Trainspotting rules at some stations

[Zoe]

If AQ are indeed putting people through full pilot training as has been suspected ever since 9/11, London is a sitting duck regardless of anything we do at ground level.

It's likely that the first sign of an aircraft deviating from course or a pilot not responding fighters will be scrambled. As a last resort the plane would most likely be shot down before it got to London.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

But they fly over London anyway. If there was an AQ pilot at the controls and he puts it into a dive just as he reaches London then shooting it down, even if the RAF ( or what is left of it now! ) could reach it in time would be pointless... it would still come down where it was being aimed at.

 

[jon0844]

The methodology used by terrorists is not an assumption but a fact. MI5 are not in the business of answering questions on terrorism from the public. It seems you are the person assuming things. There is actually an ad on the radio advising people to call the terrorist hotline if you see anything sspicious even though th chances are it will be nothing. It is better to be safe.

The Home Office published posters saying that someone with more than one mobile phone was a risk. I recently travelled to Sweden with a rucksack that had in it:

• MacBook Air
• Kindle
• HTC Incredible S
• HTC Desire Z
• Samsung Wave II
• Sony Bloggie HD
• BlackBerry Bold 9700
• Huawei MiFi
• Motorola DEFY
• Two portable battery chargers (with a load of leads that might look dodgy on X-ray)

It went through the X-ray machine without any problems.. didn't even get stopped to ask to check any of it!

Notice how those posters have gone now. They were there while New Labour were trying to scare the hell out of us - and it seems to have worked on you! In fact, for a while I think the plan was to have us ALL suspicious of each other (well, some more than others - if they fitted the stereotypical profile). I am not aware of any terrorists being thwarted by a member of the public, or a Network Rail security guard telling someone at the end of a platform taking pictures of trains to move on. That, by the way, is an assumption as I'm not privy to classified security intelligence.

Anyway, I think it's time to stop contributing to this thread. While that might make some consider me accepting defeat or having 'lost' the argument - it's just not worth going around in circles anymore. (I would like to know how quick we could scramble fighter planes though, and indeed how quickly someone would make the decision to shoot it down to prevent loss of life on the ground - which might not even be possible if the plane is over London or another city).

 

[Statto]

Even though it's not in the regulations that you have to inform Station Staff your going to take Photos, & you go to the Station & Photos of Trains, without informing Station Staff what your doing, don't complain if you are then asked to leave the Station.

 

[GB]

Even though it's not in the regulations that you have to inform Station Staff your going to take Photos

In actual fact it is and it forms part of the guidelines that many enthusiasts quote chapter and verse when/if they get questioned.

But I do agree with you. If you don't play ball and stick to the agreed method then you dont have much of a leg to stand on if things go south.

 

[curly42]

I travel to the station with a ticket. I then decide to stay a while and take a few pictures. Am I a passenger changing trains/waiting a connection,and idly taking a few pictures while I wait,or am I a railway photographer ?

It is suggested that you sign in/make your presence known - it never has been compulsory.Whether you sign in or not is your own personal choice. It is not wrong or right.

The terrorism argument is a smokescreen.

 

[Zoe]

The terrorism argument is a smokescreen.

As I said there are genuine concerns here and it's not just terrorism but also commercial photography. Yes most people taking commercial photos would arrange this first and then pay but some may try and take photos without paying. It's not at all unreasonable to inform staff what you are doing to remove any concerns they may have.

 

[jon0844]

I think commercial photography is pretty obvious; permits are usually issued for photoshoots and filming for TV/movies. I doubt many would try and do so without paying, or getting permission in advance (especially if it involves closing off any part of a station).

It's a little harder if someone took a photo of a train, put it on a photo hosting site and then earned anything from, say, Google AdSense. I am sure this could be tested in court, but I suspect TfL and the like aren't so bothered - as they might be if someone filmed at a station and it appeared in a movie.

 

[nedchester]

Huh? I am the one saying you shouldn't stop people taking photos! I'm a journalist; believe me, I've had my fair share of problems with the police, PCSOs and security guards over the years!

My comment about the IRA vs suicide bombers was an off-topic tangent I went down, sorry! Right argument, wrong person.

My comment wasn't aimed at you! Apols if it came over that way!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

2) Restricting civil liberties, including photography, is pointless and is simply handing AQ victory on a platter. Remember, the ultimate target of a terrorist is not the people of a country but their freedom and their peace of mind.

Hits the nail on the head!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Notice how those posters have gone now. They were there while New Labour were trying to scare the hell out of us - and it seems to have worked on you! In fact, for a while I think the plan was to have us ALL suspicious of each other (well, some more than others - if they fitted the stereotypical profile). I am not aware of any terrorists being thwarted by a member of the public, or a Network Rail security guard telling someone at the end of a platform taking pictures of trains to move on. That, by the way, is an assumption as I'm not privy to classified security intelligence.

Again another very good comment.

 

[moonrakerz]

Have any of you ever flown over London at 35,000 ft on a clear day? ........................To defend against an attack the UK must think outside the box.

(My highlighting)


Has to be "Blue skies thinking" I suppose ??

 

[The Box Photter]

I travel to the station with a ticket. I then decide to stay a while and take a few pictures. Am I a passenger changing trains/waiting a connection,and idly taking a few pictures while I wait,or am I a railway photographer ?

It is suggested that you sign in/make your presence known - it never has been compulsory.Whether you sign in or not is your own personal choice. It is not wrong or right.

The terrorism argument is a smokescreen.

Nail, head, hit.

Why am I any different to any other passenger awaiting his connecting train at a station just because I happen to be carrying an SLR? I have a valid ticket, ergo I have a justifiable reason to be on the station. If I attempt to sign in, I will miss my train. I need no-one's permission to lift the camera to my eye and press the shutter, regardless of what or who I photograph. Once taken, the photograph, whether digital or conventional is my property and I do not need to show it to anyone.

If I intend to spend a reasonable period of time on a manned station, I will contact a member of staff and sign in if required. But, I choose to do so through courtesy, not because of any railway byelaw. A station is a private place to which the public have been granted access, the trouble is that staff are not correctly briefed and STILL seem to adopt the blanket approach that "Photography is not allowed".

I have never seen a member of station staff approach a person carrying a camera-phone asking them why they are on the station and who they work for, yet recently a member of staff at a major London station decided to walk the whole length of the platform to where I was standing and tell me with a straight face that I was not allowed to take photographs unless I asked permission. When I politely informed her of her mistake, she suggested that I could not be on the station unless I signed in first. When I produced my annual season ticket and explained that I was on my way home from work it seemed to confuse her somewhat and she then asked me who I worked for. I presume that if I had said "Osama Bin Laden" or "Alkie-Aida" something bad would have happened to me. During this time, a train was loading with passengers at the platform and there was no other member of staff monitoring the proceedings.

I suggest that had I not been a commuter with a camera on my way home, but instead was a swivel-eyed fundamentalist with a Lowepro bag full of hydrogen peroxide and chuppati flour, approaching me and asking dim questions was not a good idea. Frankly I'm fed up with being treated like a potential terrorist because my pastime of choice is to take photographs of trains rather than get tanked up on a Friday night and pick a fight with a bouncer or concern myself with what the latest Z-list celebrity is up to.

 

[jon0844]

I don't think that the staff think for one nanosecond that you're a terrorist, as I'm sure that they'd be too scared to approach anyone that matched their stereotypical view of a terrorist (because, naturally, they're all going to dress like Osama Bin laden).

If they saw someone like that, I bet they'd run a mile - and maybe call the police or just keep their eyes down.

What I think many do is think 'Let me show my power' and use made up rules and laws to give them that power. And when they meet their match, they run again. Of course, many comply and it gives their ego a boost and convinces them that they're actually bigger than they are.

Thank God most are not like that and just do their job professionally, and no doubt keeping a watchful eye out for the things (and people) who ARE acting suspiciously. CCTV is certainly a good help in that regard.

 

[40fan]

As I said there are genuine concerns here and it's not just terrorism but also commercial photography. Yes most people taking commercial photos would arrange this first and then pay but some may try and take photos without paying. It's not at all unreasonable to inform staff what you are doing to remove any concerns they may have.

Do you have any evidence that photographers who do not say what they are doing are all commercial photographers? If not, your point is irrelevant.

 

[Ferret]

In actual fact it is and it forms part of the guidelines that many enthusiasts quote chapter and verse when/if they get questioned.

But I do agree with you. If you don't play ball and stick to the agreed method then you dont have much of a leg to stand on if things go south.

GB, you need to check your facts. Those guidelines do not make it compulsory, it is a *request* that you sign in, not a *requirement*.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

GB, you need to check your facts. Those guidelines do not make it compulsory, it is a *request* that you sign in, not a *requirement*.

The guidelines also make it compulsory to leave the station if asked to by a member of staff, for whatever reason. Yet enthusiasts would prefer to forget that bit and quote chapter and verse from the bits that benefit them.

There seem to be a whole group of people that DEMAND that others follow the rule exactly, but they come crying on here when they get caught out for not following the rules themselves. Hypocrisy?

 

[Ferret]

The guidelines also make it compulsory to leave the station if asked to by a member of staff, for whatever reason. Yet enthusiasts would prefer to forget that bit and quote chapter and verse from the bits that benefit them.

There seem to be a whole group of people that DEMAND that others follow the rule exactly, but they come crying on here when they get caught out for not following the rules themselves. Hypocrisy?

It depends on your point of view Ralph. The onus is put on staff to explain why they want you to leave the station, and if the reason that staff come up with is that you haven't asked permission, then that really does fail the reasonableness test - and therefore is not hypocrisy on the part of the enthusiast if he chooses to complain through proper channels to the TOC concerned.

It's noticeable that there are far less posts made on wnxx and here complaining about station staff, so maybe the message is at last getting through to staff that they can't go throwing their weight about as a small minority had been.

 

[jon0844]

The guidelines also make it compulsory to leave the station if asked to by a member of staff, for whatever reason. Yet enthusiasts would prefer to forget that bit and quote chapter and verse from the bits that benefit them.

Out of interest. I travel every day, with an annual season ticket. Occasionally while waiting for my train, I'll walk around (in public areas) and sometimes take photos - like the latest work done on the platforms at King's Cross, the gatelines etc.

Now if I am asked to leave the station by any member of staff because I'm not allowed to take photos, or didn't sign in, such that I can't get home, do I comply?

 

[Zoe]

Do you have any evidence that photographers who do not say what they are doing are all commercial photographers? If not, your point is irrelevant.

They are most certainly not all commercial photographers but it's possible that someone could go onto a station and take a photo and for it published in a railway magazine. The fact that the majority of people taking photos are not commercial does not make this point irrelevant as it's possible some would try it. As I said it's not at all unreasonable just to inform the staff of what you are doing.

 

[Ferret]

They are most certainly not all commercial photographers but it's possible that someone could go onto a station and take a photo and for it published in a railway magazine.

Good grief, heaven forbid! Stop everything, call the Police, call Interpol, call the Prime Minister; somebody has had the temerity to take a photo on a station which may appear in Rail next month!!!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

It depends on your point of view Ralph. The onus is put on staff to explain why they want you to leave the station, and if the reason that staff come up with is that you haven't asked permission, then that really does fail the reasonableness test - and therefore is not hypocrisy on the part of the enthusiast if he chooses to complain through proper channels to the TOC concerned.

Well, technically, the guidelines say the staff should inform etc, not that they have to. But it would be poor customer service not to do so.

The hypocrisy I refer to is not just photography. It happens with fares and ticketing especially. I hope it's not respective of the community.

Out of interest. I travel every day, with an annual season ticket. Occasionally while waiting for my train, I'll walk around (in public areas) and sometimes take photos - like the latest work done on the platforms at King's Cross, the gatelines etc.

Now if I am asked to leave the station by any member of staff because I'm not allowed to take photos, or didn't sign in, such that I can't get home, do I comply?

If you are asked to leave railway premises for whatever reason, you have to comply. You may be digging a bigger hole by not complying and risking being arrested for Public Order. Personally, if it was me, I'd obey and get the tube to Finsbury Park and pick the train up there! (assuming it stops there). Whether or not this is enforceable is another matter. However, I think having a ticket for travel would change things in the staff members eyes. I'm not saying it should or shouldn't, but it probably would.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Good grief, heaven forbid! Stop everything, call the Police, call Interpol, call the Prime Minister; somebody has had the temerity to take a photo on a station which may appear in Rail next month!!!

Agreed - it's getting silly. This isn't about commercial photography or terrorism, it's just poorly written guidelines.

 

[GB]

You can't have it both ways. The guidelines are there for the benifit of everyone. While they may not be rules as such you can't just pick and chose which parts you want to follow and then expect the very same guidlines to back you up when staff take the heavy hand.

By the same logic (ie they are not rules and so do not need to be obyed) staff can come along and chuck you out when ever they see fit without question or explanation.

Genuine Question: Where does it state other than these guidelines that you are permitted to take photos?

I'm not trying to stop photography at stations but there needs to be give and take on both parts.

 

[Ferret]

You can't have it both ways. The guidelines are there for the benifit of everyone. While they may not be rules as such you can't just pick and chose which parts you want to follow and then expect the very same guidlines to back you up when staff take the heavy hand.

By the same logic (ie they are not rules and so do not need to be obyed) staff can come along and chuck you out when ever they see fit without question or explanation.

If staff want to collect Form Ones for behaving in this manner then yes, by all means.

Genuine Question: Where does it state other than these guidelines that you are permitted to take photos?

Why does there need to be?! Are we that devoid of common sense that we need to have rules for something like this. Fook me, people have stood on platform ends since the year dot taking pictures. Why the hell should things be different now? [Zoe, don't even think about mentioning the T word or I think many people will scream at their computer screens]. Let's face it, the Guidelines wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the minority of cretins in the industry who are incapable of using some common sense.

 

[GB]

let's face it, the Guidelines wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the minority of cretins in the industry who are incapable of using some common sense.

The exact same thing can be said for the minority of enthusiasts that spoil it for the rest by acting like pricks on the platform which is not doubt where the guidelines have been derived from.

 

[Zoe]

Why does there need to be?! Are we that devoid of common sense that we need to have rules for something like this

It's quite simple, the railways are private property. You have no automatic right to go taking photos on private property but Network Rail do allow it and have published guidlines. It is not at all unreasonable to follow these guidlines published by the owner of the property.

 

[Ferret]

It's quite simple, the railways are private property. You have no automatic right to go taking photos on private property but Network Rail do allow it and have published guidlines. It is not at all unreasonable to follow these guidlines published by the owner of the property.

The railways have always been private property, but yet we haven't needed Guidelines until recent times...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The exact same thing can be said for the minority of enthusiasts that spoil it for the rest by acting like pricks on the platform which is not doubt where the guidelines have been derived from.

That's probably been a contributory factor too....

 

[nedchester]

The exact same thing can be said for the minority of enthusiasts that spoil it for the rest by acting like pricks on the platform which is not doubt where the guidelines have been derived from.

I suspect plenty of passengers act like pricks?! Do they have guidelines?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Let's face it, the Guidelines wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for the minority of cretins in the industry who are incapable of using some common sense.

Well exactly. The problem is that in many industries there has to be a 'policy' for every eventuality. This is just one example.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's quite simple, the railways are private property. You have no automatic right to go taking photos on private property but Network Rail do allow it and have published guidlines. It is not at all unreasonable to follow these guidlines published by the owner of the property.

Do all passengers (including those with mobile phones) have to ask permission? Are they singled out in the same way as enthusiasts???

 

[GB]

I suspect plenty of passengers act like pricks?! Do they have guidelines?

Guidelines no, rules and bylaws then yes.

 

[Ferret]

Guidelines no, rules and bylaws then yes.

Well, byelaws apply to everyone including enthusiasts.....!

 

[jon0844]

Imagine the scope for discrimination if staff started to ask ticket holders to leave for reasons other than the obvious, like loitering (no ticket), being drunk etc.

It would be open to terrible abuse. Taking a photo should be not be sufficient grounds for being ejected either.

Sent from my X10i using Tapatalk

 

[nedchester]

Imagine the scope for discrimination if staff started to ask ticket holders to leave for reasons other than the obvious, like loitering (no ticket), being drunk etc.

It would be open to terrible abuse. Taking a photo should be not be sufficient grounds for being ejected either.

Exactly. Which is easier for the the PCSO to have a go at the hapless trainspotter or the drunk?