This is NOT a police van

CT said:
Streep mate, youi really have to read that bit of legislation and interpret it properly.

From your original post...

Police right to stop in Scotland...

A police officer can stop and question you in the street or a park or other outside place if s/he suspects you of committing an offence OR believes that you have witnessed a possible offence.

'An offence' means theft, assault or any number of specific offences. If that element is not present, then none of the rest of the quoted legislation applies, and you have no obligations to comply with.
Click to expand...

I think the policeman in the OP did justify his reasons, where I'm not clear is just how much leeway he has in regard to using the anti terror laws and I'm not entirely sure his stated reasons really were valid. But that's no reason not to comply when all the guy wants is your details, nothing else. It might be a different story if he'd said you can't take photos of the police van or the army but he didn't. As I said earlier I understand that 4hero might have been a bit shaken and later annoyed about it, I've never been stopped like that and hopefully never will but I might feel the same.

I think the police have a hard enough job to do without us jumping on them for not being polite, so I'm what saying is lets keep our brickbats for the ones who really deserve it.
 
sepulchre said:
could do with a Scottish version, just to be on the safe side.
Click to expand...

I don't think there are many chanegs to this for scottish laws, maily they are in relation to trespassing and private ground.

I think the fundimentals of taking pictures in public and private places will be the same.

I just think its funny how they don't stop the tourists with there DSLR's taking pictures. I got told off for taking pictures of the forth rail bridge. I had my tripod out and the DSLR and I was questioned by a copper as to why I was taking pics, but yet no more than 6 feet away from me was an Italian bus load of tourists with DSLR's all snapping at the bridge. LOL

so to be safe... get a bus, and a crap load of you



Mike
 
I wouldn't have handed over details unless they could provide me with the legislation that said I had to.

Regardless, the greedy little pigs image is ace!!
 
All a terrorist needs is google earth, just look here ,top centre left http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=new+inn&sll=51.69698,-2.971373&sspn=0.07033,0.159302&ie=UTF8&ll=51.696821,-2.934723&spn=0.035165,0.079651&t=h&z=14
this used to be a fuzzy area on gm but now I'm sure most of you can work out what goes on here. Although you can not normally go inside and these may not be the usual targets of a terrorist it does make me smile when we hear stories like the op's.

There are also 2 prisons and a reservoir within the aerial view .
 
hepburn said:
You could always try the tack of asking them for their details first and a number you can call to verify they are actually a genuine police officer - and then insist the operations centre call the officer to verify it is actually them on duty. I personally never give out my details to anyone, including police, without verifying they are genuine first. If they object then just walk away (anyone remember the police advice to vulnerable motorists if they are too scared to stop for a police car - don't stop, drive to the nearest police station instead)...

Don't forget there's been many a case of bogus officials and it's not an unreasonable request given ID theft risks etc... And of course the reversed process may just be enough to tilt them towards thinking it's too much trouble to bother with, providing it's done with tact and politeness etc.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised nobody has commented on this. I think it's a great idea. Would it work?
 
You can ask to see their warrant card if you are stopped.
 
And asking for their details and a number for the control room is foolproof?

/edit If you are not sure about wether a card is genuine you can always phone the station and check, find the number yourself if you don't trust the policeman.
 
Steep said:
And asking for their details and a number for the control room is foolproof?

/edit If you are not sure about wether a card is genuine you can always phone the station and check, find the number yourself if you don't trust the policeman.
Click to expand...

Nothing is foolproof. My point was merely to put them through the same process they are subjecting you to. They then may see the irony and back off, having learnt a lesson, or comply and expect you to do so - which you should.

I would expect a conversation to go something like this:

Police: Excuse me sir, can I ask what you're doing?
Me: Taking photographs of xyz
Police: Would you give us your details, just so we can check you out?
Me: No problem at all officer, but I will need to verify you before I give you my personal details. Can I have your name, number, and station you are based at please. (dial 118118 and ask for station number).
Police (choice 1.) Yes sir, those details are xyz
Police (choice 2.) No sir, I will not give you that info.
Me (choice 1.) My details are xyz, how can I help you?
Me (choice 2.) In that case I am not willing to assist you. Walk away...

Result 1. Police get their info but learn that not all the public will tolerate unwarrented intrusion without questioning it. Maybe learn to think before stopping.

Result 2. You get on with your business and leave them to bother someone else, or you get arrested, sue, go buy some new gear with the compensation!

Personally, I have an excellent raport with our local PCSO and have been commended by him for my sensible attitude. Damn shame really as I really need some new lenses! ;)
 
Ths Stop & Search in Scotland, this may help in clarifying some of the rights of the copper in Scots Law Clicky Here Does'nt mean they know the difference between a photographer and a terrorist though.
 
Excuse me for dropping in a bit late in to this party. I have followed this thread, and many like it in other forums.

I may be indifferent about giving my details to the police than what is “normal” here for the following reasons: -

1- I am from Saudi Arabia and have to give my details a lot of times as it seems a lot of countries are now weary of people from my country.
2- I see nothing wrong with handing an officer my personal details – presuming I practice common sense in assessing that the person is a real officer. This is especially since I am more than happy to give a lot of my personal details when buying online. So, what makes me reluctant to give these details to a law-enforcement officer vs. the online store?
3- Is it not that the home office, for whom the police serve under, already have all our personal details in their files? So, what is the harm of letting add a bit more fields that says I have some good camera gear?
4- When I moved to UK I had to give A LOT of personal details and register with the police, of course this is besides all the details I had to give when I applied for the visa to come here in the first place.
5- Applying for the visa, the home office did a security check on me, my family, and all that would be directly related to me and can be traced to me. So, again, where is the harm in giving out further details?

Now, I do understand that it can be a bit annoying to be asked for my details over and over; but I am more than happy to chat with an officer about my details, why I love to photograph and the things I shoot – and along the way may be make a new friend – than to not be questioned at all and in the one instance where someone “slips” by the officers I get 100s of my friends / family / associates rounded-up like cattle and shipped out of the country.

Of course, this is the point of view of a foreigner in UK.
 
Wail said:
Of course, this is the point of view of a foreigner in UK.
Click to expand...

I think an appropriate response is the more commonplace it becomes the more it becomes expected and accepted. I can't speak for your home country laws but here we have always assumed innocence until proven guilty. The actions of some security services (police, pcso, etc) assume guilt first, innocence later. That is a fundamental shift in law enforcement and quite unacceptable to many people, especially those who have been born and bred here.

The fact you had to give a lot of details to gain entry to the Uk does not mean you should accept you must continue to do so, especially when asked on a whim by an official who ought to be showing better commonsense.

The giving of data to complete an online transaction is necessary to protect the trader and yourself. That said, there is NOTHING preventing you going to a shop and paying cash and giving NO information about yourself. That is CHOICE, which you may not be given when dealing with a police stop.

Your comment about shipping 100's of your friends out of the country in the event of a slip up is really just a bit silly. I'm unaware of this practice and wouldn't condone it if it happened unless they were guilty of a crime. I'm assuming you're not friends with known criminals!

If you want to make friends with the police by all means go out and befriend them. No one is stopping you. But please, try and understand your attitude is not shared by all. It is an attitude that will lead this country further down the road of unacceptable surveillance.

Finally, i'd like to say thanks for posting. Your comments did make me stop and think before posting my reply.
 
hepburn said:
The giving of data to complete an online transaction is necessary to protect the trader and yourself. That said, there is NOTHING preventing you going to a shop and paying cash and giving NO information about yourself.
Click to expand...

I think the whole thing of being asked for personal details is becoming more and more accepted by the general public :( Sorry, don't wish to sidetrack the thread, but twice this year shops have refused to sell to me because I refused to give my details, 1st a new number plate (Halfords) Got one off ebay :D and 2nd a digital set top box (currys) and guess what 'got one off Ebay :D OK I had to give a delivery address.....
 
hepburn,

Even in my country, and contrary to common belief, we have laws where everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but that is not the issue here!

In the UK, we have already given a lot of our personal information to the Home Office from the moment we are born.

I believe, if I am not mistaken, the UK has more CCTVs per individual than any other country in the world. So, not only does the Home Office know our personal data but they can also track our whereabouts and match the two together. Of course, we hope that this is only done for the sake of security and keeping us safe.

As for going to a brick and mortar store to buy things, unless I intend to pay by cash then the store, their suppliers and their banks will have a lot more of my personal data than I would care to give.

So, there we are again … why be reluctant to give out personal data to an officer, who works for a government body that already has all our personal data, when we’re happily doing so with a common store?

The question that begs itself here is, what harm is there in giving out personal data to an officer? While on the flip side, there is a huge amount of risk in giving your credit / debit card to any store.

I understand that there is the issue of pride in "how dare someone question my behaviour" when I have been doing nothing that is "to me" harmful .... but we just have to accept that there is no relationship between the officer's questions and me personally. On the flip side of this, if I was asked not to take pictures, or to delete something, or to surrender my gear .... then that's a whole different ball game.
 
Wail said:
So, there we are again … why be reluctant to give out personal data to an officer, who works for a government body that already has all our personal data
Click to expand...

The same reason really, that my NHS records show I have had certain illnesses and infections over the years, but I wouldn't tell the receptionist if they asked me.

It's not a matter of 'harm' per se, its the principle, why should we be expected to hand over our details just because they ask, for no *real* reason?
Like you say, innocent until proven guilty, not "guilty until proven innocent".
 
Wail said:
I understand that there is the issue of pride in "how dare someone question my behaviour" when I have been doing nothing that is "to me" harmful .... but we just have to accept that there is no relationship between the officer's questions and me personally. On the flip side of this, if I was asked not to take pictures, or to delete something, or to surrender my gear .... then that's a whole different ball game.
Click to expand...

With respect... It's not about pride, it's more about people in jobs who think they are 'above' and better than 'Joe Bloggs' going about his perfectly legal activities, it's THEIR job to know what is legal and what is not.. If they have grounds for suspicion then they should give THEIR reasons. I would never explain or justify my actions to anyone without them justifying the questions first. :D
 
Taking the NHS analogy, when we go to the receptionist in the hospital / clinic we do tell them a brief of what type of pains / ailment we have! If I have a skin rash I have to state so as to see a dermatologist. Of course, the receptionist may presume that I have VD in my genitals for all that I care!

The officer asking a few questions, is just that, a few questions. Is it like date of birth, address, credit card number, access to my bank account, my banking habits, my buying habits, my marital status? All these data, and access to source, are given out when we buy something and pay by credit / debit card.

Now you say “for no *real*” reasons; but that is presuming that the officer is asking the questions for the sake of annoying only – given that there is no real reasons! Surely officers are not that shallow, and surely they have more things to get on with, especially with the threat of lawsuits should they “push” a bit too much!
 
Disclaimer

In all fairness, may be I am just “groomed” to be more tolerant and accepting to officers asking questions.
 
Splog,

You, and most others, are 100% correct with getting agitated with this issue, but the real issue isn’t the officers asking questions but rather it is the recent events in the world.

A couple of days ago I was in Heathrow airport and there were continuous warnings on the mics that passengers shouldn’t accept packages from strangers. That made me realise how much the world has changed. Decades ago, when someone back home wanted books that couldn’t be found in my home country, I’d buy the books, wrap them in a cardboard box and go up to the airport and hand them to anyone (yes anyone) going to Saudi to deliver the “box” to my relative. It was quick and cheap way of getting books to Saudi. Of course, I’d be crazy to think I could do that today.

Sadly, events around the world today has made local security services more weary of things that the average "Joe" takes for granted. Yes, this is annoying ... it is the loss of innocense I guess :shrug:
 
Wail said:
I believe, if I am not mistaken, the UK has more CCTVs per individual than any other country in the world. So, not only does the Home Office know our personal data but they can also track our whereabouts and match the two together. Of course, we hope that this is only done for the sake of security and keeping us safe.
Click to expand...

They can't. The vast majority of the CCTV systems are security cameras in shops, and even the local authority ones are fairly useless in tracking the movements of a person in anything under a week, and even then only really at night when nobody else is about.

Wail said:
As for going to a brick and mortar store to buy things, unless I intend to pay by cash then the store, their suppliers and their banks will have a lot more of my personal data than I would care to give.
Click to expand...

They have my card details, maybe name, nothing else. They have no idea who I actually am. Any shop delving into my details will find out from my bank details that I apparently live in Swansea, somewhere I haven't been to in over 5 years.

Wail said:
So, there we are again … why be reluctant to give out personal data to an officer, who works for a government body that already has all our personal data, when we’re happily doing so with a common store?
Click to expand...

Precisely because he is a Police Officer. He has the power of arrest, he can literally lock you up for days without even charging you, let alone giving you any chance to defend yourself. It's a necessary power, but still, it's a very powerful one, and it's only right and proper in any democracy that anyone wielding that power is naturally viewed with massive suspicion and make to justify their every interaction with the public.
The fact the government (quite properly) knows so much about me that makes me even more suspicious of them wanting to tie that virtual information to the real me. A Police Officer might know all about some guy called Liam O'Neill, but he has no idea that it refers to me, the guy walking down the other side of the road, and since I wouldn't tell the dodgy looking bloke next to the PO that stuff, I don't see why, without a good reason, I'd want to tell the Officer either.
 
what annoyed me is that I had done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG! Why question me? I'm an upstanding citizen, no criminal record in my 37 years of living on this earth in the UK, and never once been in trouble/questioned by the BIB.

I will be taking this matter further.
 
4hero said:
Why question me?
Click to expand...

Ignorance. To the plod, just like most of the non-photographer public who never come into contact with an SLR, they assume it's going to take some ridiculously amazing picture that will let you zoom in to tell exactly how many layers of paint are on it and where it's been for the past week. Have you not seen members of the public infer as much before? They don't get that even a £4000 camera just takes pictures like any other camera, they think there has to be something more to it, and they never think about it long enough to realise how stupid that sounds.
They also have no concept AT ALL of taking a picture without some smiling relative in it, or the paparazzi They have no concept of photography as an art form. We've all had the classic question "What are you taking a picture of?" question, no?

To that mindset, a guy with a DSLR taking a picture of a police van (or bridge, or tower, or people, whatever) is acting suspiciously for no other reason than they are taking a picture without the smiling relative with a camera that can tell them where the van has been all week, or which rivets in the tower are the weakest.

Put that way you can see the logic, but it's no excuse, every Police Officer should be smarter than that or should not be in the service.
 
Splog said:
I think the whole thing of being asked for personal details is becoming more and more accepted by the general public :( Sorry, don't wish to sidetrack the thread, but twice this year shops have refused to sell to me because I refused to give my details, 1st a new number plate (Halfords) Got one off ebay :D and 2nd a digital set top box (currys) and guess what 'got one off Ebay :D OK I had to give a delivery address.....
Click to expand...

That's only because those retailers are selling something they are required to have details of to whom before they can sell it. Number plates to reduce fraud I believe, TV's so they can check you have a TV licence.
 
Wail said:
Splog,

You, and most others, are 100% correct with getting agitated with this issue, but the real issue isn’t the officers asking questions but rather it is the recent events in the world.
Click to expand...

Sorry..... But I don't agree. Police officers are professionals who have a job to do and should do it correctly, I cannot see any issue whatsoever with someone taking a photograph :thinking: I feel the problem is born of politicians rather than the Law or common sense :cuckoo: Try and get the Police to attend a vehichle theft, vandalism or yobs on your doorstep i.e. the things the public are really bothered about! They are not interested... Why? Government targets...Perhaps :bang:

(sorry for a bit of a rant)
 
again a little OT I bought a freeview box at asda and was told i had to queue up at the customer service desk to fill in a form giving my details to check basically if i had a TV license...

... Yes it might be the law but balls to that, just walked straight out of the shop :D
 
Splog said:
I think the whole thing of being asked for personal details is becoming more and more accepted by the general public :( Sorry, don't wish to sidetrack the thread, but twice this year shops have refused to sell to me because I refused to give my details, 1st a new number plate (Halfords) Got one off ebay :D and 2nd a digital set top box (currys) and guess what 'got one off Ebay :D OK I had to give a delivery address.....
Click to expand...


Any company selling an item that will receive TV signals has by law to record your details and pass them to the relevant dept. Buying second hand ie - E-Bay is not policed unless you are buying from a registered company.
 
hepburn said:
That's only because those retailers are selling something they are required to have details of to whom before they can sell it. Number plates to reduce fraud I believe, TV's so they can check you have a TV licence.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand the reasons :shrug: but the point is it's Halfords and currys, who are they to take my details? where's my confidentiality? where's my data protection? What right does this government have to expect me to give my personel info to a retailer? and some spotty little oik that could pass on that info to his hoody mates? :bang:
 
Wail said:
Now you say “for no *real*” reasons; but that is presuming that the officer is asking the questions for the sake of annoying only – given that there is no real reasons! Surely officers are not that shallow, and surely they have more things to get on with, especially with the threat of lawsuits should they “push” a bit too much!
Click to expand...

Have you ever stopped to ask yourself what happens to that information that you willingly hand over, or the record of the stop? Are you aware that if Police take your DNA sample it is stored for 100 years, for example? Why?

I'm no conspiracy theorist but I'm alarmed at the way the authorities collect and use our data, with little control. Let me give you a recent personal example:

I run 2 cars. My summer car is a soft top MG. Last october I declared it SORN. I shortly afterwards moved house. When I went to re-tax it for this summer I was informed there was a discrepancy in the licensing for it. Soon afterwards I got a penalty notice. I sent them a scanned copy of the SORN and asked them to correct their records. Shortly after that I got bombarded with text messages to my mobile phone from a debt collection agency insisting I pay the DVLA penalty. I tried phoning the DVLA but got no answer. They don't have a voicemail or queueing option so I just got told several times to call back later. Eventually I ended up just paying the penalty because of undue pressure from the bailiffs.

Now, where did they get my mobile number from? Why couldn't I get through to a person at the DVLA? Why was my letter apparently ignored? Why did i get so much pressure I just felt it easiest to end the matter by paying £80 I didn't really owe?

You share all you like with the authorities but me, no thanks. They already have access to enough of my info without me willingly adding more. I doubt they really want it for anti-crime reasons anyway, as so far all of this surveillance seems to be in place to squeesze money out of the public. Oh, and don't forget the government want to build a computer database that pulls all of their individual databases into one. why? Can't tell me it's efficiency as I've yet to meet an efficient government.

And YES, I do believe there are shallow officers out there!!
 
MichaelPlace said:
again a little OT I bought a freeview box at asda and was told i had to queue up at the customer service desk to fill in a form giving my details to check basically if i had a TV license...

... Yes it might be the law but balls to that, just walked straight out of the shop :D
Click to expand...

Pay cash and give the address of someone you don't like! ;)
 
:agree: But wouldn't have paid the £80

Similar problem with me . but it was with British Gas... :puke: Honestly and that's as a result of the info you give :thumbsdown:
 
Splog said:
Sorry..... But I don't agree. Police officers are professionals who have a job to do and should do it correctly,
Click to expand...

Exactly! And they spend a lot longer being trained than the 3-7 weeks a PCSO gets. Most "real" police officers are professional and do their job properly, whereas a PCSO is often the person likely to stop and question you.

The chances are a "real" police officer will have a higher degree of intelligence too. Years ago I was sitting the entrance exam for the police. Out of 40 people 20 were told to go away and not reapply. 16 people were told they had failed but to reapply again in 6 months time if they were still interested. That left me and 3 others who were accepted. I can tell you now I still remember that exam and it was tough. I felt lucky to have passed and i don't consider myself particularly clever. And please keep in mind this was in the days when you had to be at least 6ft tall and they weren't accepting just anyone into the service.
 
Shogun said:
Any company selling an item that will receive TV signals has by law to record your details and pass them to the relevant dept. Buying second hand ie - E-Bay is not policed unless you are buying from a registered company.
Click to expand...

Thank You... The point is that we are expected to give our details to an un-secure source and those un-secure sources are doing the policing for the government :bang:
 
Marcel said:
... It's its the principle, why should we be expected to hand over our details just because they ask, for no *real* reason?
Click to expand...
Splog said:
... It's Halfords and currys, who are they to take my details? where's my confidentiality? where's my data protection?
Click to expand...
OK, two slightly selective quotes, but I don't think I've distorted the meaning by being selective.

The interesting issue here, to my mind, is the parallels between the "online" world and the "real" world.

In the online world, you have to declare what you intend to do with personal data which you collect from people, and if those uses go anywhere beyond what is strictly necessary for the administration of your business then you have to register with the Information Commissioner and comply with all the small print of the Data Protection Act.

But in the real world...? Anything goes, it seems.
 
To change tack slightly.

The standard justification for stopping someone with a camera is the 'Terrorism Act'. There are a lot of people complaining about this treatment on forums such as these, and there has been wider publicity in the media / press recently also. It's not a secret that if you carry a DSLR and some serious kit there is a good chance you might get stopped.

Now, if I was really a terrorist wanting to gather some information using a camera, and knowing the likelihood of being stopped, I think I would be thinking of using a P&S to draw less attention to myself, at least if I could get the shots I wanted. All a bit ironic don't you think?!
 
I think that the issue here is not giving your details - it is in the interpretation of the law. The problem I would have in this situation is that I would be happy to give my details if they would give me a clear and coherent reason why they are asking me. If as you say, they asked you because they thought that you were taking photos of a police van then I would have to tell them that it is not a crime to do so and unless they suspected me of a criminal act I would have to terminate the conversation there.

It is all about where you are and what you are doing - if I was out late at night doing some shots in an urban area and I was stopped - I would comply with the police, becasue although I'm perfectly free to photograph at night if I want to, I can see why they might wonder what I was doing and so I would give my details.

In the situation you were in - at a public showground - no way would I make it easy for them.

You might also like this article
 
Just a thought.....

..... I'm not taking a photograph of it (the Police Van), I'm making a sketch!

Art and it's connotations! :naughty:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top