Jump to content

Advice to photographers in Uk


bill

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Worrying for a number of reasons not least this;

 

"Until now, senior royals have accepted that pictures of them could be taken if they were shot from a public place.

But both Buckingham Palace and Clarence House say they will now refuse to tolerate photographers capturing any 'intrusive' pictures of the family."

 

So given that the law allows photography in public how exactly are the Royals going to 'refuse to tolerate' photos of them having drunken fights outside Mayfair nightclubs in future?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 763
  • Created
  • Last Reply
... So given that the law allows photography in public how exactly are the Royals going to 'refuse to tolerate' photos of them having drunken fights outside Mayfair nightclubs in future?

"Orf with their heads!" :rolleyes:

 

It doesn't sound like it's been thought through ...

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think UK photographers need to organize a flash mob of the top level buildings and just shoot thousands of pics. As an expat I am sincerely dismayed to see how much control big brother has now in the UK, it's disgusting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... As an expat I am sincerely dismayed to see how much control big brother has now in the UK, it's disgusting.

I agree and, with the way he's been misbehaving, I'm starting to think that our big brother might have been adopted and is actually from the family of trailer trash bullies at the end of the street. :(

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great news, James! :) Finally the widespread abuse of powers afforded to the police under the Terrorism Act 2000 have been officially recognised. Let's hope that the police will respond accordingly and quickly.

 

It is disappointing, however, that Home Office Minister David Hanson is considering appealing the decision thereby wasting taxpayers money in an effort to legalise abuses against taxpayers. :mad:

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about the EU and the law in this country.

 

The City of London Police are now just making it up as they go along.

 

NO2ID Press Releases � City Police making up ID powers

 

Typical of the City Police. But you try telling them they are not entitled to know your name and address - you'll be off the the cells so fast your feet won't touch the ground. They'll make some spurious offense to charge you with so that you have to give them the details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian Blair, former top London cop hounded from office for various reasons put forward the case in favour of stop and search of photographers under sect44 of the anti-terrorism act.

 

Basically his case is that if the bizzies only stopped and searched those about whom they had some degree of suspicion; the "figures would look wrong" (my words), i.e. they would be stopping mostly young Muslim males. Those middle-aged white photographers are stopped just to make it look more even-handed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they do look wrong and a lot more people should be asking why we are wasting time and money searching people who are obviously not a threat. It is ultimately self-defeating.

 

The same argument has been used for the "blanket" high intensity screening at airports. Full body searches of a family going to Disneyland would appear to be disproportionate but it appears to be necessary to keep the PC brigade happy for whom any hint of discrimination is anathema.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but from the terrorist point of view little can be better than knowing in advance which sorts of people won't be screened.

 

I'm all in favour of intelligent profiling (it would be foolish to concentrate on young men with brown skin and beards, but it's stupid not to have a good look at anyone travelling alone on a one-way ticket bought for cash). But there always also needs to be a strong random element in selecting people to be screened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the random bit that's missing at the moment. Screening everyone doesn't make sense but not to know who will be screened should, if done properly, be a deterrent.

 

I'm fairly sure that there is a random element at present, in selecting the people who get more thoroughly examined than whatever is the current "standard" (e.g. having your hand-luggage swabbed and hand-searched even though there's nothing in it that would have looked suspicious on the X-ray). I certainly hope so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it that the thought police monitor twitter and intercept the (Robin Hood!) airport - but fail to pick up an obvious suspect at international Amsterdam??

Maybe as the guy didn't have a computer he had to pay for a one-way ticket in cash.... and was unable to post on twitter that he had no passport?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...