But once our profiles (or the 'photographers IDs') are created, that will be it, I guess. So, what if your ID says you're not qualified to have a permit to photograph in public? Do you want to live like that for the rest of your life? How can young people practice journalism which is a profession open to anyone?
Originally Posted by catem
And if you violate what is said on your ID, what consequences do you have to face?
The bottom line is, this is all non-sense, and we just have to be keen on what might happen to us if we didn't say we don't want such a ban. This is not just for UK, but for the rest of the world as well.
I take it you are female Cate. If you were male you would without doubt have come across such paranoia by now.
Originally Posted by catem
Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.
I guess westerners are tired of their rights and freedoms and throwing them out of the window like tennis balls. Too bad that democracy is wasted, it was such a good idea a couple thousand years and half ago...
Real photographs, created in camera, 100% organic,
no digital additives and shit
Yes, this undoubtedly makes it easier, although logically it shouldn't as women have been known to act in partnership with men to procure photographs of children (if that's what we're talking about). I accept if you're a 6ft 2 male, it's likely to be a bit different.
Originally Posted by Andy K
But there's more to it than that. It's also to do with the way you relate to people around you, especially whether you communicate or not, and even the body language you use (consciously or not).
Yes, there are cases of complete overreaction by the powers that be. But I'm not convinced it's happening nearly as much as you'd think. I also happen to believe that 'situations' could often - if not always - have been avoided.
And Firecracker - As for ID cards, - I've never said I support the idea, only that they could be useful in certain circumstances - certainly if photographers persist in refusing to speak to members of the public. I think it would need to be thought about carefully though, and I'm not at all sure the benefits would outweigh the disadvantages. I'm certainly not going get into defending the idea of having them because I have never said I believe it should happen. And as far as I know there are NO plans to make ID cards a requirement.
Photographers deserve to be heard, and these issues need to be discussed. I'm all for that. I'm just getting tired of those who don't see it as a two-way process and talk endlessly about their rights but have nothing to say about responsibilities.
p.s. won't be able to pick up on any more points as am going away for the rest of half term
Last edited by catem; 02-20-2007 at 06:42 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I see your point of view, but the problem is the ongoing process of the profiling with so called 'predictive analysis' according to the Canadian human rights lawyer. The predictive analysis is, you know, something that might or might not happen, so it cannot be a truthful representation of individuals. So, for example who might have a better chance of going to jail for child porn between the guy whose name is Pete Townsend (I have nothing against him by the way) and Mr.nobody who checks amazon for purchasing numerous photo books on young teens? I think the answer is probably both even though neither are engaged in anything illegal. That's what the predictive analysis sounds like, to me.
Originally Posted by catem
Now this might not be the case of UK right now, but for the G8 countries, it is something to be expected.
And the response to the content of the AP article more precisely, I find that the photographers whether amateurs or pros have some sort of responsibilities to communicate with their photo subjects, and I totally agree with you on that. In fact, I personally don't have problems taking photos in public (the U.S., Japan, a dozen of European countries), but the current mass-profiling is probably being done in a place I will never know. That's why there are so called 'extraordinary renditons' conducted by the U.S. authorities, and they incorporate with their allied nations. It doesn't matter what charges are. You could be held in a jail with no charge forever. Where are their rights? They are not criminals at all, but this massive and random illegal profiling makes them criminals. And this is where we are all heading to if we don't stop it.
I recommend you watch the video clips from Democracy Now that I put the links to because they really cover this subject well. And I belive democracy is a choice and so possible but only when all citizens in a given society are well informed. I'm not paranoid. I'm just telling you what's going on in the world today.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Democracy has always been the process of fighting and fighting back, but some people just don't get it.
Originally Posted by arigram
And to implement democracy in new soil is much much harder, but again some people just don't get it at all.
I think this is one of those threads - common on apug - where in fact people pretty much agree with each other.
To get back to the original point of this thread - I don't think this particular petition has been handled very well - this has a lot to do with the whole e-petition system here - and it would appear in the particular example given the photographers in question could have handled the situation differently.
I was hoping that this would open up a big discussion, but it didn't, much like many other threads in general. In a sense this is potentially more serious as a topic than the ones concerning the problems of Xray scans at the airports.
Originally Posted by catem
In terms of attacks on freedoms that we took for granted even a few years ago, you are quite right. The insidious and chilling aspect is that those who wish to remove our freedoms rely on the fact that we can be fooled into quickly forgetting how much things have changed and we even find oursleves providing a rationale as to why these changes are "justified". The analogy with surreptitiously boiling the frog sitting reasonably comfortably in the ever warmer water in the pan springs to mind. By the time he realises what is happening, it is too late.
Originally Posted by firecracker
The rationale runs: The authorities/ government must have good reason for doing what they are doing, otherwise they wouldn't do it. So it is unreasonable to hold them to account and ask that they justify such actions fully, providing cause and effect evidence and proof that the response is proportionate to the real threat.
I could go on but the whole spectrum of views has been aired before on this site and unfortunately caused more problems than it has solved. I suspect that is why it has generated less of a discussion that you had hoped for.
I would bet a public place would be city centres, public or prominent buldings/landmarks and just about anywhere in London you care to mention.......this is not a joke, police are already busy harassing photographers under the prevention of terrorism act 2000. I know, they harassed me because I was 'obviously' a photographer but ignored the literally hundreds of 'normal touristy' looking people. Terrorists generally try to make themselves look as prominent as possible as a double bluff. Zawahiri wrote the 'terorist photographers handbook' stating, "Thou shalt capture the images of the infidel structures using a tripod (the bigger the better), sheet film and acutance developers. Mujaheddin brothers must shun the evils of digital cameras and the likeness of tourists for the boosoms of 72 virgins await only the brazen and devout devotees of Berleback tripods, Ebony Cameras and the Pentax Spot meter". The Govt really are a bunch of ignorant pr*ts, the level of intiative demonstrated by many beet coppers being little better it would seem. The same idiocy denies many parents the chance to look back on videos of their children in the school play (because everyone knows children need protecting from vilanous paedaphiles getting off on children dressed up as 'Noah and the animals'. People get the politicians they deserve and so the solution lies in our hands.
I recall a similar issue with the NY police not too long ago that claimed the NYC were in breach of the law.
Last edited by Tom Stanworth; 02-22-2007 at 10:53 AM. Click to view previous post history.