose they wished that could be made to fit its criteria.

PS the sooner the masses realise the Orwellian nightmare started over 20 years ago, the better.
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
My first thought too.

Some people will always feel threatened by what they can't control, and try to restrict the freedoms of others through their personal power. I'm very grateful that we have the liberty and laws protecting it that we do. A great grandfather of mine was arrested for preaching in the street in Bristol (you might feel that was justified if you hate street preachers) and received 6 weeks in jail as a result - things have changed considerable in a relatively short space of time.
Click to expand...

But we must be careful they don't swing the other way,the freedom we enjoy today were not easily won,let not give them up so easily :(
 
That copper in the video was probably afraid that guy took pics of him slipping the rolex of the corpse :-)
 
Uncle buck said:
Here is a candidate for abusing the "new law"
Click to expand...

In a central asian former communist block state a few years ago I was stopped from taking pictures by an armed policeman but although he'd seen me taking shots he didn't insist that I delete them or make any attempt to take my camera, he just politely told me to stop. Seems that our police could teach the hated and feared cops of asia a few things.
 
Mr Bump said:
That copper in the video was probably afraid that guy took pics of him slipping the rolex of the corpse :)
Click to expand...

You don't know that and I bet you'd rather the copper didn't see your comment
 
daugirdas said:
You don't know that and I bet you'd rather the copper didn't see your comment
Click to expand...

Someone needs a humour transplant it would seem.
 
magicaxeman said:
The complete opposite I would imagine, its the lords that have been preventing this and the previous government from enacting draconian legislation.
This is one of the reasons the government want it abolished, they have no control over it and cannot prevent it blocking bad legislation that they (the government of the day) want enacted, its also why this and the previous government have been flooding the lords with their own supporters.
To my mind its better to leave it to those who are there out of duty rather than those given peerages for brown nosing and supporting the political elite.

The legislation again is one thats open ended and left to the interpretation of those enforcing it, as such it could have been used for any purpose they wished that could be made to fit its criteria.

PS the sooner the masses realise the Orwellian nightmare started over 20 years ago, the better.
Click to expand...

Indeed, this is why an unelected, in some cases hereditrary house of lords is a good thing. Make it all elected, and you just have another house of commons that reflects the political triumvirate mix of the day rubber stamping legislation.
 
PistolPeteUK said:
It's difficult for an officer to know the exact extent of every law, so they do over exert their authority on occasion.
Click to expand...

If they knew the exact extent of every law, they would be earning much more money working as lawyers.

A police officer has to use jusdgement and common sense and has the option of calling the station for guidance if he is unsure of something.


Steve.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Someone needs a humour transplant it would seem.
Click to expand...

Sadly, the comment referred to is meant to suggest that's how it really is, but made a little more acceptable by the possibility that it could be slightly funny. :(
 
magicaxeman said:
The complete opposite I would imagine, its the lords that have been preventing this and the previous government from enacting draconian legislation.
.
Click to expand...

i could be wrong , but i think you missed the sarcasm smiley .
 
Cagey75 said:
I don't get it?

He took photos of some cops walking by and they didn't beat him with truncheons ... how is this talking sense? it's more luck :D
Click to expand...
??
Have a look at my post again, I'm sure you're not talking about the same thing I was.
 
MagicMynx said:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/09/lords-reject-antisocial-asbo-ipna-bill

sleep soundly fellow togs, we can still "be annoying" by daring to take a photograph in public. :)
Click to expand...

The undemocratic chamber full of snobs and religious nut jobs that people are continually campaigning to reform once again stops our democratically elected government form passing badly thought out over zealous legislation. If only everyone would consider this when talking about a second fully elected self serving chamber!

Thread was pretty over dramatic though even if this law had been passed we would have been nowhere near the banning of photography in public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top