Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Sonny Burnett

MB Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Messages
1,341
Car
W208 CLK55 AMG
i watched this video in absolute shock...

seriously is there anything worse..?
 
Yes....The Only Way Is Essex...... T.O.W.I.E :)
 
i watched this video in absolute shock...

seriously is there anything worse..?

Yes. A police force which is widely open to bribery and corruption.

Ours isn't. Some of ours may not know all the laws, some of which are confusing in the extreme, but the police try to enforce the rules our elected and beloved leaders make.

Certainly not perfect, but on a par with the best.
 
So an anarchist goes out of his way to be as difficult as possible towards Police officers who are being polite and giving him as many chances possible to act like a normal human being and he ends up being arrested.

Where's the problem here?

I would expect to be arrested if I acted in the way this chap was acting. He went out of his way to be as difficult as possible so as to be detained just so he could record it all on cam to try and make a totally pointless protest.

Just try and see it from the Police officers in question point of view. If he wasn't up to anything dodgy, then why does he not simply give his name and address?

Just imagine if this chap then went on to cause some kind of terrorist attack and many people died? Questions would be asked as to why the police did nothing and allowed him to take his pictures which helped to plot an attack.

Worst case scenario I agree but I'm sure you would probably be the first to attack the police for not doing enough and letting it happen.

You really have to look at this from both sides and see the bigger picture.
 
i watched this video in absolute shock...

seriously is there anything worse..?

Yes, assuming that we are free to do what we want and our freedom of speech is protected. The areas in which our supposed freedoms exist is very heavily proscribed.
 
Yes, assuming that we are free to do what we want and our freedom of speech is protected. The areas in which our supposed freedoms exist is very heavily proscribed.

in public places you can take pictures.. the silly woman at the start, "anti social"

so whats anti social about taking pictures..

released without charge...
 
If bobby ask for your details - Provide the details - end of.

It could be construed that the photographer was hoping to be caught to exercise his knowledge over the PCSO and higher ranking officers.

The sooner that sort of video (that gives knowledge of how to be obstrperous, by someone who has commited an offence, or not) is banned the better. The officers in question could have used the time wasted by the photographer in catching criminals or assisting a genuine call for help.

To enpower/educate police timewasters and criminals in the art of being a pain in the 4rse is the last thing we need.
 
If bobby ask for your details - Provide the details - end of.

It could be construed that the photographer was hoping to be caught to exercise his knowledge over the PCSO and higher ranking officers.

The sooner that sort of video (that gives knowledge of how to be obstrperous, by someone who has commited an offence, or not) is banned the better. The officers in question could have used the time wasted by the photographer in catching criminals or assisting a genuine call for help.

To enpower/educate police timewasters and criminals in the art of being a pain in the 4rse is the last thing we need.

the guys walked off the coppers pursued, so they in turn wasted the time.. this timewasting theory works on most situations. for instance some one was stabed outside my house 2-3 days ago and the silly prat coppers have only just come and taped the area off 10 at night.. 3 days after the fact.. after 100s of people have walked over it..
they dident think of doing it the moment it happened... no no. that takes to much brain power for a lowly bobby to think up..
 
I personally would be wanting to cause them as much inconvenience as possible if they chose to stop me taking a few photos in the town centre. If we continue to accept these abuses of power this country will be turned into a police state before the century is done.

Theresa May dropped a few of Labour's most ludicrously authoritarian laws when she took over the Home Office but there are more that need to be removed.

The benign interpretation is that it got the coppers out of the snow and into the office for a few hours, still is it worth detaining someone so you can toast your toes?

Or it might be that the police think they run the shop. How can they seriously believe that the photographer was a threat to anything but their supposed authority?

I would hope that the people involved were sent on several rights and diversity training courses as a comedy punishment.
 
Last edited:
On the face of it this looks like an appalling abuse of authority and a waste of public money. The photographer was well within his rights not to give his his name. Why the hell should he? When he didn't they just took some time to invent something to arrest him for. I hope the officers concerned were disciplined. This is exactly the type of action that errodes public confidence in the police force and makes it difficult for good officers to do their jobs.
 
Something smells wrong with the story. I agree the photographer was apparently only taking seasonal pictures but why was he so 'clued up' on his rights? Seemed a rather scripted response.

As for this type of video being banned, that's just wrong, obstreperous he may have been, but why shouldn't EVERY citizen of this proud nation be aware of and be allowed to exercise their rights? Not to do so will erode the rights of the weaker and disadvantaged in this civilised society.

I think the real issue here was an officer's ego, I think the one that likely sent the wee lassie support officer over to "go and see what m'laddo is up to".
 
This subject has long been aired in Amateur Photographer magazine ; they have been campaigning on behalf of photographers since Section 44 started being abused in this manner and have been instrumental in having some of this legislation overturned . Said legislation has also been outlawed at European level . Thanks to publicity in AP magazine and on their website , via means such as lens cleaning cloths given away with photographers' rights printed on them , most serious photographers are probably now more aware of the relevant law than many law enforcement officers .
 
I think it's pretty laughable to suggest the photographer is an 'Anarchist' :rolleyes:

I think the biggest problem is that the European Court of Human Rights is giving people liberty in one way and our government is taking it back in another; they are sh!t scared of arresting career criminals so they pick on easy meat like this bloke.
I mean what's she on about at the beginning 'Anti-social'? Who does she work for? The Stasi?
Why should he just give his name without proper reason?

I'm afraid that snippet of VT says more about the police than it does about an amateur photographer taking pictures of Accrington (who are they?;)).....
 
The best thing to do is to apply for a permit to take photographs from the local council. If the police are suspicious then you have permission from the authority to be there, that way nobody is wasting anybody's time. Seeing as its a street party or carnival, it would have been advertised in advance, you can send letters or go to see someone in person who would give you permission, saves all the grief. It is a sign of the times we live in, police officers will arrest if they 'believe' a crime has been or about to be committed and they can make you fit that criteria if they wish to so it is within everyone's interests to prove that you have a right to be there.
 
So an anarchist goes out of his way to be as difficult as possible towards Police officers who are being polite and giving him as many chances possible to act like a normal human being and he ends up being arrested.

Where's the problem here?

I would expect to be arrested if I acted in the way this chap was acting. He went out of his way to be as difficult as possible so as to be detained just so he could record it all on cam to try and make a totally pointless protest.

Just try and see it from the Police officers in question point of view. If he wasn't up to anything dodgy, then why does he not simply give his name and address?

Just imagine if this chap then went on to cause some kind of terrorist attack and many people died? Questions would be asked as to why the police did nothing and allowed him to take his pictures which helped to plot an attack.

Worst case scenario I agree but I'm sure you would probably be the first to attack the police for not doing enough and letting it happen.

You really have to look at this from both sides and see the bigger picture.

Sorry, but I think you're argument is totally wrong here. Where does it say he's an 'anarchist'? He might well be trying it on, but that is his right. And this backs up the argument...YouTube - Know Your Rights - Photographers Vs The Terrorism Act
 
The best thing to do is to apply for a permit to take photographs from the local council.

Are you seriously suggesting that we should only be allowed to take pictures in a public place if we get prior permission from the local council?

This isn't Russia or China you know.

In the same vein, I believe the last thing we want is a police state and keeping ones identity private unless there is adequate reason to divulge this information is a fundamental part of having a free and open culture.
 
Last edited:
I sense an elephant in the room.

Did the police think this guy was a potential terrorist? I doubt it. But there is every chance that they thought he might be taking inappropriate photographs of children. I use the term "inappropriate" advisedly, as today just about any photograph taken of a child without the express permission of their parent or guardian may be considered inappropriate.

Now, I understand that many will find this situation ridiculous, and will pine for a bygone age when one could go about one's business without having one's motives questioned. However, the game has changed and if the police receive a complaint from a member of the public they can be held to account if they do not act on it.

What we do not see in the this apparently balanced video is how the guy was going about fulfilling his hobby. We see a few of his snaps, some of which do include children, but we can't see what those on the scene would have seen. He says at one point that there were other people taking photos who were not challenged, which leads me to suspect that he was behaving differently. Perhaps a mother had asked him not to photograph her child, and he had responded in his apparently belligerent manner? Who knows...

As someone who takes photographs nearly everywhere I go nowadays, I am acutely aware of other people's sensibilities. I was taking a walk in Holland Park over the weekend and saw a dog that had been completely dyed pink. Worth a shot, I thought, but as soon as it stood still for long enough for my iPod camera to stand a chance of snapping it, a young girl (maybe 4 or 5 years old) whose family was having a picnic close by ran up to take a closer look at it. Mission abandoned for me. Why? Because I would not want to have to be found in possession of a photograph of a young girl, and have to explain that it was the pink dog I was really interested in.

Similarly, there's the issue of taking photos of cars with interesting number plates - which is something of an obsession for me. However, I tend not to do this while there are people around, or if the car itself is stationary and occupied, as I would feel uneasy about having to justify what I was doing. Seems the most normal thing in the world to me (but then, I'm odd), but to someone else it must seem quite bizarre. And if I were honest and admitted I was taking these photos in order to post the more interesting ones on the internet, then I can see why some people might view this with suspicion (even though I know it is perfectly innocent).

Is this an erosion of my human rights? Maybe, but it's not a right I'm going to lose any sleep over, and I don't accept the argument that if I let this one go, something more fundanmental will follow. Let's take each one as it comes.
 
Last edited:
This subject has been discussed at length on various photographic forums, Section 44 is now obsolete, I think this video dates from some time ago when the abuses of the Act were in full flow. Directives have been issued to Chief Constables that photography per se is not a criminal act.
 
Are you seriously suggesting that we should only be allowed to take pictures in a public place if we get prior permission from the local council?

This isn't Russia or China you know.

In the same vein, I believe the last thing we want is a police state and keeping ones identity private unless there is adequate reason to divulge this information is a fundamental part of having a free and open culture.

No this isnt China or Russia, I am a member of a photographic club, so as to avoid unnecessary hassle I always write to the council and if necessary drop in to a local police station local to an event I want to photograph. Am I being pedanting? Maybe. Do I want to avoid arrest and harrassment? Yes of course. I'm not saying everyone should do it, but I'm just saying that to avoid an unnecessary confrontation with a police officer or PCSO then its easier to wave a piece of paper in their face which says in effect, "Do one."
 
Sorry, but I think you're argument is totally wrong here. Where does it say he's an 'anarchist'? He might well be trying it on, but that is his right. And this backs up the argument...YouTube - Know Your Rights - Photographers Vs The Terrorism Act

this video is prime example..

the copper her clearly states you do not have to give your details...

in this life dont ever let any one force you to do anything you dont have to or want to do.. police are nobodys, they think becasue of a silly uniform (that hardly anyone respects) that its ok for them to ask anyone anything...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom