Not to this extreme but I did have an incident once in Germany. I was taking some photos in a nice hay field that was partially bailed, right before sunset the light was great. Then comes an ~16 year old girl on a horse riding through said field and I took a few shots of her and the horse and the feild from a distance.
Her father then came into the field and came over to me to ask if I was a profesional photographer, as he didn't want me selling photos of his daughter. I agree with him, but we chatted and there was no problems, abeit only because I'm not a professional.
Although I find this article disturbing as well, and wonder how they would have handled it if he just said he's a hobbiest?
To say this gets me annoyed is an understatement. Listening to that recording I am screwing at what happened.
Another example of the british police thinking they can do what they like, and when challenged make up their own rules. Very VERY dangerous to society when the police start to think they are in charge.
My brother was stopped a couple of times recently under the terrorism section 43 for no reason, and when challenged they again ignored him and carried on 'illegally' searching him.
people need to start becoming more aware of whats happening in this country with the police and the government taking away our civil liberties and using laws for what they are not meant.
Steve - the difference with your point is by being on the farmers field you are on private property and therefore the law states you can be asked to stop taking photos, and legally you have to.
The case above was on a public thoroughfare and therefore the law states you are allowed to take photos of anyone or anything (with a few minor caveats). As such the photographer was perfectly within his rights (as defined by law) to take photos. The police, who should know and uphold the law, didn't know this and ended up trying to use anti terrorist laws for a purpose other than it was intended. i.e. because they got caught out by someone who knew his rights
Saying if he said he was an amateur might have resulted in a different outcome is missing the point totally.
Additional note: My comments are based on UK law. I have no idea about US or other countries so be wary of quoting my statements to police elsewhere. :o)
I heard his recording today, it's astonishing. Damned police. I have no idea how he kept his cool, that guy. He deserves a medal of some form.
You just know that if he hadn't recorded the whole thing those "officers" would've made any old story up about him to back up their side of the story. It's disgraceful.
Also, the number of people who actually believe there's some law about photographing kids is surprising. Mate of mine had no end of trouble with retards at his kids' school and their invented "laws" relating to this paranoia.
This makes me hopping mad and really puts the police in such a dim light.
I got threatened for photographing a policeman who was filming me while covering an animal rights march for the local paper once in Sussex. (pre 9/11 and the terrorism act). He couldnt see my point that why was it okay for him to snap me, and me not him?
That was the same day a fellow snapper got arrested and manhandled into the van, despite him showing his press pass - and doing nothing wrong at all other than take a photo of the crowds when a policeman told him not to. An animal rights activist videoed the whole thing and gave it to the police -they tampered with the evidence, they were so keen to take him to court. Luckily the woman had made a copy! The case got thrown out eventually, but no charges were made against the police :-(
It really annoys me. I went out the other day to do some street photography in Trafalgar Square (such a good place because with so many people and so many people taking pictures there is loads to shoot and you can almost go unnoticed.) I get where they are coming from though because there could be creepy people taking pictures of kids, but I missed so many opportunities of little kids running round in dressing-up costumes, it's frustrating.
What an articulate and gutsy young lad. There should be more like him in this world. Too many people give in too easily. That's why the police think it is okay to behave in this manner.
I often say 'it is the soft option'. I have to choose my words carefully now....the obvious elements in our society are often ignored by the police as they know they will have their work cut out so they opt, instead in this case, the 16 year old boy!
Hey, guys, take a look around you and focus in on what you have been trained to do.
It's a bit like the 75 year old man the other day where 'officers' smashed the side window of his car and dragged him out for a minor traffic offence!
Where is it going to stop?
I often wonder under what conditions I should get people's permissions to take thier picture, either before or after the fact. In my experience no one *ever* wants to notice a camera from a stranger pointed in their direction. There may not be laws about that, but people feel violated and I think in many cases attribute all sorts of sordid motivations to the photographer.
It wasn't the police nor a street parade. On Friday I was at our local shops - VERY small one - to get shots for my Fri-day. (I was aware of our local MP inside touting for our upcoming elections and considered asking for his pic for the day.) I noticed some workers in silhouette on a canopy covering the walkway and proceeded to take some pix with my 50mm. I had finished for the moment and was putting the lens cap on when I was approached by a woman who asked what I was doing, who was I and why I was taking pix. I was flabbergasted, told her I am an artist and taking pix for my art. She then told me when wondered if I was with xyz - an incident not too long before I arrived at the shops. I was totally confused and told her I had no idea what she was talking about. I went into the shop and bought the groceries, put them in the car, got my Sigma Macro 150mm and went back to get better shots. I also did this as a way of showing 'them' they can't scare me and I'd take pix for my art. (I must say my nieghbour two doors up 'owns' the shopping area, we acknowledge each other's existence but that's it.)
I proceeded to lean against rails, bend backwards and try to catch 'that' shot when I had another person come to me. This time is was ' didn't she tell you you need centre management permission?' I told her nothing was said about that. She again asked me why I was taking pix. At the time of my answering her first communication we realised we 'know' each other through our children's school, she lived a few doors up and ....
In the end she 'let me off', I proceeded to try to get the pic, the trolley man came up and talked to me and I left WHEN I WAS READY.
Aaahhhh! I wonder what 'trouble' I'm going to get when our beach season starts and I take pix there?
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Her father then came into the field and came over to me to ask if I was a profesional photographer, as he didn't want me selling photos of his daughter. I agree with him, but we chatted and there was no problems, abeit only because I'm not a professional.
Although I find this article disturbing as well, and wonder how they would have handled it if he just said he's a hobbiest?
Another example of the british police thinking they can do what they like, and when challenged make up their own rules. Very VERY dangerous to society when the police start to think they are in charge.
My brother was stopped a couple of times recently under the terrorism section 43 for no reason, and when challenged they again ignored him and carried on 'illegally' searching him.
people need to start becoming more aware of whats happening in this country with the police and the government taking away our civil liberties and using laws for what they are not meant.
The case above was on a public thoroughfare and therefore the law states you are allowed to take photos of anyone or anything (with a few minor caveats). As such the photographer was perfectly within his rights (as defined by law) to take photos. The police, who should know and uphold the law, didn't know this and ended up trying to use anti terrorist laws for a purpose other than it was intended. i.e. because they got caught out by someone who knew his rights
Saying if he said he was an amateur might have resulted in a different outcome is missing the point totally.
You just know that if he hadn't recorded the whole thing those "officers" would've made any old story up about him to back up their side of the story. It's disgraceful.
Also, the number of people who actually believe there's some law about photographing kids is surprising. Mate of mine had no end of trouble with retards at his kids' school and their invented "laws" relating to this paranoia.
I got threatened for photographing a policeman who was filming me while covering an animal rights march for the local paper once in Sussex. (pre 9/11 and the terrorism act). He couldnt see my point that why was it okay for him to snap me, and me not him?
That was the same day a fellow snapper got arrested and manhandled into the van, despite him showing his press pass - and doing nothing wrong at all other than take a photo of the crowds when a policeman told him not to. An animal rights activist videoed the whole thing and gave it to the police -they tampered with the evidence, they were so keen to take him to court. Luckily the woman had made a copy! The case got thrown out eventually, but no charges were made against the police :-(
I often say 'it is the soft option'. I have to choose my words carefully now....the obvious elements in our society are often ignored by the police as they know they will have their work cut out so they opt, instead in this case, the 16 year old boy!
Hey, guys, take a look around you and focus in on what you have been trained to do.
It's a bit like the 75 year old man the other day where 'officers' smashed the side window of his car and dragged him out for a minor traffic offence!
Where is it going to stop?
I proceeded to lean against rails, bend backwards and try to catch 'that' shot when I had another person come to me. This time is was ' didn't she tell you you need centre management permission?' I told her nothing was said about that. She again asked me why I was taking pix. At the time of my answering her first communication we realised we 'know' each other through our children's school, she lived a few doors up and ....
In the end she 'let me off', I proceeded to try to get the pic, the trolley man came up and talked to me and I left WHEN I WAS READY.
Aaahhhh! I wonder what 'trouble' I'm going to get when our beach season starts and I take pix there?
So go on Jules. I'd support you.