Police in UK continue to suffer from debilitating boredom.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:05:21 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 20:46:18 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:
So they do anything to fill their time.
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk..._ 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.

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...

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.

--
Bertrand

Bowser wrote:


the Brits are amazingly stupid.

Here's a deal. If you don't assume that all Brits
agree with their government(s), I'll do the same for you and
your government(s).

BugBear

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:52:16 +0100, Paul Heslop
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?

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:48:52 +0200, Ofnuts
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.

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:02:48 -0400, Bowser 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.

Must be either your friends from Olympus, or your famous IP lawyer.

Can't say about Chi-town, but with a small exception of the PA in NYC,
neither I nor any of my friends have ever been harassed in either NYC or DC.



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.




--
Peter

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:09:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:02:48 -0400, Bowser 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.

I've tramped all over Washington DC and New York and have never been
stopped or questioned. I've never heard of anyone who has. I even
shoot with a 5D II in airports with no problem whatsoever.

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:09:42 +0100, Paul Heslop
wrote:

Bowser wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:52:16 +0100, Paul Heslop
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 *******s.

Point taken, I meant no insult to the "real people" only to those who
insist of over-excercising what little power they might have to harass
innocents.

"Brits" comment withdrawn, apologies offered.

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:53:12 -0400, Bowser wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:09:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:02:48 -0400, Bowser 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.

I've tramped all over Washington DC and New York and have never been
stopped or questioned. I've never heard of anyone who has. I even
shoot with a 5D II in airports with no problem whatsoever.

On the other hand, I was approached by a security guard in the
industrial park next to the airport in Sanford, Florida. There was a
large petroleum tank with a circular iron staircase around it. I
thought the stairs and the shadows made an interesting photo.

The guard asked me what I doing photographing the tank, and I told him
why it interested me. He told me photography of the tank was not
allowed and stood there until I left. He didn't ask me to delete the
photos, though. I think he wrote down my license plate number.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:53:12 -0400, Bowser wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:09:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 08:02:48 -0400, Bowser 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.

I've tramped all over Washington DC and New York and have never been
stopped or questioned. I've never heard of anyone who has. I even
shoot with a 5D II in airports with no problem whatsoever.

On the other hand, I was approached by a security guard in the
industrial park next to the airport in Sanford, Florida. There was a
large petroleum tank with a circular iron staircase around it. I
thought the stairs and the shadows made an interesting photo.

The guard asked me what I doing photographing the tank, and I told him
why it interested me. He told me photography of the tank was not
allowed and stood there until I left. He didn't ask me to delete the
photos, though. I think he wrote down my license plate number.



You get individuals like that,everywhere. We have some interesting local
buildings. At one, which is in the same complex as Nikon, the security
guards can be sticky. I asked the building management for permission and
they had absolutely no issue. They told me to just let security know I had
permission and they backed it up with a written note. Armed with the note I
went back and wasn't even challenged. I just smiled at the security guard.


--
Peter