Police in UK continue to suffer from debilitating boredom.
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: RichA on 23 Jun 2010 23:46 So they do anything to fill their time. http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_in_Trafalgar_Square_news_299484.html
From: Ray Fischer on 24 Jun 2010 02:49 RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote: >So they do anything to fill their time. 99.0% on the irony meter. -- Ray Fischer rfischer(a)sonic.net
From: RichA on 24 Jun 2010 10:03 On Jun 24, 2:49 am, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: > RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >So they do anything to fill their time. > > 99.0% on the irony meter. > > -- > Ray Fischer > rfisc...(a)sonic.net Hey! I thought you tired of the humiliation you suffered here and shuffled off to the poltical groups?
From: Bruce on 24 Jun 2010 15:05 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. Away from these two areas, there are around 40 sites that are designated as being of particular interest to potential terrorists, and the police have enhanced powers under Section 44 of the Prevention of Terrorism Acts 2005 and 2006 to stop and interview anyone using a camera in these areas. There is no ban on photography but questions about end use are to be expected. While the police do not have specific legal powers to ask for evidence of identity in these areas, it is wise to co-operate as much as possible, otherwise an arrest and a subsequent time-consuming interview (at a police station) are likely to spoil your day. Outside the Section 44 areas you are still likely to be stopped if you are carrying "professional-looking" gear and/or are photographing buildings. The police tend not to differentiate between their greater powers in Section 44 areas and their more restricted powers elsewhere. The reason for all this is the very high level of terrorist threat from Islamists based in the UK. It is impossible to quantify the overall risk of another terrorist attack (we had two in 2005) and the additional risk posed by people photographing buildings, so the police err on the side of caution and probably stop rather more people than they need to. But we will never know if this has prevented any further attacks. "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.
From: GMAN on 24 Jun 2010 16:38
In article <2010062413314654666-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom>, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >On 2010-06-24 12:05:21 -0700, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> said: > >> 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_Trafalga >r_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. > >Why on Earth would tourists of any kind be restricted in the >photographic equipment they choose to travel with? >Do you mean to tell me that if I visited Trafalgar Square, as a >tourist, who is also a hobbyist photographer, with a DSLR and a bag >with one or two more lenses, I am going to be accused of being some >sort of Pro-photog? >I am after all a tourist without a small P&S (I don't know if a G11 in >the bag with my other stuff would count). >Do these clowns understand some amateur photographers use DSLR's? >Sometimes more than one. > >What would I be told if I stated I was just a tourist taking shots of >what is supposed to be one of London's premier tourist attractions? >That is how it is presented in the brochures, isn't it? > >Boy! Are they going to have fun in 2012 with the Olympics. > >The UK is appearing less attractive as a travel destination lately. >Although there are some places other than London I really enjoy >visiting. > > > http://www.amateurphotographer.co. uk/news/Photographers_rights_campaign_spawns_lens_cloth_launch_news_299405. html |