If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks,this isn't the way to illustrate

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Nov 30, 2010.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html

    Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.

    Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    station.

    'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).

    'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'

    'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    without getting their feet and hands cold'.

    In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.
    RichA, Nov 30, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 11/30/2010 5:28 PM, RichA wrote:
    > http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >
    > Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    > stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >
    > Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    > Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    > station.
    >
    > 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >
    > 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >
    > 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    > which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    > snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    > terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    > without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >
    > In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    > nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    > public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.


    And the US laws you mentioned are ????


    --
    Peter
    peter, Nov 30, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    tony cooper Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0800 (PST), RichA <>
    wrote:

    >http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >
    >Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    >stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >
    >Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    >station.
    >
    >'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >
    >'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >
    >'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    >which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    >snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    >terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    >without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >
    >In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    >nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    >public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.


    "Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned". Unless you can provide
    more information, all we can glean from the article is that a police
    officer asked Sibley some questions. There's no indication that the
    officer stopped Sibley from taking any more photographs or keeping the
    images he had.

    Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from asking a
    question?


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Nov 30, 2010
    #3
  4. RichA

    MC Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    tony cooper wrote:

    > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0800 (PST), RichA <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >

    http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    > >
    > > Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has
    > > been stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent
    > > today.
    > >
    > > Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    > > Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered
    > > train station.
    > >
    > > 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    > >
    > > 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    > >
    > > 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    > > which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    > > snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    > > terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    > > without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    > >
    > > In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    > > nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures
    > > in public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.

    >
    > "Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned". Unless you can provide
    > more information, all we can glean from the article is that a police
    > officer asked Sibley some questions. There's no indication that the
    > officer stopped Sibley from taking any more photographs or keeping the
    > images he had.
    >
    > Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from asking a
    > question?


    Ignore it. It is once again a misleading post. The chap was merely
    approached and asked what he was doing by a PCSO, not even a real
    police officer. The photographer politely replied and as far as that
    goes that was the end of it. In fact Amateur Photographer magazine has
    published a non-story. It must have been a slow news day.

    MC
    MC, Nov 30, 2010
    #4
  5. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 11/30/2010 7:39 PM, Rich wrote:
    > peter<> wrote in
    > news:4cf57fb6$0$5546$-secrets.com:
    >
    >> On 11/30/2010 5:28 PM, RichA wrote:
    >>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_ove
    >>> r_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >>>
    >>> Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has
    >>> been stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent
    >>> today.
    >>>
    >>> Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >>> Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    >>> station.
    >>>
    >>> 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >>>
    >>> 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >>>
    >>> 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    >>> which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    >>> snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    >>> terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    >>> without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >>>
    >>> In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    >>> nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures
    >>> in public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.

    >>
    >> And the US laws you mentioned are ????
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Good question! The cops seem to make them up as they go along...


    Do I need to remind you that you stated certain states had laws
    supporting the police action?
    You need not answer my rhetorical question


    --
    Peter
    peter, Dec 1, 2010
    #5
  6. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 11/30/2010 7:41 PM, Rich wrote:
    > tony cooper<> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0800 (PST), RichA<>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_over
    >>> _snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >>>
    >>> Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    >>> stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >>>
    >>> Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >>> Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    >>> station.
    >>>
    >>> 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >>>
    >>> 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >>>
    >>> 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    >>> which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    >>> snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    >>> terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    >>> without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >>>
    >>> In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    >>> nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    >>> public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.

    >>
    >> "Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned". Unless you can provide
    >> more information, all we can glean from the article is that a police
    >> officer asked Sibley some questions. There's no indication that the
    >> officer stopped Sibley from taking any more photographs or keeping the
    >> images he had.
    >>
    >> Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from asking a
    >> question?
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Yes. Evidently, probably cause is being dispensed with. Of course,
    > liberals are all for laws like this, as long as everyone (no matter if
    > they appear to be doing something wrong or not) is "questioned." Wouldn't
    > want to appear "insensitive" by actually stopping the people who are
    > LIKELY to commit a terrorist act or who might actually be working for
    > terrorists. That would be...racial profiling! Oh dear, oh no!!!


    I won't even waste any one's time asking for the source of that statement.
    You just have no clue about what you are talking about.

    --
    Peter
    peter, Dec 1, 2010
    #6
  7. RichA

    MC Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    Rich wrote:

    > "MC" <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > > tony cooper wrote:
    > >
    > >> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0800 (PST), RichA
    > >> <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >

    > >

    http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_over
    > > _snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    > >> >
    > >> > Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has
    > >> > been stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley,

    > Kent >> > today.
    > >> >
    > >> > Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    > >> > Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered
    > >> > train station.
    > >> >
    > >> > 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    > >> >
    > >> > 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    > >> >
    > >> > 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”.

    > To >> > which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station
    > in >> > the snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a
    > >> > potential terrorist could just look up the same images on Google
    > >> > Street View without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    > >> >
    > >> > In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront

    > of a >> > nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take
    > pictures >> > in public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.
    > >>
    > >> "Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned". Unless you can

    > provide >> more information, all we can glean from the article is
    > that a police >> officer asked Sibley some questions. There's no
    > indication that the >> officer stopped Sibley from taking any more
    > photographs or keeping >> the images he had.
    > >>
    > >> Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from

    > asking a >> question?
    > >
    > > Ignore it. It is once again a misleading post. The chap was merely
    > > approached and asked what he was doing by a PCSO, not even a real
    > > police officer.

    >
    > Unqualified ass------. A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    > general. What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!


    Well that's basically what they are and with very few powers.

    MC
    MC, Dec 1, 2010
    #7
  8. RichA

    Mike Guest

    On 30/11/2010 22:28, RichA wrote:
    > http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >
    > Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    > stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >
    > Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    > Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    > station.
    >
    > 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >
    > 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >
    > 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    > which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    > snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    > terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    > without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >
    > In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    > nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    > public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.


    I'd hardly describe him as a victim. Perhaps the terrorists on 11/9 or
    7/7 would have had a similar smart-alec response prepared in case
    someone asked them what they where doing.

    I was once stopped and asked to produce my driving licence and what I
    had been doing after driving along a 24hr bus lane at 2:30am. Maybe I
    should have cited my human rights and gone blubbing to the press.

    The officer was using my mis-demeanour as an excuse to see if I was
    under the influence. I wasn't and drove of a few minutes later, only
    now do I realise that I was a victim and my rights had been grievously
    violated.

    Whilst I've seen plenty of video's showing overly officious police
    officers/security guards moving photographers on, the photographers also
    seem to be doing their level best to provoke a reaction. A modicum of
    sense from either part would have resolves the problem, instead we have
    a photographer crying like a softcock over his rights and screw everyone
    else's.

    If I am ever asked to stop taking pictures I will, I don't regard it as
    a god given right to photograph other people and their property if they
    don't want me to regardless of where they are or their job.


    Mike
    Mike, Dec 1, 2010
    #8
  9. RichA

    Martin Brown Guest

    On 01/12/2010 01:13, MC wrote:
    > Rich wrote:
    >
    >> "MC"<> wrote in
    >> news::
    >>
    >>> tony cooper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0800 (PST), RichA
    >>>> <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>

    > http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_over
    >>> _snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has
    >>>>> been stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley,

    >> Kent>> > today.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >>>>> Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered
    >>>>> train station.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”.

    >> To>> > which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station
    >> in>> > the snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a
    >>>>> potential terrorist could just look up the same images on Google
    >>>>> Street View without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront

    >> of a>> > nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take
    >> pictures>> > in public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.
    >>>>
    >>>> "Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned". Unless you can

    >> provide>> more information, all we can glean from the article is
    >> that a police>> officer asked Sibley some questions. There's no
    >> indication that the>> officer stopped Sibley from taking any more
    >> photographs or keeping>> the images he had.
    >>>>
    >>>> Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from

    >> asking a>> question?
    >>>
    >>> Ignore it. It is once again a misleading post. The chap was merely
    >>> approached and asked what he was doing by a PCSO, not even a real
    >>> police officer.

    >>
    >> Unqualified ass------. A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    >> general. What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!


    PCSO's are not the brightest, the public decided they wanted to see a
    lot more bobbies on the beat and these guys are much cheaper.

    And for the benefit of fuckwit troll RichA the UK has had deputized
    trained citizens in the police force for a very long time. They have
    full police powers and are properly trained. Called Special Constables
    and in Canada the Royal Canadian Mounted Police uses them too as do
    several other former Commonwealth nations.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_constable
    >
    > Well that's basically what they are and with very few powers.


    It is also not unreasonable to be asked the occasional question if you
    are taking architectural photographs of infrastructure that could be of
    use to terrorists. Would you prefer it if the police turned a blind eye
    to anyone taking photographs in a potentially sensitive location?

    AP has a vendetta against the police and will report every incident no
    matter how trivial as if their photographer was slung into a dungeon.
    You can bet your bottom dollar that the AP cameraman did everything he
    could to escalate the situation.

    I have been challenged like this a few times and interpret it as mainly
    the security guys doing their job. If I am on private land I will desist
    if asked to but normally after a short conversation they go away again
    and I continue to shoot. During the active IRA bombing of UK cities in
    the 70's police challenges to photographers were much more frequent.

    Regards,
    Martin Brown
    Martin Brown, Dec 1, 2010
    #9
  10. RichA

    Richard Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    "Mike" <> wrote in message
    news:xdnJo.189683$2...
    > On 30/11/2010 22:28, RichA wrote:
    >> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >>
    >> Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    >> stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >>
    >> Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >> Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    >> station.
    >>
    >> 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >>
    >> 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >>
    >> 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    >> which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    >> snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    >> terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    >> without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >>
    >> In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    >> nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    >> public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.

    >
    > I'd hardly describe him as a victim. Perhaps the terrorists on 11/9 or
    > 7/7 would have had a similar smart-alec response prepared in case someone
    > asked them what they where doing.
    >
    > I was once stopped and asked to produce my driving licence and what I had
    > been doing after driving along a 24hr bus lane at 2:30am. Maybe I should
    > have cited my human rights and gone blubbing to the press.
    >
    > The officer was using my mis-demeanour as an excuse to see if I was under
    > the influence. I wasn't and drove of a few minutes later, only now do I
    > realise that I was a victim and my rights had been grievously violated.
    >
    > Whilst I've seen plenty of video's showing overly officious police
    > officers/security guards moving photographers on, the photographers also
    > seem to be doing their level best to provoke a reaction. A modicum of
    > sense from either part would have resolves the problem, instead we have a
    > photographer crying like a softcock over his rights and screw everyone
    > else's.
    >
    > If I am ever asked to stop taking pictures I will, I don't regard it as a
    > god given right to photograph other people and their property if they
    > don't want me to regardless of where they are or their job.


    Please stop taking pictures.
    Now sell you camera.
    TIA
    Richard, Dec 1, 2010
    #10
  11. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened bycutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    On Dec 1, 3:11 am, Martin Brown <|||>
    wrote:
    > On 01/12/2010 01:13, MC wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > Rich wrote:

    >
    > >> "MC"<>  wrote in
    > >>news::

    >
    > >>> tony cooper wrote:

    >
    > >>>> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0800 (PST), RichA
    > >>>> <>  wrote:

    >
    > >http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_over
    > >>> _snow_pictures_news_304099.html

    >
    > >>>>> Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has
    > >>>>> been stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley,
    > >> Kent>>  >  today.

    >
    > >>>>> Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    > >>>>> Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered
    > >>>>> train station.

    >
    > >>>>> 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).

    >
    > >>>>> 'I replied I'm taking photos in the snow .'

    >
    > >>>>> 'He said I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security .
    > >> To>>  >  which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station
    > >> in>>  >  the snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a
    > >>>>> potential terrorist could just look up the same images on Google
    > >>>>> Street View without getting their feet and hands cold'.

    >
    > >>>>> In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront
    > >> of a>>  >  nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take
    > >> pictures>>  >  in public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.

    >
    > >>>> "Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned".  Unless you can
    > >> provide>>  more information, all we can glean from the article is
    > >> that a police>>  officer asked Sibley some questions.  There's no
    > >> indication that the>>  officer stopped Sibley from taking any more
    > >> photographs or keeping>>  the images he had.

    >
    > >>>> Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from
    > >> asking a>>  question?

    >
    > >>> Ignore it.  It is once again a misleading post.  The chap was merely
    > >>> approached and asked what he was doing by a PCSO, not even a real
    > >>> police officer.

    >
    > >> Unqualified ass------.  A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    > >> general.  What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!

    >
    > PCSO's are not the brightest, the public decided they wanted to see a
    > lot more bobbies on the beat and these guys are much cheaper.
    >
    > And for the benefit of fuckwit troll RichA the UK has had deputized
    > trained citizens in the police force for a very long time. They have
    > full police powers and are properly trained. Called Special Constables
    > and in Canada the Royal Canadian Mounted Police uses them too as do
    > several other former Commonwealth nations.


    Retard. It gets worse. Imagine the kind of left-wing scum that
    normally gets elected locally in Britain (communists running town
    councils, that kind of thing) having a hand at running the police!
    You people are pathetic.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11882026
    RichA, Dec 1, 2010
    #11
  12. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 12/1/2010 8:23 AM, RichA wrote:
    > On Dec 1, 3:11 am, Martin Brown<|||>


    >>>> Unqualified ass------. A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    >>>> general. What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!

    >>
    >> PCSO's are not the brightest, the public decided they wanted to see a
    >> lot more bobbies on the beat and these guys are much cheaper.
    >>
    >> And for the benefit of fuckwit troll RichA the UK has had deputized
    >> trained citizens in the police force for a very long time. They have
    >> full police powers and are properly trained. Called Special Constables
    >> and in Canada the Royal Canadian Mounted Police uses them too as do
    >> several other former Commonwealth nations.

    >
    > Retard. It gets worse. Imagine the kind of left-wing scum that
    > normally gets elected locally in Britain (communists running town
    > councils, that kind of thing) having a hand at running the police!
    > You people are pathetic.
    >
    > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11882026
    >


    Answer my questions.

    Is it true you are a member of the Communist Party?

    --
    Peter
    peter, Dec 1, 2010
    #12
  13. RichA

    Martin Brown Guest

    On 01/12/2010 13:30, peter wrote:
    > On 12/1/2010 8:23 AM, RichA wrote:
    >> On Dec 1, 3:11 am, Martin Brown<|||>

    >
    >>>>> Unqualified ass------. A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    >>>>> general. What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!
    >>>
    >>> PCSO's are not the brightest, the public decided they wanted to see a
    >>> lot more bobbies on the beat and these guys are much cheaper.
    >>>
    >>> And for the benefit of fuckwit troll RichA the UK has had deputized
    >>> trained citizens in the police force for a very long time. They have
    >>> full police powers and are properly trained. Called Special Constables
    >>> and in Canada the Royal Canadian Mounted Police uses them too as do
    >>> several other former Commonwealth nations.

    >>
    >> Retard. It gets worse. Imagine the kind of left-wing scum that
    >> normally gets elected locally in Britain (communists running town
    >> councils, that kind of thing) having a hand at running the police!
    >> You people are pathetic.
    >>
    >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11882026


    I think this is actually one of the dumbest ideas the new Con-Dem
    government has come up with so far. Aping the stupid US system which
    makes pandering to irrational public fears and locking up prisoners for
    as long as possible into a profitable industry is utterly stupid.

    The "Land of the Free" has an appallingly high incarceration rate.
    >
    > Answer my questions.
    >
    > Is it true you are a member of the Communist Party?


    No RichA is a trolling NeoNazi wannabe. Pure killfile material.

    Regards,
    Martin Brown
    Martin Brown, Dec 1, 2010
    #13
  14. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened bycutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    On Dec 1, 2:02 pm, Martin Brown <|||>
    wrote:
    > On 01/12/2010 13:30, peter wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On 12/1/2010 8:23 AM, RichA wrote:
    > >> On Dec 1, 3:11 am, Martin Brown<|||>

    >
    > >>>>> Unqualified ass------. A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    > >>>>> general. What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!

    >
    > >>> PCSO's are not the brightest, the public decided they wanted to see a
    > >>> lot more bobbies on the beat and these guys are much cheaper.

    >
    > >>> And for the benefit of fuckwit troll RichA the UK has had deputized
    > >>> trained citizens in the police force for a very long time. They have
    > >>> full police powers and are properly trained. Called Special Constables
    > >>> and in Canada the Royal Canadian Mounted Police uses them too as do
    > >>> several other former Commonwealth nations.

    >
    > >> Retard. It gets worse. Imagine the kind of left-wing scum that
    > >> normally gets elected locally in Britain (communists running town
    > >> councils, that kind of thing) having a hand at running the police!
    > >> You people are pathetic.

    >
    > >>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11882026

    >
    > I think this is actually one of the dumbest ideas the new Con-Dem
    > government has come up with so far.


    Don't worry they haven't been in office long I'm sure something dumber
    will come along shortly ;-)

    > Aping the stupid US system which
    > makes pandering to irrational public fears and locking up prisoners for
    > as long as possible into a profitable industry is utterly stupid.


    What, even if it's profitable !!!!!!!!!!
    I'm not sure how it's profitable I assume you mean in the USA it's
    profitable.
    In the UK the tax payer funds the prison service.

    > The "Land of the Free" has an appallingly high incarceration rate.


    I don't think they've noticed. :)
    Whisky-dave, Dec 1, 2010
    #14
  15. RichA

    tony cooper Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 07:06:08 -0800 (PST), Whisky-dave
    <> wrote:

    >On Dec 1, 2:02 pm, Martin Brown <|||>
    >wrote:
    >> On 01/12/2010 13:30, peter wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> > On 12/1/2010 8:23 AM, RichA wrote:
    >> >> On Dec 1, 3:11 am, Martin Brown<|||>

    >>
    >> >>>>> Unqualified ass------. A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    >> >>>>> general. What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!

    >>
    >> >>> PCSO's are not the brightest, the public decided they wanted to see a
    >> >>> lot more bobbies on the beat and these guys are much cheaper.

    >>
    >> >>> And for the benefit of fuckwit troll RichA the UK has had deputized
    >> >>> trained citizens in the police force for a very long time. They have
    >> >>> full police powers and are properly trained. Called Special Constables
    >> >>> and in Canada the Royal Canadian Mounted Police uses them too as do
    >> >>> several other former Commonwealth nations.

    >>
    >> >> Retard. It gets worse. Imagine the kind of left-wing scum that
    >> >> normally gets elected locally in Britain (communists running town
    >> >> councils, that kind of thing) having a hand at running the police!
    >> >> You people are pathetic.

    >>
    >> >>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11882026

    >>
    >> I think this is actually one of the dumbest ideas the new Con-Dem
    >> government has come up with so far.

    >
    >Don't worry they haven't been in office long I'm sure something dumber
    >will come along shortly ;-)
    >
    >> Aping the stupid US system which
    >> makes pandering to irrational public fears and locking up prisoners for
    >> as long as possible into a profitable industry is utterly stupid.

    >
    >What, even if it's profitable !!!!!!!!!!
    >I'm not sure how it's profitable I assume you mean in the USA it's
    >profitable.
    >In the UK the tax payer funds the prison service.


    As does the taxpayer in the US. The difference is that there are
    private, for-profit, state prisons in the US. Our government pays
    these prisons taxpayer dollars. The company that runs the prison may
    make a profit on the difference between what they are paid by the
    government and what their expenses are, but it is the taxpayer who is
    burdened with the cost.

    The "benefit" of this system is that the state writes one check to the
    prison company and doesn't have to employ people and deal with all of
    the suppliers that a prison has. Very much like a company outsourcing
    certain functions. Simpler for the state, but - overall - I don't
    think there's a benefit to either the taxpayer or the prisoners.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Dec 1, 2010
    #15
  16. RichA

    Mike Guest

    On 01/12/2010 13:05, Richard wrote:
    > "Mike"<> wrote in message
    > news:xdnJo.189683$2...
    >> On 30/11/2010 22:28, RichA wrote:
    >>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >>>
    >>> Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    >>> stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >>>
    >>> Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >>> Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    >>> station.
    >>>
    >>> 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >>>
    >>> 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >>>
    >>> 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    >>> which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    >>> snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    >>> terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    >>> without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >>>
    >>> In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    >>> nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    >>> public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.

    >>
    >> I'd hardly describe him as a victim. Perhaps the terrorists on 11/9 or
    >> 7/7 would have had a similar smart-alec response prepared in case someone
    >> asked them what they where doing.
    >>
    >> I was once stopped and asked to produce my driving licence and what I had
    >> been doing after driving along a 24hr bus lane at 2:30am. Maybe I should
    >> have cited my human rights and gone blubbing to the press.
    >>
    >> The officer was using my mis-demeanour as an excuse to see if I was under
    >> the influence. I wasn't and drove of a few minutes later, only now do I
    >> realise that I was a victim and my rights had been grievously violated.
    >>
    >> Whilst I've seen plenty of video's showing overly officious police
    >> officers/security guards moving photographers on, the photographers also
    >> seem to be doing their level best to provoke a reaction. A modicum of
    >> sense from either part would have resolves the problem, instead we have a
    >> photographer crying like a softcock over his rights and screw everyone
    >> else's.
    >>
    >> If I am ever asked to stop taking pictures I will, I don't regard it as a
    >> god given right to photograph other people and their property if they
    >> don't want me to regardless of where they are or their job.

    >
    > Please stop taking pictures.
    > Now sell you camera.
    > TIA


    There's gratitude for you, I thought I did a top notch job on your
    mugshot, I even managed to photoshop out that huge zit:
    http://tinyurl.com/23odb6u


    Mike
    Mike, Dec 1, 2010
    #16
  17. RichA

    Richard Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    "Mike" <> wrote in message
    news:hBvJo.3478$2...
    > On 01/12/2010 13:05, Richard wrote:
    >> "Mike"<> wrote in message
    >> news:xdnJo.189683$2...
    >>> On 30/11/2010 22:28, RichA wrote:
    >>>> http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...tographer_over_snow_pictures_news_304099.html
    >>>>
    >>>> Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    >>>> stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >>>>
    >>>> Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >>>> Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    >>>> station.
    >>>>
    >>>> 'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >>>>
    >>>> 'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >>>>
    >>>> 'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    >>>> which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    >>>> snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    >>>> terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    >>>> without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >>>>
    >>>> In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    >>>> nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    >>>> public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.
    >>>
    >>> I'd hardly describe him as a victim. Perhaps the terrorists on 11/9 or
    >>> 7/7 would have had a similar smart-alec response prepared in case
    >>> someone
    >>> asked them what they where doing.
    >>>
    >>> I was once stopped and asked to produce my driving licence and what I
    >>> had
    >>> been doing after driving along a 24hr bus lane at 2:30am. Maybe I
    >>> should
    >>> have cited my human rights and gone blubbing to the press.
    >>>
    >>> The officer was using my mis-demeanour as an excuse to see if I was
    >>> under
    >>> the influence. I wasn't and drove of a few minutes later, only now do I
    >>> realise that I was a victim and my rights had been grievously violated.
    >>>
    >>> Whilst I've seen plenty of video's showing overly officious police
    >>> officers/security guards moving photographers on, the photographers also
    >>> seem to be doing their level best to provoke a reaction. A modicum of
    >>> sense from either part would have resolves the problem, instead we have
    >>> a
    >>> photographer crying like a softcock over his rights and screw everyone
    >>> else's.
    >>>
    >>> If I am ever asked to stop taking pictures I will, I don't regard it as
    >>> a
    >>> god given right to photograph other people and their property if they
    >>> don't want me to regardless of where they are or their job.

    >>
    >> Please stop taking pictures.
    >> Now sell you camera.
    >> TIA

    >
    > There's gratitude for you, I thought I did a top notch job on your
    > mugshot, I even managed to photoshop out that huge zit:
    > http://tinyurl.com/23odb6u
    >
    >
    > Mike


    Thanks again.
    Richard, Dec 1, 2010
    #17
  18. RichA

    peter Guest

    On 12/1/2010 9:02 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
    > On 01/12/2010 13:30, peter wrote:
    >> On 12/1/2010 8:23 AM, RichA wrote:
    >>> On Dec 1, 3:11 am, Martin Brown<|||>

    >>
    >>>>>> Unqualified ass------. A disgrace to British policing and Britain in
    >>>>>> general. What next, dep-U-tizin' citzens???!!
    >>>>
    >>>> PCSO's are not the brightest, the public decided they wanted to see a
    >>>> lot more bobbies on the beat and these guys are much cheaper.
    >>>>
    >>>> And for the benefit of fuckwit troll RichA the UK has had deputized
    >>>> trained citizens in the police force for a very long time. They have
    >>>> full police powers and are properly trained. Called Special Constables
    >>>> and in Canada the Royal Canadian Mounted Police uses them too as do
    >>>> several other former Commonwealth nations.
    >>>
    >>> Retard. It gets worse. Imagine the kind of left-wing scum that
    >>> normally gets elected locally in Britain (communists running town
    >>> councils, that kind of thing) having a hand at running the police!
    >>> You people are pathetic.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11882026

    >
    > I think this is actually one of the dumbest ideas the new Con-Dem
    > government has come up with so far. Aping the stupid US system which
    > makes pandering to irrational public fears and locking up prisoners for
    > as long as possible into a profitable industry is utterly stupid.
    >
    > The "Land of the Free" has an appallingly high incarceration rate.
    >>
    >> Answer my questions.
    >>
    >> Is it true you are a member of the Communist Party?

    >
    > No RichA is a trolling NeoNazi wannabe. Pure killfile material.
    >


    Not so sure. His anti profit rants sound more like extreme left wing
    communism. In reality there is little difference in the social policies
    of communists and nazis.



    --
    Peter
    peter, Dec 1, 2010
    #18
  19. RichA

    Ollie Clark Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened bycutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2010-11-30 15:26:10 -0800, tony cooper <> said:
    >>
    >> "Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned". Unless you can provide
    >> more information, all we can glean from the article is that a police
    >> officer asked Sibley some questions. There's no indication that the
    >> officer stopped Sibley from taking any more photographs or keeping the
    >> images he had.
    >>
    >> Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from asking a
    >> question?

    >
    > I agree. The whole story isn't here. Amateur Photographer has
    > established its self as the anti-police, pro-photographer web advocate.
    > As such it has to keep the story alive one way or another.
    >
    > I have a feeling Sibley went out of his way to initiate some sort of
    > interaction between this Community Support Officer and himself. As it
    > is written it is a non-event. This officer might as well have walked up
    > to somebody painting a fence to ask what they were doing. When told to
    > say, "Oh!" and walk on.


    If you look at the photo in the article, Sibley was taking pictures of
    the officers in front of the station. I have to say, if I was in their
    place, I might well have asked him what he was doing!

    Cheers,

    Ollie
    Ollie Clark, Dec 1, 2010
    #19
  20. RichA

    GMAN Guest

    Re: If Brit police are terrified their jobs are threatened by cutbacks, this isn't the way to illustrate their value

    In article <>, tony cooper <> wrote:
    >On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0800 (PST), RichA <>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Police_stop_photographer_over_snow_p

    >ictures_news_304099.html
    >>
    >>Amateur photographer magazine technical writer Richard Sibley has been
    >>stopped by police while taking photos of snow in Bromley, Kent today.
    >>
    >>Richard, who lives nearby, said he was questioned by a Police
    >>Community Support Officer as he took pictures of a snow-covered train
    >>station.
    >>
    >>'He asked what I was doing,' said Richard (pictured).
    >>
    >>'I replied “I'm taking photos in the snow”.'
    >>
    >>'He said “I'm asking as this is a time of heightened security”. To
    >>which I pointed out that I didn't think Bromley South Station in the
    >>snow would be a likely terrorist target... especially as a potential
    >>terrorist could just look up the same images on Google Street View
    >>without getting their feet and hands cold'.
    >>
    >>In recent years Amateur photographer has been at the forefront of a
    >>nationwide campaign to defend photographers' right to take pictures in
    >>public, as many fell victim to anti-terror laws.

    >
    >"Stopped", in this case, means "Questioned". Unless you can provide
    >more information, all we can glean from the article is that a police
    >officer asked Sibley some questions. There's no indication that the
    >officer stopped Sibley from taking any more photographs or keeping the
    >images he had.
    >
    >Are you in favor of laws that prohibit a police officer from asking a
    >question?
    >
    >

    They have NO business asking you questions or stopping you if you are not
    violating ANY laws.
    GMAN, Dec 1, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RichA
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    474
    Paul Heslop
    Dec 24, 2009
  2. RichA
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    409
    Kennedy McEwen
    Jan 24, 2010
  3. RichA
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    415
    Paul Heslop
    Jul 21, 2010
  4. RichA

    Brit police to get worse

    RichA, Jul 26, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    39
    Views:
    878
    tony cooper
    Jul 29, 2010
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    214
    Joe Makowiec
    Feb 6, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page