Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Abuse and intimidation of London photographer

Reply
Thread Tools

Abuse and intimidation of London photographer

 
 
Martin Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-27-2008
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, John Ferguson
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Welcome To The Gulag wrote:
>> This is scary stuff - seriously, what has happened to a once proud
>>and free nation?
>>
>>http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...grapher/2008/0
>>3/you-cant-pictur.html
>> [click to play video]


>I reckon I'll avoid London if I ever get to GB.


London isn't the friendliest place on Earth, but it isn't all that bad!
The M25 ring road is best avoided unless you enjoy traffic jams.

The identification number of the officious half wit that accosted him is
clearly on the video so he should make a formal complaint. That guy
clearly needs retraining. "Community Support" officers are policing on
the cheap, poorly trained, badly equipped and paid a pittance. It is no
surprise that some of them once in uniform act like jumped up little
Hitlers - they are not representative of mainstream UK policing which is
generally by consent.

It is quite safe to ask a UK policeman the time. My university
supervisor had permanent scarring from his first encounter with the US
local police. And a historian from York was beaten to a pulp by a dozen
or more US plainclothes guys for jaywalking a couple of years back.

I have been stopped more than once for taking photos by anti-terrorist
police in the UK and they are professional and courteous provided that
you are reasonable with them. They are after all just doing their job
and if you are taking pictures that might be useful to a terrorist you
must expect to be challenged. I'd say security was a lot tighter in the
past during the major IRA bombing campaign against UK city centres than
it is now.

Regards,
--
Martin Brown

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Focus
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008

"Welcome To The Gulag" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> This is scary stuff - seriously, what has happened to a once proud and
> free nation?


They imported stupid Chinese that speak bad English and feel very
important...


> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...nt-pictur.html
>
>
> [click to play video]
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mikia
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008

"Welcome To The Gulag" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> This is scary stuff - seriously, what has happened to a once proud and
> free nation?
>
>
> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...nt-pictur.html
>
>
> [click to play video]
>

Dammed if they do dammed if they don't.
Fair enough he probably looked suspicious. If he was a bomber then BANG! He
looked Sus that is why and he was in the middle of a place that has been
bombed! I bet someone else around that place had been filming just like him
and nothing was said.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Bartram
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008

"irwell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote

> Do not accidently touch the On switch of your P&S in your
> pants pocket, that lens extension could cost you.


"Are you zooming closer or just pleased to see me?"
~ Mae West (kinda)

Paul


 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Savage
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
On 2008-03-28, Mikia <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> "Welcome To The Gulag" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> This is scary stuff - seriously, what has happened to a once proud and
>> free nation?
>>
>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...e_photographer
>>

> Dammed if they do dammed if they don't.
> Fair enough he probably looked suspicious. If he was a bomber then BANG! He
> looked Sus that is why and he was in the middle of a place that has been
> bombed! I bet someone else around that place had been filming just like him
> and nothing was said.


What is 'suspicious' about using a video camera in a notorious tourist
trap? The last people to bomb London a couple of years ago were caught
on several CCTV cameras. None of the released footage shows them
standing around waving video cameras.

I'm not aware of any bomb in the place he was standing, but I couldn't
identify it too accurately, one of the 'circuses' in the west end is my
best guess. You obviously know better, care to share?

What is this connection you are drawing, that you appear to think is
obvious, between someone filming/photographing and a terrorist planting
a bomb? I know of no such association.

--
Chris Savage Kiss me. Or would you rather live in a
Gateshead, UK land where the soap won't lather?
- Billy Bragg
 
Reply With Quote
 
Roy G
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008

"C J Campbell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:2008032710213616807-christophercampbell@hotmailcom...
>
> At WPPI in Las Vegas last week Dennis Orchard related a story about a
> fellow London wedding photographer. Apparently the photographer was posing
> the bride and attempting to turn her shoulders to an angle toward the
> camera when he accidentally brushed one of her breasts. He was charged
> with sexual assault, served six months in prison, and was placed on a
> dangerous sexual offenders list for 10 years. He is to have no contact
> with children under 18, meaning that his child portrait business is
> destroyed.
>
> If these stories are true, I would avoid visiting Great Britain until the
> country re-establishes fundamental human rights.
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor
>


Hi.

I would be inclined to treat this story about the wedding photographer as an
"Urban Legend".

He would need to have done a lot more than just accidentally brushing a boob
in order to get prosecuted.

Even if he had been prosecuted, it would be very unlikely that he would have
gone to jail for such a trivial first offence.

As for the other story, I can think of a lot more reasons for avoiding
London than the chance of being harassed by some foreign accented moron, who
has less authority than the average traffic warden.

Roy G


 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Malcolm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Alfred Molon <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, John Ferguson
> says...


>> I reckon I'll avoid London if I ever get to GB.


> Same here - if this is how they treat you in the UK.


If it was then nobody would have bothered making a fuss about it.

--
Chris Malcolm http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

 
Reply With Quote
 
dmaster
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008
On Mar 27, 11:36*am, John Ferguson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Welcome To The Gulag wrote:> This is scary stuff - seriously, what has *happened to a once proud and free
> > nation?

>
> >http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...tographer/2008...

>
> > [click to play video]

>
> I reckon I'll avoid London if I ever get to GB.


Well, I spent several weeks in London immediately after the
Underground bombings. Parts of the line were still blocked and
security was quite heavy. My wife and I were carrying a camcorder, my
none-too-inconspicuous Panasonic FZ20, and another digital camera. We
took photos and video everywhere we went, including in the
underground. Not once were we stopped, questioned, or harrassed. We
did *ask* security personel if we could take their pictures before
doing so, and we were never refused.

My suspicion is that unless you are purposely trying to annoy someone,
or taking pictures in an obviously restricted area, you won't have any
trouble.

Dan (Woj...)
Dan (Woj...)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Brace
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008

"dmaster" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
On Mar 27, 11:36 am, John Ferguson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Welcome To The Gulag wrote:> This is scary stuff - seriously, what has
> happened to a once proud and free
> > nation?

>
> >http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...tographer/2008...

>
> > [click to play video]

>
> I reckon I'll avoid London if I ever get to GB.


Well, I spent several weeks in London immediately after the
Underground bombings. Parts of the line were still blocked and
security was quite heavy. My wife and I were carrying a camcorder, my
none-too-inconspicuous Panasonic FZ20, and another digital camera. We
took photos and video everywhere we went, including in the
underground. Not once were we stopped, questioned, or harrassed. We
did *ask* security personel if we could take their pictures before
doing so, and we were never refused.

My suspicion is that unless you are purposely trying to annoy someone,
or taking pictures in an obviously restricted area, you won't have any
trouble.

Dan (Woj...)
Dan (Woj...)

dmaster:
Your response is so typical of the "gee if I get in trouble with the
authorities, then I must obviously be in the wrong and if they question me I
must bow my head so they can more accurately land their blows".
You must be Canadian, eh?
What in hell do you mean by "purposely trying" to annoy someone and
what, specifically, is an "obvious" restriction on an "area".
Total BS, it is. The video shows what happens when someone has
mistakenly interpreted their authority (racial comments aside) and is
challenged -- nothing more.
Those of us who have seen this Rent-A-Cop approach to Policing the
public are not at all surprised by the public's reaction, especially when
dealing with those in the public who have not accepted the Master VS. Peon
relationship.
Bob


 
Reply With Quote
 
Pboud
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-28-2008
Robert Brace wrote:

> dmaster:
> Your response is so typical of the "gee if I get in trouble with the
> authorities, then I must obviously be in the wrong and if they question me I
> must bow my head so they can more accurately land their blows".
> You must be Canadian, eh?

At least you're objective..
> What in hell do you mean by "purposely trying" to annoy someone and
> what, specifically, is an "obvious" restriction on an "area".

Barb wire, electrical fencing, that sort of thing would be a fair
indicator.. In some cases, you might have to read signs.
> Total BS, it is. The video shows what happens when someone has
> mistakenly interpreted their authority (racial comments aside) and is
> challenged -- nothing more.
> Those of us who have seen this Rent-A-Cop approach to Policing the
> public are not at all surprised by the public's reaction, especially when
> dealing with those in the public who have not accepted the Master VS. Peon
> relationship.

Master vs Peon? sorry, that doesn't sound like a Canadian concept so I'm
a little shy on it.. Can you expand a bit?

P.
> Bob
>
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Abuse of the Net/Abuse on the Net Dr Wankfest Computer Support 14 07-19-2006 10:31 PM
Fighting abuse with abuse Mara Computer Support 70 03-24-2005 08:30 PM
Re: Fighting abuse with abuse Peter =?UTF-8?B?S8O2aGxtYW5u?= Computer Information 0 03-22-2005 10:31 AM
Newsgroup abuse and email account terminatoin Kal Iyer C++ 10 12-09-2004 11:01 PM



Advertisments