Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,697   Posts: 1,669,683   Online: 894
      
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 100
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,067
    There is quite a lot of evidence to suggest that the officers, and certainly the senior officer do know and understand the law. It's either not being communicated to the beat officers - or it's being ignored. Either which way it's a problem. Andy K was talking about the whole totalitarianism thing. I know the U.K. decided to implement the Total Information Awareness thing. Here, it was officially withdrawn due to 1.) public outcry and 2.) the fact that Admiral John Poindexter, (yes he of Irangate conviction) was running it. It's in DARPA now - so, like everything else in DARPA it's not really happening! I believe it's Poindexter's company that's doing it for the U.K. Nice to know we're all in the hands of a convicted, (but pardoned, of course) felon. Plus, we all know how good our governments are at safeguarding the information in their charge!!

    You're getting me going guys!!!!!!!!!

    Bob H
    "Why is there always a better way?"

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,067
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    In the past, Posts from the UK on this subject usually talked about film being fogged or just destroyed, camera seized, and photographers being arrested. The fact that the OP was handled civilly is an improvement. Not perfect, but an improvement.

    Steve
    Behold the Power of APUG

    Bob H
    "Why is there always a better way?"

  3. #23
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    10,012
    But let's get practical: How to react?

    Starting a campaign against that kind of control?
    We should not forget that many people want that control, so it's not just the authority.

    Just have oneself checked and go further as long as they don't stop you taking photographs?
    Well, I have nothing to hide at a police control, but they might think, that guy has been mangled that often through the computer, there must be something wrong with him.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,067
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    But let's get practical: How to react?

    Starting a campaign against that kind of control?
    We should not forget that many people want that control, so it's not just the authority.

    Just have oneself checked and go further as long as they don't stop you taking photographs?
    Well, I have nothing to hide at a police control, but they might think, that guy has been mangled that often through the computer, there must be something wrong with him.
    That's the big question - and an excellent one to ask. And you're right - many people want the control because somehow it makes them feel safe. I used to commute daily into London in the early seventies in the middle of the big IRA bombing campaign and there was a sense then, that if we allowed things to change because of the terrorism we would, in effect, be surrendering. The police had everyone's cooperation and mutual respect prevailed - and it worked. This time around it's so very different.

    I agree, I have nothing to hide, let them search me; but random search and seizure was outlawed for a reason - the power it afforded was abused. We've seen too many countries where civil rights were sacrificed in the name of security, and it's always gone tubular. It never starts without some sort of apparently reasoning, but it nearly always degenerates bit by tiny bit until it's just too damned late.

    Perhaps the U.S. Bill of Rights, or the U.N. Bill of Rights or the European Bill of Rights would be a good start. They're all good documents and perhaps if we really stood for that (as we say we do) then personal "security" may, in some instances be at odds. It's a choice - and one which we should be permitted to make. As it is we are instructed as to which of our rights we will forgo and it becomes a fait accompli

    It's become either unpatriotic, naive or just plain stupid to promote rights over security, but to my mind too many people have died fighting for those rights over too many years to just surrender to people who no better than us what liberties we deserve.

    I'll just go format my hard drive now

    Bob H
    "Why is there always a better way?"

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    san jose, ca
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,569
    Images
    77
    The bottom line is:

    You are pissed that this cost you money. If they had gone away and not come back, you would have chalked it up to whatever. But t cost you money. I have felt that way many times before, I am of Irish heritage a it carries with it.

    They left you alone to do wht you wanted. After the incidents of last week, all police in GB are gonna err on the investigative side. Is it right? Nope. But it is how it is. And apparently legal.

    You screwed up.

    Face the music and pay the fine. I haven't been stopped by police indamn time. But when I was, I said thing. They always caught me fair and square and I paid the fine. The number of times I have gotten away with it justified the price.

    And yes, I have been stopped in Germany by the polizei for shooting after midnight on the streets of Bitburg, asked many questions, and let go. I did nothing wrong, but they thouit was worth while checking out.

    It's not right, but it is.

    tim in san jose
    Where ever you are, there you be.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    337
    Images
    1
    This post has split in to two threads, I don't disagree that being disturbed or prevented from photographing in legal places
    is a PITA and an infringement of my rights as a citizen, blah, blah, blah,, but you did screw up, sorry, breaking the law is breaking the law.
    If you had crashed into my car and had no insurance I would have been well pissed off.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    32
    In Germany the insurance companies inform the authority who registered a car when an insurance expires. I'm not sure if there is any fine but you will loose your car registration.

    I don't care because I don't have a driving licence. But I care if the police poses me questions when I'm carrying my camera in a rucksack or am photographing.

    And I see a problem if the police is checking number plates for an expired insurance because somebody is photographing and not because they are stopping and checking cars on a random basis. The consequence will be that it's more likely for a photographer to get a fine than for a non-photographer. I wouldn't call this equality before the law.

    Markus

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Seoul
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    86
    I'm in total agreement with Mourr. In my (apparently quaint) opinion, the police have no business whatsoever asking questions of someone taking photos of a derelict building. The question of whether he is a professional or not seems quite irrelevant, also (they were probably buying time to think up a reason to be asking questions). They asked for ID?! Even a former head of MI5 (Stella Rimington) recently accused the Government of using terrorism threats to scare the public into accepting this sort of treatment.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7893890.stm

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,067
    I don't think the OP's main point was the GBP200 fine - although I personally think it a little excessive, and I also note that their concern for the public at large didn't go as far as impounding the car to prevent uninsured driving - but rather how things have changed dramatically in recent years and not for the better.

    In New York, following the London Underground bombings, the police are now empowered to stop and search any bag or backpack at random and believe me I absolutely understand this need to prevent tragedies like those in London. Since that time, however, no terrorist attack has been uncovered - but thousands of other arrests, (mainly drug-related) have been made. It seems strange to me that the otherwise illegal search and seizure did not restrict the prosecutions that could arise from any non-terrorist discoveries. (And yes, I do question the intelligence of anyone carrying a bag of weed on the subway when they know they can be stopped and searched at random!)

    The surveillance cameras that hone in only on registration plates, for example. They seem to have nothing to do with anti-terrorist operations. The sad fact is that these governments rely on fines to fund themselves and that necessity results in stupid legislation based not on what is good for the public but what is good for government coffers. I would add that these policies adversely affect the less well-off. (The OP's GBP 200 fine is a relatively bigger penalty to him than to a multi-millionaire.) If punishment for non-violent offences were restricted to community service you would see huge changes, if not in the law - then most certainly in their enforcement.

    I know, I know - I'm on a rant. Sorry - but being in my fifties, I just see everything that used to be important, and that we used to stand for being flushed down the crapper,

    Bob H
    "Why is there always a better way?"

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Mount Victoria, Blue Mountains
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    42
    The other evening I saw what I believe is an iconic image of our times. A small lonely child in a local fenced-in playground, tokenly playing but looking bored. The light was dull that said it all. The parent had their bum on the railing looking bored and impatiently waiting for the child to finish their token-after work playtime.

    I though this would make a great social photograph of our times. Twenty years ago there would be no problems with such a photograph. Now such a shot is wrought with problems – under age kids - even though they would never be identified.

    Just a few decades ago kids would be down the creeks, the back lots, the bush, whatever, with no parental supervision after every school day, doing whatever they liked. Great for the imagination, getting into trouble and everything else.

    A photographer around a playground – I am likely to be rounded up by a group of parents presuming I am a paedophile. Oh what a sad society we now live in. What the answer is I do not know.

    Any comments!
    The Medium is the Massage - Marshal McLuhan
    www.abriefvisionoftime.com

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin