I got escorted off Canary Wharf by security...

Jo said:
This is a question BTW.

Had there been any of these stop and searches, or clashes with photographers previous to the July 7th Attacks?

I agree with your point, but also can't help but think that every little bit of protection helps. No one is going to die because they have been stopped and searched, or escorted off any premises. But people could die because the security wasn't there to prevent them from carrying out their plot. Again, I realise this may sound OTT, but the visions of pain and anguish I see in my mind when I think of the alternatives tell me otherwise.
Click to expand...

If you are really that concerned that concerned that terrorists may be using cameras to hatch their evil plots....then there is only one solution. Ban photography, or strictly control and license the activity. Bag searches into and out of any 'sensitive' areas in case they are concealed. Give police powers to confiscate any equipment and wipe memory cards/film.

Anything less is a total and utter waste of time. Professional quality photographic equipment is potentially a tool for terrorists. Ban it.

Please, think of the children :thumbsdown:
 
EdinburghGary said:
I actually think though Jo, that this climate does more damage than good. If you single out a community for example, and treat them as terrorists - suspect them of all sorts, and basically - rape them of their rights and liberties, you are actually playing into the very hands of those terrorists whom lurk in the shadows. You create sympathisers, and you suddenly have hundreds, thousands, perhaps tens or hundreds of thousands, of people, who start to understand or perhaps, sympathise with why the terrorists strike at our country. Then you have a much more dangerous situation, a country full of people who might not need too much convincing to carry out the very atrocities that they might never have considered, had they been given the same respect as the rest of us.

Gary.
Click to expand...

I can see your point 100% Gary, I really can. I honestly don't know what else to say to that without sounding argumentative. I don't want to argue with you Gary :) Also I am paranoid now about looking like an OTT emotional freak :lol: So maybe it's time for me to bow out of this one.
 
Jo said:
I can see your point 100% Gary, I really can. I honestly don't know what else to say to that without sounding argumentative. I don't want to argue with you Gary :) Also I am paranoid now about looking like an OTT emotional freak :lol: So maybe it's time for me to bow out of this one.
Click to expand...

Hey I never argue here :D I just feel strongly about this subject, I was best friends with a Muslim at college who had a life not worth living after 9/11. He lived in a real dive, and after the attacks, he was beaten up, his windows smashed for weeks and months on end, his family terrorised, yet - they were the nicest people you could meet. Broke my heart.

It's a bit of a stretch to go from the Ban of Photography in Canary Wharf, to the treatment of Muslims...but there is a definite link.

It's a big boiling pot of fear, hate, rules, paranoia, and actual terrorism. If there were easy answers to any of this stuff, these debates would never kick off.

Anyway, no arguments from me :D Just differing opinions at times.

Gary.
 
mid_gen said:
If you are really that concerned that concerned that terrorists may be using cameras to hatch their evil plots....then there is only one solution. Ban photography, or strictly control and license the activity. Bag searches into and out of any 'sensitive' areas in case they are concealed. Give police powers to confiscate any equipment and wipe memory cards/film.

Anything less is a total and utter waste of time. Professional quality photographic equipment is potentially a tool for terrorists. Ban it.
Click to expand...

That is really unessesary. If I thought that by doing all of those things it would put an end to ALL terroism all over the world, then I would gladly back such actions. But since it wont, I wont. I never said that terrorism was a result of photography.

mid_gen said:
Please, think of the children :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

That, though I highly doubt you know it, cut very very deep. Thanks.
 
seriously, regarding security, would it not be an idea to have an optional register with the council giving people photography licences, completely optional, perhaps charge a small fee, then all said photographer would have to do is flash a card. They wouldn't be compulsory, but could save an awful lot of hassle! Not just for pros, but anyone who wants to apply, just name, address, DOB and photo and a "registered photography licence through ******** council" written on, something daft like that?

It's not going to change much but could reduce hassle!
 
MagicMynx said:
serioudly, regarding security, would it not be an idea to have an optional register with the council giving people photography licences, completely optional, perhaps charge a small fee, then all said photographer would have to do is flash a card. They wouldn't be compulsory, but could save an awful lot of hassle! Not just for pros, but anyone who wants to apply, just name, address, DOB and photo and a "registered photography licence through ******** council" written on, something daft like that?

It's not going to change much but could reduce hassle!
Click to expand...

Be EXTREMELY careful as to what you wish for!!!! :lol:
 
MagicMynx said:
serioudly, regarding security, would it not be an idea to have an optional register with the council giving people photography licences, completely optional, perhaps charge a small fee, then all said photographer would have to do is flash a card. They wouldn't be compulsory, but could save an awful lot of hassle! Not just for pros, but anyone who wants to apply, just name, address, DOB and photo and a "registered photography licence through ******** council" written on, something daft like that?

It's not going to change much but could reduce hassle!
Click to expand...

Would it not be easier to just flash your driving licence and say "It's ok, I'm known to the government"? :D
 
A very interesting read :)

I'm a simple bloke and it strikes me as the old adage of 'Its Better Safe Than Sorry" might apply here.

Yeah the Security Guards were no doubt over zealous but a few more over zealous guards might have prevented some of the atrocities that we've seen in these sad days - by no means all - but one prevention would be enough :)

I think both Gary's and Jo's concerns are 100% justified!!!

Maybe, knowing the climate, an e-mail up front securing clearance for the night would have been worthwhile but hindsight is a marvellous thing and it sounds like a spur of the moment trip anyway!

I'm just sorry that what could have been a healthy debate has to suffer some of the mud slinging and sarcasm that we've seen here and there in this thread - it didn't help here as I'm sure it didn't on the night in question! :nono:

:)
 
MagicMynx said:
:lol: ah only the bad wishes come true

honestly though, they're blabbering on about alsorts of ID things, why not do a card under the anti terrorism thing, don't make it compulsory but have it as an option and stuff, - I'm sure you know what I mean?
Click to expand...

Not heard of the ID card scheme then?
 
MagicMynx said:
:lol: ah only the bad wishes come true

honestly though, they're blabbering on about alsorts of ID things, why not do a card under the anti terrorism thing, don't make it compulsory but have it as an option and stuff, - I'm sure you know what I mean?
Click to expand...

I understand exactly where you are coming from. My fear would be, your cool idea would eventually be compulsory, and instead of it costing £10 a year, it would end up costing several hundred pounds a year.

Gary.
 
I've closed this thread temporarily whilst we do some cleaning up and dish out some discipline.

Normal service will be resumed shortly.
 
The thread has now been cleaned up and Kryptix is taking seven days off (that might become permanent) for his behaviour and attitude towards other forum members.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all users that we have a reputation for being a friendly forum and we wish to maintain that reputation. Personal attacks, insults and the type of generally rude behaviour shown by Kryptix are not what we want to see and any further breaches of etiquette will not be tolerated.

Play nicely.






Or else. :)
 
Before I start I think I would like to make a disclaimer. I love TP, recommend it to all my friends, and you mods do a bloody good job of keeping the peace.

I know Kryptix's history, and ever since that topic about the mod's being unfair it seems everyone has had it in for him.

I do not agree entirely with much of what he says, since he can be a mouthy git, but I wouldn't say it wasn't provoked, and I wouldn't say it hasn't been in the past.

I did not see all the comments he made and perhaps some of them were totally out of order, but I'm with Gary here.

In the OP Kryptix didn't really complain about being kicked out and he seemed fairly aware that making such a comment as his closing line that he'd be kicked out. He knew the rules and abided by them, but there was no effort to not harass him all night! - they should have put a message out on the radio "We have a photographer with a big camera and a tripod, name 'Luke'. Leave him be, he's cool". No effort at all.

I would be peeved too.

But yet it seems everyone took it as an opportunity to call him a smart arse and that he deserved to be escorted out by the police :S
 
foodpoison said:
Before I start I think I would like to make a disclaimer. I love TP, recommend it to all my friends, and you mods do a bloody good job of keeping the peace.

I know Kryptix's history, and ever since that topic about the mod's being unfair it seems everyone has had it in for him.

I do not agree entirely with much of what he says, since he can be a mouthy git, but I wouldn't say it wasn't provoked, and I wouldn't say it hasn't been in the past.

I did not see all the comments he made and perhaps some of them were totally out of order, but I'm with Gary here.
Click to expand...

Totally and utterly plus one, and all in the bestest possible intentions. Well said Sean :clap: :thumbs:
 
TBH If it were me I'd be annoyed after a couple of times of being questioned.
Once or twice and I would be more than happy to state what I was doing and why.....

I don't mind explaining what I'm doing, but the security guards clearly didn't know the rules. Regardless of whether Kryptix said he was a student or not shouldn't matter, you dont have to be a student to shoot there. You have to be shooting non-commercially.
It doesn't matter what you do as a job, it's your time on CW that's important.

So technically David Bailey could go shooting there as long as he doesn't sell the shots he takes.

The guards didn't know the rules. They should have radioed around and told the others that he was OK to carry on shooting.

However, if it were me, I'd ask the security guards to radio it in after the second or so time, to make sure.

So, to summarise. They were fair in checking what he was doing. They may have made a mistake by checking a second or so time.
They cocked up by asking him more than that.
He got smart-arsed (justified, but wrong to do), and was (rightly) escorted off the premises.

Oh, and mid_gen's post was clearly tongue in cheek.
And the 'think of the children' is a line from a cartoon ;)
 
foodpoison said:
Before I start I think I would like to make a disclaimer. I love TP, recommend it to all my friends, and you mods do a bloody good job of keeping the peace.

I know Kryptix's history, and ever since that topic about the mod's being unfair it seems everyone has had it in for him.

I do not agree entirely with much of what he says, since he can be a mouthy git, but I wouldn't say it wasn't provoked, and I wouldn't say it hasn't been in the past.

I did not see all the comments he made and perhaps some of them were totally out of order, but I'm with Gary here.

In the OP Kryptix didn't really complain about being kicked out and he seemed fairly aware that making such a comment as his closing line that he'd be kicked out. He knew the rules and abided by them, but there was no effort to not effectively - they should have put a message out on the radio "We have a photographer with a big camera and a tripod, name 'Luke'. Leave him be, he's cool". No effort at all.

I would be peeved too.

But yet it seems everyone took it as an opportunity to call him a smart arse and that he deserved to be escorted out by the police :S
Click to expand...

Sean, let me assure you that no one, and in particular the staff, has "got it in" for Kryptix, with all the members and posts we don't have the time or the inclination for vendettas. He has repeatedly broken the rules and should have paid more attention to what he was posting today, which was very patronising, condescending and completely uncalled for and was nothing to do with he did or did not get up to at Canary Wharf.
 
Hacker said:
Sean, let me assure you that no one, and in particular the staff, has "got it in" for Kryptix, with all the members and posts we don't have the time or the inclination for vendettas. He has repeatedly broken the rules and should have paid more attention to what he was posting today, which was very patronising, condescending and completely uncalled for and was nothing to do with he did or did not get up to at Canary Wharf.
Click to expand...

FWIW I did see the comments Kryptix made and they were his usual offensive, patronising and completely uncalled for style. What's worse is that they were targeted at a lady :thumbsdown:. However valid or otherwise his points are in his OP, the suspension is utterly justified imho. TP has no place for his attitude :nono:
 
PS. I agree with Edinburgh Gary.
This blanket term of 'Terrorism' is bandied about WAY too much so people can get away with things they wouldn't normally have a cat in hells chance of being allowed to do.
 
Marcel said:
PS. I agree with Edinburgh Gary.
This blanket term of 'Terrorism' is bandied about WAY too much so people can get away with things they wouldn't normally have a cat in hells chance of being allowed to do.
Click to expand...

:clap::clap::clap: and the rest ;)
 
Hacker said:
Sean, let me assure you that no one, and in particular the staff, has "got it in" for Kryptix, with all the members and posts we don't have the time or the inclination for vendettas. He has repeatedly broken the rules and should have paid more attention to what he was posting today, which was very patronising, condescending and completely uncalled for and was nothing to do with he did or did not get up to at Canary Wharf.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about the staff, I was talking about the members. I understand he's broken the rules and that action must be taken, but I stand by the fact that he is provoked by other members, and it seems their comments seem to have been ignored. Obviously I can't pull up examples in this thread because it's been wiped.

Grendel, I only saw a few of his posts. As I said mate, I don't agree with the way Kryptix presents himself, however I do feel as if he is provoked into having such an attitude.
 
What did i miss - i go off and have some tea and do the kids homework with them - all hell breaks loose then it gets 'cleaned' up and suspensions are handed out leaving me all confuddled and feeling left out :(

:lol:
 
Jo said:
Gary if you have some of that Tamiflu, can you keep some aside for me? :lol: I kid you not , I worry about it daily because I know I am in the vulnerable category. I don't want to leave my husband a widower :(




Can you explain your second paragraph a bit better, I'm struggling with it. :)
Click to expand...

Sure, I've just read it again and it makes no sense to me either lol.

What I meant to type was this.

Pretty much all of the terrorist plots that have been stopped have been from weeks or months of intelligence gathering and survelience, like tapping phones, following people around.

If they stumble across someone buying some explosive's then they probably aren't interested in that person but more the cell he/she is working with, where they get their orders from.

All the stop and search's and anti-terrorist act is simply to keep the public happy making them feel like they are safe, its to stop public panic.

Look at the flu pandemic, they didn't want to call it a pandemic incase it caused a mass panic, but thats what it is.

Thats my thought's anyway.
 
Marcel said:
PS. I agree with Edinburgh Gary.
This blanket term of 'Terrorism' is bandied about WAY too much so people can get away with things they wouldn't normally have a cat in hells chance of being allowed to do.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.

As I said earlier, it is to control the masses, which in itself is bad enough, but without adequate information, training and implementation, it will never work.

It certainly isn't currently working.

I agree that people should speak up if something is wrong, there are times when this is not wise, but a blanket acceptance is only going to lead us further down a path of which there is no turning back.
 
foodpoison said:
I wasn't talking about the staff, I was talking about the members. I understand he's broken the rules and that action must be taken, but I stand by the fact that he is provoked by other members, and it seems their comments seem to have been ignored. Obviously I can't pull up examples in this thread because it's been wiped.

Grendel, I only saw a few of his posts. As I said mate, I don't agree with the way Kryptix presents himself, however I do feel as if he is provoked into having such an attitude.
Click to expand...

Whilst there may be an element of truth in what you say if you have acted badly in the past you only have yourself to blame if you end up with a reputation. It's then up to you how you deal with that - throwing around condescending / patronising comments isn't going to help :shrug:

I can understand why the OP was frustrated but I don't think the security were being over-zealous as such - they were all just doing their job's as they see fit, the problem is they were all doing it on an individual basis. Their big mistake is not communicating with each other that any perceived threat had been checked and no issue found. Again - they then end up with a reputation as over the top busybodies determined to give people a hard time. Maybe they need to re-think their procedures and this kind of thing would be avoided.
 
Dal said:
Sure, I've just read it again and it makes no sense to me either lol.

What I meant to type was this.

Pretty much all of the terrorist plots that have been stopped have been from weeks or months of intelligence gathering and survelience, like tapping phones, following people around.

If they stumble across someone buying some explosive's then they probably aren't interested in that person but more the cell he/she is working with, where they get their orders from.

All the stop and search's and anti-terrorist act is simply to keep the public happy making them feel like they are safe, its to stop public panic.

Look at the flu pandemic, they didn't want to call it a pandemic incase it caused a mass panic, but thats what it is.

Thats my thought's anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I just don't argree, it to keep the public worried. Without the threat of terror you can't pass draconion laws, people just wouldn't stand for it.
Seeing people stopped and searched doesn't reasure me, if thats a sucide bomber it's way too late at a stop and search, if I am close enough to see the search, I'm close enough to get hit when he presses the button.
Lets not forget we had a lot more terrorist activity with the IRA than we ever had with Al-Qaeda, we didn't have all this trouble then.
 
I know one thing. If I had a fledgling photography business, the last thing I would want on a public forum is how I was escorted anywhere by the police!

No comment on this 'security risk' or not subject, but it doesn't surprise me.

As for victimisation - I can't really see it. If you make yourself a target, you've got to expect some attention from members/authorities.
There seems no logic or rationalisation to many things Kryptix does - perhaps that's just the way he works. We all have to take responsibility for our actions though.
 
Whenever this subject comes up i.e. security guards, PCSO's etc and how they interpret the rules, laws or whatever! I am always reminded of some of the weird Health & Safety rules implemented by companies, schools, councils etc.
IMHO it's the jobsworth mentality of people who can't or don't interpret the sense behind the original thinking :cuckoo:

If it was worthy of their (security) time to haul the OP and his mates from the Wharfe then they should have had the Police there to at least question them :thinking: however I'm more inclined to believe it was probably a beer fuelled wind-up of the security people..just my opinion and I'm usually wrong anyway :nuts:
 
Jo said:
I have to say that I'm impressed by the security of Canary Wharf. Before you continue to complain, just think about what you and thousands of other people would say if Canary Wharf was hit by terrorists ... because people kept on complaining about being stopped while trying to take photos, so they stepped down on security.
Click to expand...


Canary Wharf was hit by terrorists - At 7.01pm on 9 February 1996, the IRA exploded a massive bomb at Canary Wharf which killed two men and caused at least £85m of damage.

It is as a direct result of this why security is taken so seriously at Canary Wharf now, what with an abundance of CCTV cameras and security guards popping up to ask you what you are doing - especially late at night which was when Kryptix was there

And as for Kryptix comment to the security guard:

Kryptix said:
I'm taking pictures of security cameras for my friend Osama bin Laden.
Click to expand...

He is lucky he was not escorted from Canary Wharf by the police in hand cuffs, locked up for weeks on end and interrogated, his home raided and ripped apart with a fine forensic tooth comb and all his photographic and computer equipment seized again for forensic examination with a fine tooth comb and of course the same happening to his family and close friends.

I wonder if he would have found his comments funny after the above happening to him?
 
Keith W said:
.....And as for Kryptix comment to the security guard:
He is lucky he was not escorted from Canary Wharf by the police in hand cuffs, locked up for weeks on end and interrogated, his home raided and ripped apart with a fine forensic tooth comb and all his photographic and computer equipment seized again for forensic examination with a fine tooth comb and of course the same happening to his family and close friends.

I wonder if he would have found his comments funny after the above happening to him?
Click to expand...
Don't be soft - freedom of speech is allowed, if frowned upon when certain comments are made, but nonetheless he is (was) allowed to say whatever he thinks. If the police (or whoever) deem that inappropriate and take what they feel as relevant action, then so be it, that's their prerogative in the interests of whatever law they choose to question and/or charge him under.

This kind of thing will continue, no doubt about that, and some people will feel aggrieved when it happens to them, but I wonder how many of us in reality would deal with a 'jobsworth' in any other way? We get wound up easily these days, I do anyway, and if some people can resist the urge to not bite back then fair play to them, but for the rest of us who can't do that then I see no harm in having a dig when someone challenges them in a way that's not exactly using common sense.
 
Keith W said:
He is lucky he was not escorted from Canary Wharf by the police in hand cuffs, locked up for weeks on end and interrogated, his home raided and ripped apart with a fine forensic tooth comb and all his photographic and computer equipment seized again for forensic examination with a fine tooth comb and of course the same happening to his family and close friends.

I wonder if he would have found his comments funny after the above happening to him?
Click to expand...

no offence but that would be a gross over reaction. anyone taking that sort of action over a clearly tounge in cheek remark needs a new hobby..

the media likes to go on about the british spirit in dire times and are keen to show people carrying on as normal and brushing stuff off etc etc, but some people seem to have lost their sense of humour.
 
Kryptix said:
I'm taking pictures of security cameras for my friend Osama bin Laden.
Click to expand...

If you find yourself in customs at an airport and they ask if you are carrying drugs I suggest you don't use the same tactic... an answer like "up my arse" might prove a little interesting! LOL.
 
Grendel said:
FWIW I did see the comments Kryptix made and they were his usual offensive, patronising and completely uncalled for style. What's worse is that they were targeted at a lady :thumbsdown:. However valid or otherwise his points are in his OP, the suspension is utterly justified imho. TP has no place for his attitude :nono:
Click to expand...

Is this the "lady" that called him a liar and a smart arse?

As that hasn't been removed are we to assume that is acceptable?

Perhaps it would be best to close this thread as now its main purpose seems to be to complain about the OP when he is unable to answer back.
 
Gordon Scott said:
If you find yourself in customs at an airport and they ask if you are carrying drugs I suggest you don't use the same tactic... an answer like "up my arse" might prove a little interesting! LOL.
Click to expand...

Customs at airports are completely different to security guards i.e. a security guard has no more power / authority than anyone else....They just think they have... :) and anyone should feel free to talk to them as they would anyone else who approached them, hopefully with a bit of courtesy, but they don't need to explain anything... (having said all that I do accept your point)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top