Being prevented from taking photos outside a train station in London 3rd Mar 2011

[platformone]

Also their is no hyphen (-) in the rail enthusiasts, for some reason I can't rid of the hyphen.

[camelstory]

I approve of their vigilance. Of course if you are doing no wrong, why would you have a problem accounting for what you were doing? Granted they did not articulate that well.

[camelstory]

If all is as it appears, this is not BTP's finest moment, and they are clearly not articulating themselves well. BUT how are they not to know you are not conducting hostile reconnaissance for a Mumbai style atrocity. Most tourists don't point cameras at "old speakers". Sorry to say this, but that is a little odd. The next person to do what you did might be bent on Jihad or armed robbery and noting CCTV locations. You are at a location where thousands pass daily. I for one approve of their vig

[chrisloizou]

Ridiculous and the excuse a 'security risk? Just stupid. What about tourists taking pictures, maybe we should ban them too and stop them coming into the country to spend their money that helps our economy? I am a film maker and often take pictures at St Pancras St and have every right seeing as it was the very taxes I paid to the government that helped renovated it. The world has gone mad living in fear of every tiny action of every man. people like you porter2002, just afraid of being free.

[Femmenition]

Did you go to the station manager and get their permission? Did you sign in at the station reception? If the answer to these is "yes", then you had a right to be there. However, if your answer is "no" then they had every right to ask you to leave. A railway station is not public space. It's owned by Network Rail.

[RussellHiGGS]

@Femmenition .... I simply refuse to collude in the idea that we need "permission" to take photographs in the street (as I was here) OR inside PUBLIC transport spaces. I do not care if it is technically "private property". ALL land is owned by someone, even common land. Train stations are the same as the street ... they are public.

[Femmenition]

@RussellHiGGS

Railway stations are not public land. Network Rail land is all private land. If this was filmed in the street, the police are the ones in the wrong, but if it was filmed in a station, it's you who is in the wrong. Understand this. It's not complicated

As for the term "Public Transport", it's named as such because it's transport to get the public around, not because the public own it - which they do not. Network Rail own the railways. Not the public

[mysteryelv]

@RussellHiGGS Agreed...you don't need 'permission'. You have a right to photograph in a public place and you are correct to insist on this. We, the public obviously need to assert our rights or they will be eroded. It seems as if just because you are requested to do something or they prefer you to inform them of your actions, that this is taken as an order to do so or as some new 'law' when clearly that is not the case.

[EastAngliaUK]

You told them should of got the manager unless it says not to take pictures.

[yohansen316]

being told what to do in england by someone who can hardly speak it... great.

[RussellHiGGS]

@yohansen316 ... I thought the CSO's english was absolutely fine. Meanwhile I've written a Note over on FB giving a wider perspective on my day that day ... russellhiggsgreenfingers[dot]b­logspot[dot]com/2011_03_01_arc­hive[dot]html#4497472854172314­987 ...

[aspirezakura]

Haha I LOVE the ending! Keep fighting the good fight brother!

[porter2002]

If it is indeed private property then they don't need to have a reason. If they don't want you to take photos then don't. Take your soppy camera and jog on somewhere where you are welcome. I usually have great sympathy for these sorts of videos but in this case I fully support the owners right to prohibit your filming.

[RussellHiGGS]

@porter2002 ... It's a train station. It's the street. The streets should be nobody's private property. You might be ok with passively doing whatever you are told to do. I choose otherwise. And immediately afterwards I jogged on to 2 more stations where nobody hassled me about taking photos. Just as nobody should have stuck their nose in at this station.

[RussellHiGGS]

‎... Met Police advice on photography ... met.police.uk/about/photograph­y[dot]htm ...

[tomwash1]

They're only PCSO's, they have no power, you should have just blanked them completely. Don't even talk to them, you don't have too.

[RussellHiGGS]

@tomwash1 ... initially I did, I just carried on taking pictures and ignored them.

[TheHolySpirit]

It's called Freedom of Panorama I believe. They don't own the photons your camera captures.

[TheHolySpirit]

@TheHolySpirit Section 62 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is much broader than the corresponding provisions in many other countries, and allows photographers to take pictures of

buildings, and

sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship (if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public).

[RussellHiGGS]

it is symptomatic of the gradual silent theft of our public spaces. More and more we find ourselves having to traverse private spaces which have the superficial appearance of being public. Social environments where citizens are in fact placed in a position of subordination, with restricted rights. Where public assembly, protest, or loitering is prohibited. Or as Space Hijackers put it, unless you're shopping you're not welcome.

[RussellHiGGS]

... quote... "On the surface, London is a city full of open spaces bustling with shoppers and tourists. If you scratch beneath it, you soon discover that this openness is a scam. If you’re a local council, selling off land to private developers is an easy way to raise capital. But the undermining of social liberties that comes with these sales is unprecedented." spacehijackers[dot]co[dot]uk/

[Wokstation]

Alas, they do have the right to eject you from private property, even if it is common public access.

You could have taken a few steps onto public property and then filmed them overtly, where there's nothing they could do about it.

Can understand your annoyance (photographer too), but technically, if not morally, they were right :(

[RussellHiGGS]

@Wokstation ... it was purely petty of them stopping me from taking pictures. There is NO excuse for their actions.

[RussellHiGGS]

... We're expected to tolerate CCTV cameras EVERYWHERE and yet we're supposedly meant to believe that we can't take pictures ourselves.

[scicoe]

That was so stupid... What do they tell the tourists that take pictures.

[RussellHiGGS]

@scicoe .... see "I'm a photographer not a terrorist" ... photographernotaterrorist [dot] org ...