UK: it is illegal to photograph the police, page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 21 times

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 06:25 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by atzmaz

"We also shot film and I can post it if anyone has any more doubts about it. "

Consider yourself lucky.

You won't be so bold on a year's time - not after people start going to prison for this.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 06:33 AM by cropmuncher

Originally posted by atzmaz
Like I said in my post last night, this is totally untrue. We took pictures of and even posed in front of a police car with two officers sitting in it. We also shot film and I can post it if anyone has any more doubts about it. There are many laws that are passed so that they can be used against people later as a way to compound charges or pick up suspicious characters, this may be one of those.

I hear what your saying atzmaz and im not doubting you. If your taking pics with police in town on a sat night they are unlikely to bother with you as they have enough on there plate usually plus why potentially spark an incident with people full of beer ( generalising i know ).
It is down to interpretation and they now have the means to be able to enforce the law if and when they see fit.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 06:33 AM by Cythraul

Originally posted by 23432
I am afraid Law and Act are not really the same thing at all.

But the reason we've been lumbered with so many unjust laws is precisely because they're initially presented as "acts" or "suggestions" and slowly, covertly developed into full-blown laws. Before we know it we've got a new law that no-one remembers getting any coverage when introduced. The Establishment turns round and says "yes, actually, we presented this to the public last year" knowing full well that what they ACTUALLY presented was an act or suggestion.

Britain, thanks to the EU is target #1 for Orwellian-style oppression.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 06:42 AM by KIRKSTERUK

Anyone else notice they didn't specify video? So I can still video these creeps but not photograph then. Seems fair to me.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 06:48 AM by cropmuncher

reply to post by cropmuncher

I found a police officers forum last night and came across a thread discussing this issue and they quite clearly state that it is in fact law and is possible to enforce it. Thankfully there are a few cops posting that have some common sense & say they are more bothered about what they look like on film rather than getting angry about being filmed but most of them say it really riles them, one calling us ignorant ungratefull bastards.
Under circumstances when the police are acting outside of the law - eg the roughing up of that soldier etc & you are caught filming it then your in trouble - simple as!

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 07:14 AM by ImaginaryReality1984

reply to post by CavemanDD

Yep i heard about this law coming into power a little while ago and i was horrified then. I honestly thought they wouldn't get this law passed but it seems they have. So now, if a policeman beats the living hell out of you and you have no witness except your mobile phone then they will take that and you're screwed. On top of that you probably can't even use the footage in court now.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 07:44 AM by Nirgal

How on earth has this been allowed to reach four pages when there was a thread on this subject last month?

It's been debunked, your average bobby doesn't know the act correctly, it isn't illegal to photograph the police.

Budski's probably banging his head against the monitor as I type...

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 07:52 AM by cropmuncher

reply to post by Nirgal

Hi nirgal, here is a link to a police online forum where they are discussing the legislation, it exsists.
How far they want to go with it will be down to the individual officer & circumstances, if there annoyed they will use it.

www.ukpoliceonline.co.uk...

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 08:49 AM by Power_Semi

I think there's a less obvious underlying reason here.

Recently there was a muslim protest that turned quite nasty with missiles etc being thrown at the police - unsurprisingly it didn't make it onto the BBC or any other news channel.

It did however make it onto the internet, much to the embarrassment of the police & govt I should think.

That won't happen again, because if you were there filming this disgraceful behaviour & the cowardly capitulation by the police, then they would be able to use the "illegal to film the police" statute & take away your camera.

Hence, you will see nothing on tv or the net that they don't want you to see, and we are firmly under total control of the thought police.

Big brother has entered the building.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 09:23 AM by masonwatcher

One thing you have to bear in mind, police in the UK are corrupt. The majority of police officers are law abiding and do what they are been paid to do but within the ranks are seriously bent cops going all the way up the chain. Good cops know this but keep their mouths shut on two counts; whistle blowing will entail the total destruction of the officer concerned by a systematic and coordinated campaign of surveillance and scrutiny of the individual and there is no independent internal investigatory process within the police.

Tottenham and Hornsey Police stations are notorious in North London with an active police gang from the junior ranks to inspector level in CID. They are active within the Kurdish mafia and the drug dealing networks often using them as the 'eyes' on the streets to clean up low level crimes, burglary, car theft and general disorder while collecting on their share of organised crime takings. Any raids planned on known dealers and mafia property is often tipped off by officers.

Crime stats in Haringey are wholly based up on disorganised and youth led criminal activity while the serious criminals being protected by police gangs. These same police officers have contact with other centres of police crime throughout the UK making an effective shadow police force tasked with the personal enrichment of their membership.

This move of banning photography, requested by ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers), is one of a list of special powers that has rendered the police service untouchable, secretive and arbiters of political activity in the UK.

Yesterday the Mail on Sunday published an extensive investigation into Acpo and alleged that not only was it making vast amounts of money as a private company – a status that seems extraordinary given the money received via the Home Office from the taxpayer – but that it had been pushing a self-serving agenda that mimicked the governing board of a national police service, yet without the accountability and scrutiny expected in most public bodies. The Mail called it "One of the most mysterious and powerful organisations in Britain".

www.guardian.co.uk...

At the heart of these powers and lack of accountability is money with senior officers becoming very wealthy as members of qangos such as ACPO and various subcommittees set up by ACPO.

Few understand that ACPO is a private company, which happens to be funded by a Home Office grant and money from 44 police authorities. But despite its important role in drafting and implementing policies that affect the fundamental freedoms of this country, ACPO is protected from freedom of information requests and its proceedings remain largely hidden from public view. In reality ACPO is no more troubled by public scrutiny than the freemasons.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Junior ranks within this shadow police police force secure income with the liberal use of the RIPA 2000 Act which allows them to set up personal informer networks for whom they get funds to furnish housing, cars and a wage for their contacts. While details of this expenditure of moneys is exempt under the FOIA so far I have been unable to secure information on any method of scrutiny of moneys once transferred to the 'investigating' police officers. There is a massive opportunity for kick backs and resale of items of favour like cars and motorcycles.

For those interested in the link below, it will lead to the RIPA application form site. You find all the prerequisite forms needed to initiate an indefinite investigation on anyone by any police officer or civil servant. Of interest is the document 'Application for Use of Direct Surveillance' which details an entry for cash requirements. These documents only requires one signature of a civil servant of grade PO8 or a police officer at inspector level.

security.homeoffice.gov.uk...

The bottom line is, banning the photography of unimportant police officers going about their duties has nothing to do with the prevention of terrorism or targeting by criminals but rather it is about shutting down accountability. Supposing you photograph police officers conducting a Rodney King jamboree; you are likely to end up detained by the police under the Terrorism Act for 40 days while they systematically turn over your life then release you having lost your job and home.

[edit on 052828p://pm2840 by masonwatcher]

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 12:26 PM by GorehoundLarry

OLD

OLD

OLD news.

and I'm curious on why one wants to photograph police anyway. This doesn't really affect anyone unless you want to photograph a piggy beating down someone or have a thing for men in uniform..

[edit on 22-2-2009 by GorehoundLarry]

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 12:39 PM by skibtz

This will change nothing.

People were having their cameras confiscated long before this new law was dreamt up!

The police will always suffer corruption - corruption is human nature - even the church et al are corrupt.

And as for the UK being a nazi outpost - that is not too likely considering the USA took all the remaining nazis, well the scientists, from the end of WWII amd gave them jobs and a home

Anyone outside of the UK looking in and thinking that they are better off are seriously kidding themselves!

The UK will always need more surveillance equipment and methods in order to protect itself from US crazy secret service folk.

In terms of people filming the police - we need to think one step ahead - as was already mentioned, we need new hardware that is part of our person/clothing, i.e. in headwear, eyewear etc.

The police need to confiscate the hardware in order to retrieve and check the images you have taken.

What if you had a camera that did not have storage capability? What if this camera was always online and sent all images/videos to a server instantly?

The police could not take your equipment because there is no storage - and even if they did they wouldn't be able to intercept and destroy/hide/alter anything because it is not there.

And they would certainly need to jump through many more hoops in order to access your data that now resides on a server.

You will never get these laws changed but you can defend yourself from them.

[edit on 22/2/2009 by skibtz]

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 01:13 PM by ImaginaryReality1984

reply to post by masonwatcher

"A certain type of copper is never short of money"

That exact phrase was given to me by a friend in the police force. He considered leaving but decided to stay and make a difference. It is sad to think that many coppers like my friend join to really make a difference and then get defeated by people who are supposed to be doing the same job.

He's still out there though, being a decent copper, using some common sense and not taking money from criminals. You are right though, if you blow the whistle you get destroyed and your career is over. Just take a look at the Panorama and Dispatches investigations.

When those coppers came out about corruption and incompetence they were destroyed overnight. They knew that would happen and they waited until they were going to leave before starting on those documentaries. It is scary to think that a police force that is supposed to serve the people, actually destroys officers who do just that. It's the wrong way around, they should be rewarded! If that happened then every copper would behave for fear of being turned in by their colleagues.

This new act (which will become law, wait and see) will be abused by the police officers who commit crimes themselves.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 02:19 PM by SpacePunk

reply to post by CavemanDD

Looks like the watchers don't like to be watched. So, what to do?

Organize a few hundred people to do nothing other than take pictures of the police. Unfortunately I"m not in the UK.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 03:20 PM by budski

just to prove this is all bullplop, I'm going out tomorrow to take pics of the police.

I'll try and get them to pose for a few shots as well.

And I have no fear of arrest, because as I have posted on several other threads about this, all this worry is bullplop.

Know your rights, and know the law - then if they arrest you, it's a nice bit of compensation.

reply posted on 22-2-2009 @ 03:37 PM by Anonymous ATS

I haven't heard anything about this, and it's probably going to be one of those things that are just forgotten. Plus, I'd just like to congratulate the Police! I know first hand that they have to put up with a lot of crap because people know the police can't legally do anything (Unless they're bent!) They deserve alot more credit than some people in here are giving them!

reply posted on 23-2-2009 @ 03:47 AM by Avalon22

reply to post by Exuberant1

I see where you're going with the fabian fascist context and much of today's society has become entirely too complacent with swallowing beurocratic political excrement. It's tough to see where the line will be drawn and who will draw it, but I have a distinct feeling the collective boiling point is not far off now. The people will only be cowed for so long and I have a hidden faith that the people will do whats needs to be done when the time comes (although everyone sure is waiting till the last minute).

Besides do you really think all those Asian tourists are going to give up their Nikkons

J/K...

reply posted on 23-2-2009 @ 06:19 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by budski

"Know your rights, and know the law - then if they arrest you, it's a nice bit of compensation."

Have you forgotten?

"Suspected Terrorists" have no rights ;-)

*I can see the officer's testimony:

"He looked suspicious, so I approached him, then Felt threatened and tazered him. After analyzing the terrorist's footage - sorry, I meant, 'suspected' terrorist's footage - we concluded that he might possibly have been gathering intel for a terrorist attack - it is a good thing we stopped him.

Due to his death by Excited Delirium brought on and exacerbated by pre-existing conditions, we will never know the full extent of the horrors Mr. Budski had planned."

(I'm joking, I'm sure the police will only harass you... for now ;0)

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^