View Full Version : Your no photographer until...
... you've been searched under the terrorism act.
I have to say, i wasn't too bothered when they did it. They probably had to fill their 'quota' and they are only doing their job.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2085/2283896251_e7ee7c67fa.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/mrorb/2283896251/)
what made them stop you?
I was walking through Edinburgh's Waverley Train Station with my camera round my neck. I wasn't taking any photos, just passing through.
well, no wonder then :bang:
a1ex2001
22-02-2008, 20:46
I was walking through Edinburgh's Waverley Train Station with my camera round my neck.
I'd have shot your for such a terrible crime!
Matt Charlton
22-02-2008, 20:49
Its things like this that make me wonder if its worth the hassle of owning a DSLR sometimes you know :(
ElCapone
22-02-2008, 20:52
And what happens when there is a terrorist taking pics planning there next attack and he didnt get searched???
Police are just doing there job
So, you were barefoot, are of zero height, yet of slim build? Be fun to see an Identikit :lol:
ranarama
22-02-2008, 20:54
It's lucky you weren't stopped by the grammar police at the same time...
...sorry;)
Matt Charlton
22-02-2008, 20:54
I should think a "terrorist" would use a mobile phone or a hidden camera rather than a full blown DSLR outfit so they don't draw attention to themselves.
And what happens when there is a terrorist taking pics planning there next attack and he didnt get searched???
Police are just doing there job
personally, If I was a terrorist, I'd just have a look on Flickr, far easier and less chance of getting nabbed ;)
I see it's a BTP ticket. Their remit is different with regards to terrorism due to the nature of the areas they Police. As you said yourself you weren't too bothered and appreciated they have a job to do.
At the end of the day big deal, they haven't taken your equipment or made you delete pictures as we have read about on other threads.
Good on you for being so tolerent.:thumbs:
Matt Charlton
22-02-2008, 21:00
I know that we all have to be tolerant and I'm not trying to be confrontational or difficult but I'm just more than a little concerned that walking through a train station with a camera around your neck is reasonable grounds for a stop and search.
Far too many of these threads popping up for me.
I know that we all have to be tolerant and I'm not trying to be confrontational or difficult but I'm just more than a little concerned that walking through a train station with a camera around your neck is reasonable grounds for a stop and search.
Far too many of these threads popping up for me.
Matt:
The subject of terrorism is a lot different from some of the other threads about taking pics in public places and getting hassled by security guards in shopping centres etc. Personally if a security guard asked me to delete photos or whatever, then I'd tell him where to go (and I would be confruntational and difficult believe me).
Decisions are made at a very high level (Government in a lot of cases) as to what the Police should regard as a possible terrorist threat or activity. I can fully understand why this particular scenario has arisen.
You have got to remember the terrorist scum who target us in our daily lives aim to cause maximum disruption, death and injury. So, you'll find airports, train stations and the underground etc have, quite rightly imo, hightened security levels.
Everybody on here now knows you are likely to get stopped in these places if you are taking pics or carrying a camera (and I do take the point that DSLR's appear to be targeted but come on they are a lot more obvious). If, in this knowledge, you go to such a place and do get stopped/searched etc, don't effin moan about it.:thumbs:
I work in Canary Wharf and have been stopped and searched many times...I just let them get on with it now. I dont even bother to ask them about it...They search my bag I answer whatever questions they ask and im on my way. Ive learned that if you are confronational about it, it just gives them ammunition and they keep you longer...I just want to get to work or home ASAP :lol:
I work in Canary Wharf and have been stopped and searched many times...I just let them get on with it now. I dont even bother to ask them about it...They search my bag I answer whatever questions they ask and im on my way. Ive learned that if you are confronational about it, it just gives them ammunition and they keep you longer...I just want to get to work or home ASAP :lol:
Well done you :thumbs::thumbs:
My only concern on the issue would be that once they have filled out their forms, I wonder which databases you end up on, and whether that could feasibly cause any problems in the future? Like the majority, I have nothing to hide, and as a result would certainly co-operate, however once the questions from them had ended, I would have some pretty stern ones of my own regarding where the information they had taken was going to be put, and for what it might be used in the future.
If, in this knowledge, you go to such a place and do get stopped/searched etc, don't effin moan about it.:thumbs:
I just want to point out i'm not moaning about being searched, i'm just joking your not a photographer until you've had it :p
My only concern on the issue would be that once they have filled out their forms, I wonder which databases you end up on, and whether that could feasibly cause any problems in the future? Like the majority, I have nothing to hide, and as a result would certainly co-operate, however once the questions from them had ended, I would have some pretty stern ones of my own regarding where the information they had taken was going to be put, and for what it might be used in the future.
I'd imagine your details will be on some data base, same as if you were stopped for a minor road traffic matter for instance. It'd never be used against you as it's not a criminal record or a conviction so no future problems caused.
CarlukeDave
22-02-2008, 22:02
It would depend on how I was stopped and asked as to wether it bothered me or not, but surely it would make sense to use profiling when stopping and searching people. The threat we face is pretty specific, it's not like the days when the terror threat came from the ira.
crapshot
22-02-2008, 22:21
as long as the search doesn't involve rubber gloves :-(
shrimperblue
22-02-2008, 22:28
And what happens when there is a terrorist taking pics planning there next attack and he didnt get searched???
Do you know what a terrorist looks like then?
My point is terrorists can be anyone and everywhere. So comments like yours really dont mean anything unless you know. AND if we knew the answer we wouldnt need to randomly search as there wouldnt be any terrorists would we?!
I would rather get searched knowing if the innocent to suspect ratio was 1,000,000 to 1 then at least that "one" is worth it with the amount of lives that are saved.
Theres no tone on these forums, I say this with a friendly tone and not of sarcasim.
SB :)
PS
Police do not need any reason to search or detain under the terrorism act other than suspicion.
Nope, I'm not having it, doesn't matter which way you cut it, owning a camera does not qualify as just cause for a stop and search.
Maybe there isn't anything you can do about it, and the easiest/quickest way out of it is to just comply, but that doesn't make it right.
Defending this rubbish with "just doing a job" is no defence at all, I want them stop searching people they suspect as up to no good, not everyone who has a camera round their neck, thats just plain stupid.
shrimperblue
22-02-2008, 23:02
Defending this rubbish with "just doing a job" is no defence at all, I want them stop searching people they suspect as up to no good, not everyone who has a camera round their neck, thats just plain stupid.
Ok I agree with you if that officer(s) are deliberately using the terrorism act to exploit searching people and if that happens then that should be reported in the first insctance.
BUT I have to say this to you Joxby. Can you prove its only people with Cameras getting searched under the terrorism act? Because if you can then there is obviously a Discrimination issue there and it should be dealt with by reporting in to the IPCC.
Everyone of all race, gender, age and description get searched under this act every minute, every hour of everyday. I can assure you that.
Do I agree with it? On a Human level I enjoy my Human Rights. BUT on a "protection from terrorism, and I dont enjoy seeing death" level, I dont care if it means they catch/deter the sick terrorists. If a person with a camera gets searched so what, if a person with parrot in a cage gets searched.....who cares......if the person with ruck sack gets searched........who cares, one day they WILL find parts of a bomb in a bag, pics of the security system at Kings Cross on a camera, or bomb parts in a parrot........ its happened, and will always go on.
SB
BenMottram
22-02-2008, 23:03
hmmm - the fact you have an obvious camera on a station is grounds enough for them to stop and ask you to account for your actions - to take pics on a station you need permission from the station manager so, IMHO, a BTP officer should stop anyone with a camera and ask if they have permission at least.
B.
ElCapone
22-02-2008, 23:13
Do you know what a terrorist looks like then?
My point is terrorists can be anyone and everywhere. So comments like yours really dont mean anything unless you know. AND if we knew the answer we wouldnt need to randomly search as there wouldnt be any terrorists would we?!
I would rather get searched knowing if the innocent to suspect ratio was 1,000,000 to 1 then at least that "one" is worth it with the amount of lives that are saved.
Theres no tone on these forums, I say this with a friendly tone and not of sarcasim.
SB :)
PS
Police do not need any reason to search or detain under the terrorism act other than suspicion.
I dont get why your quoting me, i was putting across that people shouldnt mind getting searched. Its a good thing people are searched imo.
shrimperblue
22-02-2008, 23:25
Sorry ElCapone, I read it as you complaining that while you/a person is being searched another was getting away with it as their searching the wrong person.
So I humbley offer my apology,
SB
I'd have shot your for such a terrible crime!
I thought they only did that to Brazillians?
ElCapone
22-02-2008, 23:35
I thought they only did that to Brazillians?
that guy ran and had to be stopped
i dont mean stopped by shooting him
hmmm - the fact you have an obvious camera on a station is grounds enough for them to stop and ask you to account for your actions - to take pics on a station you need permission from the station manager so, IMHO, a BTP officer should stop anyone with a camera and ask if they have permission at least.
B.
This is exactly what I'm talking about, account for what actions ?, the fact he's carrying a camera, what, you need permission to carry a camera now as well as use it ?,
That is not grounds for a stop & search.
He wasn't taking pictures, it was hanging round his neck like medalion man.
Look, I'm sorry, they can kiss my arse, they obviously have targets to meet and that is a stop for the sake of a stop.
Ok, they did it, ce la vie, but stopping someone just because they're carrying a camera is not on.
I dont know the circumstances, maybe Mr Orb did something to arouse their suspicions, I dont know, but if everyone with a camera round their neck is seen as fair game wherever they are, we might aswell leave the sodding things at home.
ranarama
22-02-2008, 23:57
The issue is not that Mr. Orb got stopped but more why he got stopped. I really do believe the police do not know the law a lot of the time (and I speak from personal experience). They are not trained lawyers and I don't expect them to know every law ever written but this issue keeps cropping up so there really should be some training in this area and it should be addressed quickly.
The amount of CCTV monitoring in London makes it the most observed city in the most observed country in the world. They choose to stop people taking photos of buildings because they have a big camera. I can't be the only one that finds that ironic.
shrimperblue
23-02-2008, 00:05
I agree its so annoying as I can see both sides.
Depends on the building, depends on the location, depends on government intelligence etc etc the list goes on.
The minority have ruined it for the majority. Its not a nice thing but we should be pro-active rather than re-active. We shouldnt wait until another 9/11 etc to then think "why wernt we checking before this happens"
Theres not a right or wrong answer.
***EDIT***
Just wanted to post this from www.yourrights.org.uk
"Stop and Search
These refer to persons and vehicles and it is an offence to fail to stop a vehicle.
When a police officer reasonably suspects you are a terrorist you can be stopped and searched to discover whether you have anything in your possession that could constitute evidence that you are a terrorist. Since being a terrorist is not in itself an offence, unless you are a member of a proscribed group, this power means that the police do not have to suspect you of committing an offence or of carrying prohibited articles.
In addition the police can designate specific areas to be places where they have special powers in relation to terrorism. This means that within these localities people and vehicles can be stopped and searched by the police if they consider it expedient to do so to prevent acts of terrorism. There is no need for any reasonable suspicion.
They should be looking for articles which could be used in connection with terrorism but the powers can be used whether or not the police have grounds for suspecting the presence of articles of that kind.
Failure to stop a vehicle or obstructing a police officer in the exercise of these powers is an offence punishable with a fine, a prison sentence of six months or both.
Authorisations to designate areas as subject to these powers last for 28 days but they can be renewed. The Secretary of State has powers to intervene in such authorisations. "
SB
I'm just wondering... did the BTP specifically mention the camera was part of the reason why they stopped you. The assumption seems to be it was but you haven't actually said that's what happened?
Do i need a receipt like that to join your club :-), i've been stopped under that act several times but never searched.
... you've been searched under the terrorism act.
I have to say, i wasn't too bothered when they did it. They probably had to fill their 'quota' and they are only doing their job.
The USA under Bush was already on my list of 'places to avoid'. Now the U.K. has joined them.
I'll spend my rock hard €uros where I feel welcome instead of threatened, suspected, and spied on, thank you.
Diego Garcia
23-02-2008, 09:12
Day to day, I wear comedy clown shoes out and about. I get stopped all the time as they think I am a shoe bomber with an increased payload.
Its a nightmare - I have given up on the spinning bow tie and comedy flower but I will never surrender my bucket of chopped paper to these people.
FREEDOM !PS - Yes my car does fall apart when I shut the door.
I reckon being stopped and asked a few questions is ok as the police should be able to suss you out from that - if they aren't convinced then fair enough hold you for a little longer and get the forms filled out but again they should really be able to make a decent judgement call from asking you some basic questionos and seeing ID of some kind.
Oddly enough, when I lived in London I used to ride out to Essex (on a motorbike) every weekend to go air rifle shooting at a proper range with full length rifle in a rifle bag slung over my shoulder in full view. Never once got stopped! It was unloaded and secure in it's nylon bag (therefore legal) but was obviously a rifle and I would have thought that even a spot check would have happened!
I did get stopped a lot and receive a lot of grief for the loud exhaust. I guess that was more of a danger to public than a rifle. :(
Just a point, I guess the police may of been operating on one of their special tasks that they sometimes do where they temporarily get extra powers and you may have just been unlucky with the timing. We don't really know what intelligence they may have received previously to justify the search. I suppose no harm done and if it's not a regular thing then I wouldn't be bothered by it.
Do i need a receipt like that to join your club :-), i've been stopped under that act several times but never searched.
If I'm not mistaken you're still supposed to get a slip if you've been stopped under the act too.
well i get searched all the time coz i look asian and carry a backpack so u kinda get used to it even *** im black/mexican/white lol... i never hurry anywhere so im often seen as l
oitering
It's lucky you weren't stopped by the grammar police at the same time...
...sorry;)
http://www.frauleinspace.com/pics/grammarnazi.png
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Le5K4lu3K5E&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Le5K4lu3K5E&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
inaneredstripe
23-02-2008, 13:42
i got stopped once for wearing an offensive t shirt , and asked to cover it up. been to a bike rally , where offensive t shirts are mandatory . went into town shopping , forgetting i was wearing it. someone complained to plod, who asked me to cover up.:nono: fair enough.
even i have some decency.
(not much admitedly, but some).
This is exactly what I'm talking about, account for what actions ?, the fact he's carrying a camera, what, you need permission to carry a camera now as well as use it ?,
That is not grounds for a stop & search.
He wasn't taking pictures, it was hanging round his neck like medalion man.
Look, I'm sorry, they can kiss my arse, they obviously have targets to meet and that is a stop for the sake of a stop.
Ok, they did it, ce la vie, but stopping someone just because they're carrying a camera is not on.
I dont know the circumstances, maybe Mr Orb did something to arouse their suspicions, I dont know, but if everyone with a camera round their neck is seen as fair game wherever they are, we might aswell leave the sodding things at home.
Ah, the spirit that made Britain great - Ignorance:thinking:
Ah, the spirit that made Britain great - Ignorance:thinking:
Well why don't you explain my ignorance.
By all means, have an opinion but.......actually, much like yourself, I can't be bothered, so in the spirit of senseless personal comments......don't bother
BenMottram
24-02-2008, 10:20
>>Well why don't you explain my ignorance.
I will try...
>>account for what actions ?,
We don't actually know - no do you unless you are the OP or the BTP officer.
>>what, you need permission to carry a camera now as well as use it ?
The BTP need to be able to determine if you have lawful business on their premises. The railway is NOT a public place and has its own regulations and by-laws
>>That is not grounds for a stop & search.
Isn't it? are you a member of the BTP? Do you know the exact reason for the stop and search?
>>He wasn't taking pictures
Wasn't he? and if he was did he have permission from the station master?
>>Look, I'm sorry, they can kiss my arse,
Actually, you will find that on railway property you can kiss theirs. Try it on sometime and see where it gets you.
>>that is a stop for the sake of a stop
Is it? just because YOU can't see the reason for the stop doesn't make it a stop for the sake of a stop.
>>stopping someone just because they're carrying a camera is not on.Isn't it?
If that someone was about to break a by-law by taking pictures without permission, or had just broken a by-law by taking pictures without permission I would say that stopping that person is a reasonable action on behalf of the BTP. In fact it is their duty to stop that person.
>>I dont know the circumstances,
Too right you don't and nor do any of the responders to this thread.
>>maybe Mr Orb did something to arouse their suspicions,
Almost certainly.
>>but if everyone with a camera round their neck is seen as fair game wherever they are
Wherever they are? PMSL because, of course, this incident took place on private property namely a railway station.
I believe that you have shown your own ignorance and shouldn't need anyone else to point it out :D
However, in the nature of a public service, I have endeavoured to do the job for you ;)
B.
well i get stopped in the street very often and they never have a reason....
Guys - chill a bit eh? You might want to consider editing some of the rudeness from your responses before a mod comes along and does it for you..... A civil question gets you much further than an abusive comment on here remember.
I'd imagine your details will be on some data base, same as if you were stopped for a minor road traffic matter for instance. It'd never be used against you as it's not a criminal record or a conviction so no future problems caused.
Do you REALLY believe that? Honestly?
By the way - the OP mentions that he wasn't taking pictures, simply passing through the station earlier on. The layout of Waverley is such that it's often used as a cut through - it's a nice simple route from the Old Town through to the new - and is used as such by an awful lot of folk. Thought I'd add that to clarify things a little for people who don't know the station.
^^Gord^^
24-02-2008, 11:15
I've been stopped and moved on by the RAF Police does that qualify me? :D
The interesting thing about this is that there was quite a bit of publicity recently regarding the amount of Stop and Search actions 'logged' by the BTP in Scotland compared to the those performed by the regular police forces here. I can't remember the exact figures but it was something like regular police 170-odd, BTP 14,000-odd in the 6 months following the attack at Glasgow Airport so I would be inclined to err on the side of a stop for the sake of it in this case....
Ben, He walked through a station with a camera round his neck, thats what he said and any other assumptions are just that, assumptions.
He should not be stopped just because he is carrying a camera, thats my opinion....the end.
You might think thats ok, I do not, I defend you're right to have the opposite opinion.
That doesn't make me, you or anybody else right, and ignorance certainly isn't a factor, anyone expecting me not to respond to that, is mistaken.
As I said above, we don't know that the camera was a factor in the decision to stop. It could have been any of a thousand other random reasons but because the OP mentioned a camera there seems to be an assumption that the camera was the cause.
Did the OP ask for a reason and was the camera mentioned as part of the reply? We simply don't know...
I was walking through Edinburgh's Waverley Train Station with my camera round my neck. I wasn't taking any photos, just passing through.
:shrug:
you can only comment on information received...
>>Well why don't you explain my ignorance.
I will try...
>>account for what actions ?,
We don't actually know - no do you unless you are the OP or the BTP officer.
>>what, you need permission to carry a camera now as well as use it ?
The BTP need to be able to determine if you have lawful business on their premises. The railway is NOT a public place and has its own regulations and by-laws
>>That is not grounds for a stop & search.
Isn't it? are you a member of the BTP? Do you know the exact reason for the stop and search?
>>He wasn't taking pictures
Wasn't he? and if he was did he have permission from the station master?
>>Look, I'm sorry, they can kiss my arse,
Actually, you will find that on railway property you can kiss theirs. Try it on sometime and see where it gets you.
>>that is a stop for the sake of a stop
Is it? just because YOU can't see the reason for the stop doesn't make it a stop for the sake of a stop.
>>stopping someone just because they're carrying a camera is not on.Isn't it?
If that someone was about to break a by-law by taking pictures without permission, or had just broken a by-law by taking pictures without permission I would say that stopping that person is a reasonable action on behalf of the BTP. In fact it is their duty to stop that person.
>>I dont know the circumstances,
Too right you don't and nor do any of the responders to this thread.
>>maybe Mr Orb did something to arouse their suspicions,
Almost certainly.
>>but if everyone with a camera round their neck is seen as fair game wherever they are
Wherever they are? PMSL because, of course, this incident took place on private property namely a railway station.
I believe that you have shown your own ignorance and shouldn't need anyone else to point it out :D
However, in the nature of a public service, I have endeavoured to do the job for you ;)
B.
Ben:
Cheers, saved me a heep of typing. Very well put, couldn't have said it better. Ta!!
Aww, I love yooz guyz too........:love:
Aww, I love yooz guyz too........:love:
Ignorance and sarcasm, some guy;)
Forbiddenbiker
24-02-2008, 15:13
So if one ticket makes me a Photographer, how many tickets before I can claim to be a semi pro then?
:naughty:
I got loads see. ... :D
Did the OP ask for a reason and was the camera mentioned as part of the reply? We simply don't know...
I didn't ask them, was more wondering what everyone around me was thinking.
By the way - the OP mentions that he wasn't taking pictures, simply passing through the station earlier on. The layout of Waverley is such that it's often used as a cut through - it's a nice simple route from the Old Town through to the new - and is used as such by an awful lot of folk. Thought I'd add that to clarify things a little for people who don't know the station.
I thought I would save myself a couple of minutes walking through the station... ended up wasting about 10.
I thought I would save myself a couple of minutes walking through the station... ended up wasting about 10.
LOL - handy cut-through from the Halfway House to the Guildford Arms though! ;):beer:
inaneredstripe
24-02-2008, 22:19
gord , i,m impressed.
Tis quite funny from my point of view, mainly because I'm slightly crazy, however there are some heated view points when it comes to this sort of thing.
It all comes down to people having some self righteous belief that as they are doing nothing wrong, then they should not be liable to random stop and searches.
I disagree, and although I would afterwards question the officer's decision to waste my time, I would be thankful that there are these powers in place, and that an attempt to police a threat that cannot be seen easily is in place.
I feel for the countless members of the non-white ethnic groups that are targeted by the police for stop and searches all over the country, but again, If the police have a report of a white male with a blue jacket and black jeans on having just robbed a bank, then that is what they will look for. Comprende?
Alright, owning a camera does not make you a terrorist, but given the nature of todays terrorism threat, the ownership of a camera in a crowed train station makes you a suspect.
I'm a 21 year old. I drive my parents car. I could not afford the car on my own. I have been stopped by the police several times just to make sure that i am allowed to drive it. Its annoying, but I fit a profile, end of story. Interesting side note, I get treated like **** if im wearing a hoody ;) . as opposed to shirt and tie from work!
Just the way it is.
Stop whinging and just be thankful that the police are doing theyre job and not just eating doughnuts!!!!!
I am amazed at the number of people on here prepared to have their civil liberties repeatedly cut by the government in the name of protection form terrorists.
have they ever caught or prevented a terrorist attack from a stop and search in the street? Can the government look after your personal details correctly?
Personally i think the 9/11 terrorists would have probely managed to hit the twin towers with out a pic of them! But if they needed one they could have just brought a post card in NY.
Its all typical reactionary BS. X has happened so we much prevent it happening again. Which as of yet they havent managed. 7/7 happened. 21/7 and Glasgow airport didin't happen only cos the terrorists messed up, not because the police prevented anything.
The IRA had a much more sustained campaign of terror and we didn't need special measures then.
Yes the attacks were horrible and a feel for those who have suffered a personal loss but as a nation we have gone a little crazy over the whole thing.
and another point nobody has mentioned is that when the police shot the guy at stockwell ( im not going to try to spell his name, but im not being disrespectful), they shot the wrong guy because they messed up the tail (as i understand it) but what happened to the guy they were supposed to be tailing?? Did they ever find him again or is he free to blow himself and everybody else up???
Photos of buildings with public entry are not an aid to terrorism, if they want buildings information they want blue prints and detailed information not snap shots (even if they are high quality pics). These people infiltrate the system they want to attack to get inside knowledge! They don't stand outside taking photos.
Well i am going to stop ranting now but that's my PoV.
The Met Police took out a full page advert in The London paper yesterday. I wish i would have kept my copy and scanned it as it was quite relevant to this topic.
Basically it was an advert with lots of digital cameras and one was circled with a text box and in that text box it asked the public to report suspicious behaviour or if they saw someone with a camera in a public place such as a train station or an airport as terrorists will photograph the locations of security cameras, entrances and exits and other notable features of a public place in order to plan attacks.
As I said in a previous reply to this thread I have been stopped and searched many times. I am of Indian origin working in an area that is very prone to terrorist attacks (Canary Wharf) so thats probably the reason why. However every time I have been stopped and searched they have been quite friendly and not made me feel like im a criminal and I just let them get on with it...The quicker they do their job the quicker I can get to work/home...
Whether they single out members of ethnic minorities I dont know. However if you are walking through a train station or an airport with a big backpack and/or a camera hanging from your neck you are more likley to get stopped and searched. Even if your intentions are completely innocent they dont know that. You could be anybody to them. A terrorist doesn't have a fixed profile of what one must look like. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about thats the way I see it.
By the way, you don't need permission to take photos on a train station. You only need to inform the station master that you're there. Not actually GET permission.
Photography
You can take photographs at stations provided you do not sell them. However, you are not allowed to take photographs of security related equipment, such as CCTV cameras.
Taken from http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/777.aspx
sbrownphoto
27-02-2008, 15:23
By the way, you don't need permission to take photos on a train station. You only need to inform the station master that you're there. Not actually GET permission.
Correct ..... you dont need permission to photograph a building for non commercial gain ... in Scotland anyway .. dont know about you English or EU folks, or who ever else pops by in here.
ALSO, you cannot be ordered to delete photos ... will try find the article again and scan it about this as apparently its destruction of property and is an offence, so you can effectively charge the police if they do ...lol
I will try find the article to be sure again though for all to see, was in a mag somewhere.
:bonk:
Noo I mean you don't need to actually get permission to be there and take photos. You can...they just require you to inform the station master of your presence on the day.
i live in Edinburgh and been throu that train station many many times as a short cut from princess street to market street.
I was actually in there around september time getting some pictures.
Never got stopped questioned or searched.
You must have been looking like a terriorist... or was it the backpack or were you running for a train
mike
By the way, you don't need permission to take photos on a train station. You only need to inform the station master that you're there. Not actually GET permission.
i've been in Queens street & central station and you do need permission especially if using tripod, its formality all they ask are they private or professional & how long are you going to be in station. Give you a badge warn you to stay away from track. In cenral a few times i've been watched by security
nickking910
19-03-2008, 08:27
I was stopped and questioned on Sunday. I was in Crystal Palace Park taking pictures of the ruins of the old Palace. The copper explained himself, saying that I didn't look like your average terrorist (jeans and a Harlequins rugby shirt, you decide!), but while he was talking to me three police cars turned up as backup:eek:
The park also has the athletics stadium, so I suppose I could have been trying to find locations to plant explosives prior to the next meeting there.
In response to a previous post, I work at Canary Wharf as well, and I find the security on the estate are a more rude and curt than any policemen I've dealt with.
NathanJT
19-03-2008, 12:04
The copper explained himself, saying that I didn't look like your average terrorist (jeans and a Harlequins rugby shirt, you decide
Which to me simply says that the police DO have an internal directive to stop anyone with a camera.
The park also has the athletics stadium, so I suppose I could have been trying to find locations to plant explosives prior to the next meeting there.
Personally I don't see that as reasonable grounds either.
raiderjay99
19-03-2008, 17:39
as long as the search doesn't involve rubber gloves :-(
Now that's funny.
Wow, having never been to Europe, I had no idea what was going on over there. You can take pictures in public places here. Tourists do it all the time. I would think that if you were acting suspiciously, or fit a certain profile, you would be searched. This is an amazing thread.
So how long before we get some T-Shirts printed...
"I'm a tourist, not a terrorist."
Matt Charlton
19-03-2008, 18:51
Already available mate :p
http://focus52.blogspot.com/2008/03/im-photographer-not-terrorist.html
http://bp3.blogger.com/_muXUtKfbP_c/R8rqxgvJvoI/AAAAAAAAAms/ijRbx_e87vE/s400/jitcrunch.aspx.jpg
NathanJT
21-03-2008, 18:20
I saw this today and thought the irony just too good to miss taking a picture!
http://www.nathanthorpe.co.uk/photos/CanonRow.jpg
Tis quite funny from my point of view, mainly because I'm slightly crazy, however there are some heated view points when it comes to this sort of thing.
It all comes down to people having some self righteous belief that as they are doing nothing wrong, then they should not be liable to random stop and searches.
I disagree, and although I would afterwards question the officer's decision to waste my time, I would be thankful that there are these powers in place, and that an attempt to police a threat that cannot be seen easily is in place.
Stop whinging and just be thankful that the police are doing theyre job and not just eating doughnuts!!!!!
This is really not meant as a putdown, but at 21 you've not a lot of experience of the world from which to define others' beliefs as "self righteous".
I could not disagree more with your sentiment. Read Mencken - " The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary". These fears, encouraged in order to extend the power of the politician and the state, are primarily for the purpose of the politician's gain, not for your good.
When you give such unchecked powers to the police, you encourage a***holes like the policeman in the below video, which I encourage everyone to watch.
http://sebrogers.typepad.com/seb_rogers_blog/2008/03/free-country.html
The state exists by YOU AND ME granting power to it We do not exist by their blessing. Such power must always be answerable to us.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.