Concerned mum wants law changed

AZ6

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,051
Edit My Images
No
I feel uneasy about some of my street shots but I want them and it's MY right to take them not the publics right not to have them taken.
With such rights, come responsibilities. Of course, we want the freedom to be able to take pictures which record our experience of the world. And in some instances, the 'subjects' of those pictures may not be too happy. So it's about balancing your 'right' with sensitivity towards others.


I had a day out as I had heard that Hull City centre had a drugs dealing problem in public. This is just a few of the somewhat dangerous shots.
Here's an area where you have to be particularly careful, when it comes to publishing images. Your pictures there do not show any illegal activity, just a few individuals hanging around in a public space. Some are clearly intoxicated/just having a nap. But to imply that any of them are doing anything illegal, whether they are or not, can get you in hot water, because we operate a judicial system based on the premise of 'innocent until proven'. You haven't actually stated that the individuals pictured are involved in any crime, which is good. It's worth remembering that it's better to let the viewer decide what's going on, in some cases. In that way, you're merely observing, not passing judgment.

I think the thread is veering off topic again, probably my fault rambling on about something or other.
It's a debate we should all be having. It's about our rights and freedoms, as well as those of others.
 
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
8,029
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
It's a debate we should all be having. It's about our rights and freedoms, as well as those of others.
Yes I know, its just that I would not want the thread to end up as an argument.
 

AZ6

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,051
Edit My Images
No
Yes I know, its just that I would not want the thread to end up as an argument.
But clearly, there are differences of opinion. I feel it's important to listen to all sides.
 
Messages
2,573
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
As regards the legality or otherwise of "Street" photography. The following may be of interest to some.
It is a copy of correspondence I had with Derbyshire Police having been made to delete images following an RTC.




Report of incident outside Royal Derby Hospital.

By Graham Whitmore freelance photographer BFP membership no. AP/120573



Hi.

I would appreciate it if you could read the following report and comment on the points raised by email.

Can I point out that I have already reported the matter via your “Contact us” page seeking general clarification and I have been contacted by ‘phone by Sgt. *******who was most helpful. I suggested that I should put my concerns in writing and seek a written reply.



Thursday 2.12.10 3.15 pm



I was at the scene of the RTC outside The Royal Derby and had taken 4 general scene shots taking care not to intrude on operations or include injured parties in the images. I was approached by officer ******and I was informed that I must delete any images or have my camera seized.
I was somewhat surprised by this comment which he reiterated and said that he wasn’t going to argue about it, and that they were being very strict on these things. I said that I felt that this would be destroying his evidence that I had done wrong and mine that I hadn’t. He said that it was their evidence and that it was a crime scene. I felt that it wasn’t the time to debate the legalities of his demands as the collision had only recently taken place and I felt sure that he had more pressing matters to attend. It is worth noting that a member of the public (******) was at the time attempting to direct the oncoming traffic into one lane


I reluctantly agreed to delete the images in the presence of the officer. At this point the officer seemed satisfied, I asked if I could take his number which he was more than happy for me to do, I offered to shake his hand which he accepted and I left the scene.

My Points;

1. Under the circumstances I didn’t feel that he was in a position to seize and be responsible for over £5,000 worth of camera equipment.

2. I was sure that a court order was needed to force the deletion of digital images.

3. I was on the pavement in a public area there was no visible police cordon and I was in no way interfering with the work of the emergency services.

4. Was the area potentially being a crime scene relevant?

5. I am a member of the Bureau of Freelance Photographers and was working in this capacity. I believed, and still believe that I was operating totally within the law.

I later managed to obtain data retrieval software and reclaim the images, which I processed and passed on to the Derby Evening Telegraph making them aware of the circumstances. They replied thanking me for the images and confirmed that a court order was required to delete images.

The delay meant that I had missed the deadline for the next day’s publication. One of the images was however published on the paper’s website.

The prevention of my going about my legitimate business and delaying my activities weakened my submission to the paper and, along with the subsequent time spent following up the matter, has caused me considerable expense and loss of earnings.

Kind Regards Graham Whitmore.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear Mr Whitmore,


As the supervisor of PC ******, the officer involved in the incident you mention, I have been asked by my Inspector to make contact with you. Do you have a number I can ring please ? I have answers to the points you raised, and need to discuss the way forward. If you wish to communicate via e-mail, let me know and I'll give you a definitive run down.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi ******.

I would prefer an email response (ie, written.). But if you need to contact me by 'phone you can get me on **** *****.

Cheers for now. Graham.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Graham,

No problem. The circumstances as related by yourself have been confirmed by my officer, so there is no discrepancy there. Taking your points individually then:

  • quite simply, in these circumstances we are not able to seize your equipment. Had we done so, then that aside, we would have accepted responsibility for its security and care.
  • once an image is recorded, we have no power to delete or confiscate it without a Court Order, even if we think it contains damaging or useful evidence. It is a matter for editors to control distribution or publication thereafter.
  • accepted fully.
  • the area potentially being a Crime Scene has great relevance. As you can appreciate we are duty bound to secure the best evidence we can for either prosecution purposes or on the behalf of a coroner in the case of serious or fatal traffic collisions.
Having spoken with my officer, I am happy that he acted as he thought fit at the time. He was presented with a potentially life changing incident in its early stages, so it was important that he acted positively and quickly. Without making excuses, our natural mind set is to secure an area with a ring of steel through which nothing goes in or out. Our dealings with the Press at Pc and Sgt. level are fairly limited, but it is recognised that there is much of mutual benefit that co-operation can achieve.



To this end we have a set of operating procedures and guidance to refer to. Individual officers understanding and retention of this information differs widely as you would expect.



Your dealings with *****seemed fairly cordial, so I trust there was nothing in your encounter which caused you undue concern. I have drawn his attention to your e-mail and recommended his perusal of the guidelines for dealing with members of the press.



To finalise this matter I am required to seek your approval for what is termed a local resolution which I feel in this instance is the most appropriate course of action. This means that your views are officially recorded and the officers attention is drawn to them. An action plan is discussed which in this case I suggest consists of a review of our guidelines by the officer.



This will conclude the matter as far as the officers conduct goes. I note however that you mention in the final paragraph of your e-mail, loss of earnings and expenses incurred. This is outside the scope of my duties, but if you are intending to make a claim of some description, then I will be happy to forward that on to our Force Solicitors for their consideration.



I trust this meets with your approval.



Regards. ......


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Hi *****.

I'm sorry it's taken so long to reply but I've been away for a couple of weeks.

I see that you require me to give approval for local resolution. If you could just indulge me for a little longer I'm sure that will be forthcoming.



I understand your points about the area being potentially a crime scene and agree with them fully. However I fail to see how my photographing the scene in the way I was compromised that.



I am also in agreement that your officer was acting as he saw fit at the time. I would say though that the fact that he said that they were being very strict on this, leads me to believe that your officers have been given some rather dubious instructions.

I now realise that it was the very early stages of the incident and that if I had held off from photographing the scene and waited a little (Loitered with intent?) perhaps the outcome would have been a little different.

I'm very happy that you say that there is much of mutual benefit that co-operation can achieve.



I am slightly alarmed that you feel that I would expect your officers understanding and retention of operating procedures to differ widely, particularly on something so fundamental.



Yes, my dealings with PC ***** were fairly cordial, but then I'm a cordial kind of guy! He came across as efficient and accertive and I hope he'd be the same if I was trapped in the vehicle.



Regarding any claim for loss of earnings. If I were allowed to continue my legitimate business and make a timely submission to the local press, I would have expected to receive payment based on NUJ guidelines of circa £85.00 I would be grateful if you would pass this on to your force solicitors for their consideration, as you offered. Beyond that it is not my intention to pursue a claim for loss of earnings

Graham.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



All noted thank you. I have passed the salient details on to our Legal department for their consideration. I

dare say they will respond directly to yourself after due consideration.



Regards. ........


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Hi again Dave.

Thanks for your continued attention.

All my "niggles" have been addressed and I'm happy for this to be filed under "Local Resolution".

Obviously if I can be of any assistance please feel free to contact me.

Can I wish you and your team a happy and safe new year.

All the best. Graham.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Many thanks Graham, I shall file accordingly. Thank you for your patience and understanding.



All the best. ......





































 
Last edited:
Messages
1,320
Edit My Images
Yes
As regards the legality or otherwise of "Street" photography. The following may be of interest to some.
It is a copy of correspondence I had with Derbyshire Police having been made to delete images following an RTC.




Report of incident outside Royal Derby Hospital.

By Graham Whitmore freelance photographer BFP membership no. AP/120573



Hi.

I would appreciate it if you could read the following report and comment on the points raised by email.

Can I point out that I have already reported the matter via your “Contact us” page seeking general clarification and I have been contacted by ‘phone by Sgt. *******who was most helpful. I suggested that I should put my concerns in writing and seek a written reply.



Thursday 2.12.10 3.15 pm



I was at the scene of the RTC outside The Royal Derby and had taken 4 general scene shots taking care not to intrude on operations or include injured parties in the images. I was approached by officer ******and I was informed that I must delete any images or have my camera seized.
I was somewhat surprised by this comment which he reiterated and said that he wasn’t going to argue about it, and that they were being very strict on these things. I said that I felt that this would be destroying his evidence that I had done wrong and mine that I hadn’t. He said that it was their evidence and that it was a crime scene. I felt that it wasn’t the time to debate the legalities of his demands as the collision had only recently taken place and I felt sure that he had more pressing matters to attend. It is worth noting that a member of the public (******) was at the time attempting to direct the oncoming traffic into one lane


I reluctantly agreed to delete the images in the presence of the officer. At this point the officer seemed satisfied, I asked if I could take his number which he was more than happy for me to do, I offered to shake his hand which he accepted and I left the scene.

My Points;

1. Under the circumstances I didn’t feel that he was in a position to seize and be responsible for over £5,000 worth of camera equipment.

2. I was sure that a court order was needed to force the deletion of digital images.

3. I was on the pavement in a public area there was no visible police cordon and I was in no way interfering with the work of the emergency services.

4. Was the area potentially being a crime scene relevant?

5. I am a member of the Bureau of Freelance Photographers and was working in this capacity. I believed, and still believe that I was operating totally within the law.

I later managed to obtain data retrieval software and reclaim the images, which I processed and passed on to the Derby Evening Telegraph making them aware of the circumstances. They replied thanking me for the images and confirmed that a court order was required to delete images.

The delay meant that I had missed the deadline for the next day’s publication. One of the images was however published on the paper’s website.

The prevention of my going about my legitimate business and delaying my activities weakened my submission to the paper and, along with the subsequent time spent following up the matter, has caused me considerable expense and loss of earnings.

Kind Regards Graham Whitmore.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear Mr Whitmore,


As the supervisor of PC ******, the officer involved in the incident you mention, I have been asked by my Inspector to make contact with you. Do you have a number I can ring please ? I have answers to the points you raised, and need to discuss the way forward. If you wish to communicate via e-mail, let me know and I'll give you a definitive run down.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi ******.

I would prefer an email response (ie, written.). But if you need to contact me by 'phone you can get me on **** *****.

Cheers for now. Graham.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Graham,

No problem. The circumstances as related by yourself have been confirmed by my officer, so there is no discrepancy there. Taking your points individually then:

  • quite simply, in these circumstances we are not able to seize your equipment. Had we done so, then that aside, we would have accepted responsibility for its security and care.
  • once an image is recorded, we have no power to delete or confiscate it without a Court Order, even if we think it contains damaging or useful evidence. It is a matter for editors to control distribution or publication thereafter.
  • accepted fully.
  • the area potentially being a Crime Scene has great relevance. As you can appreciate we are duty bound to secure the best evidence we can for either prosecution purposes or on the behalf of a coroner in the case of serious or fatal traffic collisions.
Having spoken with my officer, I am happy that he acted as he thought fit at the time. He was presented with a potentially life changing incident in its early stages, so it was important that he acted positively and quickly. Without making excuses, our natural mind set is to secure an area with a ring of steel through which nothing goes in or out. Our dealings with the Press at Pc and Sgt. level are fairly limited, but it is recognised that there is much of mutual benefit that co-operation can achieve.



To this end we have a set of operating procedures and guidance to refer to. Individual officers understanding and retention of this information differs widely as you would expect.



Your dealings with *****seemed fairly cordial, so I trust there was nothing in your encounter which caused you undue concern. I have drawn his attention to your e-mail and recommended his perusal of the guidelines for dealing with members of the press.



To finalise this matter I am required to seek your approval for what is termed a local resolution which I feel in this instance is the most appropriate course of action. This means that your views are officially recorded and the officers attention is drawn to them. An action plan is discussed which in this case I suggest consists of a review of our guidelines by the officer.



This will conclude the matter as far as the officers conduct goes. I note however that you mention in the final paragraph of your e-mail, loss of earnings and expenses incurred. This is outside the scope of my duties, but if you are intending to make a claim of some description, then I will be happy to forward that on to our Force Solicitors for their consideration.



I trust this meets with your approval.



Regards. ......


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Hi *****.

I'm sorry it's taken so long to reply but I've been away for a couple of weeks.

I see that you require me to give approval for local resolution. If you could just indulge me for a little longer I'm sure that will be forthcoming.



I understand your points about the area being potentially a crime scene and agree with them fully. However I fail to see how my photographing the scene in the way I was compromised that.



I am also in agreement that your officer was acting as he saw fit at the time. I would say though that the fact that he said that they were being very strict on this, leads me to believe that your officers have been given some rather dubious instructions.

I now realise that it was the very early stages of the incident and that if I had held off from photographing the scene and waited a little (Loitered with intent?) perhaps the outcome would have been a little different.

I'm very happy that you say that there is much of mutual benefit that co-operation can achieve.



I am slightly alarmed that you feel that I would expect your officers understanding and retention of operating procedures to differ widely, particularly on something so fundamental.



Yes, my dealings with PC ***** were fairly cordial, but then I'm a cordial kind of guy! He came across as efficient and accertive and I hope he'd be the same if I was trapped in the vehicle.



Regarding any claim for loss of earnings. If I were allowed to continue my legitimate business and make a timely submission to the local press, I would have expected to receive payment based on NUJ guidelines of circa £85.00 I would be grateful if you would pass this on to your force solicitors for their consideration, as you offered. Beyond that it is not my intention to pursue a claim for loss of earnings

Graham.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



All noted thank you. I have passed the salient details on to our Legal department for their consideration. I

dare say they will respond directly to yourself after due consideration.



Regards. ........


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Hi again Dave.

Thanks for your continued attention.

All my "niggles" have been addressed and I'm happy for this to be filed under "Local Resolution".

Obviously if I can be of any assistance please feel free to contact me.

Can I wish you and your team a happy and safe new year.

All the best. Graham.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Many thanks Graham, I shall file accordingly. Thank you for your patience and understanding.



All the best. ......





































Did you get the £85?. you usually don't get anything unless you do a letter before action.
 
Messages
12,251
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
Here's an area where you have to be particularly careful, when it comes to publishing images. Your pictures there do not show any illegal activity, just a few individuals hanging around in a public space. Some are clearly intoxicated/just having a nap. But to imply that any of them are doing anything illegal, whether they are or not, can get you in hot water, because we operate a judicial system based on the premise of 'innocent until proven'. You haven't actually stated that the individuals pictured are involved in any crime, which is good. It's worth remembering that it's better to let the viewer decide what's going on, in some cases. In that way, you're merely observing, not passing judgment.

If you are going to spout legal BS, at least try and learn the law.

His comment has nothing to do with proving someone guilty or innocent. It is straightforward defamation (if they are in fact not involved in drug use) which is a civil tort.
Since the change in our defamation laws (Defamation Act 2013), it is highly unlikely that this would reach the requirements for a judgement.
 
Messages
12,251
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
As regards the legality or otherwise of "Street" photography. The following may be of interest to some.
It is a copy of correspondence I had with Derbyshire Police having been made to delete images following an RTC.

I'd have been after a damned sight more than eighty five quid if that had happened to me, although (not trying to be a smart arse) I would have refused point blank
to delete the images.

I also wouldn't have been happy with his governor's acceptance that the PC thought he was acting as he saw fit. Not with the incident being dealt with at a local level.

The PC was acting in direct contravention of ACPO's guidelines in respect of photography - even though ACPO has now been replaced by the NPCC.

Every PC should be aware of them.

If we allow 'local discipline' then those guidelines are ignored or forgotten about and some other poor sucker gets abused furthr down the line. And let's be clear, this absolutely is abuse of power.
 
Messages
5,363
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Messages
1,651
Edit My Images
Yes
Completely OT but I don’t feel like starting a new thread for it and this one has wandered about a bit :).
“The House of Commons’ former official photographer, responsible for famous front page images of the last two year’s Brexit drama, has had his home raided by police after a clash with parliamentary authorities.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...y-home-raided-by-police-over-stolen-furniture
I think you should consider tying this in with Sajid Javid resigning from the position of Chancellor. You know, it used to be one of the key positions of state in the UK.

Right now, if the position holder doesn't conform to the inner circle's consensus, bye bye.

As a snapper, you are merely collateral damage.
 
Messages
25,010
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I think you should consider tying this in with Sajid Javid resigning from the position of Chancellor. You know, it used to be one of the key positions of state in the UK.

Right now, if the position holder doesn't conform to the inner circle's consensus, bye bye.

As a snapper, you are merely collateral damage.
Tis nothing new. Look at the purge of moderates and arguably Jews too from Labour which I'd argue is far more sinister a thing than merging 10/11 Downing Street, if rather ot.
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,003
Edit My Images
No
I am trying to figure out, how we got to where the thread is now up to.
It's the internet. The previous posts have been pursuant to section 25 subsection (d) paragraph (ii) of the phantasy rules for online discussion...
if a discussion hasn't drifted off course by posting #500 it is the duty of all right minded readers to change the path of the conversation by introducing completely irrelevent information to the thread.
:naughty: :naughty: :naughty:
 
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
8,029
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
It's the internet. The previous posts have been pursuant to section 25 subsection (d) paragraph (ii) of the phantasy rules for online discussion...
:naughty: :naughty: :naughty:
I have been waiting to see where things go, before I can post again. I have lost a little momentum. (y)
 
Messages
992
Name
Jamesev
Edit My Images
No
I'd have been after a damned sight more than eighty five quid if that had happened to me, although (not trying to be a smart arse) I would have refused point blank
to delete the images.

I also wouldn't have been happy with his governor's acceptance that the PC thought he was acting as he saw fit. Not with the incident being dealt with at a local level.

The PC was acting in direct contravention of ACPO's guidelines in respect of photography - even though ACPO has now been replaced by the NPCC.

Every PC should be aware of them.

If we allow 'local discipline' then those guidelines are ignored or forgotten about and some other poor sucker gets abused furthr down the line. And let's be clear, this absolutely is abuse of power.
Having read the response from the governor it does seem like covering arses rather than any admission which would have got more respect. Sometimes I suspect they believe their dealing with idiots rather than those clued up/
 
Messages
5,363
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Having read the response from the governor it does seem like covering arses rather than any admission which would have got more respect. Sometimes I suspect they believe their dealing with idiots rather than those clued up/
Which of course they often are, which may colour their views ;)
 

AZ6

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,051
Edit My Images
No
You really are an idiot, aren't you?
Well, so my wife often tells me... :banana:


If you are going to spout legal BS, at least try and learn the law.

His comment has nothing to do with proving someone guilty or innocent. It is straightforward defamation (if they are in fact not involved in drug use) which is a civil tort.
Since the change in our defamation laws (Defamation Act 2013), it is highly unlikely that this would reach the requirements for a judgement.
Don't get your knickers in such a twist sweetheart. It's the internet, remember? Relax. Be chill. It's the Sabbath. X
 

AZ6

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,051
Edit My Images
No
Last edited:

simon ess

Just call me Roxanne.
Messages
8,308
Edit My Images
No
How liberating! In a sensible, interesting, adult discussion on this forum I can spout any old load of drizzling s***e 'cause it's the internet innit.

If someone doesn't like it it's their fault.

Joking, right?
 
Messages
12,251
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
How liberating! In a sensible, interesting, adult discussion on this forum I can spout any old load of drizzling s***e 'cause it's the internet innit.

If someone doesn't like it it's their fault.

Joking, right?

Sadly that's the mentality of people like Alpha-Omega above.
 
Messages
2,573
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
I'd have been after a damned sight more than eighty five quid if that had happened to me, although (not trying to be a smart arse) I would have refused point blank
to delete the images.

I also wouldn't have been happy with his governor's acceptance that the PC thought he was acting as he saw fit. Not with the incident being dealt with at a local level.

The PC was acting in direct contravention of ACPO's guidelines in respect of photography - even though ACPO has now been replaced by the NPCC.

Every PC should be aware of them.

If we allow 'local discipline' then those guidelines are ignored or forgotten about and some other poor sucker gets abused furthr down the line. And let's be clear, this absolutely is abuse of power.

NB. This indecent was 10 years ago (As dated on my report) I don't know if that makes a difference to procedures / current legalities.
 
Messages
407
Edit My Images
Yes
Last edited:

AZ6

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,051
Edit My Images
No
Re the police, the average cop get a couple of weeks training on the Law so are as thick as pigsh*t when it comes to it, they then are teamed up to learn on the job with a more experienced plod... who also went through the same system, for the run of the mill stuff they will have an idea of the law, for the rest.. doubtful.

https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAs...-legal-acts-of-laws-and-rules-and-regulations
TBH, most are pretty ignorant of the actual laws that they most commonly have to enforce and uphold. Or, like a certain other poster on here, misinterpret them... ;) The answer is obviously education, but sadly, the educational requirements for entry into the police force, are... well, there aren't any, beyond a basic ability to read and write, and add up. I've long felt this is a big problem with our police, because so many problems and miscarriages of justice stem from poor intellectual ability of individual officers. A better educated (at least to say first year uni/equivalent standard) police force would be better able to make more intelligent and informed decisions when policing, and this would only benefit society. But, ignorant and uneducated people are much easier to manipulate and coerce into following orders...
 
Messages
12,251
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
TBH, most are pretty ignorant of the actual laws that they most commonly have to enforce and uphold. Or, like a certain other poster on here, misinterpret them... ;) The answer is obviously education, but sadly, the educational requirements for entry into the police force, are... well, there aren't any, beyond a basic ability to read and write, and add up. I've long felt this is a big problem with our police, because so many problems and miscarriages of justice stem from poor intellectual ability of individual officers. A better educated (at least to say first year uni/equivalent standard) police force would be better able to make more intelligent and informed decisions when policing, and this would only benefit society. But, ignorant and uneducated people are much easier to manipulate and coerce into following orders...

I'd suspect that the average police constable is probably better educated than you are. Once again, your facts are askew.

No surprise there then.
 
Messages
12,251
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
Re the police, the average cop get a couple of weeks training on the Law so are as thick as pigsh*t when it comes to it, they then are teamed up to learn on the job with a more experienced plod... who also went through the same system, for the run of the mill stuff they will have an idea of the law, for the rest.. doubtful.

https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAs...-legal-acts-of-laws-and-rules-and-regulations

Using someone else's targeted FOI request to make a generalised statement about police training is a bit daft.

You might also like to learn to write better before criticising someone else's education.
 
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
8,029
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
Re the police, the average cop get a couple of weeks training on the Law so are as thick as pigsh*t when it comes to it, they then are teamed up to learn on the job with a more experienced plod... who also went through the same system, for the run of the mill stuff they will have an idea of the law, for the rest.. doubtful.

https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAs...-legal-acts-of-laws-and-rules-and-regulations
TBH, most are pretty ignorant of the actual laws that they most commonly have to enforce and uphold. Or, like a certain other poster on here, misinterpret them... ;) The answer is obviously education, but sadly, the educational requirements for entry into the police force, are... well, there aren't any, beyond a basic ability to read and write, and add up. I've long felt this is a big problem with our police, because so many problems and miscarriages of justice stem from poor intellectual ability of individual officers. A better educated (at least to say first year uni/equivalent standard) police force would be better able to make more intelligent and informed decisions when policing, and this would only benefit society. But, ignorant and uneducated people are much easier to manipulate and coerce into following orders...
I'd suspect that the average police constable is probably better educated than you are. Once again, your facts are askew.

No surprise there then.
I think the average copper is probably better educated than me, but there again I think the average person is better educated than me, as I can be a right thicko at times, I even have to ask the most basic questions on here. :(


But when it comes to cooking, I can keep three woks on the go at the same time.

I remember when I was working in catering a good few years ago, I was serving a meal to a very high ranking Police Officer. He asked if we had any Cigars, and I replied no. He jokingly replied, "maybe you should get some in". I said I thought you had to have a Licence to sell Tobacco. He scratched his head and said, "I am not sure, I will have to ask my staff on the regulations regarding Tobacco".

I was gobsmacked that he did not know, but there again even he can't know everything.


Wow, this thread certainly has veered off topic. Me again, waffling on. :)
 
Top