[YOUTUBE]<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Le5K4lu3K5E&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Le5K4lu3K5E&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]
Your no photographer until...
- Thread starter Mr.Orb
- Start date
inaneredstripe
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,457
- Name
- mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i got stopped once for wearing an offensive t shirt , and asked to cover it up. been to a bike rally , where offensive t shirts are mandatory . went into town shopping , forgetting i was wearing it. someone complained to plod, who asked me to cover up.:nono: fair enough.
even i have some decency.
(not much admitedly, but some).
even i have some decency.
(not much admitedly, but some).
- Messages
- 12,939
- Edit My Images
- No
joxby
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,782
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
Ah, the spirit that made Britain great - Ignorance
Well why don't you explain my ignorance.
By all means, have an opinion but.......actually, much like yourself, I can't be bothered, so in the spirit of senseless personal comments......don't bother
BenMottram
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 417
- Edit My Images
- Yes
>>Well why don't you explain my ignorance.
I will try...
>>account for what actions ?,
We don't actually know - no do you unless you are the OP or the BTP officer.
>>what, you need permission to carry a camera now as well as use it ?
The BTP need to be able to determine if you have lawful business on their premises. The railway is NOT a public place and has its own regulations and by-laws
>>That is not grounds for a stop & search.
Isn't it? are you a member of the BTP? Do you know the exact reason for the stop and search?
>>He wasn't taking pictures
Wasn't he? and if he was did he have permission from the station master?
>>Look, I'm sorry, they can kiss my arse,
Actually, you will find that on railway property you can kiss theirs. Try it on sometime and see where it gets you.
>>that is a stop for the sake of a stop
Is it? just because YOU can't see the reason for the stop doesn't make it a stop for the sake of a stop.
>>stopping someone just because they're carrying a camera is not on.Isn't it?
If that someone was about to break a by-law by taking pictures without permission, or had just broken a by-law by taking pictures without permission I would say that stopping that person is a reasonable action on behalf of the BTP. In fact it is their duty to stop that person.
>>I dont know the circumstances,
Too right you don't and nor do any of the responders to this thread.
>>maybe Mr Orb did something to arouse their suspicions,
Almost certainly.
>>but if everyone with a camera round their neck is seen as fair game wherever they are
Wherever they are? PMSL because, of course, this incident took place on private property namely a railway station.
I believe that you have shown your own ignorance and shouldn't need anyone else to point it out
However, in the nature of a public service, I have endeavoured to do the job for you
B.
I will try...
>>account for what actions ?,
We don't actually know - no do you unless you are the OP or the BTP officer.
>>what, you need permission to carry a camera now as well as use it ?
The BTP need to be able to determine if you have lawful business on their premises. The railway is NOT a public place and has its own regulations and by-laws
>>That is not grounds for a stop & search.
Isn't it? are you a member of the BTP? Do you know the exact reason for the stop and search?
>>He wasn't taking pictures
Wasn't he? and if he was did he have permission from the station master?
>>Look, I'm sorry, they can kiss my arse,
Actually, you will find that on railway property you can kiss theirs. Try it on sometime and see where it gets you.
>>that is a stop for the sake of a stop
Is it? just because YOU can't see the reason for the stop doesn't make it a stop for the sake of a stop.
>>stopping someone just because they're carrying a camera is not on.Isn't it?
If that someone was about to break a by-law by taking pictures without permission, or had just broken a by-law by taking pictures without permission I would say that stopping that person is a reasonable action on behalf of the BTP. In fact it is their duty to stop that person.
>>I dont know the circumstances,
Too right you don't and nor do any of the responders to this thread.
>>maybe Mr Orb did something to arouse their suspicions,
Almost certainly.
>>but if everyone with a camera round their neck is seen as fair game wherever they are
Wherever they are? PMSL because, of course, this incident took place on private property namely a railway station.
I believe that you have shown your own ignorance and shouldn't need anyone else to point it out
However, in the nature of a public service, I have endeavoured to do the job for you
B.
Witch
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,731
- Name
- Robyn
- Edit My Images
- No
Guys - chill a bit eh? You might want to consider editing some of the rudeness from your responses before a mod comes along and does it for you..... A civil question gets you much further than an abusive comment on here remember.
Do you REALLY believe that? Honestly?
By the way - the OP mentions that he wasn't taking pictures, simply passing through the station earlier on. The layout of Waverley is such that it's often used as a cut through - it's a nice simple route from the Old Town through to the new - and is used as such by an awful lot of folk. Thought I'd add that to clarify things a little for people who don't know the station.
Do you REALLY believe that? Honestly?
By the way - the OP mentions that he wasn't taking pictures, simply passing through the station earlier on. The layout of Waverley is such that it's often used as a cut through - it's a nice simple route from the Old Town through to the new - and is used as such by an awful lot of folk. Thought I'd add that to clarify things a little for people who don't know the station.
The interesting thing about this is that there was quite a bit of publicity recently regarding the amount of Stop and Search actions 'logged' by the BTP in Scotland compared to the those performed by the regular police forces here. I can't remember the exact figures but it was something like regular police 170-odd, BTP 14,000-odd in the 6 months following the attack at Glasgow Airport so I would be inclined to err on the side of a stop for the sake of it in this case....
joxby
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,782
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
Ben, He walked through a station with a camera round his neck, thats what he said and any other assumptions are just that, assumptions.
He should not be stopped just because he is carrying a camera, thats my opinion....the end.
You might think thats ok, I do not, I defend you're right to have the opposite opinion.
That doesn't make me, you or anybody else right, and ignorance certainly isn't a factor, anyone expecting me not to respond to that, is mistaken.
He should not be stopped just because he is carrying a camera, thats my opinion....the end.
You might think thats ok, I do not, I defend you're right to have the opposite opinion.
That doesn't make me, you or anybody else right, and ignorance certainly isn't a factor, anyone expecting me not to respond to that, is mistaken.
pxl8
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,288
- Name
- Andy Jones
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As I said above, we don't know that the camera was a factor in the decision to stop. It could have been any of a thousand other random reasons but because the OP mentioned a camera there seems to be an assumption that the camera was the cause.
Did the OP ask for a reason and was the camera mentioned as part of the reply? We simply don't know...
Did the OP ask for a reason and was the camera mentioned as part of the reply? We simply don't know...
joxby
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,782
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 12,939
- Edit My Images
- No
>>Well why don't you explain my ignorance.
I will try...
>>account for what actions ?,
We don't actually know - no do you unless you are the OP or the BTP officer.
>>what, you need permission to carry a camera now as well as use it ?
The BTP need to be able to determine if you have lawful business on their premises. The railway is NOT a public place and has its own regulations and by-laws
>>That is not grounds for a stop & search.
Isn't it? are you a member of the BTP? Do you know the exact reason for the stop and search?
>>He wasn't taking pictures
Wasn't he? and if he was did he have permission from the station master?
>>Look, I'm sorry, they can kiss my arse,
Actually, you will find that on railway property you can kiss theirs. Try it on sometime and see where it gets you.
>>that is a stop for the sake of a stop
Is it? just because YOU can't see the reason for the stop doesn't make it a stop for the sake of a stop.
>>stopping someone just because they're carrying a camera is not on.Isn't it?
If that someone was about to break a by-law by taking pictures without permission, or had just broken a by-law by taking pictures without permission I would say that stopping that person is a reasonable action on behalf of the BTP. In fact it is their duty to stop that person.
>>I dont know the circumstances,
Too right you don't and nor do any of the responders to this thread.
>>maybe Mr Orb did something to arouse their suspicions,
Almost certainly.
>>but if everyone with a camera round their neck is seen as fair game wherever they are
Wherever they are? PMSL because, of course, this incident took place on private property namely a railway station.
I believe that you have shown your own ignorance and shouldn't need anyone else to point it out
However, in the nature of a public service, I have endeavoured to do the job for you
B.
Ben:
Cheers, saved me a heep of typing. Very well put, couldn't have said it better. Ta!!
- Messages
- 12,939
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 11,048
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So if one ticket makes me a Photographer, how many tickets before I can claim to be a semi pro then?
I got loads see. ...
I got loads see. ...
OP
Mr.Orb
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 232
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I didn't ask them, was more wondering what everyone around me was thinking.
Witch said:
I thought I would save myself a couple of minutes walking through the station... ended up wasting about 10.
Witch
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,731
- Name
- Robyn
- Edit My Images
- No
inaneredstripe
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,457
- Name
- mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
gord , i,m impressed.
Rozzy
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 799
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tis quite funny from my point of view, mainly because I'm slightly crazy, however there are some heated view points when it comes to this sort of thing.
It all comes down to people having some self righteous belief that as they are doing nothing wrong, then they should not be liable to random stop and searches.
I disagree, and although I would afterwards question the officer's decision to waste my time, I would be thankful that there are these powers in place, and that an attempt to police a threat that cannot be seen easily is in place.
I feel for the countless members of the non-white ethnic groups that are targeted by the police for stop and searches all over the country, but again, If the police have a report of a white male with a blue jacket and black jeans on having just robbed a bank, then that is what they will look for. Comprende?
Alright, owning a camera does not make you a terrorist, but given the nature of todays terrorism threat, the ownership of a camera in a crowed train station makes you a suspect.
I'm a 21 year old. I drive my parents car. I could not afford the car on my own. I have been stopped by the police several times just to make sure that i am allowed to drive it. Its annoying, but I fit a profile, end of story. Interesting side note, I get treated like **** if im wearing a hoody . as opposed to shirt and tie from work!
Just the way it is.
Stop whinging and just be thankful that the police are doing theyre job and not just eating doughnuts!!!!!
It all comes down to people having some self righteous belief that as they are doing nothing wrong, then they should not be liable to random stop and searches.
I disagree, and although I would afterwards question the officer's decision to waste my time, I would be thankful that there are these powers in place, and that an attempt to police a threat that cannot be seen easily is in place.
I feel for the countless members of the non-white ethnic groups that are targeted by the police for stop and searches all over the country, but again, If the police have a report of a white male with a blue jacket and black jeans on having just robbed a bank, then that is what they will look for. Comprende?
Alright, owning a camera does not make you a terrorist, but given the nature of todays terrorism threat, the ownership of a camera in a crowed train station makes you a suspect.
I'm a 21 year old. I drive my parents car. I could not afford the car on my own. I have been stopped by the police several times just to make sure that i am allowed to drive it. Its annoying, but I fit a profile, end of story. Interesting side note, I get treated like **** if im wearing a hoody
. as opposed to shirt and tie from work!Just the way it is.
Stop whinging and just be thankful that the police are doing theyre job and not just eating doughnuts!!!!!
Toothie
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,360
- Name
- Ruth
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am amazed at the number of people on here prepared to have their civil liberties repeatedly cut by the government in the name of protection form terrorists.
have they ever caught or prevented a terrorist attack from a stop and search in the street? Can the government look after your personal details correctly?
Personally i think the 9/11 terrorists would have probely managed to hit the twin towers with out a pic of them! But if they needed one they could have just brought a post card in NY.
Its all typical reactionary BS. X has happened so we much prevent it happening again. Which as of yet they havent managed. 7/7 happened. 21/7 and Glasgow airport didin't happen only cos the terrorists messed up, not because the police prevented anything.
The IRA had a much more sustained campaign of terror and we didn't need special measures then.
Yes the attacks were horrible and a feel for those who have suffered a personal loss but as a nation we have gone a little crazy over the whole thing.
and another point nobody has mentioned is that when the police shot the guy at stockwell ( im not going to try to spell his name, but im not being disrespectful), they shot the wrong guy because they messed up the tail (as i understand it) but what happened to the guy they were supposed to be tailing?? Did they ever find him again or is he free to blow himself and everybody else up???
Photos of buildings with public entry are not an aid to terrorism, if they want buildings information they want blue prints and detailed information not snap shots (even if they are high quality pics). These people infiltrate the system they want to attack to get inside knowledge! They don't stand outside taking photos.
Well i am going to stop ranting now but that's my PoV.
have they ever caught or prevented a terrorist attack from a stop and search in the street? Can the government look after your personal details correctly?
Personally i think the 9/11 terrorists would have probely managed to hit the twin towers with out a pic of them! But if they needed one they could have just brought a post card in NY.
Its all typical reactionary BS. X has happened so we much prevent it happening again. Which as of yet they havent managed. 7/7 happened. 21/7 and Glasgow airport didin't happen only cos the terrorists messed up, not because the police prevented anything.
The IRA had a much more sustained campaign of terror and we didn't need special measures then.
Yes the attacks were horrible and a feel for those who have suffered a personal loss but as a nation we have gone a little crazy over the whole thing.
and another point nobody has mentioned is that when the police shot the guy at stockwell ( im not going to try to spell his name, but im not being disrespectful), they shot the wrong guy because they messed up the tail (as i understand it) but what happened to the guy they were supposed to be tailing?? Did they ever find him again or is he free to blow himself and everybody else up???
Photos of buildings with public entry are not an aid to terrorism, if they want buildings information they want blue prints and detailed information not snap shots (even if they are high quality pics). These people infiltrate the system they want to attack to get inside knowledge! They don't stand outside taking photos.
Well i am going to stop ranting now but that's my PoV.
The Met Police took out a full page advert in The London paper yesterday. I wish i would have kept my copy and scanned it as it was quite relevant to this topic.
Basically it was an advert with lots of digital cameras and one was circled with a text box and in that text box it asked the public to report suspicious behaviour or if they saw someone with a camera in a public place such as a train station or an airport as terrorists will photograph the locations of security cameras, entrances and exits and other notable features of a public place in order to plan attacks.
As I said in a previous reply to this thread I have been stopped and searched many times. I am of Indian origin working in an area that is very prone to terrorist attacks (Canary Wharf) so thats probably the reason why. However every time I have been stopped and searched they have been quite friendly and not made me feel like im a criminal and I just let them get on with it...The quicker they do their job the quicker I can get to work/home...
Whether they single out members of ethnic minorities I dont know. However if you are walking through a train station or an airport with a big backpack and/or a camera hanging from your neck you are more likley to get stopped and searched. Even if your intentions are completely innocent they dont know that. You could be anybody to them. A terrorist doesn't have a fixed profile of what one must look like. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about thats the way I see it.
Basically it was an advert with lots of digital cameras and one was circled with a text box and in that text box it asked the public to report suspicious behaviour or if they saw someone with a camera in a public place such as a train station or an airport as terrorists will photograph the locations of security cameras, entrances and exits and other notable features of a public place in order to plan attacks.
As I said in a previous reply to this thread I have been stopped and searched many times. I am of Indian origin working in an area that is very prone to terrorist attacks (Canary Wharf) so thats probably the reason why. However every time I have been stopped and searched they have been quite friendly and not made me feel like im a criminal and I just let them get on with it...The quicker they do their job the quicker I can get to work/home...
Whether they single out members of ethnic minorities I dont know. However if you are walking through a train station or an airport with a big backpack and/or a camera hanging from your neck you are more likley to get stopped and searched. Even if your intentions are completely innocent they dont know that. You could be anybody to them. A terrorist doesn't have a fixed profile of what one must look like. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about thats the way I see it.
sbrownphoto
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 51
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Correct ..... you dont need permission to photograph a building for non commercial gain ... in Scotland anyway .. dont know about you English or EU folks, or who ever else pops by in here.
ALSO, you cannot be ordered to delete photos ... will try find the article again and scan it about this as apparently its destruction of property and is an offence, so you can effectively charge the police if they do ...lol
I will try find the article to be sure again though for all to see, was in a mag somewhere.
:bonk:
dj_myk
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 168
- Name
- Mike Guthrie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i live in Edinburgh and been throu that train station many many times as a short cut from princess street to market street.
I was actually in there around september time getting some pictures.
Never got stopped questioned or searched.
You must have been looking like a terriorist... or was it the backpack or were you running for a train
mike
I was actually in there around september time getting some pictures.
Never got stopped questioned or searched.
You must have been looking like a terriorist... or was it the backpack or were you running for a train
mike
oldfart
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 569
- Name
- Davey
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i've been in Queens street & central station and you do need permission especially if using tripod, its formality all they ask are they private or professional & how long are you going to be in station. Give you a badge warn you to stay away from track. In cenral a few times i've been watched by security
nickking910
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 10
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I was stopped and questioned on Sunday. I was in Crystal Palace Park taking pictures of the ruins of the old Palace. The copper explained himself, saying that I didn't look like your average terrorist (jeans and a Harlequins rugby shirt, you decide!), but while he was talking to me three police cars turned up as backup
The park also has the athletics stadium, so I suppose I could have been trying to find locations to plant explosives prior to the next meeting there.
In response to a previous post, I work at Canary Wharf as well, and I find the security on the estate are a more rude and curt than any policemen I've dealt with.
The park also has the athletics stadium, so I suppose I could have been trying to find locations to plant explosives prior to the next meeting there.
In response to a previous post, I work at Canary Wharf as well, and I find the security on the estate are a more rude and curt than any policemen I've dealt with.
Which to me simply says that the police DO have an internal directive to stop anyone with a camera.
Personally I don't see that as reasonable grounds either.
raiderjay99
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4
- Name
- Jay Planty
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Now that's funny.
Wow, having never been to Europe, I had no idea what was going on over there. You can take pictures in public places here. Tourists do it all the time. I would think that if you were acting suspiciously, or fit a certain profile, you would be searched. This is an amazing thread.
Matt Charlton
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,550
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Moadib
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,062
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is really not meant as a putdown, but at 21 you've not a lot of experience of the world from which to define others' beliefs as "self righteous".
I could not disagree more with your sentiment. Read Mencken - " The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary". These fears, encouraged in order to extend the power of the politician and the state, are primarily for the purpose of the politician's gain, not for your good.
When you give such unchecked powers to the police, you encourage a***holes like the policeman in the below video, which I encourage everyone to watch.
http://sebrogers.typepad.com/seb_rogers_blog/2008/03/free-country.html
The state exists by YOU AND ME granting power to it We do not exist by their blessing. Such power must always be answerable to us.