and please use their services
"I am not a terrorist!", "Photography is not a crime!" - The fightback starts here...
- Thread starter Marcel
- Start date
- Messages
- 448
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Indeed. This is the thing. Where's the evidence an s44 stop of someone they had no reason to suspect at all other than they had a camera, has actually prevented terrorism, or in any way led to prosecution?
The case the police trotted out recently was not an s44 photography stop. It was a case of suspects they had been observing thanks to that age old policing skill... intelligence. They already suspected them as I understood it and had obtained the CCTV footage to further their case (despite no prosecution in the end). The CCTV footage would never have been looked at in the first place if it was not for... police intelligence.
If they have a good reason to stop, no problem with that. The problem is they do not have a good reason in general.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,005
- Name
- Nigel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm sorry to butt in, but I'd just like to clarify - one side is saying that the difficulty is that the police don't know who could be a terrorist, and the other side is complaining that the police don't know who is a terrorist?
Can we please stop the squabble (in which both sides, ultimately, agree) and push this thread, kicking and screaming, back on topic, i.e. "Photography is not a crime".
Sorry for the rant, and yes I do feel it's important to debate these things, but I am concerned that intelligent debate may be about to deteriorate rapidly. This is probably affected by the inflection- and emphasis-free nature of written text, which can very easily lead to misunderstandings.
This post is not intended as a starter for discussion - I realise my first statement trivialises both positions (hopefully equally - I'm trying not to take sides
), but I'm trying to point out that this is not black and white - as with life in general, it's all shades of grey.
Thanks for reading, and I apologise in advance if anyone takes this as an argument for their side...
Can we please stop the squabble (in which both sides, ultimately, agree) and push this thread, kicking and screaming, back on topic, i.e. "Photography is not a crime".
Sorry for the rant, and yes I do feel it's important to debate these things, but I am concerned that intelligent debate may be about to deteriorate rapidly. This is probably affected by the inflection- and emphasis-free nature of written text, which can very easily lead to misunderstandings.
This post is not intended as a starter for discussion - I realise my first statement trivialises both positions (hopefully equally - I'm trying not to take sides
), but I'm trying to point out that this is not black and white - as with life in general, it's all shades of grey.Thanks for reading, and I apologise in advance if anyone takes this as an argument for their side...
- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Oh dear,
The arguements in this thread seem to have got very personal and quite nasty. That is symptomatic of the issue affecting the whole of society in a wider context.
The terrorists are winning.
Their primary aim is not to kill and maim as many people as possible. That is just a means to an end. The real aim is to spread fear, suspicion and panic throughout the community, causing internal divisions amongst our people and the erosion of our rights and freedoms which will cause dissent and unrest. They want to precipitate the breakdown of our society and the disintegration of our culture. I'd say they are doing a pretty good job!
The police are approaching the whole issue in completely the wrong way - their policies, particularly in central London - are in danger of becoming instrumental in achieving those divisions. I do have some sympathy with them because it is clear that they are almost in a state of panic over terrorism. It appears that their counter terrorism intelligence is woefully inadequate and they are desperate to be seen to be doing something high profile so that if the worst does occur they can say "You can see we are doing all we can."
But that does not excuse the misuse of powers (which some senior officers now seem to be acknowledging) or the systematic attempt to curtail liberties and freedoms that have historically been hard won and have been gradually woven into the fabric of our heritage and traditions since Magna Carta. Throwing away 700 years of social evolution that has made us one of the most democratic and tolerent nations on earth is simply inexcusable on the grounds that it is necessary to fight terrorism.
And we, the great British public have a responsibility in this, too. When an attrocity occurs on our streets it is right that we should be outraged, but it is pointless and counter productive to look for scapegoats. It is unfair and unacceptable to blame the police for failing to prevent it because by it's very nature it is virtually impossible to predict or prevent. Instead we should remain united rather than divided - don't give the terrorists what they want. Stand firm, four sqaure, and broadcast a firm message; "You can bomb us, you can kill us but you will never divide us or break our spirit. You will never defeat us!" That is the most potent weapon we have against terrorism of any kind.
More parochially, we as photographers have been thrust reluctantly into the frontline of the battle to retain our nation's freedoms. We must not shirk. We must take up the mantle and accept the challenge. Sure, it may bring us into conflict (in the sense of disagreement, not physical conflict) with the police but ultimately it is in their interests as much as ours to demonstrate to them the folly of their policies. Protests such as the one in Trafalger Square are useful to highlight and publicize the issue, to put it on the agenda for wider discussion and debate, to help us win hearts and minds. That is what democracy and the concept of peaceful protest is all about.
As for how to react when personally stopped, I believe it is reasonable to co-operate with, rather than antagonise, the officer(s) concerned. Answer questions, allow your pictyures to be viewed and produce ID if you have it. However, be polite but firm and establish under what power they are stopping you and confirm whether it is a Stop and Search or Stop and Account. Question what are the grounds for suspicion and note these down. Make sure you are issued with the relevant documentation and that all the details are clear and legible. Ask to see the officer's warrant card and note his/her name and ID number. Explain to them that it is nothing personal but that you strongly object to their force's policy and that you will be making an official complaint - and make sure you do!
I realise that some who have already contributed to this thread might consider this provocative towards the police and a waste of their time, but a very important principle of basic rights and freedom is at stake. It would not be quite so bad if all sections of the public were treated equally.
If it is right to challenge photographers using DSLR cameras then surely the same should apply to users of compacts and mobile phones. In fact, logically mobile phones are surely much more of a security threat. Not only do they take still photographs and video, but they can also be used as a means of communication between terrorists and can even be used as remote detonaters for bombs. Because of their small, unobtrusive size and ubiquitous nature (everyone has one) they are the perfect covert tool for any terrorist, from reconnaissance to perpetration of the attack. If you accept the arguement for stopping DSLR users by logic you must accept the arguement for exactly the same policy to be applied to mobile phone users.
By concentrating specifically on serious photographers the police are sending a message to the general public that photographers should be viewed with suspicion, feared and mistrusted. With the current wave of paranoia regarding paedophiles that can only make our acceptance on the streets even more precarious and could lead to villification and unprovoked attacks on photographers.
We must unite and act to stop it now!
The arguements in this thread seem to have got very personal and quite nasty. That is symptomatic of the issue affecting the whole of society in a wider context.
The terrorists are winning.
Their primary aim is not to kill and maim as many people as possible. That is just a means to an end. The real aim is to spread fear, suspicion and panic throughout the community, causing internal divisions amongst our people and the erosion of our rights and freedoms which will cause dissent and unrest. They want to precipitate the breakdown of our society and the disintegration of our culture. I'd say they are doing a pretty good job!
The police are approaching the whole issue in completely the wrong way - their policies, particularly in central London - are in danger of becoming instrumental in achieving those divisions. I do have some sympathy with them because it is clear that they are almost in a state of panic over terrorism. It appears that their counter terrorism intelligence is woefully inadequate and they are desperate to be seen to be doing something high profile so that if the worst does occur they can say "You can see we are doing all we can."
But that does not excuse the misuse of powers (which some senior officers now seem to be acknowledging) or the systematic attempt to curtail liberties and freedoms that have historically been hard won and have been gradually woven into the fabric of our heritage and traditions since Magna Carta. Throwing away 700 years of social evolution that has made us one of the most democratic and tolerent nations on earth is simply inexcusable on the grounds that it is necessary to fight terrorism.
And we, the great British public have a responsibility in this, too. When an attrocity occurs on our streets it is right that we should be outraged, but it is pointless and counter productive to look for scapegoats. It is unfair and unacceptable to blame the police for failing to prevent it because by it's very nature it is virtually impossible to predict or prevent. Instead we should remain united rather than divided - don't give the terrorists what they want. Stand firm, four sqaure, and broadcast a firm message; "You can bomb us, you can kill us but you will never divide us or break our spirit. You will never defeat us!" That is the most potent weapon we have against terrorism of any kind.
More parochially, we as photographers have been thrust reluctantly into the frontline of the battle to retain our nation's freedoms. We must not shirk. We must take up the mantle and accept the challenge. Sure, it may bring us into conflict (in the sense of disagreement, not physical conflict) with the police but ultimately it is in their interests as much as ours to demonstrate to them the folly of their policies. Protests such as the one in Trafalger Square are useful to highlight and publicize the issue, to put it on the agenda for wider discussion and debate, to help us win hearts and minds. That is what democracy and the concept of peaceful protest is all about.
As for how to react when personally stopped, I believe it is reasonable to co-operate with, rather than antagonise, the officer(s) concerned. Answer questions, allow your pictyures to be viewed and produce ID if you have it. However, be polite but firm and establish under what power they are stopping you and confirm whether it is a Stop and Search or Stop and Account. Question what are the grounds for suspicion and note these down. Make sure you are issued with the relevant documentation and that all the details are clear and legible. Ask to see the officer's warrant card and note his/her name and ID number. Explain to them that it is nothing personal but that you strongly object to their force's policy and that you will be making an official complaint - and make sure you do!
I realise that some who have already contributed to this thread might consider this provocative towards the police and a waste of their time, but a very important principle of basic rights and freedom is at stake. It would not be quite so bad if all sections of the public were treated equally.
If it is right to challenge photographers using DSLR cameras then surely the same should apply to users of compacts and mobile phones. In fact, logically mobile phones are surely much more of a security threat. Not only do they take still photographs and video, but they can also be used as a means of communication between terrorists and can even be used as remote detonaters for bombs. Because of their small, unobtrusive size and ubiquitous nature (everyone has one) they are the perfect covert tool for any terrorist, from reconnaissance to perpetration of the attack. If you accept the arguement for stopping DSLR users by logic you must accept the arguement for exactly the same policy to be applied to mobile phone users.
By concentrating specifically on serious photographers the police are sending a message to the general public that photographers should be viewed with suspicion, feared and mistrusted. With the current wave of paranoia regarding paedophiles that can only make our acceptance on the streets even more precarious and could lead to villification and unprovoked attacks on photographers.
We must unite and act to stop it now!
- Messages
- 6,481
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 448
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Key bit:
"Police powers to use terror laws to stop and search people without grounds for suspicion are illegal, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled."
The bit in bold is the real issue that certainly I have, and I suspect is what most of us here have. Being stopped under s44 powers and having your camera searched, just because you are a photographer is completely wrong. Being stopped because they have good grounds to suspect you are a terrorist, is another matter.
However, I would not expect this ruling to make a blind bit of difference. This is a European Human Rights ruling which the UK will likely ignore and just claim that s44 is above the EU as it relates to the protection of the realm.
- Messages
- 6,481
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- No
Well, yes, but what are "grounds for suspicion"?....
Having a camera?
Having a DSLR?
Having a tripod?
Taking photographs of something/anything?
Taking photographs of buildings?
Taking photographs of bits of buildings?
Being in London?
Having a beard?
Having dusky skin?
Wearing sandals?
Having colourful clothing?
Speaking with a foreign accent?
Looking a bit shifty?
Running into coppers when they are bored?
I sympathise with the job the police have to do, but seriously, if they are ever suspicious of me and my photography then their judgement will be proved very poor indeed. Personally I'd rather they just left me alone and didn't create a needless "confrontation" in the first place. When I'm pursuing my legal right to photograph things, what would be deemed reasonable grounds for suspicion? Nothing that I'd be doing, that's for sure. I should not have to explain myself when I am minding my own business and doing no harm to anyone.
Having a camera?
Having a DSLR?
Having a tripod?
Taking photographs of something/anything?
Taking photographs of buildings?
Taking photographs of bits of buildings?
Being in London?
Having a beard?
Having dusky skin?
Wearing sandals?
Having colourful clothing?
Speaking with a foreign accent?
Looking a bit shifty?
Running into coppers when they are bored?
I sympathise with the job the police have to do, but seriously, if they are ever suspicious of me and my photography then their judgement will be proved very poor indeed. Personally I'd rather they just left me alone and didn't create a needless "confrontation" in the first place. When I'm pursuing my legal right to photograph things, what would be deemed reasonable grounds for suspicion? Nothing that I'd be doing, that's for sure. I should not have to explain myself when I am minding my own business and doing no harm to anyone.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Does this new ruling mean that if the Police break the law by continuing to misuse these powers, we are entitled to perform a citizen's arrest (using only "reasonable" force) and march them to the nearest police station where they can be formally charged?
A criminal is a criminal, whether they are wearing a uniform or not!
A criminal is a criminal, whether they are wearing a uniform or not!
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
Does this new ruling mean that if the Police break the law by continuing to misuse these powers, we are entitled to perform a citizen's arrest (using only "reasonable" force) and march them to the nearest police station where they can be formally charged?
A criminal is a criminal, whether they are wearing a uniform or not!
sadly, I would of thought not - the ECHR ruling is only 'persuasive' sadly - it doesn't create binding judgments,
- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My comment was, of course, tongue in cheek! However, ECHR rulings are binding. My employers found that to their cost many years ago when they attempted to seriously disadvantage many employees by retrospectively changing the rules of the pension scheme. Two employees challenged this in court and lost every round up to and including the House of Lords. However, the ECHR ruled in their favour and as a consequence I'm a lot better of in my retirement than I otherwise would have been!
So don't dismiss this ECHR ruling lightly; the police will ignore it at their peril!
Of course, the battle is not yet won, but if we stand firm the police will eventually be forced to capitulate.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm not dismissing it - but ECHR judgments are only persuasive. This doesn't mean they carry no weight of course and I'm overjoyed by this ruling, but the UK government does tend to ignore them, look at the 2008 judgment about DNA retention, thats just ignored. The European Court of justice makes binding rulings - not the ECHR.
I'm not dismissing it in any way - but it saddens me that I don't think it'll make a blind bit of diffference
- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm not suggesting that by itself it will solve the problem but it will help to publicise the issue, make it a matter for public concern (the media will see to that) and hopefully build a weight of public opinion that will eventually force a change of policy. I'm not going to give up the fight!
- Messages
- 25
- Name
- Mark Gee
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 448
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Is just a bit convenient for them isn't it. Attention drawn away from the protest and focus the public's mind on the FUD of terrorism and now any mention of s44 stops and they'll trot out that our concerns and rights are irrelevant because of the heightened terror level.
One of the best ways to control citizens is to rule by fear. It's been working quite well for the recent 10 years. We fear terrorists, we fear for the safety of children so don't let them out the door, we fear hoodies, we fear getting stabbed or shot, we fear eating and drinking, we fear doing anything at all that will result in injury and harm which results in so much of our leisure and work activities are restricted.
These are all the signs of living in a dictatorship. Just rather than one dictator we have an entity acting as the dictator which is "the state".
One of the best ways to control citizens is to rule by fear. It's been working quite well for the recent 10 years. We fear terrorists, we fear for the safety of children so don't let them out the door, we fear hoodies, we fear getting stabbed or shot, we fear eating and drinking, we fear doing anything at all that will result in injury and harm which results in so much of our leisure and work activities are restricted.
These are all the signs of living in a dictatorship. Just rather than one dictator we have an entity acting as the dictator which is "the state".
Forbiddenbiker
The Enforcer
- Messages
- 11,048
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What a coincidence.
Today is the big meet in Trafalger square for photographers to protest about the use of section 44 to stop and search photographers.
Today the government raises the threat level from a terrorist attack to Severe
Yep, its all so obvious isn't it.
Have we got them on the run, no, but we have them up on their toes!
Forbiddenbiker
The Enforcer
- Messages
- 11,048
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 9,050
- Name
- Rob Telford
- Edit My Images
- No
Last edited:
- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yep, its all so obvious isn't it.
Have we got them on the run, no, but we have them up on their toes!
Yes, and we need to keep them there - keep up the pressure until they have to face the reality of the situation, come to their senses and revoke this absurd and meaningless policy.
How about adding some of these pictures here: http://www.flickr.com/groups/change-we-see
Watch out for the clause though but I can't really see them using any
Watch out for the clause though but I can't really see them using any
- Messages
- 448
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 1,048
- Edit My Images
- No
nice.
- Messages
- 127
- Name
- wayne
- Edit My Images
- Yes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/feb/21/photographer-films-anti-terror-arrest
this is probaly up here but this is just crazy!!!
this is probaly up here but this is just crazy!!!
- Messages
- 1,005
- Name
- Nigel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That is ludicrous - I'd just give my name though...
- Messages
- 2,092
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Good article in todays Sunday Times colour supplement and here: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article7050481.ece, which points out many of the stupidities enforced in the name of "the law". Several pages in fact.
Something alluded to, but to my mind not reinforced enough, is the fact as the "most spied-on country in the world with an estimated 4.2 million CCTV cameras tracking our moves" public authorities and their agents have created this dreadfully Orwellian "them and us" divide.
Something alluded to, but to my mind not reinforced enough, is the fact as the "most spied-on country in the world with an estimated 4.2 million CCTV cameras tracking our moves" public authorities and their agents have created this dreadfully Orwellian "them and us" divide.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
ive been posting the same topic every where please have a read.....
I came across and article in the paper that I thought everyone should read. If you already know about it its well worth looking into it more because the topic is being brought into parliament very soon.
Im talking of corse about the taboo issue of taking photos outdoors in public and how we are all soon to be seen as criminals. I have a few interesting websites that may help to understand what is going on.
The first and article I came across in The Independent.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...icion-then-we-are-all-threatened-1857777.html
this sparked off a search for me to find out more. I then came across a facebook group called im a photographer not a terrorist
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Im-a-Photographer-Not-a-Terrorist/128534046017?v=wall
Im quite concerned about the whole thing and would really like some feedback on your thoughts, I never want to be stopped by the police or have my camera seized. I worry that because of the way our country is overcompensating on many things this will be the next thing and there will be photographers being arrested all over the UK and we will be forced to limit out art.
I did find some things from the metropolitan police website that can help but its not looking promising at the moment.
http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm
http://tvca.ox4.org/downloads/bust_card.pdf
im looking forward to your replies on this subject
I came across and article in the paper that I thought everyone should read. If you already know about it its well worth looking into it more because the topic is being brought into parliament very soon.
Im talking of corse about the taboo issue of taking photos outdoors in public and how we are all soon to be seen as criminals. I have a few interesting websites that may help to understand what is going on.
The first and article I came across in The Independent.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...icion-then-we-are-all-threatened-1857777.html
this sparked off a search for me to find out more. I then came across a facebook group called im a photographer not a terrorist
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Im-a-Photographer-Not-a-Terrorist/128534046017?v=wall
Im quite concerned about the whole thing and would really like some feedback on your thoughts, I never want to be stopped by the police or have my camera seized. I worry that because of the way our country is overcompensating on many things this will be the next thing and there will be photographers being arrested all over the UK and we will be forced to limit out art.
I did find some things from the metropolitan police website that can help but its not looking promising at the moment.
http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm
http://tvca.ox4.org/downloads/bust_card.pdf
im looking forward to your replies on this subject
- Messages
- 984
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Many of us do not seek confrontation with the authorities and even ten years ago it would have been inconceivable, but the way the situation is deteriorating I'm afraid it will soon be a choice of do we run and hide or stand and fight for what we believe in and know is right.
- Messages
- 559
- Edit My Images
- No
I was on jury service recently, on a case in which a shop on a busy industrial estate had been smashed up.
There were three CCTV cameras on the scene ... and no footage. One was broken, and the police downloaded the footage from the other two in the wrong format, making it unusable.
I found it all rather pathetic to say the least.
There were three CCTV cameras on the scene ... and no footage. One was broken, and the police downloaded the footage from the other two in the wrong format, making it unusable.
I found it all rather pathetic to say the least.
- Messages
- 274
- Name
- Matt
- Edit My Images
- No
Hello all
good to see so many people talking about such a poignant issue.
I was at the photographer not a terrorist protest and is nice to see other peoples photos from the event. Once I figure out how to post photos I'll put some up.
I think the terrorist laws are dangerous as they're the first laws to allow the prevention of photography.. this could lead to privacy laws to prevent officials from being photographed, giving the state more power over the medium.
My advice, go and abuse the fact your allowed to pictures of anyone, anywhere.
good to see so many people talking about such a poignant issue.
I was at the photographer not a terrorist protest and is nice to see other peoples photos from the event. Once I figure out how to post photos I'll put some up.
I think the terrorist laws are dangerous as they're the first laws to allow the prevention of photography.. this could lead to privacy laws to prevent officials from being photographed, giving the state more power over the medium.
My advice, go and abuse the fact your allowed to pictures of anyone, anywhere.
Well there you have it! I never thought I'd hear Jack Bauer admit to being scared...EVER!
Maybe its a good thing this season of 24 is the last, old Jack obviously can't hack the pace anymore!!
Last edited: