plusiotis653459
Well-known member
...I think that the cops REALLY should have tasered him.
Cheers
Cheers
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
--True the photog may have helped calm the situation by being more cooperative, but I have to say that I am astonished at the number of police resources dispatched to check out a guy taking a photo, and I don't blame the photog for blowing off the nosy rent-a-cop in the first place. If a rent-a-cop (or anyone else) walked up to me in a public place and started giving me the 3rd degree I'd tell them where to go too.
There is a mindset involved here - a rush to judge all photographers as suspicious. It is an ugly thing and very dangerous for photography, and photographers.
The poor guy is lucky it was a church he took photos of and not a kid.
I agree with you Dennis... I don't think there is anything wrong with ignoring some security guard from a neighbouring building when you are not going there. But obviously it would annoy the guard in question.The fact that the police showed up in mass lends itself to the guard going too far in his report of the situation...
Hey... I totally agree that you should not be harrassed for taking photos... what I AM saying is that the police received a complaint about a possible issue from a guard (quite possibly the trouble maker in this case) who happened to work at a building which demands due consideration because of its potential as a target (I mean the Bank of America office BTW and not whatever the photographer is shooting).You DO NOT have to provide anyoe with your name for taking a photograph, and people saying the guy should have been tasered are pathetic.
I can't imagine why you of all persons would have trouble dealing with police.All the people on here defending the police should be ashamed of themselves. I have dealt with this sort of behaviour myself and can say without bias that the majority of the UK police are nothing but bully boys and thugs.
London police have had their work cut out for them what with the IRA actions of the past and the jihadis trying to kill as many Londoners as possible now. Anyone purposely making their work more difficult than it needs to be should be ashamed of themselves.You DO NOT have to provide anyoe with your name for taking a photograph, and people saying the guy should have been tasered are pathetic. We are seeing our rights being gradually eroded and are sleepwalking into it, wake up people.
--
--I can't imagine why you of all persons would have trouble dealing with police.All the people on here defending the police should be ashamed of themselves. I have dealt with this sort of behaviour myself and can say without bias that the majority of the UK police are nothing but bully boys and thugs.
London police have had their work cut out for them what with the IRA actions of the past and the jihadis trying to kill as many Londoners as possible now. Anyone purposely making their work more difficult than it needs to be should be ashamed of themselves.You DO NOT have to provide anyoe with your name for taking a photograph, and people saying the guy should have been tasered are pathetic. We are seeing our rights being gradually eroded and are sleepwalking into it, wake up people.
--
Fiat Lux
Amazing.get a life ....... and an Olympus E-3 ..... (and then give it to me).
Bit of an overstatement, don't you think? Even if it's one out of every hundred thousand people with a camera who get stopped it's too many but there's no point in being paranoid and blowing things totally out of proportion.There is a mindset involved here - a rush to judge all photographers as suspicious. It is an ugly thing and very dangerous for photography, and photographers.
The poor guy is lucky it was a church he took photos of and not a kid.
How can you expect the police to know a false call from a real one? I could just imagine the field day the press and public would have if the police and other emergency responders were to pick and choose who they respond to!Clearly you seem to be more comfortable with the erosion of your rights than I am. If you feel photographers are such a threat why do you associate with them?
I know that law enforcement has a tough job to do, but mindlessly searching photographers isn't a good way to catch the bad guys and we all know it.
And excusing these kinds of lame brained incidents doesn't help either. The photog should have been more courteous with the real police (shame on him), and the police should have recognized a false call from an angry rent-a-cop who overstepped his authority, The police should have refused to be dragged in like the rent-a-cops private goon squad to hassle the photog. (shame on all of them, especially the rent-a-cop).
You can support law enforcement and still reject the concept that taking photos is somehow a terrorist act, and speak up about these stupid incidents and demand justice.
Or you can be a sheep.
Happy shooting.
Pure quality I love it. I get it but seems others don't, I grew up in Northern Ireland during the 70s and 80s. I have shed loads of first hand experience of terrorism. i went to university while my friends went to prison for membership, posession etc. The only way to beat terrorism is to win the intelligence war. When Danny Morrison was asked why the IRA gave up the armed struggle his answer was simple, 'We lost the intelligence war.' There is no intelligence being shown here by the police.Let me define a false call for you:
Rent-a-cop calls saying 'Oh my god someone is taking photographs! Send the Police!'
Get it?
That's me having my collar felt quite regularly then...If you are planning to take photos of buildings around the City of London you may want to think again. Anti-terrorism police have instructed security guards to treat as suspicious anyone seen taking photos who hasn't notified the building's security personnel beforehand.
--Millions have visited London and taken who knows how many photographs blissfully unawares that in the minds of a few there is a war being fought against them.
Its plain to me now-one hear ever lost a loved one to a terrorist bomb!Hey... I totally agree that you should not be harrassed for taking photos... what I AM saying is that the police received a complaint about a possible issue from a guard (quite possibly the trouble maker in this case) who happened to work at a building which demands due consideration because of its potential as a target (I mean the Bank of America office BTW and not whatever the photographer is shooting).You DO NOT have to provide anyoe with your name for taking a photograph, and people saying the guy should have been tasered are pathetic.
This is not a RANDOM stop and question situation. I believe the police should do something more meaningful than to stop passing photographers but they DO have to pay attention to reports from guards (even possibly annoying ones).
Stand by your rights by all means, I certainly will but if the officer is polite, I believe we should answer questions within reason. what's wrong with that? let's not make a mountain out of a mole hill...
Regards,
Rachis
---------------
I am an Amateur / Enthusiast / Hobbyist / etc… not a Pro = I can be wrong
Cautions:
I may when the mood suits me become a pixel peeper!