Section 76: Taking photos of Police to be a crime under terrorist legislation

[jimadore]

no no dont ' do that sir

police only like they photo taken in the best possible way ? commuity programs or helping people? never take a photo in the cells when they are kicking the shi- out off you or trying to get a conviction.

 

[bluestreak]

Have I mentioned already: Fuck 'em.

 

[bluestreak]

- and meanwhile police photograph innocent people attending political meetings to scare them off.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/4119466.Police____scare_tactics_/

Good on David Lepper MP for questioning this, lets hope he persues it.

More chance of him building a thirty storey building out of his own shite.

 

[derf]

Ah! But I have some Cat Stevens

Cat who?

Ah, you mean Yusuf Islam.

Ner, haram as far as the way out on the edge extremist go.

Singing Al qur'an is a groovy as it gets for that bunch.

 

[Pingu]

Hmmmm

I have been asked to take pictures of our dibbles police dog handlers for a calendar... am I being fitted up?

devious...

 

[Barking_Mad]

Mark Vallee has an article on the Guardian website about this........

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/11/police-terrorism-photography-liberty-central

 

[spitfire]

So, are any urbanites popping along to this?

 

[editor]

I intend to go.

 

[e19896]

Yes 44 pounds on a ticket from sheffield, early rise a day in London, bags packed me just chilling..

 

[spitfire]

I'll come and say hello.

Anyone else?

 

[HarrisonSlade]

10 years gaol for take photos of Plod.

http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=836675

Apparently taking photos of Policepeople will be a criminal offence on the 16th February. So if the Police kick the shit out of someone, or murder them in cold blood on a tube train, people taking photos for evidence will be considered a terrorist. Nice.

And if I want to take photos of buildings will I have to ask a Policeman if he could move out of the way, in case I get thrown in Prison?

Photography is now partly against the law. But do you think it should be?

 

[johnnymarrsbars]

i think the key bit is "likely to be useful to a person commiting or prepating an act of terrorism."

don't they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you'll be using the photos as a terrorist? taking photographic evidence of a policeman beating someone up wouldn't qualify...

i'm not an expert though so best leave this to the law folks. where's DB when you need him.

 

[DotCommunist]

i think the key bit is "likely to be useful to a person commiting or prepating an act of terrorism."

don't they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you'll be using the photos as a terrorist? taking photographic evidence of a policeman beating someone up wouldn't qualify...

i'm not an expert though so best leave this to the law folks. where's DB when you need him.

Just like how they need a valid reason to do a stop search on you which means they never do.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

i think the key bit is "likely to be useful to a person commiting or prepating an act of terrorism."

don't they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you'll be using the photos as a terrorist? taking photographic evidence of a policeman beating someone up wouldn't qualify...

i'm not an expert though so best leave this to the law folks. where's DB when you need him.

The likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism is indeed key.

However the wording of that suggests that no proof of any involvement with terrorism is required, only that a terrorist may find your pictures to be useful. Which could easily be argued that any picture of plod is useful cos he could then be a terrorist target.

Yet another badly thought out law from nu labour, chipping away at freedom and democracy.

 

[pinkmonkey]

This is shit - am managing a team of stewards at a march (in March heh) and us stewards discussed this in our meeting yesterday - in the past a camera phone was quite handy if things got a little hairy - now its our word against the cops...

 

[The Groke]

Even if the risk was actually a tangible and quantifiable one, I would happily accept the potential threat of planned terrorism as the cost of general freedom of action and activity in the UK and the right to go about one's business without being tapped, photo'd, filmed, harassed, searched, stopped, tagged etc etc...

If police reserve the right not to be captured on film, then so should we.

 

[Goatherd]

i think the key bit is "likely to be useful to a person commiting or prepating an act of terrorism."

Problem is that the police on the frontline aren't concerned with the niceties. If you give them an excuse to nick you and take your camera then they'll use it, regardless of whether it leads to charges or not.

 

[berniedicters]

http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=836675

Apparently taking photos of Policepeople will be a criminal offence on the 16th February. So if the Police kick the shit out of someone, or murder them in cold blood on a tube train, people taking photos for evidence will be considered a terrorist. Nice.

And if I want to take photos of buildings will I have to ask a Policeman if he could move out of the way, in case I get thrown in Prison?

Photography is now partly against the law. But do you think it should be?

Bindun. You're DAYS too late, Harrison.

Some fighter for truth and justice you're turning out to be if you can't get the news to us a bit quicker...!

 

[HarrisonSlade]

I was threatened with prison for taking photos inside London Bridge station, for taking photos of the station and the Policemen there. There were probably more Police there than commuters, and I found that fascinating, so I started snapping, when this guy, who asked for his colleagues to back him up (against me?) started warning me that if I didn't stop it he would have me arrested and thrown into gaol. Not realising that the law was actually on my side, I stopped and went away.

I do not pose a threat to anybody, yet I was treat like a criminal for taking photographs, and now it will be made law tomorrow I will be a criminal. Anyone who says that this is not turning into a Fascist state wants their head seeing to.

 

[TomPaine]

Another joke law from Nu-Labour. The behaviour of this government for the past 12 years has been utterly fucking disgusting in a way I think many people couldn't have imagined in May 97.
Tories and Labour, not a fucking space of difference between them anymore.

 

[HarrisonSlade]

Bindun. You're DAYS too late, Harrison.

Some fighter for truth and justice you're turning out to be if you can't get the news to us a bit quicker...!

I am very rarely at a computer screen.

 

[cybertect]

I intend to go.

I have a bloody meeting at work that I can't get out of

 

[e19896]

I have a bloody meeting at work that I can't get out of

You said you was feeling rather un well, one is shure that will not cure itself by monday idd phone in sick just in case better be safe and all that..

 

[AndyO'C]

This vid made me laugh. I guess soon these ill-informed idiots will be 100% correct

 

[liberty]

Will the press be allowed to photograph them?

 

[editor]

Will the press be allowed to photograph them?

In theory yes, but what's happening here is that the police have been given a suitably vague new law which gives them the right to randomly arrest - or threaten with arrest - pesky photographers.

It's much like the CJA which gave the Plod a set of laws that were wide open to obvious misuse - which is exactly what they did.

There is already another, more detailed, thread on this so I will merge it shortly.

 

[derf]

I am, in general, not opposed to police having powers to stop and search.
I have no real objections to ID cards. (I have to carry 3 here and it makes no difference to me).
However I can see the point of those in the UK that object while laws of this nature spring up.
The UK sounds an lots like its heading towards being some Eastern European police state from the 1950s.

Just out of interest I wonder what will happen to the tourists who all troop over to Downing street to take snaps. Will the cops do making mass terrorist arrests.
There, as I'm sure you know, are cops around 24/7 and it would be pretty much bloody impossible to take a photo without one in it.

 

[editor]

I am, in general, not opposed to police having powers to stop and search.
I have no real objections to ID cards. (I have to carry 3 here and it makes no difference to me).

I have lots of objections, starting from the fact that they would represent a colossal waste of my money and make fuck all difference in the fight against terrorism.

 

[derf]

I have lots of objections, starting from the fact that they would represent a colossal waste of my money and make fuck all difference in the fight against terrorism.

In general they make things easier over here.
The police only ever ask to see them if there is a crime, accident or some special reason and it's sorts out everything without hassle.
One quick look at a card and the cops know I'm legal and that's that.
Same goes for general population.

Now it sounds like you are in a very different position over there with a very dodgy government out to control all they can so I can see why you are anti.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Of course, it is possible that native residents of Indonesia - a country which doesn't have a record of possessing the most enlightened and non-massacring-of-millions governments - might disagree with you there.