Police in UK continue to suffer from debilitating boredom.
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Paul Heslop on 25 Jun 2010 12:03 Bowser wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:48:52 +0200, Ofnuts <o.f.n.u.t.s(a)la.poste.net> > wrote: > > >On 24/06/2010 22:52, Paul Heslop wrote: > >> Bowser wrote: > > > >>> the Brits are amazingly stupid. Do they really think stopping > >>> photographers will stop terrorism? Now that the terrorists know this, > >>> they'll do what, go somewhere else where you can shoot pics? > >>> > >>> Amazing... > >> > >> why do you say 'the brits'? > > > >Maybe because Bowser falls victim of exactly the same kind of > >generalization that make others think that anyone with a camera in hand > >is a terrorist. > > Right. That would make me a terrorist. Look, I get your point, but > like I said in my other reply, is there any other civilized western > country where this is happening? Seems to be a problem unique to the > island. Is that wrong? Are other countries detaining people if they > simply shoot pics in a public place? With a "pro" camera? I haven't > heard of any. thing is there is no rhyme nor reason for it. little pen pushers etc. reading a book about policing by a policeman recently where he tried to explain how crazy the rules etc they have to deal with are and how they are given certain 'crimes' to target more in a certain area for a period of time then on to something else. I honestly think a lot of these London things are aimed at protesters rather than terrorists. it's the seat of power and the less you can personally make a fuss about near to the houses of parliament and just about anywhere publicly the better for them. and then on a side note, if that day was hotter than it was up here in the north east there may well have been people messing around in and around the fountains and someone may have complained that someone was taking pictures of them (that one is just a complete what if?) -- Paul (we break easy) ------------------------------------------------------- Stop and Look http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
From: Paul Heslop on 25 Jun 2010 12:04 Bruce wrote: > > On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:02:48 -0400, Bowser <Canon(a)Nikon.Panny> wrote: > > > >Right. That would make me a terrorist. Look, I get your point, but > >like I said in my other reply, is there any other civilized western > >country where this is happening? Seems to be a problem unique to the > >island. Is that wrong? Are other countries detaining people if they > >simply shoot pics in a public place? With a "pro" camera? I haven't > >heard of any. > > The USA? Friends of mine have had similar treatment in New York, > Washington and Chicago, as I explained earlier in the thread. > > In the UK, outside London, and in the USA, outside those cities, the > problem seems not to exist. But those cities are known to be prime > targets for Islamic terrorists. exactly. I think I have heard of a couple of people being stopped from photographing odd places, like train stations, but not as often as you hear about London. -- Paul (we break easy) ------------------------------------------------------- Stop and Look http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
From: Paul Heslop on 25 Jun 2010 12:09 Bowser wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:52:16 +0100, Paul Heslop > <paul.heslop(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > >Bowser wrote: > > > >> >"Amateur Photographer" should know all this, however the magazine is > >> >keen to be seen to supporting the freedom of photographers, especially > >> >in London, and articles like this - which are a knee-jerk reaction to > >> >something that they should already know - seem increasingly to be a > >> >regular feature of the magazine. > >> > >> the Brits are amazingly stupid. Do they really think stopping > >> photographers will stop terrorism? Now that the terrorists know this, > >> they'll do what, go somewhere else where you can shoot pics? > >> > >> Amazing... > > > >why do you say 'the brits'? I don't think I personally know of one > >person who thinks that people should be stopped photographing > >anywhere, except obviously rabid groups of morons who would try to > >hang you if you happen to have a camera within the same area as a > >child, even if it's your own. > > I say "the brits" because I don't see this type of harrassment > anywhere else. At lease not in a "free and civilized" country. Is > there any other free western country where people are detained for > shooting pics in public places, like Trafalgar? Was he detained? have we heard that this actually happened? has he been charged with something? We, the Brits, don't make the rules. people in power are using anti terror laws to excuse all sorts of things. they even use them to combat dog poo on the streets apparently. Our govt and our local councils are full of people who like nothing more than to restrict freedom for the average Joe. Since Thatcher and through the Bliar years things have gone from bad to worse. But please, don't label all of us with these power crazed bastards. -- Paul (we break easy) ------------------------------------------------------- Stop and Look http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
From: Gary Edstrom on 25 Jun 2010 12:18 On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:05:21 +0100, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:46:18 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> >wrote: >>So they do anything to fill their time. >>http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_in_Trafalgar_Square_news_299484.html > > >"Amateur Photographer" should know that, in London, there are two >specific areas where most photography is banned. One is in Trafalgar >Square, where this incident occurred. The other is in Parliament >Square and Whitehall, around the Houses of Parliament and the main >offices of Government. > >Some exceptions are made for tourists with small P&S cameras, although >they are still liable to be stopped and asked about the end use of any >images they make. But anything other than tourists' snapshots are >banned, which means that anyone carrying a camera that looks like they >mean business (for which read: SLR) is likely to be stopped and >politely asked to desist. That's interesting...I just got back from a week in London. I shot pictures all around Parliament, Big Ben, and Westminster Abby with professional looking camera (Canon 50D), a telephoto lens, a photographer's vest, a bag of camera accessories, and a tripod. I did this on multiple occasions. I walked all around Parliament, shooting it from many angles. Nobody ever said anything. I also shot pictures in Trafalgar Square, although not nearly as many since the weather was quite overcas. Gary
From: Bruce on 25 Jun 2010 12:31
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 09:18:47 -0700, Gary Edstrom <GEdstrom(a)PacBell.Net> wrote: >On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:05:21 +0100, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>"Amateur Photographer" should know that, in London, there are two >>specific areas where most photography is banned. One is in Trafalgar >>Square, where this incident occurred. The other is in Parliament >>Square and Whitehall, around the Houses of Parliament and the main >>offices of Government. >> >>Some exceptions are made for tourists with small P&S cameras, although >>they are still liable to be stopped and asked about the end use of any >>images they make. But anything other than tourists' snapshots are >>banned, which means that anyone carrying a camera that looks like they >>mean business (for which read: SLR) is likely to be stopped and >>politely asked to desist. > >That's interesting...I just got back from a week in London. I shot >pictures all around Parliament, Big Ben, and Westminster Abby with >professional looking camera (Canon 50D), a telephoto lens, a >photographer's vest, a bag of camera accessories, and a tripod. I did >this on multiple occasions. I walked all around Parliament, shooting it >from many angles. Nobody ever said anything. > >I also shot pictures in Trafalgar Square, although not nearly as many >since the weather was quite overcas. Perhaps you are another person who doesn't understand the difference between "likely" and "always". |