Britain takes yet another step to being a police state.

[yorkie]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...9/Why-cant-we-take-pictures-of-policemen.html

Why can't we take pictures of policemen?


In that brief time not long after he became Prime Minister, when Gordon Brown was regarded as a serious political figure and one refreshingly less artful than his predecessor, he delivered a speech at the University of Westminster on liberty. It was an erudite and thoughtful exposition of this country's difficult, and sometimes bloody, attempts to come to terms with the countervailing demands of individual liberty and state power.

I recall being impressed that a prime minister was making such a weighty and thought-provoking speech. I even kept a copy, though it can be found on the Number 10 website; and after last week's decision to ban a Dutch MP from visiting Britain because of his views on Islam, I thought it apposite to read it again.

"Too often in recent years the public dialogue in our country has undervalued the importance of liberty," Mr Brown said. "Now is the time to reaffirm our distinctive British story of liberty – to show it is as rich, powerful and relevant to the life of the nation today as ever; to apply its lessons to the new tests of our time."

Yet, not for the first time, what the Government does bears no resemblance to its rhetoric. From today, new counter-terrorism laws come into effect that will entrench a growing tendency by the police to prevent anyone taking photographs in public, especially if they (the police) are the subject. There has been a worrying increase recently in police arresting or seeking to prevent what is a lawful activity.

Andrew Carter, a plumber from Bedminster, near Bristol, took a photograph of an officer who had ignored a no-entry road sign while driving a police van. This might have appeared a somewhat petulant thing to do, but taking a photograph in a public place is not a crime. Yet the policeman smashed the camera from Mr Carter's hand, handcuffed him, put him in the back of the van and took him to the police station, where he was kept for five hours. When he returned to answer bail the following week, he was kept at the station for another five hours. He was released without charge, despite an attempt by the police to claim some spurious offence of "assault with a camera".

Whereas in the past the police have not had the power to prevent photographs being taken of them, from today they have. Under the new Counter-Terrorism Act it is an offence to take pictures of officers "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism". This is such a catch-all measure that it can be used – and, in view of recent trends, will be used – to prevent photographs to which the police object merely by invoking counter-terrorist requirements. While it is important for officers involved in such operations to maintain anonymity, many photographers fear these powers will be abused.

In an article in the British Journal of Photography, Justin Tallis, a freelance photographer, recounted how he was threatened while covering a protest against the BBC's decision not to broadcast a fundraising film for Gaza. He was approached by an officer who had just been photographed. According to Tallis, the officer tried to take his camera away, but gave up as other photographers captured the incident.

A few weeks ago, an amateur photographer was stopped in Cleveland by officers when taking pictures of ships. The photographer was asked if he had any terrorism connections and told that his details would be kept on file. According to the Government, while there are no legal restrictions on photography in public places, "there may be situations in which the taking of photographs may cause or lead to public order situations or raise security considerations".

The problem is that there are so many instances of counter-terror laws being invoked to stop perfectly innocent activities, such as trainspotting or bird watching, that many photographers do not believe such assurances.

There is a wider issue of creeping censorship which a new organisation, the Convention on Modern Liberty, is seeking to highlight with the publication today of a list of examples of this insidious development. They include a demand by Suffolk police that Facebook shut down a page dedicated to an over-zealous traffic warden because it contained "hurtful criticisms"; proposed curbs on financial reporting during the banking crisis; a ban on students filming an interview in Parliament Square; the threatened arrest of two evangelical preachers for committing a "hate crime" by handing out Gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham; the occasions when the police have reprimanded people for wearing T-shirts carrying political slogans; and, of course, the ban last week on Geert Wilders from showing a film on Islam to a group of parliamentarians.

In his speech on liberty, Mr Brown said: "The character of our country will be defined by how we write the next chapter of British liberty – by whether we do so in a way that respects and builds on our traditions, and progressively adds to and enlarges rather then reduces the sphere of freedom." At least it sounded good at the time.

 

[Rebus]

"The photographer was asked if he had any terrorism connections"

Like he's going to say 'yes, it's a fair cop guv'!


Guilty until proven innocent I guess

 

[D841]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...9/Why-cant-we-take-pictures-of-policemen.html

Interesting that the article is in the Telegraph, rather than the Grauniad or Indie. It might make some people in high places stop and think, if we're lucky.

 

[LilLoaf]

Why would any normal minded person want to take pictures of a cop anyway? A thing for uniforms maybe ? Although that would be a bit of a worry. The country has gone mad its not a free country now, if you want a free country try America go into the desert of Texes not a cop for 100's of miles.

 

[Mojo]

Why would any normal minded person want to take pictures of a cop anyway?

Because in many places, they are part of the "landscape." The police are often present at protests and are likely to be involved in pictures there. What if you want to take pictures as evidence of police wrongdoing, or to make a complaint?

 

[richa2002]

We seriously need to get these power hungry, control obsessed morons out of power. Anyone who voted Labour though has no right to complain... Yes, the Tories may not be the most inspiring of parties at the moment but to just look at the sort of people the government churn out on 'Question Time' is laughable. They seem to be totally detached from reality.

 

[LilLoaf]

Because in many places, they are part of the "landscape." The police are often present at protests and are likely to be involved in pictures there. What if you want to take pictures as evidence of police wrongdoing, or to make a complaint?

I'm sorry i see what you mean now, thought it was a bit of odd talking a photo litrally of a cop. So what are we supposed to do exactly if you want to take a picture of a high street becuase it has a nice building in it you want a picture of, stand on a seat look up and down the high street to see of there is a cop around and then take a photo ! Madness !

Trouble with not all, but some cops is they think they are above the law.

 

[bluenoxid]

It is one of those badly implemented pieces of legislation. I was being asked about it today during a presentation on Photo Law and I had to say that in all honesty we don't know but past experience says that it will be abused by police officers in hot situations such as a footy match which has gone wrong and some police brutality is necessary to stop fans kicking all seven bells out of each other. I said that I would doubt that they'd try it on in the street as arresting someone is not just worth the paper work

I just want them to place a loophole in it that makes photos only something you can't charge for unless the accused is being arrested on other terrorism charges. In other words, they have to think before they open their gob.

 

[WessexWarrior]

Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dLf57DrAsk

 

[yorkie]

'Ministers 'using fear of terror'


See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7893890.stm

 

[90019]

Frankly, I think the government are trying to rule by fear and are completely taking the p*ss.
The best example was from the car bombs in London in 2007; 2 Mercedes E classes, almost identical, with almost identical bombs are found by police on the same day, both miraculously before they detonate. These are then found to be connected to the Glasgow airport retarded terrorist attack (Don't even get me started on how stupid that was), and is used to help convict one of the people from the Glasgow attack.

To me, this absolutely stinks of being a fraud. It's far to perfect a situation; police find multiple bombs just in time, use them to help convict terrorists from other attacks.

 

[Matt Taylor]

There is no need to overeact, I don't like the situation any more than other photographers do but it hasn't stopped me photographing what I want to photograph.

http://matthew-taylor.fotopic.net/p56459643.html


There's nothing wrong with the picture I've linked to, it's just an illustration of the BTP doing what they do every week when there is football traffic, and I recieved no attention from the BTP for taking that shot.




Matt

 

[richa2002]

It's not an overreaction when some policeman consider Rail Enthusiasts taking photos as 'terrorism related'. It's an abuse of power and is well documented in the railway press.

 

[devon_metro]

On a side note, Yorkie, you really should be a Daily Mail reporter with that thread title

 

[ladysue]

Good thread Yorkie. I am apalled by the erosion of so many freedoms in this country. This is just another step towards a society where we cant do anything without someone complaining.As I have a number of photos of policemen in my home( my late husband and father were both policemen) perhaps I should be worried.

 

[yorkie]

There is no need to overeact, I don't like the situation any more than other photographers do but it hasn't stopped me photographing what I want to photograph.

One day you may be stopped, questioned, searched and perhaps arrested, then you may change your mind - but it will be too late...

 

[The Box Photter]

Hello, quite new to this forum, but would like to add my comments:

From a discussion I had with a member of the platform staff at Blackfriars a couple of months ago, it seems that members of Transac (DoT Secret Squirrels) regularly visit stations with SLR cameras and wander around taking photos. If they are not challenged, they report the matter and the staff are subjected to a "scecurity briefing".

Personally, I have no problem if a member of staff approaches me and politely asks me to confirm what I am doing. The problem is that the next sentence tends to be "You can't photograph trains, its a security risk".

However many times the PR departments of Network Rail or the relevant TOC spout forth the mantra in the railway press that "photography for personal use is NOT prohibited" it never seems to filter down to the staff at the sharp end. I'm sure for some who can't understand why we take pictures of trains, its just an easy way to project what little authority they think they have.

Of course if we stand our ground and refuse to stop taking photographs, we risk being arrested by BTP and all that entails, because the general assumption seems to be that we have no right to be on the station anyway. In most circumstances, I am on the station as a passenger with a valid ticket to travel. I wonder how it would go down with the management of the TOCs if this situation was correctly described as "fluorescent-jacketed staff member insults and threatens his customer because he doesn't understand what he is doing".

I urge all photographers to carry with them the printed statements from the National Rail and BTP websites which confirm our legal right to take photographs of trains. Show this to the staff member and if you still have no joy, leave politely with no fuss, but then write to the managing director of the company concerned and suggest appropriate "re-training" for the staff member.

Sorry for the rant, but the whole situation really annoys me. The resemblance to Eastern Europe in the 1970s is really chilling.

 

[D841]

Sorry for the rant, but the whole situation really annoys me. The resemblance to Eastern Europe in the 1970s is really chilling.

Honecker would have really loved the technology available to this Government!