assaulted when taking photos

Moi???

I cannot live to hear the news from England,
But I do prophesy th' election lights
On Fortinbras. He has my dying voice.
So tell him, with th' occurrents, more and less,
Which have solicited- the rest is silence.
 
My advice would be to try the shot on a week night when most people will be working rather than boozing again the day after. Weekends for me are generally 'iffy' even in the Peak District towns as so many idiot's can't handle their watered down beer and want to impress their mates by being louts.

If you let it get to you then all these idiots have done is let you stoop to their level, let them drink themselves to an early grave on weekends and try a night shot on a Tues/Weds/Thurs night where there is less risk of running into anyone intoxicated.
 
RjL great advice thanks. It was homework for my soon-to-be brother in law, due in on monday so kinda needed to be then. But in future Ill absolutely try to fequent other less hostile areas.

Although I take it you have never been to Glasgow? lol. Every night is a boozy night. Haha.

Like I said, Ill just put it down to experience and move on.
 
paulf1990 said:
Jon I was just making mention of an incident and having a rant. I am not seeking publicity or to get the officers investigated. As i said the main point was about being able to take photographs.

As for the deadly weapon part, the police said they would take that with a pinch of salt as the lad never produced a weapon.

I cant help but feel that you are trying to wind me up.
Click to expand...

Good advice, that. I shall do the same.
 
to be fair on the police if youd called them straight away they may have caught up with them, but once you got home was too late as theyd probably be home or taking cover somewhere where they could change their appearance.
 
Her brother called them from the car and they told us to go home and they would send a car round. They arrived two hours later. Lol
 
Lol yeah but then id be charged. Losing my job and not being able to afford my house for my soon to be born baby. Best just to let the wee you know whats think they are hard and hope for an outcome from a police enquirey.

Paul
 
paulf1990 said:
Lol yeah but then id be charged. Losing my job and not being able to afford my house for my soon to be born baby. Best just to let the wee you know whats think they are hard and hope for an outcome from a police enquirey.

Paul
Click to expand...


nah - guy says he has a knife and you defend youself simples.
 
In my line of work though, even a pending investigation will mean I cant work in the places I work. And an investigation can take years sometimes so it would not be viable. Its frustrating but thats the life I chose.

Where in Scotland is it youre from POAH?

Paul
 
jon ryan said:
And what about poor Sam Coleridge, then?


In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome decree:
Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
Through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.

So twice five miles of fertile ground
With walls and towers were girdled round:
And there were gardens bright with sinuous rills,
Where blossomed many an incense-bearing tree;
And here were forests ancient as the hills,
Enfolding sunny spots of greenery.

But oh! that deep romantic chasm which slanted
Down the green hill athwart a cedarn cover!
A savage place! as holy and enchanted
As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted
By woman wailing for her demon-lover!
And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
A mighty fountain momently was forced:
Amid whose swift half-intermitted burst
Huge fragments vaulted like rebounding hail,
Or chaffy grain beneath the thresher's flail:
And 'mid these dancing rocks at once and ever
It flung up momently the sacred river.
Five miles meandering with a mazy motion
Through wood and dale the sacred river ran,
Then reached the caverns measureless to man,
And sank in tumult to a lifeless ocean:
And 'mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
Ancestral voices prophesying war!

The shadow of the dome of pleasure
Floated midway on the waves;
Where was heard the mingled measure
From the fountain and the caves.
It was a miracle of rare device,
A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice!

A damsel with a dulcimer
In a vision once I saw:
It was an Abyssinian maid,
And on her dulcimer she played,
Singing of Mount Abora.
Could I revive within me
Her symphony and song,
To such a deep delight 'twould win me
That with music loud and long
I would build that dome in air,
That sunny dome! those caves of ice!
And all who heard should see them there,
And all should cry, Beware! Beware!
His flashing eyes, his floating hair!
Weave a circle round him thrice,
And close your eyes with holy dread,
For he on honey-dew hath fed
And drunk the milk of Paradise.


...he wrote. That was as far as he got when some scrote from Porlock knocked on his door, and made him forget the other 74 verses! I mean, think how much he lost, getting paid by the line as poets were back then.



Point of Order: How do you know he was 17?

Now, where had we got to. Ah yes. Shakespeare. 37 plays he's credited with, as we all know...
Click to expand...


Think this lads had one too many ales
 
paulf1990 said:
In my line of work though, even a pending investigation will mean I cant work in the places I work. And an investigation can take years sometimes so it would not be viable. Its frustrating but thats the life I chose.

Where in Scotland is it youre from POAH?

Paul
Click to expand...

Thing is if you put him on his ass and he was able to somehow call the police in his drunken state wouldnt the cops be telling him the same thing he told you? That is if they really wanted to listen to a drunk 17 year old who would already be in trouble for underage drinking. He would then end up having to explain at a later time why he claimed to have a knife on him and threatened to stab you if you retaliated.

and yes what is it with the community on here lately? I'm seeing a lot of people come out with snooty or snide comments to other members all the time, its probably one reason I don't come on here as much. Its like a bunch of old ladies sitting in a bus stop complaining about how the whole world annoys them.
 
Last edited:
strumstrum said:
Um did you read which section this post is in??
Click to expand...

Did you read my earlier post, which mentions that it was originally started in Talk Photography?
 
Ye but as I said there would still be the investigation time. Plus had anything happened to the fiances brothers I could never forgive myself.

Strumstrum I had originally posted in tp. It was moved here. I had no idea this part existed tbf but now ive foind it I find it hilarious. Lol.

Paul
 
mxfun said:
Think this lads had one too many ales
Click to expand...

Sam was a dope fiend - opium (in the form of laudanum, probably) was his fix of choice. His dad was a vicar and headmaster. How disappointed he must have been in his errant son!
 
Should have just dumped him in the Clyde...preferably with a couple of brick inserted in his pockets, best place for the neds.
 
POAH said:
shouldl have just smashed him in the face at that point :LOL:
Click to expand...

and kicked him in the balls to make sure he didnt get up , and ****ed off sharpish without calling the police
 
Why are people to easy to blame the police. Come on, doesn't common sense apply in this situation. Would you walk about with a necklace around your neck with £1000 wrapped around it in a dodgy area and being totally oblivious as to what might happen - because that's just what you have done. Surely that's not the police to blame but society today and the way some parents raise their children - I could go on but that's another debate. Yes I totally agree you should be able to go wherever and whenever you want but unfortunately you can't, that's not the police to blame is it.
The law says you are quite within your rights to defend yourself as long as its proportionate to the situation. I.e. if he hit you and then you go chasing after him, catch him up and punch him in the face then you have gone too far. But, if you give a pre emptive strike on him and punch him in the face before or as he is hitting you - then there is no issues with this. You have defended yourself, lawfully.
Come on don't blame the police for everything, yes there is some lazy ones out there - don't tar them all with the same brush. Yes your description of your assailant might be very distinctive to you at the time, don't forget the police deal with these type of people on a daily basis and one idiot looks and dresses much the same as another. Unfortunately it's the same old story, they are understaffed, overworked and can't do right in anyone's eyes. Shouldn't you look elsewhere rather than the easy option to blame?
 
Last edited:
yelnek said:
Why are people to easy to blame the police. Come on, doesn't common sense apply in this situation. Would you walk about with a necklace around your neck with £1000 wrapped around it in a dodgy area and being totally oblivious as to what might happen - because that's just what you have done. Surely that's not the police to blame but society today and the way some parents raise their children - I could go on but that's another debate. Yes I totally agree you should be able to go wherever and whenever you want but unfortunately you can't, that's not the police to blame is it.
The law says you are quite within your rights to defend yourself as long as its proportionate to the situation. I.e. if he hit you and then you go chasing after him, catch him up and punch him in the face then you have gone too far. But, if you give a pre emptive strike on him and punch him in the face before or as he is hitting you - then there is no issues with this. You have defended yourself, lawfully.
Come on don't blame the police for everything, yes there is some lazy ones out there - don't tar them all with the same brush. Yes your description of your assailant might be very distinctive to you at the time, don't forget the police deal with these type of people on a daily basis and one idiot looks and dresses much the same as another. Unfortunately it's the same old story, they are understaffed, overworked and can't do right in anyone's eyes. Surely blame the government for this rather than your local police?
Click to expand...

did you actually read any of Pauls posts properly?
 
where'd the fun be in that :naughty:

its like giving accurate advice - more trouble than its worth (for example a pre emptive strike will not be seen by the police as legitimate self defence) :LOL:
 
Yelnek I said those certain police officers were not the best. But in no way did i tar them all with the same brush. Quite the opposite infact.
 
Thats cool. Like I said there are some real stand up folk in the police force who do anything and everything to help out. And some who just see it as a way to pay the bills. C'est la vie
 
big soft moose said:
where'd the fun be in that :naughty:

its like giving accurate advice - more trouble than its worth (for example a pre emptive strike will not be seen by the police as legitimate self defence) :LOL:
Click to expand...

I do to
s. 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967
" A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or in assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large".
 
"I have trained for many yaers as a thai boxer and know I can handle myself"

The moment he touched your tripod, it was only going to end one way.
But he should have been the one having the slap.
 
As I said, I couldnt risk the youn'uns or my job. Thought it best to be the bigger man and walk away.

Paul
 
yelnek said:
I do to
s. 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967
" A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or in assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large".
Click to expand...

indeed - but punching him in the face because he looked at you funny isnt 'reasonable in the the circumstances of the prevention of a crime' - punching him in the teeth premptively after he pulls a knife would be fine , as would putting him in an armlock after he takes a swing at you .

but the police won't look kindly on striking first preemptively just because you think he'd going to hit you
 
big soft moose said:
indeed - but punching him in the face because he looked at you funny isnt 'reasonable in the the circumstances of the prevention of a crime' - punching him in the teeth premptively after he pulls a knife would be fine , as would putting him in an armlock after he takes a swing at you .

but the police won't look kindly on striking first preemptively just because you think he'd going to hit you
Click to expand...

I think it's down to circumstances. If someone was being aggressive, and threatening a first strike could be regarded as reasonable behaviour in defense. Depends on the situation of course.

For info Paul, a 17 year old is not a minor in Scotland. A minor is someone under the age of 16 up here. So the age thing I don't think matters too much.
 
Last edited:
POAH said:
personally I'd not be down at Xscape late at night - heck there are plenty of scum down there during the day lol
Click to expand...

:LOL:

Usually, in the less salubrious areas, when the local neds approach me and ask why I'm taking pics I just tell them it's for security- social security, they **** off pretty quickly after that ;)
 
EOS_JD said:
I think it's down to circumstances. If someone was being aggressive, and threatening a first strike could be regarded as reasonable behaviour in defense. Depends on the situation of course.
.
Click to expand...

Although you've got a point its about the perception that the police have when they arrive on scene - he says some words, you hit him, he hits you back - the police turn up see two blokes fighting (especially in a bad area where such things are common) and nick you both for affray

after that your story is , "he threatened me So I hit him" , and his story is "he hit me first i was just defending myself"

The police and PF see it as two sides of the coin and you both wind up with an assault/affray/disturbing the peace charge

My feeling on this is if you are going to strike first , only do so when there are no witnesses, do so decisively, end the confrontation quickly and then walk away without involving the police.

If you want to involve the law don't strike first (unless you really have to, to defend yourself from an imediate and apparent threat - like him pulling a blade)
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
Although you've got a point its about the perception that the police have when they arrive on scene - he says some words, you hit him, he hits you back - the police turn up see two blokes fighting (especially in a bad area where such things are common) and nick you both for affray

after that your story is , "he threatened me So I hit him" , and his story is "he hit me first i was just defending myself"

The police and PF see it as two sides of the coin and you both wind up with an assault/affray/disturbing the peace charge

My feeling on this is if you are going to strike first , only do so when there are no witnesses, do so decisively, end the confrontation quickly and then walk away without involving the police.

If you want to involve the law don't strike first (unless you really have to, to defend yourself from an imediate and apparent threat - like him pulling a blade)
Click to expand...

You are there with a tripod and camera.... Enjoying taking a few photos....

The other guy a Ned with a knife in his pocket......

There's only one view I'd take and in any case it would NEVER go to court - although the ned might get arrested if (as is likely) it's not a first offense.

Yes a few sides no doubt but you have to look at the whole scenaro.
 
EOS_JD said:
You are there with a tripod and camera.... Enjoying taking a few photos....

The other guy a Ned with a knife in his pocket poor misunderstood youth whose only crime is wanting a job and a steady home life......

There's only one view I'd take and in any case it would NEVER go to court - although the ned might get arrested if (as is likely) it's not a first offense.

Yes a few sides no doubt but you have to look at the whole scenaro.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you (y)
 
We can argue this one till we're blue in the face but the core point is that its bad advice to suugest that striking first is generally justifiable - because it isnt

reasonable in the prevention of a crime is talking about aprehending burgulars or breaking up fights, etc or justifiable self defense when you are attacked, - it doesnt mean smacking someone in case they commit a crime when they havent yet attempted to
 
Last edited:
I do a lot of night photography alone in Liverpool. Wherever i go i make sure i know the area well, have a good look around before i take my camera out. Outside of the City Centre i try and stay close to the car as i can, sadly some places are just a no-go thou when you got valuable equipment with you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top