clicky



Its a good job we have these anti-terror lawsa. What would the police do with all these nasty, viscious evil photographers if they didnt have the power to look like complete prats!!!

I'm a terrorist, not a photographer …

Mark

You going to eggs-plode yourself? (8-p)

I think he's just yolking.

Jon

Wouldn't a real terrorist with a camera just pull out a gun as soon as they were challenged and shoot those involved?
And the police wonder why they don't have a lot of public support. While ever they do stupid things like this, people won't respect them.

Every time I drive across the Tyne Bridge there are two are three people (tourists no doubt) taking pictures and video of The Sage and The Baltic (a very high profile area). Now, on occasion they have been obviously muslim (stick with me this isn't going to be racist) no one bats an eyelid which is a good thing and I've never seen the police, who are normally in the area (as there is a big police station nearby) question anyone, which is also a good thing.

Perhaps the attitudes of Police in the north and south are a tad different when it comes to abusing anti terror laws, that said I certainly feel a lot safer in the north than London, except when I see armed police questioning teenagers on a friday night at Harrogate asda.

London, being the capital city of the U.K., was always going to be deemed a higher priority target for terrorism by the police, it still doesn't justify stopping people simply for taking photographs.

It's becoming a bit of a cliché, but if you wanted to covertly surveil a building would you do it with a mahoosive tripod, camera, flash gun and kit bag or would you use a happy-snapper or camera 'phone?
Targeting professional/semi-professional/amateur photographers as terrorists because they have a half-decent camera is just stupid. Plain and simple.

Mark

EDIT - I've been posting these stories on my Fb profile, here's a rundown of them so far :
Armed police swoop on Thames tourist
BBC photographer terror stop
Photographer in Christmas lights 'terror' stop
Police u-turn on photographers and anti-terror laws
Photographers' terror stops spark fresh commons petition
Photographer stopped after photographing a church (which was next to a bank)
'Not a terrorist' photographer to lodge formal complaint against police

Google Street View would be the first port of call. It will probably give you all you need.

Seems to me that this is another example of possible abuse and misuse of power in the UK, the fact that the laws on terrorism and the extra rights that the government and police have wide possibilities of abuse.

It feels a bit reactionary saying that, but my thoughts briefly are these: If the laws affect more people negatively than they are intended to protect and are not necessary to decrease terror threat then they are not just. The scope for abuse is too wide and if we accept this then the next constraining anti civil rights laws may be enforced with little effort and declining scepticism resulting in a slow degredation of our rights.

As I said reactionary, but not necessarily invalid as a result.

This is one of the main reasons why I can't support labour, from 1997-2003 they had a good record for fixing the tory degraded mess left in '97. Enforcing a minimum wage, raising NHS salaries, increasing education budgets year on year to 2008, winter fuel allowance etc but their actions from 2005 onwards have been by weight an appalling set of sizures in personal liberties. Faith in such a party would be misplaced.

There's been another journalist stop and search using section 44 as the reason …
Guardian clicky

Mark

If anyone feels strongly enough to make their presence felt then there's an I'm a Photographer Not a terrorist! mass picture taking event in Trafalgar Square at 12 noon on Saturday 23 January.

Mark

That's

There's another one in the news.It really is quite frightening the way the police are using Section 44 in such a carte blanche manner.

Mark

My experience is that once the police make the initial contact he or she will refuse to back down despite common sense and all the facts pointing towards a wrong assumption by them. That's probably the point - they are unable to make an informed decision as they are blinkered by their powers and it's the public and professionals that are suffering.

Al

But the initial contact shouldn't be made in the first place, unless the photographer really does look like they are involved in something suspicious.
Directions from the top have been sent down the line that photographer are to be left alone.
How difficult can it be?!?

Mark