| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/13/2009 09:17:13 AM · #1 |
While the UK seems to be the worst place for photogs, the US isn't far behind. Two more stories of "are you kidding me??"
From the UK
From the US
I honestly don't think we have a chance when stopped. This saddens me. :-( |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 09:42:43 AM · #2 |
| Ever heard of Ken Duncan? He was kicked off Cottesloe Beach a few years ago, now that is just ridiculous. I really hope Australia doesn't go this way but, well, America is our greatest influence, followed by the ol' Queen and country line of Britain. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 09:55:36 AM · #3 |
It certainly seems to be getting out of control in the UK
Guardian Report - From Snapshot to Special Branch |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 10:39:58 AM · #4 |
It's really a case of how hard you want to push it. Question is, if you're on someone else's property, and there are others involved, is it worth it to you for one picture, and not necessarily a great one, to be arrested, go to jail, and have to deal with the trial and fallout afterward?
For me, now way! I'm just not so heavily principled in a bad situation that I'm interested in being the test case, or statistic.
I know I push the line here and there.....I go places I shouldn't, and I know I take pictures places that I'm not allowed to, but am left alone because I don't make a nuisance of myself.
I've had to deal with an unpleasant scenario here and there, but not yet has there been one that couldn't be resolved without have to resort to police and lawyers.
So I feel it's a trade-off......some of the shots I get are of things that I wouldn't have were I caught, and other times I'm asked to move along where someone has no legal right to do so......and I do 'cause there's always another day.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2009 11:20:01 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
It's really a case of how hard you want to push it. Question is, if you're on someone else's property, and there are others involved, is it worth it to you for one picture, and not necessarily a great one, to be arrested, go to jail, and have to deal with the trial and fallout afterward?
For me, now way! I'm just not so heavily principled in a bad situation that I'm interested in being the test case, or statistic.
I know I push the line here and there.....I go places I shouldn't, and I know I take pictures places that I'm not allowed to, but am left alone because I don't make a nuisance of myself.
I've had to deal with an unpleasant scenario here and there, but not yet has there been one that couldn't be resolved without have to resort to police and lawyers.
So I feel it's a trade-off......some of the shots I get are of things that I wouldn't have were I caught, and other times I'm asked to move along where someone has no legal right to do so......and I do 'cause there's always another day. |
Jeb, i think you're missing the point here. The main point of these stories and the anger towards the Police is not that people are getting stopped on other peoples property or places where they should not be, but are being stopped and questioned when taking photographs that they have every right to do. There's no trade-off involved at all. The fuss is about the police using legal powers in an illegal way, whether through ignorance on their behalf or on purpose. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 11:26:04 AM · #6 |
Is it really out of line for a police officer to simply ask you what you are doing? why is the first response for you to say " i don't need to tell you" you could simply say " i am at work taking photos for a news story" rather then act all evasive. IF your photographing something sensitive that really should not be viewed by police then by all means go to the mat to defend your rights in detail but why the need to pick a fight over something silly just to make a point. If you showed up on my lawn and behaved like the guyin the video I would be calling the police and pulling the rifle down off the cabinet.
Yes you have the right to take pictures and the police also have the right to ask you what you are doing, what you don't have the right to do is be a pain in the ass about it. In that guardian report why did the guy not produce his credentials as is indicated in the agreements in place as referenced in the other story.
Message edited by author 2009-12-13 11:26:43.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2009 11:34:17 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
Is it really out of line for a police officer to simply ask you what you are doing? |
Is that honestly what you think this is about?!! |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 12:00:34 PM · #8 |
| Note in the first article I posted, not only did the photographer cooperate fully, she provided credentials without delay and explained fully what she was doing. She STILL had her gear confiscated and was considered subversive.... for shooting a wedding. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 12:07:57 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Note in the first article I posted, not only did the photographer cooperate fully, she provided credentials without delay and explained fully what she was doing. She STILL had her gear confiscated and was considered subversive.... for shooting a wedding. |
Yup. But, interestingly, the second source incident is totally unrelated to terrorism, presumptive or otherwise; in that incident, the police were investigating "suspicious" photography of children. And the photographer was arrested NOT for any pictures he took, but because he got physical with the cops. Always a bad move. I have little sympathy in that case. And, in that incident, I can't really even say the cops were out of line based on what the article says, because they were acting on a complaint by a citizen. The one who was initially overreacting was the father who accosted the photographer, and then proceeded to report him to security even though he REMOVED the image in question from his card.
R. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 12:17:13 PM · #10 |
I think the Guardian piece is just trying to make a point.
Only last week the Association of Chief Police Officers had issued a memo basically instructing the police to "tone it down" (my words....) as far as photographers are concerned.
Police do U Turn on Anti Terror Law
|
|
|
|
12/13/2009 01:11:43 PM · #11 |
According to the department of homeland security, I am a terrorist because I am in the US military. I know it is rediculous. The government seems to be going downhill quick.
Message edited by author 2009-12-13 13:12:01.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2009 01:21:03 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
According to the department of homeland security, I am a terrorist because I am in the US military. I know it is rediculous. The government seems to be going downhill quick. |
Well, one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter after all so its probably not that ridiculous when you think about it. History is written by the victors and all that. Remember, both Nelson Mandela and Ghandi were seen as terrorists. Language and truth are the first victims when it comes to war. (gosh, i'm a paraphrasing machine tonight aren't i!) |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 02:22:07 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Melethia:
Note in the first article I posted, not only did the photographer cooperate fully, she provided credentials without delay and explained fully what she was doing. She STILL had her gear confiscated and was considered subversive.... for shooting a wedding. |
Yup. But, interestingly, the second source incident is totally unrelated to terrorism, presumptive or otherwise; in that incident, the police were investigating "suspicious" photography of children. And the photographer was arrested NOT for any pictures he took, but because he got physical with the cops. Always a bad move. I have little sympathy in that case. And, in that incident, I can't really even say the cops were out of line based on what the article says, because they were acting on a complaint by a citizen. The one who was initially overreacting was the father who accosted the photographer, and then proceeded to report him to security even though he REMOVED the image in question from his card.
R. |
I agree with Bear. The guy who reported it to the police overreacted. But I think the policeman acted appropriately in checking it out. Just respond, show him your credentials. With all of the awards he has, I'm sure he had credentials. You don't then pull out the camera and take a picture of the cop -- that's just being a smart ass. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 02:23:46 PM · #14 |
| I am searching for a comment...something witty to say, but the only thing I can do is bow my head and shake it in disgust and embarrassment that these types of stories exist in our country. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 03:04:38 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Melethia:
Note in the first article I posted, not only did the photographer cooperate fully, she provided credentials without delay and explained fully what she was doing. She STILL had her gear confiscated and was considered subversive.... for shooting a wedding. |
Yup. But, interestingly, the second source incident is totally unrelated to terrorism, presumptive or otherwise; in that incident, the police were investigating "suspicious" photography of children. And the photographer was arrested NOT for any pictures he took, but because he got physical with the cops. Always a bad move. I have little sympathy in that case. And, in that incident, I can't really even say the cops were out of line based on what the article says, because they were acting on a complaint by a citizen. The one who was initially overreacting was the father who accosted the photographer, and then proceeded to report him to security even though he REMOVED the image in question from his card.
R. |
Sorry, but just because one is a police officer, moonlighting as a rent-a-cop in the mall, doesn't mean that everyone else has to kowtow and be completely meek in their presence. The cop has no right to physically assault someone with a camera in their hand who wants to take their picture, even if the person with the camera is being questioned. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 06:34:19 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
And the photographer was arrested NOT for any pictures he took, but because he got physical with the cops. Always a bad move. I have little sympathy in that case. |
And I have no sympathy with an officer of the law who thinks it's ok to just grab a camera out of a persons hand. An effective officer could have accomplished his goals without this type of conflict. I know several personally who do this type of duty, both uniformed and not. It's amazing sometimes what they can do with conflict management. Many times the people involved don't even know they've interacted with an officer. But with the measly salaries most police are paid now-a-days it's rare to obtain this type of person. And more importantly it's rare for any of them to receive the proper training. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 06:44:18 PM · #17 |
Crap like this, which has happened to me on a few occasions, not fully arrested, thankfully. Yet stupid people being stupid followed by being hassled by the little men in little blue suits, or women whichever the case may be. I was never arrested because I never did anything wrong, or even remotely illegal. But it sure soured me to photograph anything outdoors. Specially around other people.
Crap like this seriously pisses me off.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2009 06:47:05 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by littlegett:
Crap like this, which has happened to me on a few occasions, not fully arrested, thankfully. Yet stupid people being stupid followed by being hassled by the little men in little blue suits, or women whichever the case may be. I was never arrested because I never did anything wrong, or even remotely illegal. But it sure soured me to photograph anything outdoors. Specially around other people.
Crap like this seriously pisses me off. |
I seem to remember something that happened to you on the beach once, another outrageous situation. Or maybe it was someone else. |
|
|
|
12/13/2009 06:48:16 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by littlegett:
Crap like this, which has happened to me on a few occasions, not fully arrested, thankfully. Yet stupid people being stupid followed by being hassled by the little men in little blue suits, or women whichever the case may be. I was never arrested because I never did anything wrong, or even remotely illegal. But it sure soured me to photograph anything outdoors. Specially around other people.
Crap like this seriously pisses me off. |
I seem to remember something that happened to you on the beach once, another outrageous situation. Or maybe it was someone else. |
Yes Louis, it was me, one of the few instances I was hassled.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2009 06:59:18 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
It's really a case of how hard you want to push it. Question is, if you're on someone else's property, and there are others involved, is it worth it to you for one picture, and not necessarily a great one, to be arrested, go to jail, and have to deal with the trial and fallout afterward?
For me, now way! I'm just not so heavily principled in a bad situation that I'm interested in being the test case, or statistic.
I know I push the line here and there.....I go places I shouldn't, and I know I take pictures places that I'm not allowed to, but am left alone because I don't make a nuisance of myself.
I've had to deal with an unpleasant scenario here and there, but not yet has there been one that couldn't be resolved without have to resort to police and lawyers.
So I feel it's a trade-off......some of the shots I get are of things that I wouldn't have were I caught, and other times I'm asked to move along where someone has no legal right to do so......and I do 'cause there's always another day. |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Jeb, i think you're missing the point here. The main point of these stories and the anger towards the Police is not that people are getting stopped on other peoples property or places where they should not be, but are being stopped and questioned when taking photographs that they have every right to do. There's no trade-off involved at all. The fuss is about the police using legal powers in an illegal way, whether through ignorance on their behalf or on purpose. |
Not missing the point at all. I have a way to reconcile within myself a good reason not to give a man with a gun and an attitude a reason to take it out on me.
I see no need to be killed, injured/crippled, or arrested to make a point.
You cannot win on the spot, there simply isn't the understanding on a wide basis, and when you're standing there in a public place with a cop who has to make a determination as to what's going to happen, he will err to the side of caution, and/or, make a move that will cause you grief and/or harm.
Why make a stand?
If you want to make a point, acquiesce, take down the pertinent info, and call your lawyer when you get home. Invite the press to hear your lawsuit, and publish the results. On site is not the time to make a stink.
As I stated previously, I have walked away from every occurrence of questioning with the person believing that I met his wishes/demands. Often, with the pictures still in my camera.
To me, it just seems like a good idea to get out of the situation intact......and if that means that you have to suck it up and make someone feel like they're the boss of you so you don't get in deep sh*t, well......it's worth it to me.
Message edited by author 2009-12-13 19:00:58.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2009 02:09:01 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
It's really a case of how hard you want to push it. Question is, if you're on someone else's property, and there are others involved, is it worth it to you for one picture, and not necessarily a great one, to be arrested, go to jail, and have to deal with the trial and fallout afterward?
For me, now way! I'm just not so heavily principled in a bad situation that I'm interested in being the test case, or statistic.
I know I push the line here and there.....I go places I shouldn't, and I know I take pictures places that I'm not allowed to, but am left alone because I don't make a nuisance of myself.
I've had to deal with an unpleasant scenario here and there, but not yet has there been one that couldn't be resolved without have to resort to police and lawyers.
So I feel it's a trade-off......some of the shots I get are of things that I wouldn't have were I caught, and other times I'm asked to move along where someone has no legal right to do so......and I do 'cause there's always another day. |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Jeb, i think you're missing the point here. The main point of these stories and the anger towards the Police is not that people are getting stopped on other peoples property or places where they should not be, but are being stopped and questioned when taking photographs that they have every right to do. There's no trade-off involved at all. The fuss is about the police using legal powers in an illegal way, whether through ignorance on their behalf or on purpose. |
Not missing the point at all. I have a way to reconcile within myself a good reason not to give a man with a gun and an attitude a reason to take it out on me.
I see no need to be killed, injured/crippled, or arrested to make a point.
You cannot win on the spot, there simply isn't the understanding on a wide basis, and when you're standing there in a public place with a cop who has to make a determination as to what's going to happen, he will err to the side of caution, and/or, make a move that will cause you grief and/or harm.
Why make a stand?
If you want to make a point, acquiesce, take down the pertinent info, and call your lawyer when you get home. Invite the press to hear your lawsuit, and publish the results. On site is not the time to make a stink.
As I stated previously, I have walked away from every occurrence of questioning with the person believing that I met his wishes/demands. Often, with the pictures still in my camera.
To me, it just seems like a good idea to get out of the situation intact......and if that means that you have to suck it up and make someone feel like they're the boss of you so you don't get in deep sh*t, well......it's worth it to me. |
Ah, i get your point now Jeb. Sorry. Most of the scenarios you mentioned were of trespassing or similar so i got a bit confused. |
|
|
|
12/14/2009 02:38:05 PM · #22 |
As a non U.S. citizen and I would never ever take a camera with me on trips to the states. My first fear would be ending up in a situation like this. Me being a black tourist with a camera in hand and a non-u.s. citizen. You could'nt pay me enough to photograph anything.
When I visit, I go straight to the malls and restaurants. If it was'nt for the shopping, I would'nt visit. Period!!!
I however would not visit europe, because I fear the same level of harassment and the shopping is'nt good there :) |
|
|
|
12/14/2009 02:40:43 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by dmadden:
As a non U.S. citizen and I would never ever take a camera with me on trips to the states. My first fear would be ending up in a situation like this. Me being a black tourist with a camera in hand and a non-u.s. citizen. You could'nt pay me enough to photograph anything.
When I visit, I go straight to the malls and restaurants. If it was'nt for the shopping, I would'nt visit. Period!!!
I however would not visit europe, because I fear the same level of harassment and the shopping is'nt good there :) |
Shopping in Europe - the continent, anyway - is better than in the states, and very little hassle for photogs compared to the US or the UK. :-) |
|
|
|
12/14/2009 02:46:04 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by dmadden:
As a non U.S. citizen and I would never ever take a camera with me on trips to the states. My first fear would be ending up in a situation like this. Me being a black tourist with a camera in hand and a non-u.s. citizen. You could'nt pay me enough to photograph anything.
When I visit, I go straight to the malls and restaurants. If it was'nt for the shopping, I would'nt visit. Period!!!
I however would not visit europe, because I fear the same level of harassment and the shopping is'nt good there :) |
Come on up here Dave and bring your camera. I'm pretty sure that you won't stick out at all. Then I wanna come to Jamaica. |
|
|
|
12/14/2009 03:13:22 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by dmadden:
As a non U.S. citizen and I would never ever take a camera with me on trips to the states. My first fear would be ending up in a situation like this. Me being a black tourist with a camera in hand and a non-u.s. citizen. You could'nt pay me enough to photograph anything.
When I visit, I go straight to the malls and restaurants. If it was'nt for the shopping, I would'nt visit. Period!!!
I however would not visit europe, because I fear the same level of harassment and the shopping is'nt good there :) |
Come on up here Dave and bring your camera. I'm pretty sure that you won't stick out at all. Then I wanna come to Jamaica. |
Where u located spazmo? Anyone is welcome here anytime, I'll happily show you around. I'd really love to tour europe and photograph lots of places, but I cant seem to shake this concern no matter how hard I try. Sounds silly I know, but just the way I feel. |
|
