When did respect for the Police end

[big soft moose]

All fines should be means tested.

A £100 fine is much more of a deterrent to an averagely paid person than it is to a millionaire.
.

yep a 60 quid fine to someone on JSA is roughly 25% of their monthly income - and so is roughly equivalent to £500 to someone in a good job

also cutting accross the central reservation is potentially serious - hence more points than what sounds like a speeding offence

 

[DorsetDude]

As a young guy (20 today) it is very interesting to hear people's opinions of young people today. I agree with the notion that there has been a decrease in general respect, I have noticed that in my lifetime and having younger siblings it makes it even more visible so I'm not going to disagree with it.

The main problem for me however lies when the blame is placed on the youth of this nation. The morals and ethics of today's young people is directly related to the changes in family and social dynamics over the last 20-30 years. The quality of parenting and discipline is the main reason for the way many people have grown up. We now live in a country where people know the price of everything but the value of nothing and showing respect to older people is something often forgotten.

However as I said before the blame doesn't lie solely with the young people it lies heavily with the people who are of the age to make the decisions, do you think that respect in young people would be as bad if discipline in schools was increased, if the numbers of broken homes and teenage pregnancies were decreased or what about if minor offences such as vandalism and shoplifting were clamped down upon instead of being ignored?
How about if people helped nurture young children aspirations and gave them dreams to aim for. What do they have currently to look forward too?

A world were everyone is out for themselves, where you are pressured into achieving at school from a young age, where to go to university means saddling yourself with £45K of debt, where getting a job with little experience is harder than claiming money from the state, where buying your own first house is borderline impossible?

Then translate all this to how they see the world. How do you expect them to react to a world which is so ruthless? For me the police is just one service which is in the firing line for this instilled anger and hatred and it is not just the police but a society- wide attitude which has resulted in a decrease in general respect.

However with this in mind don't tar all young people with the same brush. I know many young people who give up their entire spare time around studying to work helping elderly or disabled or homeless people. Those young people who will do anything to make society a better place and those who despite how grim the outlook is for the rest of their lives will go out and work hard to achieve their goals and do well in life. At the end of the day every generation and walk of life has the people who work through the adversities life throws at them and it also has those who blame society for everything that is wrong with them and take no personal responsibility for anything.

 

[Russ77]

thats not really the polices fault though - in both cases they treated the offender the same, ie arrested/charged etc - the fault in the differential of punishment lies with cps/courts/dvla

round here no tax, insurance or mot, would result in car confiscated and crushed

I didn't say it was the Police's fault did I? As I said a Policeman told me this and the impression he gave me that he thought the jobless layabout should have got a harsher punishment than the guy who chucked a u-turn.

I'd almost guarantee the layabout will just carry on commiting minor and maybe not so minor offences and just keep getting slaps on the wrist.

But I digress!

Back on topic..... the moron in the video needs bringing down a peg or three!!! For those familiar with the TV Series Life on Mars, a little DI Hunt treatment wouldn't have gone a miss

 

[Laudrup]

This forum should know more than most about the police and their perception in public. The glut of photographer vs police videos that were (and still are) on here don't inspire confidence or generate much goodwill and respect. Making up the law as you go along to intimidate and arrest people is not going to win you any respect. Just because you have a shiny uniform on doesn't automatically mean you command any respect, your actions will dictate that.

 

[big soft moose]

However respect is a two way street - and setting out to wind up police and security guards in order to make a provacative youtube clip is also not the way to inspire respect or credibility.

I'd suggest that the forum does know more than most about the police (indeed several members are or were police) but that this perception be based on forum members own experiences of law enforcement - not the actions of those with a clear anti police agenda in mind, whos own actions dictate that they desetrve very little respect indeed

 

[Laudrup]

However respect is a two way street - and setting out to wind up police and security guards in order to make a provacative youtube clip is also not the way to inspire respect or credibility.

I'd suggest that the forum does know more than most about the police (indeed several members are or were police) but that this perception be based on forum members own experiences of law enforcement - not the actions of those with a clear anti police agenda in mind, whos own actions dictate that they desetrve very little respect indeed

"I had to make the law up, I was provoked!"

It's unorthodox I grant you, but a flawed argument.

 

[DorsetDude]

"I had to make the law up, I was provoked!

Huh?

It's unorthodox I grant you, but a flawed argument.

Huh? Whats unorthodox? What's a flawed argument?

Thread lock imminent I think.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

Don't the odds of killing a person dramatically increase with just a small rise in speed?

It's your responsibility as the driver of a moving 1.5 tonne hulk of metal and plastic to be concentrating and know what the limit is.

I'm not saying I've never sped, but I'd take it like a man when I got caught.

But we digress...

Re increase in speed - kinetic energy increases with the square of velocity. That's why hitting somebody at 30 is so much worse than the same accident at 20.

 

[Laudrup]

Huh?


Huh? Whats unorthodox? What's a flawed argument?

Thread lock imminent I think.

Go watch a photographer vs police video on here, there are lots of them.

 

[big soft moose]

"I had to make the law up, I was provoked!"

It's unorthodox I grant you, but a flawed argument.

I'm not saying it doesnt happen - what i'm saying is that the tiny minority of cases isnt representative , and those making the youtube clips have deliberately set out in most cases to atagonise and provoke a confrontation in order to show the police , or more usually security guards, in a bad light.

I personally have had over 100 encounters with the police (mostly working with them - not because i'm a career criminal or anything ) and Ive never seen them 'make the law up' or behave in anyway unproffesionally - and like i was saying I prefer to draw conclusions from my own experience, not from random youtube clippage

and I'd say the same to you - are you basing your opinion on your own experience , or only on your experience of watching video clips on the internet / other media sensationalism ?

 

[DorsetDude]

Go watch a photographer vs police video on here, there are lots of them.

and that observation is relevant to

I had to make the law up, I was provoked!

and

It's unorthodox I grant you, but a flawed argument.

in what way exactly?

 

[POAH]

I personally have had over 100 encounters with the police (mostly working with them - not because i'm a career criminal or anything ) and Ive never seen them 'make the law up' or behave in anyway unproffesionally - and like i was saying I prefer to draw conclusions from my own experience, not from random youtube clippage

just wait till you are a career criminal you'll see how they make up laws to get their own way lol

 

[big soft moose]

just wait till you are a career criminal you'll see how they make up laws to get their own way lol

I'll just have to use my startling intellect not to get caught, for starters i wouldn't confess to my life of crime on an internet foru........ oh b****r

 

[big soft moose]

and that observation is relevant to



and



in what way exactly?

Hes saying that those videos show the police having a less than firm grip on the law regarding photography in public places ... which is true as far as it goes but does overlook the fact that the photographers in those clips have deliberately picked a fight , that in most cases the videos show security guards anyway, that in many cases the tog concerned is commiting an offence , such as obstructing the pavement with his tripod and then not moving on when asked, and also that videos can be eddited to put the worst possible spin on events.

 

[POAH]

I'll just have to use my startling intellect not to get caught, for starters i wouldn't confess to my life of crime on an internet foru........ oh b****r

hear say rule applies IMHO

 

[DorsetDude]

Hes saying that those videos show the police having a less than firm grip on the law regarding photography in public places ... which is true as far as it goes but does overlook the fact that the photographers in those clips have deliberately picked a fight , that in most cases the videos show security guards anyway, that in many cases the tog concerned is commiting an offence , such as obstructing the pavement with his tripod and then not moving on when asked, and also that videos can be eddited to put the worst possible spin on events.

Fair enough.

Thought he was trying out a random sentence generating program or something.

 

[Laudrup]

I'm not saying it doesnt happen - what i'm saying is that the tiny minority of cases isnt representative , and those making the youtube clips have deliberately set out in most cases to atagonise and provoke a confrontation in order to show the police , or more usually security guards, in a bad light.

I personally have had over 100 encounters with the police (mostly working with them - not because i'm a career criminal or anything ) and Ive never seen them 'make the law up' or behave in anyway unproffesionally - and like i was saying I prefer to draw conclusions from my own experience, not from random youtube clippage

and I'd say the same to you - are you basing your opinion on your own experience , or only on your experience of watching video clips on the internet / other media sensationalism ?

If an officer or security guard or PCSO is provoked by something perfectly legal and has to resort to making up as they go along to intimidate then they either need retrained or sacked.

As for experiencing it versus watching Motorway Cops, well I wasn't in the Guildford Four, but yes I could draw on experiences to judge for myself. It's a rather unsophisticated way of looking at the situation to only judge it on your experience or lack thereof though.

 

[big soft moose]

If an officer or security guard or PCSO is provoked by something perfectly legal and has to resort to making up as they go along to intimidate then they either need retrained or sacked.

its revealing that you think setting out to provoke a confrontation with the police is perfectly legal

As for experiencing it versus watching Motorway Cops, well I wasn't in the Guildford Four, but yes I could draw on experiences to judge for myself. It's a rather unsophisticated way of looking at the situation to only judge it on your experience or lack thereof though.

If you'd rather draw conclusions based on partial and incomplete evidence, spun to fit a predjudiced view point , then thats your perogative - personally I prefer objectivity , but each to his own

 

[Laudrup]

its revealing that you think setting out to provoke a confrontation with the police is perfectly legal

If it is perfectly legal then how can it be provoking arrest? Is it breaking the law or not?

If you'd rather draw conclusions based on partial and incomplete evidence, spun to fit a predjudiced view point , then thats your perogative - personally I prefer objectivity , but each to his own

In what way can you 'spin' an officer making up a law to arrest you? Force him to say it on video?

 

[big soft moose]

If it is perfectly legal then how can it be provoking arrest? Is it breaking the law or not?

exactly - setting out to provoke a police officer is not perfectly legal , for a start its wasting police time , and if you do so agressively its probably a breach of the peace as well

In what way can you 'spin' an officer making up a law to arrest you? Force him to say it on video?

you can edit what he says, you can edit what you say, you can edit out the bit where you abusively provoked him , you can edit off the end of the sentence so that it sounds worse than it is , you can lie about the circumstances of the arrest (or indeed whether it even took place), you can lie about what else you were doing at the time that led to the arrest and so forth

also as above the cops don't need to 'make up the law' to arrest you - failing to move on when asked can easily become reasonable cause , as can using abusive language , and indeed obstructing a highway or failing to leave proivate land when requested.

In fact I don't think ive ever seen one of those clips where the people concerned werent commiting at least one arrestable offence , yet despite this 99% of the time the confrontation doesnt actually lead to an arrest at all.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Every part of society has its good and its bad elements.

A lot of people seem to regard politicians as devious, grasping barstewards, and I used to have to deal with a politician who was all of these - but recently I've been dealing with a very successful one who I'm convinced is the exact reverse.

It's the same with the police. Over the years I've come across lazy, corrupt liars who somehow managed to become police officers and who have not only managed to stay in the job but who have also risen through the ranks. Most of this type have been weeded out though, although inevitably some remain, and often reach senior rank. But most of those I've met are 100% in every way, and it's a shame that the actions of the minority have led so many people to be anti police.

The problem, as I see it, isn't with the police per se, or with any other occupational group -it's with the perception of ignorant people who tar everyone with the same brush.

In a way, the low esteem in which the police are held is the fault of the police - it's the fault of the vast majority of otherwise good officers who, although they despise the few bad ones, don't do anything about it.

But mainly it's our fault. We shouldn't jump to conclusions when we don't know the true facts, we shouldn't blame the police for the systematic faults that sometimes stop them being as effective as we would like them to be, and when we come across "bad apples" then we should always complain. It may be true that the complaints process is in itself seriously flawed, but the only way to change that is to use the system and then complain when the system fails us.

 

[Laudrup]

exactly - setting out to provoke a police officer is not perfectly legal , for a start its wasting police time , and if you do so agressively its probably a breach of the peace as well

If I'm doing something legal then you've no need to stop me and waste both of our times. If you want to intimidate and make it up as you go along to arrest someone for being in contempt of cop then yes there will be a problem.

you can edit what he says, you can edit what you say, you can edit out the bit where you abusively provoked him , you can edit off the end of the sentence so that it sounds worse than it is , you can lie about the circumstances of the arrest (or indeed whether it even took place), you can lie about what else you were doing at the time that led to the arrest and so forth

also as above the cops don't need to 'make up the law' to arrest you - failing to move on when asked can easily become reasonable cause , as can using abusive language , and indeed obstructing a highway or failing to leave proivate land when requested.

In fact I don't think ive ever seen one of those clips where the people concerned werent commiting at least one arrestable offence , yet despite this 99% of the time the confrontation doesnt actually lead to an arrest at all.

Caught on video making it up, arresting people, the CPS even saying they don't know why you were arrested, an out of court settlement paid and you can explain it all away with 'hatchet edit job'. These frankly hopeless flimsy excuses you are trying to prop up are part of the reason there is a lack of respect.

 

[big soft moose]

If I'm doing something legal then you've no need to stop me and waste both of our times. If you want to intimidate and make it up as you go along to arrest someone for being in contempt of cop then yes there will be a problem.

that shows a fundemental misunderstanding of how the police operate - they don't randomly wander about stopping people for the hell of it - in most cases it comes from either a complaint from another member of the public (as with worried/paranoid parent sees man photographing children in park), or because there is a flagrant breach of the law in progress (for example photographing on private premises, asked to stop and leave, refused - police called by security to deal with now agravated trespass ) or because they have 'reasonble cause' to belive that their might be (such as someone acting suspiciously)

Also in most cases with these videos the photographer has set out to inflame the situation - times ive been stopped , usually relating to late night long exposure/ wire spinning or what have you falling into the third category, all that is required is a polite explanation and everyone goes their seperate ways happily - if you set out to p the police off, or do so because you are a mouthy gob*****, by shouting about rights that you often don't really have, then of course there'll be a problem

Caught on video making it up, arresting people, the CPS even saying they don't know why you were arrested, an out of court settlement paid

how often has that actually hapened though - you a full of hyperbole about 'loads of videos' but most of them don't have that resolution ( i can only think of one that did)

These frankly hopeless flimsy excuses you are trying to prop up are part of the reason there is a lack of respect.

No the reason theres a lack of respect is that too many people believe that because they've seen it in the media or on youtube it must be the whole story - yes there are bad cops (as there are in any proffesion) but generalising about the proffesion as a whole isnt fair or helpful

I don't know what your day job is, but if one member of your chosen proffesion was guilty of proffesional misconduct (and there probably is one) then does that make you guilty too by association ?

 

[Bernie174]

Steve

BofP sorry, you aren't corect. There is an immediate power to arrest, and it doesn't have a maximum sentence (in fact Murder is a B of P, you are charged with "that you did murder XXXX against the peace").
No you don't have to warn. You may have got the wrong idea, as the CPS really don't like it. which is why the guidelines are now that you should detain until the BofP cannot reoccur then release.

Richard and Munch

Perception is, I agree bang on the nail. But then the press have a great deal of responsibiility, just as the Police stop action type programs. Hillsbrough being a good example. Someone a few posts down has leap on that quoting politians. Never a good idea. The Hillsbrough report however, doesn't exactly say what the press/Politicians said. It makes a couple of things clear, which have been swept under the carpet, simply because they don't make sensational news. 1. It says clearly that accounts were asked for, those are not statements. They were asked for by the Solicitors firm who represented the Police Force. The accounts were reviewed and solicitors asked for changes to be made in some cases. Worthy of note, not that you'd know from the press, is that those reports which criticised the supporters were also changed on instructions of those solicitors.
These were not statements made in accordance with the Criminal Justice acts as it was then, and statements were not presented in the same way at that point. They were simply fact "I went I saw I did". "Not I think I believe and I concluded" which is the way they are made now.
Of course there's a fly in the ointment which is that some of the senior police officers were investigated for criminal offences. Like you and I did at the time, they have the right to defend themselves in some cases by not saying anything.
Now, you can and the press would like to perceive that as a cover up. But perception doesn't make it reality.

Landrup

I've said this numerous times, but I have dealt with photographers, and I have been the photograpoher dealt with by police. Both sides can be wrong, in fact, I'd go so far as to say I've seen far more photographers causing their own problems that provoked or badly dealt with by police.
The difference is though I have been there, seen it and done it, and I very much doubt you have. First hand experience is far better than hearsay, or to go back to the previous point, perception.

 

[Pookeyhead]

I'm hoping you mean the video- not ther discussion that followed it

LOL.. no, I meant the video

 

[big soft moose]

First hand experience is far better than hearsay,

exactly

 

[Laudrup]

that shows a fundemental misunderstanding of how the police operate - they don't randomly wander about stopping people for the hell of it - in most cases it comes from either a complaint from another member of the public (as with worried/paranoid parent sees man photographing children in park), or because there is a flagrant breach of the law in progress (for example photographing on private premises, asked to stop and leave, refused - police called by security to deal with now agravated trespass ) or because they have 'reasonble cause' to belive that their might be (such as someone acting suspiciously)

They are doing nothing illegal and are being intimidated with arrest due to made up laws.

Also in most cases with these videos the photographer has set out to inflame the situation - times ive been stopped , usually relating to late night long exposure/ wire spinning or what have you falling into the third category, all that is required is a polite explanation and everyone goes their seperate ways happily - if you set out to p the police off, or do so because you are a mouthy gob*****, by shouting about rights that you often don't really have, then of course there'll be a problem

As I said, guilty of contempt of cop.

how often has that actually hapened though - you a full of hyperbole about 'loads of videos' but most of them don't have that resolution ( i can only think of one that did)

How many do you want or need? You'll find it happening up and down the country (not just to photographers) resulting in all sorts of outcomes when it shouldn't be happening at all.

No the reason theres a lack of respect is that too many people believe that because they've seen it in the media or on youtube it must be the whole story - yes there are bad cops (as there are in any proffesion) but generalising about the proffesion as a whole isnt fair or helpful

I don't know what your day job is, but if one member of your chosen proffesion was guilty of proffesional misconduct (and there probably is one) then does that make you guilty too by association ?

But we can generalize and say have respect for them collectively?

 

[big soft moose]

They are doing nothing illegal and are being intimidated with arrest due to made up laws.

who are ? - so far you've been long on hyperbole and short on facts - the police have a perfect right to stop and question someone who is behaving suspiciously as i said its happened to me, and in my experience if you don't set out to pee them off, nothing bad happens.

You'll find it happening up and down the country (not just to photographers) resulting in all sorts of outcomes when it shouldn't be happening at all.

and you know this how ? (and don't say youtube videos) as above if you want to be taken seriously some evidence wouldnt go amiss - otherwise its just random police bashing

But we can generalize and say have respect for them collectively?

you can generalise in either direction - its fine to say that you don't have respect for them collectively - but don't try to state that they don't deserve respect as a fact when its only your unsubtantiated opinion.

 

[Laudrup]

Steve

BofP sorry, you aren't corect. There is an immediate power to arrest, and it doesn't have a maximum sentence (in fact Murder is a B of P, you are charged with "that you did murder XXXX against the peace").
No you don't have to warn. You may have got the wrong idea, as the CPS really don't like it. which is why the guidelines are now that you should detain until the BofP cannot reoccur then release.

Richard and Munch

Perception is, I agree bang on the nail. But then the press have a great deal of responsibiility, just as the Police stop action type programs. Hillsbrough being a good example. Someone a few posts down has leap on that quoting politians. Never a good idea. The Hillsbrough report however, doesn't exactly say what the press/Politicians said. It makes a couple of things clear, which have been swept under the carpet, simply because they don't make sensational news. 1. It says clearly that accounts were asked for, those are not statements. They were asked for by the Solicitors firm who represented the Police Force. The accounts were reviewed and solicitors asked for changes to be made in some cases. Worthy of note, not that you'd know from the press, is that those reports which criticised the supporters were also changed on instructions of those solicitors.
These were not statements made in accordance with the Criminal Justice acts as it was then, and statements were not presented in the same way at that point. They were simply fact "I went I saw I did". "Not I think I believe and I concluded" which is the way they are made now.
Of course there's a fly in the ointment which is that some of the senior police officers were investigated for criminal offences. Like you and I did at the time, they have the right to defend themselves in some cases by not saying anything.
Now, you can and the press would like to perceive that as a cover up. But perception doesn't make it reality.

Landrup

I've said this numerous times, but I have dealt with photographers, and I have been the photograpoher dealt with by police. Both sides can be wrong, in fact, I'd go so far as to say I've seen far more photographers causing their own problems that provoked or badly dealt with by police.
The difference is though I have been there, seen it and done it, and I very much doubt you have. First hand experience is far better than hearsay, or to go back to the previous point, perception.

So in essence you didn't arrest someone for not breaking the law. You can only speak for yourself and what you see. If I witness poor policing first hand or through the media it isn't nullified because a policeman somewhere else did something different.

 

[Steve Smith]

Steve

BofP sorry, you aren't corect. There is an immediate power to arrest, and it doesn't have a maximum sentence (in fact Murder is a B of P, you are charged with "that you did murder XXXX against the peace").

I know that every crime is essentially a breach of the peace. I thought an actual breach of the peace could only be cautioned and not arrested but I am happy to be corrected.

the police have a perfect right to stop and question someone who is behaving suspiciously

Yes, but there does have to be a suspicion of an actual crime, not a complaint about someone doing something which is perfectly legal but which the complainer doesn't like (such as walking around with an offensive wife).


Steve.

 

[big soft moose]

@laudrup

if its the media or on youtube you didnt witness it :bang:

and also how do you know the photographers bernie dealt with werent breaking the law ? were you there ? or do you subscribe to the fond belief that photographers never break the law ?

blocking a pavement with a tripod = obstruction

photographing on private land and refusing to leave when asked by landowner or his agents = agravated tresspass

continually photographing a particular person who has asked you to stop = harrasment

getting shouty and agressive when asked to stop doing any of the above = breach of the peace

and thats without going into any of the more obstruse possibilities

the idea that the police are arresting people with 'made up laws' is a fiction except in a teeny minority of cases

 

[pepi1967]

Made up laws? The police have a hard enough time prosecuting a criminal with the laws that we do have let alone making one up on the spot just to nick someone.

Funny how the folks who slate the police or the laŵs are the first on the phone to the police when they want help sorting out their own problems.

 

[Laudrup]

who are ? - so far you've been long on hyperbole and short on facts - the police have a perfect right to stop and question someone who is behaving suspiciously as i said its happened to me, and in my experience if you don't set out to pee them off, nothing bad happens.

People doing nothing illegal that are bullied and intimidated by aggressive police.

and you know this how ? (and don't say youtube videos) as above if you want to be taken seriously some evidence wouldnt go amiss - otherwise its just random police bashing

First hand, anecdotally, newspaper stories, current affairs shows how many sources do you want? Could you prove you met police 100 times and had no incidents? You can see any video or read almost any newspaper and find these stories I speak of. There is no burden of proof for me to bear.

you can generalise in either direction - its fine to say that you don't have respect for them collectively - but don't try to state that they don't deserve respect as a fact when its only your unsubtantiated opinion.

So generalize when it's good, but not when it's critical?

 

[big soft moose]

You can see any video or read almost any newspaper and find these stories I speak of.

so basically you've read it on the net so it must be true :bang:

i give up

 

[Laudrup]

so basically you've read it on the net so it must be true :bang:

i give up

I read you met the police 100 times on the net, is that true? If I see the video or story and the police have apologised and paid a settlement then I have no reason not to doubt they were in the wrong. Unless it's one giant conspiracy to lie directly to me for unknown purposes?

 

[Laudrup]

Made up laws? The police have a hard enough time prosecuting a criminal with the laws that we do have let alone making one up on the spot just to nick someone.

Funny how the folks who slate the police or the laŵs are the first on the phone to the police when they want help sorting out their own problems.

That's always the crumb of comfort when this issue is raised, is there any evidence for it at all? Surely the more faith you had the more likely you were to call rather than taking matters into your own hands?

 

[big soft moose]

If I see the video or story and the police have apologised and paid a settlement then I have no reason not to doubt they were in the wrong. ?

you don't seem able to grasp that a few isolated cases all be it widely reported do not make it a common occurence.

If I see that i equally have no reason to doubt that those particular cops were in the wrong - but it doesnt automatically follow that every cop is , or even every cop who happens to stop a photographer.

of course any abuse of power is one too many - we can all agree on that, but I know loads of cops who would also agree not least because it makes their jobs that much harder - particularly when a sensationalist press spins is as a far more common occurence than it is.

If you really think the police unworthy of respect i'd suggest going and spending some time in one of the many third world **** holes where the rule of law is utterly corrupt or entirely absent - it might make you appreciate the men and women who put their lives on the line on a daily basis to keep you safe

and now i really am done with this pointless argument

 

[Bernie174]

Lardrup

Go and watch the video at the start of this thread, and then imagine the driver is a photographer, and the level of abuse from him his a couple of levels lower. Impossible? No, I've seen photogs act that way.
Like it or not, a photog may well know he's doing everything legally and above board. BUT it does not always look that way to other people. In 2 or 3 cases a year something goes wrong from the photogs point of view. It happens. In far more cases it's the photog who's in the wrong, either for the sort of attitude we see at the start of this subject, or because they think they have rights they don't, or who have pushed their luck beyond what the rest of the world thinks is reasonable and legal.
But your attitude seems to have been formed through living on youtube, not reality.

 

[Steve Smith]

Also, with no disrespect to police officers, they are not lawyers and do not not know the full extent of the law (they would be earning more as lawyers if they did!).

A police officer's role is to protect the public and keep the peace and this relies as much on common sense as it does on legal knowledge.


Steve.

 

[big soft moose]

Also, with no disrespect to police officers, they are not lawyers and do not not know the full extent of the law (they would be earning more as lawyers if they did!).
.

I think what loud burp is reffering to is a couple of videos posted on here last year where police officers (In fact in one case a PCSO) have been filmed incorrectly saying that you can't photograph in public.

They are of course wrong about that , as the ACPO letter makes clear, but in neither case was anyone arrested, and in both cases the photographer didnt help himself by getting loud and shouty rather than calm and reasonable. - also the videos do kind of overlook the point that while you do have the right to photograph in public, you also have the responsibility to act in a way that doesnt harm or impede others. (which is pretty much what the police in both cases were concerned about)

Personally if i was asked to move on by the police i would do so without question as arguing the toss isnt going to end well - however I can only think of one incident where moving on was necessary - every other time a polite explanation of what i was doing was all that was required before they went away happy.

at the end of the day you get what you ask for - and if you approach police officers with your mind already made up that they are corrupt scum out to impede your perfect right to do whatever you like (never mind what anyone else may think) then you have a far higher chance of the encounter ending badly.

If you have the midset , that for the most part they are people doing a hard and nasty job for the greater good, and treat them with respect - you have a much more pleasnt encounter.