Living & working in France. Never been bothered by security or Police so far. In London the SAME scene happened to me 2 years ago in front of this SAME building !
Made some shots in NYC. From my experience, i asked 1st to the security guys. As long as i don't get INSIDE the building, i can take picture from the street which is a PUBLIC space.
See as a photography this bothers me on different levels. People say he is wasting police time or digging himself a hole. The cops are the ones wasting time and if defending your rights is digging a hole, then get me a shovel. I can't count the number of times cops have threaten me with being arrested for not throwing away my rights. I don't do architectural photography anymore because it's become such a hassle in the USA. Land of the free is bullshit as they think they can arrest you for obstr
When this was taken in 2009... they just needed Reasonable grounds to suspect that the photography may be used in any sense of terrorism. Being as evasive as this guy was, that's enough for suspicion. I'm not for the Act, I think it was a very bad idea and am glad it was made illegal. But sticking to your rights and being evasive can, and will just dig you a deeper hole with police.
Street photography is not an offence but people like you and your aggravating attempts to undermine the generally acceptable behaviour of the police could cause it to be so. You dont have to surrender your details but then you should have no objection whatsoever for not showing what you have filmed if you have nothing to hide. What great encouragement you give to those real terrorists out there!! I totally agree with mreltel and his comments about you
Im a photographer but agree with the police/security in this case, you are just being awkward! Its their job to defend from terrorism, and if they have reasonable suspicions they should approach you. You were being suspicious by not telling them why your doing it, and not letting them see the footage. Yes you don't have to, but it's only in your favour! They clearly said suspicious behaviour is filming reception/cameras/fire exits, not "the bottom of the building" as you tried to make it sound!!
I think most people misinterpret street photography. Seriously, 99% of the photos I see from amateur street "photographers" just take pictures of random people for no apparent reason. Pointless.
You get a lot of criticism from fellow citizens, which shows that they don't get it! One is not being a dick or a cunt while doing what is in their rights to do, because if it is in their rights to do, then society and the law has already approved to the behavior. It does us all a favor when one holds firm to his rights. Some of you want to make "rights" a dirty word.
paperwork, democratism, communism, common law, country, countries, affidavits, uniform commercial code, oaths, jurisdiction, constitution, bill of rights, blacks law dict, legality, inalienable/unalienable, freeman, human, civil, criminal, sovereign, acts, statutes, national, international treaties, legislation, etc, its all hearsay, fictitious & ambiguous, all we need is a meeting of the minds. type in imbatman57 in youtube & talkshoe.com.
I can see why some people say you're being awkward or similar, but you were fair and gave security and the officers ample opportunity to ask the relevant questions before they brought up Section 44. You are right, you can film in a public place and in order to view the footage they have to have grounds for believing that you were acting in a manner that raised terrorism suspicions.The uniformed officers forgot all of that and just went in all guns blazing before looking stupid asking what to do.
why would you be so awkward? people like you think you are being so smart, state your business and you could have filmed what you like, this whole video is just you being a twat. You are not big or clever. You seem like you are lucky enough to have enjoyed the security and safety of the UK but you want to try and undermine that, you sir are a CUNT. I would not think twice about knocking your teeth out you sad pathetic man who is just trying to be controversial.
Good video. But i ran into this before and footage can be viewed but not erased. The problem here seems that these guys were unaware of this until it was called in...Yet this was the special branch. On the other hand, by not answering the questions straight forward would increase the awareness level of any officer or security team. (im a freelance photographer working on a short(or whatever). No names needed, enjoy your day.
I experienced a similar issue last year when I was on the side photographing a local hospital. I was damn near the street. and security try to have me remove.
On this one I would have to side with the property owners. If the photographer would state his business and at least ask for permission I bet he wouldn't have had to go through the 3rd degree. People bring this on themselves. I understand why they didn't want the photographer photographing the foundation of the building for obvious reasons on terrorism.
I'm sorry, I am all for civil liberties and protecting personal freedom but this "photographer" was just being a twat. This is just like the videos of skateboarders deliberately skating in places they know are going to attract confrontation simply so they can film it and show how "oppressed" they are. The security in this film was not disrespecting the photographer, they were simply asking for a little respect as well. Being CIVIL is a give and take from BOTH sides. Security was civil, you weren
you cvould have cut this video down to 44 secs if you had just told them that you were working, flashed them some id, showed a couple of pictures and asked what the security guards offered to you in the first place by shooting up etc..sounds like you were just seeking attention and pushing the boundries from the cops.... if it was me i would have given id, showed a couple of pics and gave them a business card..lol
You are correct, there is no "law" saying you cant film that stuff. But there are rules and regulations reguarding what can and cannot be filmed on this building
UGH that is what you get for harassing these security and police officers. None of this would have happened if you had just said. OK Sorry I will go on my way and not film this building. Quit being sketchy.
There is no law to stop a photographer taking a photograph or filming in a public place, even if those photographs or the film are of a private building. If you don't defend your civil liberties you lose them.
@willowmeister I totally agree with you. It is really sad that this situation had to happen at all. We are soooo lucky to live in 1st world countries where we have liberties like the freedom to take pictures and video where ever we please. there are so many other countries in this world where the authorities would have arrested you, taken your camera, and inspected it. I agree we need to protect our civil liberties. But we also live in a world where terrorism is a big problem.
@willowmeister Be easy going and respectful. And if you have nothing to hide you will not have any further problems with you. You broke one of their rules, not to take close up videos of sensitive areas of a "targeted" building. You cant change their rules for protecting this building. And security was just doing what they are paid to do. I am sorry you were harassed and your personal space was violated.
@willowmeister But that is the world we live in today. It is part of the polices job to investigate people personal lives and sometimes it is done without proper reason.That is why we need to respect people that are trying to protect the world from terrorists. Comply with what they are asking you to do.
They have no right to harras you when filming/photographing from the street. The power to stop and search someone under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 no longer exists. Officers do not have the power to delete digital images or destroy film at any point during a search. Deletion or destruction may only take place following seizure if there is a lawful power (such as a court order) that permits such deletion or destruction.
I AGREE WITH THE POLICE THEY WERE JUST DOING THERE JOB AND THEY CAN ASK TWO SEE THE FOOTEGE UNDER SEC44 LOOK WHAT HAPPEND TWO THE MERRIOIT HOTEL IN MUMBAI SO THEY HAVE GOT REASON.THIS IS JUST CHILDISH. ACT NORMAL AND THEY WONT BOTHER YOU
yeah, what if you just said to the security guy: ah don't worry mate, I'm just a street photographer, It's my hobby, just doing this for fun, wanna see what I've got so far?. they prolly would have said: awh okay no problem then. but on the other hand, even if you are acting weird, it is not prohibited to take pictures. it is not prohibited to call the cops either. just tell them the same thing. I shoot analog, so they can't see my photos. I just tell them they can buy my photos once developed
This is an important point being made. It is a valid investigation into the grey areas in the law versus our rights. How do we find out what levels Police will go to in order to scare us with the law that is in actual fact supposed to protect us?
The only thing being wasted here is tax payers money through the Police taking excessive action. If you listen to everything that the journalist is saying, you have to wonder why the pint is being pursued by the officers. Eye opening Jounalism.
"They're concerned about..." and "They're concerned about..." and "They're concerned about..." and "They're concerned about..." and... Should have told this copper you're concerned about some random guy across the street for some random reason that isn't against the law. If it's private property and they ask you to leave, leave, but once you're out on the street, they can't say jack.
The person filming is being a arsehole, there are laws in place to protect buildings and the public and he is being a cock. It is not illegal to film in a public place but common sense prevails. i'm sure that if someone from another ethnic background had done the same there would be an uproar.
@andrew5860 your alleged "common sense" (i.e. acting out of fear from being stopped by the police) and the resulting "chilling effect" is what destroys freedom of speech, journalism, even art (street photography).
Why did you submit at the end? If they arrest you for a non-existing crime then you can sue them. You were so strong up until the end and then you folded. Don't be afraid of jail. Everyday you spend in jail for a crime you did not commit is more money they have to pay you in your lawsuit.
I'll tell you all one thing, if I was that guard and the dude wasn't abiding by the one simple small rule we had, I would have his camera, and his teeth. He is one fucking dick head, and this is a pure example of ignorant people. I can't believe they even talked to this dude this long, I would have fucked him up a long time ago.
In short: Police State! The sad thing is that the same people who is supposed to be on your side are the ones being instrumental in constructing the Police State. Don't these fat cops have families who could also be subjected to the same abuses?
Anyone wishing to conduct surveillance could surely do it covertly. The gherkin must be a prime target. I thing I get the reason for the nervousness here.
come one though the photographer is sorta on the wrong, he could have just said Where He work since he Already said he is a journalist, or writer...come on now, just made it harder on himself.. now i agree with the wierd stop n
"I'm going to take a note of your details under section 44 of the terrorism act"
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act - "An authorisation under this subsection authorises any constable in uniform to stop a vehicle in an area or at a place specified in the authorisation and to search..."
@rmdhonda no, he knew from the start what he would have to do he was wasting there time and being rude putting a camera in there face. but he probs was a terrorist working for you, u seem mad enough to be 1
I find this highly amusing; I never knew this would cause so much interrogation. It won't stop me shooting where I want though! Photography is such a great art. I'd be bored without it!
This happens to me all the time, just the other day it happened. Some jumped up security guy trying to tell me I can't take photos when I'm clearly ON A PUBLIC HIGHWAY. Normally I just tell them they're talking rubbish and don't know the law suggesting they go and view it. This usually works. In this case, if they really thought he was a terrorist wouldn't they have just shot him? That's what they normally do, Jean Charles de Menezes comes to mind.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
What a fuck wit. This guy is just making an arse of himself. The security guys and the police are just doing their job. I would have just grabbed him camera and shoved it up his arse.
Lovely bit of brutal journalism. I always carry a copy of section 44 in my wallet in case I'm ever stopped. Never have been yet, although after watching this I'm almost looking forward to the day I get stopped.
tell me what the fuck is the point of building a sturcutre with as much beauty as the one is ee in the background IF YOU CANT FUCING TAKE A PICTURE OF IT????
He's filming a building and the problem with that is ? It's BS to say police have a right to see footage The STUPIDITY is obvious He's filmed the building he's told thecops know he's filmed the building If they look at it what are they going to see? HEY he's filmed the building And the point of that is? to protect us? NO it' to have us beleive we're safe No reality to this at all Research says that cameras are rarely used to plan terrorist attacks Beware of giving your power to an illusion
There are cameras everywhere, on the top of poles and the sides of buildings, and the public have no access to the footage they take. But if a member of the public pulls out a camera...
Such anti-camera laws and policies are pointless anyway. High definition cameras already exist that are so small as to be undetectable unless searched. And they are only getting smaller and cheaper.
The photographer in this video was almost certainly captured on security camera, so why hassle him?
thanx for the video. i learned a great deal. i bought a slr camera recently and i was stopped. i didnt know what to do. i stopped filming and moved on.
im sure a terrorist wouldnt reveal himself so obvious that he is filming. there many ways to take pictures without looking like your are. those guys were only trying to abuse the law and scare someone.
I'm a street photographer and I hate the way we are questioned and told to move on all the time but in this case I'm on the side of the police. This guy was really acting dodgy. Clearly just trying to waste police time. If I get questioned like that I wouldn't show them my work but I would explain myself (as a street photographer) and then move on. people questioning the current laws like this guy will eventually force them to lock down new more restricting privacy laws. SO WISE UP
@DemonicGenocide I know what you mean, but the guy was proving a point in this video. The police had no right to ask the questions, so he was perfectly within his right to refuse to answer.
@xAtticsToEden The police had every right to ask him what he was doing because he WAS acting suspiciously... if he had simply explained roughly what he was doing, the police wouldn't have been involved. People 'proving a point' like this will eventually make it worse and we will legally have to declare what we are doing in this regard. This proves no point because they weren't against him because of what he was doing but the way in which he was conducting himself... (being a stubborn ass)
u must read this. once u have started there is no turning back. a little 10 year old girl was raped and murderded in 1945. her body was not found until 1947. then a boy last week read this and did not copy and paste this message. the dead girl appeared in his room haunting him and killed him. if you do not copy and paste this onto 10 vidoes in 30 minutes the dead girl will apear in your room tonight and haunt you and kill you. well you better start to copy and paste to be saved not min
This reporter is an epic failure. Glory hunting by deliberately being an awkward half-wit. Its ironic how everyone bitchs about being stopped (Yes there have been a few in the wrong) but if a terrorist did recce the building and blow it (and the pathetic reporter) the police would be questioned as to why they didnt stop it.
The guy was obviously standing for a while filming the building before this clip - how difficult would it have been to quickly show them the vid? A lot faster than this.
its not an offence if youre taking a pic of someone and behind that someone theres a public building or private than it would be ok. if its solely the building its not ok. the same happens if someone shows up in the frame when youre taking a pic of someone. get it? hope so.
would a terrorist not use a super-zoom camera and stay out off sight ?
or conceal a cellphone camera behind clothes with a small hole for the lens ?
if i had a recon job i would send a hot girl in a tight dress and with everybody starring at her i had all the time in the world to take videos and pictures
@unamaxify Or just walk by and commit things to memory and then sketch or it out later, or write down details. If they don't want people looking at their receptionist maybe they should paint the windows black.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the point is that we have policemen enforcing laws that neither they, nor the public really understand. This is a result of the brutalisation of the police, whose original purpose was to uphold the law to protect the public rather than enforce the will of parliament and the ignorance (equal parts inflicted and self-inflicted) of the general public. God bless you Thatcher/Major/Blair and all your greedy parasitic cohorts. Grease y'selves up folks--more coming!
Here in the US, the Police are allowed to con or bully you into stuff. They are not obliged to provide you your civil rights unless you invoke them. And then it pisses them off, and they make it even harder for you. Go to flex your rights and see some of what I mean.
Way to go! You effectively wasted everyone's time involved, including your own. All this talk about rights and you wasted tax payers money to try to prove some point which I am unclear as to what that is. Was your point that the law if suspicious of someone tries to investigate?
The real reason they dont want anyone filming is they dont want the world to see how fkin filthy pomland is lmao , who would even want to travel to there anyway.
Stupid cunts , dont ther realize that if a terroist wanted to film they would have micro cameras and not dirty big ass cameras lik ethat , maybe they shopuld worry about the rag heads with spy cams in there hats and jackets , silly fkers.
ya very good on standing your ground, people need to be more like you and stand up for their rights and not give in to the "police" who are more like dictators in a free country what sense does that make?
The police and security officers did an excellent job. The photographer was a dick. I'm a photographer. I have a degree in journalism. The photographer was just harassing the guys doing their job. Life isn't black and white. People have to use judgement. This photographer just has too much ego.
You can see their point though.... why push it, they have a job to do and i am glad they are doing it. I am a street photographer also but i respect others.
@quickshooter100 wrote, "You can see their point though.... why push it, they have a job to do and i am glad they are doing it. I am a street photographer also but i respect others."
UTTER RUBBISH!
This entire incident is what is properly called "security theater" ("security theatre" in the U.K.).
Neither the police in the U.S.A. nor the U.K. have EVER foiled a terrorist plot by grabbing people with cameras off the street and searching their cameras.
Please list all examples, or a single example, of a terrorist plot being foiled by this variety of keystone kops charlatanism.
You're obviously either being paid taxpayer money to engage in this security theatre or a simplistic rube.
Do you suppose as police flip through pictures they're going to run across a frame with a picture of a notebook with the words "Terrorist Attack Plan" scrawled across the cover?
It a big show, a circus, performed so police can claim "we're doing something," even when that something is 100% ineffectual.
Those aren't uniforms, they're costumes for the performance.
Here in the U.S. the police act almost identically and react just as poorly when they run across individuals who know their rights and are willing to stand up to officers' coercive tactics.
These videos are great teaching tools for citizens on both sides of the Atlantic.
haha... ya, it's not the US ... but the UK is way more paranoid of this stuff than we are here. I usually tell security to fuck off (in a nice way) when they approach me.
Brilliant!...It just goes to show that these bobbies don't really know what they're doing...besides, if they really thought that our man was a real terrorist, they would have run a mile in the opposite direction! ...To call them hapless would be a complete misnomer. They should be charged with wasting their own time!..meanwhile the terrorist walked straight into the building unchecked!
we wont just wait a second scotty policeman, and your behaviour is the only behaviour that is suspicious around here, not declaring who you are or your badge number. are you impersonating a policeman.
are you a naughty policeman, moonlighting as head of security, for extra cash, which is not allowed, by statute which of course you have to obey.
In the US, if terrorism is suspected during photographic activity, they may seize the camera, but MUST obtain a search warrant to view the camera's content. I believe that an individual educated in their rights, and police authority, is the best guard against police abuse.
Having been in law enforcement, I know that police often abuse their authority. We have to remember that although we have laws that counter terrorism, we, the people, have rights too. The police, at least in the US, can't search at camera unless they have specific reason to believe that terrorism is afoot. I applaud this guy for respectfully standing up for his rights. The police can't do whatever they want under the color of law!!!!!
Its definitely bad for them to stop you like this but wouldnt it have been easier just to appologise and leave the building rather than being a cocky prick?
There are hundreds of thousands of street CCTV cameras all over the UK. Are they breaking the law? Why can't we video anywhere we like. It's a case of one law for them and another for everyone else.
When photographers say they are going to 'shoot' something, they mean taking pictures, not becoming a terrorist... This is, for lack of a better word, STUPID. How is it a national threat?
That's the thing about S.44 of the terrorism act. The police don't need to have 'reasonable suspicion'. Whereas anything non-terrorist related requires 'reasonable suspicion' to stop and search.
The police and security guards were behaving fully within the law and the camera man was simply ignorant of the law which is no defense.
I understand that he's trying to prove that its not against the law, but he was definitely trying to provoke the policeman and it makes sense why they don't want any pictures of security cameras and things like that.
@theeuphioquestion - Why was he provoking the orificer ,.....just because he was questioning their mal practise and inquiring as to what his rights were???
It seems that folk like yourself love nothing better than to falsely imply that an individual is been provoking because he asked questions and is concerned that his rights are being taken away and there is an abuse of power being made!! clearly!!
@Ramondequeens02 ...if he was stood in your garden, without your permission, taking pictures through your windows, you'd want him arrested. This is no different. He was stood on their property doing exactly that. The UK law is quite clear, and very fair. If it's private, you need the owners permission to enter and take pictures. He chose not to, purely to provoke a reaction and film the results - thats lame. We understand the rules and work by them. This idiot is not a street photographer.
@JClavinPhotography You need permission to ENTER and take pictures, but according to law youre allowed to photograph and video tape anything if youre on the street. The only thing you cant do is sell those pictures without the authorization/model releases of any distinguishable person or piece of art in the picture.
Also, wth? youre not allowed to film in the street, but they are allowed to assume youre a terrorist, without any proof, and violate your privacy by illegally searching you?
@davidgzmn12345 He wasnt on the street, ...thats the point. He had enterered ONTO private property, the plaza. ...no different than if he was stood in your garden taking pictures of your house. you know, theres a big difference in being on private property thats made available for public use, like a tesco car park, and actually being on public property like a pavement, park or roadway, where you and me have every right to photograph what we want. He was NOT in a public place. end of.........
@JClavinPhotography Only at the beginning, he is standing inside the structure (and even there, he is not inside, hes just under the outer ceiling, but well enough) the he is asked to leave, which he does, then continues filming from outside, on the sidewalk.
He WAS outside, he WAS legally able to photograph, but we all know something as stupid as the law wont stop a stuck up cop from doing whatever he wants.
Maybe im missing the point but, firstly, he was on private property. If it was my property and he was shooting through my windows, I'd be pissed with him too. Secondly, if i'm not mistaken thats the Gherkin in the city, a prime terrorist target, they have every right to be wary. Thirdly, his whole attitude is offensive, trying to provoke a reaction for his buddy with the video cam. Its practically staged for gods sake. He's not doing us any favours with this.... just a good story for his paper.
Boy, those watchdogs are stupid! They immediately bark as soon as they see big video camera or DSLR, that happens everywhere. They not even realizing that filming in such open way is what terrorists would NEVER do. But they bark loud so that their bosses see that they are "working". Because when real terrorist threat or act happens they are the first out with tails between their legs.
@MrAwangK No,not all Muslims are terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslims. Most Muslims give moral support to terrorists as they beleive terrorists fight for Islamic cause.
Islam is to blame for most of this world's evil which makes big news everyday.
Why blame the Police?. Why they do this in the first place?
It's happening not just in Europe but in many parts of Asia and North America. Islamic terrorism has turned around everything. Police have to be vigilant to avert any attacks. Police are just humans without any magical power to spot the real culprits.
Blame Islam not the police who try to protect us from any attacks. We are losing our libery but still there are people amidst us who harbor and protect Islamists in our socities.
Living & working in France. Never been bothered by security or Police so far. In London the SAME scene happened to me 2 years ago in front of this SAME building !
Made some shots in NYC. From my experience, i asked 1st to the security guys. As long as i don't get INSIDE the building, i can take picture from the street which is a PUBLIC space.
eyesonlife-photography . com
eyesonlife 1 week ago
See as a photography this bothers me on different levels. People say he is wasting police time or digging himself a hole. The cops are the ones wasting time and if defending your rights is digging a hole, then get me a shovel. I can't count the number of times cops have threaten me with being arrested for not throwing away my rights. I don't do architectural photography anymore because it's become such a hassle in the USA. Land of the free is bullshit as they think they can arrest you for obstr
TOCBass31 1 week ago
When this was taken in 2009... they just needed Reasonable grounds to suspect that the photography may be used in any sense of terrorism. Being as evasive as this guy was, that's enough for suspicion. I'm not for the Act, I think it was a very bad idea and am glad it was made illegal. But sticking to your rights and being evasive can, and will just dig you a deeper hole with police.
TeamNuclearWaste 2 weeks ago
at first i found this funny and interesting but when i realised he's just wasting police time it dawned on me that he is an unbearable journalist.
doynsc 2 weeks ago
Street photography is not an offence but people like you and your aggravating attempts to undermine the generally acceptable behaviour of the police could cause it to be so. You dont have to surrender your details but then you should have no objection whatsoever for not showing what you have filmed if you have nothing to hide. What great encouragement you give to those real terrorists out there!! I totally agree with mreltel and his comments about you
ChamptonWit 2 weeks ago
But isn't the bottom of the building on Google street view for the whole world to see???
fatpatuk 1 month ago 5
Im a photographer but agree with the police/security in this case, you are just being awkward! Its their job to defend from terrorism, and if they have reasonable suspicions they should approach you. You were being suspicious by not telling them why your doing it, and not letting them see the footage. Yes you don't have to, but it's only in your favour! They clearly said suspicious behaviour is filming reception/cameras/fire exits, not "the bottom of the building" as you tried to make it sound!!
TBPHOTO92 1 month ago
glad you stood your ground
greybash 1 month ago
I think most people misinterpret street photography. Seriously, 99% of the photos I see from amateur street "photographers" just take pictures of random people for no apparent reason. Pointless.
xxbluejay21 1 month ago
That was cycle cops not special branch.
What can you expect at the gherkin in the lobby, you are lucky they didn't put your arm up your back.
Fair play for holding your ground but in the current climate you should know- to keep away from the financial district or face their woe.
The Scottish cop couldn't have been fairer.
breakit46 1 month ago
You get a lot of criticism from fellow citizens, which shows that they don't get it! One is not being a dick or a cunt while doing what is in their rights to do, because if it is in their rights to do, then society and the law has already approved to the behavior. It does us all a favor when one holds firm to his rights. Some of you want to make "rights" a dirty word.
Bently100 1 month ago
paperwork, democratism, communism, common law, country, countries, affidavits, uniform commercial code, oaths, jurisdiction, constitution, bill of rights, blacks law dict, legality, inalienable/unalienable, freeman, human, civil, criminal, sovereign, acts, statutes, national, international treaties, legislation, etc, its all hearsay, fictitious & ambiguous, all we need is a meeting of the minds. type in imbatman57 in youtube & talkshoe.com.
Harv7340 1 month ago
I can see why some people say you're being awkward or similar, but you were fair and gave security and the officers ample opportunity to ask the relevant questions before they brought up Section 44. You are right, you can film in a public place and in order to view the footage they have to have grounds for believing that you were acting in a manner that raised terrorism suspicions.The uniformed officers forgot all of that and just went in all guns blazing before looking stupid asking what to do.
ryan270286 2 months ago
why would you be so awkward? people like you think you are being so smart, state your business and you could have filmed what you like, this whole video is just you being a twat. You are not big or clever. You seem like you are lucky enough to have enjoyed the security and safety of the UK but you want to try and undermine that, you sir are a CUNT. I would not think twice about knocking your teeth out you sad pathetic man who is just trying to be controversial.
MrEltel63 2 months ago
Good video. But i ran into this before and footage can be viewed but not erased. The problem here seems that these guys were unaware of this until it was called in...Yet this was the special branch. On the other hand, by not answering the questions straight forward would increase the awareness level of any officer or security team. (im a freelance photographer working on a short(or whatever). No names needed, enjoy your day.
KemmetMedia 2 months ago
I experienced a similar issue last year when I was on the side photographing a local hospital. I was damn near the street. and security try to have me remove.
coquiangel 2 months ago
On this one I would have to side with the property owners. If the photographer would state his business and at least ask for permission I bet he wouldn't have had to go through the 3rd degree. People bring this on themselves. I understand why they didn't want the photographer photographing the foundation of the building for obvious reasons on terrorism.
ronniegenesmith 2 months ago
You're a dickhead
tdude129 2 months ago
I'm sorry, I am all for civil liberties and protecting personal freedom but this "photographer" was just being a twat. This is just like the videos of skateboarders deliberately skating in places they know are going to attract confrontation simply so they can film it and show how "oppressed" they are. The security in this film was not disrespecting the photographer, they were simply asking for a little respect as well. Being CIVIL is a give and take from BOTH sides. Security was civil, you weren
heathenhymnal 2 months ago 3
you cvould have cut this video down to 44 secs if you had just told them that you were working, flashed them some id, showed a couple of pictures and asked what the security guards offered to you in the first place by shooting up etc..sounds like you were just seeking attention and pushing the boundries from the cops.... if it was me i would have given id, showed a couple of pics and gave them a business card..lol
sleepysnz 2 months ago
OK it is probable cause they do't not need to be officially allowed. You learn this in police foundations,
Freepepsi42 2 months ago
You are correct, there is no "law" saying you cant film that stuff. But there are rules and regulations reguarding what can and cannot be filmed on this building
JAlexanderPhoto 2 months ago
UGH that is what you get for harassing these security and police officers. None of this would have happened if you had just said. OK Sorry I will go on my way and not film this building. Quit being sketchy.
JAlexanderPhoto 2 months ago
@JAlexanderPhoto
There is no law to stop a photographer taking a photograph or filming in a public place, even if those photographs or the film are of a private building. If you don't defend your civil liberties you lose them.
willowmeister 2 months ago
@willowmeister I totally agree with you. It is really sad that this situation had to happen at all. We are soooo lucky to live in 1st world countries where we have liberties like the freedom to take pictures and video where ever we please. there are so many other countries in this world where the authorities would have arrested you, taken your camera, and inspected it. I agree we need to protect our civil liberties. But we also live in a world where terrorism is a big problem.
JAlexanderPhoto 2 months ago
@willowmeister Be easy going and respectful. And if you have nothing to hide you will not have any further problems with you. You broke one of their rules, not to take close up videos of sensitive areas of a "targeted" building. You cant change their rules for protecting this building. And security was just doing what they are paid to do. I am sorry you were harassed and your personal space was violated.
JAlexanderPhoto 2 months ago
@willowmeister But that is the world we live in today. It is part of the polices job to investigate people personal lives and sometimes it is done without proper reason.That is why we need to respect people that are trying to protect the world from terrorists. Comply with what they are asking you to do.
JAlexanderPhoto 2 months ago
@willowmeister
Well said.
urbanimage 2 months ago
They have no right to harras you when filming/photographing from the street. The power to stop and search someone under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 no longer exists. Officers do not have the power to delete digital images or destroy film at any point during a search. Deletion or destruction may only take place following seizure if there is a lawful power (such as a court order) that permits such deletion or destruction.
galindes 2 months ago
I AGREE WITH THE POLICE THEY WERE JUST DOING THERE JOB AND THEY CAN ASK TWO SEE THE FOOTEGE UNDER SEC44 LOOK WHAT HAPPEND TWO THE MERRIOIT HOTEL IN MUMBAI SO THEY HAVE GOT REASON.THIS IS JUST CHILDISH. ACT NORMAL AND THEY WONT BOTHER YOU
LOGANUVA 2 months ago
and of course the way to fight it, it just like draw mohammed day
everybody keep doing it, all the time
mikesomething 2 months ago
what a legend
cookwerth 3 months ago
How does a terrorist look when they film or take photographs? Surely they don't walk around in camouflage gear and a Green beret!
Hoppo5970 3 months ago
tossers...........
cameracameras 3 months ago
yeah, what if you just said to the security guy: ah don't worry mate, I'm just a street photographer, It's my hobby, just doing this for fun, wanna see what I've got so far?. they prolly would have said: awh okay no problem then. but on the other hand, even if you are acting weird, it is not prohibited to take pictures. it is not prohibited to call the cops either. just tell them the same thing. I shoot analog, so they can't see my photos. I just tell them they can buy my photos once developed
ShanghaiCheck 3 months ago 18
This is an important point being made. It is a valid investigation into the grey areas in the law versus our rights. How do we find out what levels Police will go to in order to scare us with the law that is in actual fact supposed to protect us?
The only thing being wasted here is tax payers money through the Police taking excessive action. If you listen to everything that the journalist is saying, you have to wonder why the pint is being pursued by the officers. Eye opening Jounalism.
simonsalive 3 months ago
These are the same people who killed the Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes on the tube.
queusuariosobrou 4 months ago
Unnecessary provocation wasting your own and others' time
tamasmarkos 4 months ago
"They're concerned about..." and "They're concerned about..." and "They're concerned about..." and "They're concerned about..." and... Should have told this copper you're concerned about some random guy across the street for some random reason that isn't against the law. If it's private property and they ask you to leave, leave, but once you're out on the street, they can't say jack.
Mindcrime121 4 months ago
you don't have to show them, as long as you are filming in public place you don't have to show them
o9a6la 4 months ago
The person filming is being a arsehole, there are laws in place to protect buildings and the public and he is being a cock. It is not illegal to film in a public place but common sense prevails. i'm sure that if someone from another ethnic background had done the same there would be an uproar.
andrew5860 4 months ago
@andrew5860 your alleged "common sense" (i.e. acting out of fear from being stopped by the police) and the resulting "chilling effect" is what destroys freedom of speech, journalism, even art (street photography).
OttoStrawanzinger 3 months ago
@andrew5860 No. He's not being an arsehole. He's testing them and Section 44.
AntiIgnorantDimwit 3 months ago
Why did you submit at the end? If they arrest you for a non-existing crime then you can sue them. You were so strong up until the end and then you folded. Don't be afraid of jail. Everyday you spend in jail for a crime you did not commit is more money they have to pay you in your lawsuit.
kendallnavstar 4 months ago
just cover up the building with some blanket or something...this is INSANE
cemput33 4 months ago
I like to take a vacation in Europe but should I bring my camera?.
tabungar08 4 months ago 2
I'll tell you all one thing, if I was that guard and the dude wasn't abiding by the one simple small rule we had, I would have his camera, and his teeth. He is one fucking dick head, and this is a pure example of ignorant people. I can't believe they even talked to this dude this long, I would have fucked him up a long time ago.
helgenx 5 months ago
@helgenx Yes, that would definitely grant you credibility over his arguments.
smokejc 5 months ago
@helgenx looool. Bless your tiny brain.
GodIsAWasteMan 4 months ago
Comment removed
helgenx 4 months ago
@GodIsAWasteMan yeah, you're a little too late and outdated son.
helgenx 4 months ago
@helgenx Yeah, that makes no sense.
GodIsAWasteMan 4 months ago
@GodIsAWasteMan Notice how nobody has replied to what I said in weeks/months, because this and what you said is just more bullshit. Peace.
helgenx 4 months ago
@helgenx Weeks/months? It hasn't even been one month.. Cheers.
GodIsAWasteMan 4 months ago
In short: Police State! The sad thing is that the same people who is supposed to be on your side are the ones being instrumental in constructing the Police State. Don't these fat cops have families who could also be subjected to the same abuses?
gnossticc 5 months ago
It is just a matter of having a new dictator like Hitler, the road is already paved.
gnossticc 5 months ago
Anyone wishing to conduct surveillance could surely do it covertly. The gherkin must be a prime target. I thing I get the reason for the nervousness here.
G58 6 months ago
/watch?v=FJH9F7Hcluo
Looks like the message has begun to seep down to officers. Here's hoping it finally seeps down to private security as well!
TheDirector17 6 months ago
/watch?v=FJH9F7Hcluo
Looks like the message has begun to seep down to officers. Here's hoping it finally seeps down to private security as well!
TheDirector17 6 months ago
Comment removed
TheDirector17 6 months ago
come one though the photographer is sorta on the wrong, he could have just said Where He work since he Already said he is a journalist, or writer...come on now, just made it harder on himself.. now i agree with the wierd stop n
GeMeNi2012 6 months ago
"I'm going to take a note of your details under section 44 of the terrorism act"
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act - "An authorisation under this subsection authorises any constable in uniform to stop a vehicle in an area or at a place specified in the authorisation and to search..."
Funny uniform that.
AstroPiranha 6 months ago
I consider the officious antics of those plods to be tantamount to common assault.
Their Professional Standards Department should have given them "words of advice", even if they were not invited to"an interview without coffee".
ThePaulCDickie 6 months ago
be a little nicer next time dont gives cops hard time they don't need it
alreacon 6 months ago
@alreacon shut the fuck up, he was standing up for himself for being accused of being a terrorist when he clearly done nothing wrong.
rmdhonda 6 months ago 3
@rmdhonda no, he knew from the start what he would have to do he was wasting there time and being rude putting a camera in there face. but he probs was a terrorist working for you, u seem mad enough to be 1
alreacon 6 months ago
@alreacon lol i ain't even mad, i'm just telling you to shut the fuck up and explaining why you should shut the fuck up.
rmdhonda 6 months ago
I find this highly amusing; I never knew this would cause so much interrogation. It won't stop me shooting where I want though! Photography is such a great art. I'd be bored without it!
risofsmailnet 6 months ago 27
Comment removed
risofsmailnet 6 months ago
This happens to me all the time, just the other day it happened. Some jumped up security guy trying to tell me I can't take photos when I'm clearly ON A PUBLIC HIGHWAY. Normally I just tell them they're talking rubbish and don't know the law suggesting they go and view it. This usually works. In this case, if they really thought he was a terrorist wouldn't they have just shot him? That's what they normally do, Jean Charles de Menezes comes to mind.
rolybling 6 months ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What a fuck wit. This guy is just making an arse of himself. The security guys and the police are just doing their job. I would have just grabbed him camera and shoved it up his arse.
Yorgibear13 7 months ago
This law is stupid but you need to respect it or they wont respect you
8bennugent 7 months ago
This dude has balls of steel.
187onaPigeon 7 months ago
If this happens to me I'm just gonna say "Eat shit"
noobie1890 7 months ago
It's idiots like this that make real photographers (and videographers) job so much more difficult.
You may "technically" have the right to shoot there, but being an arse about it only shows that you have no clue what you are doing.
A tiny bit of common courtesy and respect will get you much further.
And you still need a signed release form when shooting individuals as done here.
Your right to shoot there, does not overrule the individual's right to not be exploited on your crappy film.
qwiksquirrel 7 months ago
Why is he even restraining? It is not like he will get arrested or anything...
chakracannon97 7 months ago
Lovely bit of brutal journalism. I always carry a copy of section 44 in my wallet in case I'm ever stopped. Never have been yet, although after watching this I'm almost looking forward to the day I get stopped.
mikeos 7 months ago
@mikeos Hahah! I know what you mean - I almost want to get stopped just so I can say no!
Moleskineman 7 months ago
LAWYARD SIKILLS!!;) ;););)
franfred11 7 months ago
haha good man
dazreject 8 months ago
This guy is bloody great !!
mrnicekevin 8 months ago
tell me what the fuck is the point of building a sturcutre with as much beauty as the one is ee in the background IF YOU CANT FUCING TAKE A PICTURE OF IT????
STiNGFiST77 8 months ago
@ttriana They would have taken him to "BOOTS" To get it developed:)
etiosoul 8 months ago
He's filming a building and the problem with that is ? It's BS to say police have a right to see footage The STUPIDITY is obvious He's filmed the building he's told thecops know he's filmed the building If they look at it what are they going to see? HEY he's filmed the building And the point of that is? to protect us? NO it' to have us beleive we're safe No reality to this at all Research says that cameras are rarely used to plan terrorist attacks Beware of giving your power to an illusion
writerman242 8 months ago
omg ur greatt!
nifdhdid 8 months ago
There are cameras everywhere, on the top of poles and the sides of buildings, and the public have no access to the footage they take. But if a member of the public pulls out a camera...
Such anti-camera laws and policies are pointless anyway. High definition cameras already exist that are so small as to be undetectable unless searched. And they are only getting smaller and cheaper.
The photographer in this video was almost certainly captured on security camera, so why hassle him?
skevosmavros 8 months ago
If someone was a terrorist then they are not going to kick up a fuss and keep attracting more police are they...
RichardS2777 8 months ago
thanx for the video. i learned a great deal. i bought a slr camera recently and i was stopped. i didnt know what to do. i stopped filming and moved on.
im sure a terrorist wouldnt reveal himself so obvious that he is filming. there many ways to take pictures without looking like your are. those guys were only trying to abuse the law and scare someone.
jh3835 9 months ago
I'm a street photographer and I hate the way we are questioned and told to move on all the time but in this case I'm on the side of the police. This guy was really acting dodgy. Clearly just trying to waste police time. If I get questioned like that I wouldn't show them my work but I would explain myself (as a street photographer) and then move on. people questioning the current laws like this guy will eventually force them to lock down new more restricting privacy laws. SO WISE UP
DemonicGenocide 9 months ago 2
@DemonicGenocide I know what you mean, but the guy was proving a point in this video. The police had no right to ask the questions, so he was perfectly within his right to refuse to answer.
xAtticsToEden 8 months ago
@xAtticsToEden The police had every right to ask him what he was doing because he WAS acting suspiciously... if he had simply explained roughly what he was doing, the police wouldn't have been involved. People 'proving a point' like this will eventually make it worse and we will legally have to declare what we are doing in this regard. This proves no point because they weren't against him because of what he was doing but the way in which he was conducting himself... (being a stubborn ass)
DemonicGenocide 8 months ago
YOU ARE RIGHT!!!!!
decas115aaf 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
u must read this. once u have started there is no turning back. a little 10 year old girl was raped and murderded in 1945. her body was not found until 1947. then a boy last week read this and did not copy and paste this message. the dead girl appeared in his room haunting him and killed him. if you do not copy and paste this onto 10 vidoes in 30 minutes the dead girl will apear in your room tonight and haunt you and kill you. well you better start to copy and paste to be saved not min
toljakta 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@toljakta Go fuck yourself you stupid cunt.
DemonicGenocide 9 months ago
monty python?!!!
76boromir 9 months ago
now just imagine what would have happened in the US ... they would have probably water-boarded you ...
markuslinke 9 months ago
This reporter is an epic failure. Glory hunting by deliberately being an awkward half-wit. Its ironic how everyone bitchs about being stopped (Yes there have been a few in the wrong) but if a terrorist did recce the building and blow it (and the pathetic reporter) the police would be questioned as to why they didnt stop it.
The guy was obviously standing for a while filming the building before this clip - how difficult would it have been to quickly show them the vid? A lot faster than this.
Myiphone5 9 months ago
unbelievable. the terrorist act and sheep policemen - a politicians dream.
c4l50 9 months ago
wow..
KemmersFilms 9 months ago
Man that would be a nice architecture picture!
snowboardbum 9 months ago
terrorists have Google Earth. why they would need to go to the streets and take pics? :)
ptlofts 10 months ago 2
its not an offence if youre taking a pic of someone and behind that someone theres a public building or private than it would be ok. if its solely the building its not ok. the same happens if someone shows up in the frame when youre taking a pic of someone. get it? hope so.
ptlofts 10 months ago
i don't get.
would a terrorist not use a super-zoom camera and stay out off sight ?
or conceal a cellphone camera behind clothes with a small hole for the lens ?
if i had a recon job i would send a hot girl in a tight dress and with everybody starring at her i had all the time in the world to take videos and pictures
unamaxify 10 months ago
@unamaxify i am already imagining this hot girl. and the super-zoom lense makes her even hotter.
aizhol 9 months ago
@unamaxify Or just walk by and commit things to memory and then sketch or it out later, or write down details. If they don't want people looking at their receptionist maybe they should paint the windows black.
JHVH1 9 months ago
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the point is that we have policemen enforcing laws that neither they, nor the public really understand. This is a result of the brutalisation of the police, whose original purpose was to uphold the law to protect the public rather than enforce the will of parliament and the ignorance (equal parts inflicted and self-inflicted) of the general public. God bless you Thatcher/Major/Blair and all your greedy parasitic cohorts. Grease y'selves up folks--more coming!
MrCatastrofeas 10 months ago 17
Here in the US, the Police are allowed to con or bully you into stuff. They are not obliged to provide you your civil rights unless you invoke them. And then it pisses them off, and they make it even harder for you. Go to flex your rights and see some of what I mean.
RCK502 10 months ago
Anti-terrorism, LOL, excuse for everything!
reverandjames 10 months ago
1 Security and 3 Policemen don't like this video
flexusxyz 10 months ago 2
wow you are really brave hahahah
DVL1507 10 months ago
you should have let them datain you
and launched complaints against all of them
they need to learn
NefariousVirtuoso88 10 months ago
Way to go! You effectively wasted everyone's time involved, including your own. All this talk about rights and you wasted tax payers money to try to prove some point which I am unclear as to what that is. Was your point that the law if suspicious of someone tries to investigate?
MrAsesino187 10 months ago
in canada, authorities need a registered warrant from the court to search someone's camera
no section 44 here, just a charter of rights and freedoms
vehlajatt22 11 months ago 3
The real reason they dont want anyone filming is they dont want the world to see how fkin filthy pomland is lmao , who would even want to travel to there anyway.
Mr40up 11 months ago
Stupid cunts , dont ther realize that if a terroist wanted to film they would have micro cameras and not dirty big ass cameras lik ethat , maybe they shopuld worry about the rag heads with spy cams in there hats and jackets , silly fkers.
Mr40up 11 months ago
ya very good on standing your ground, people need to be more like you and stand up for their rights and not give in to the "police" who are more like dictators in a free country what sense does that make?
Gpow32 11 months ago
As a tax payer this is waste of public money and time, also a misuse of section 44.
This country is going down...
hsbc999 11 months ago
I wish I had been there.
FirebrandNIRE 11 months ago
Terrorism my asssssssssss, theses guys are idiots of the highest order
Well done for standing your ground fella
FirebrandNIRE 11 months ago
I've heard about this. I'm glad it isn't this bad in the USA.
wannabeb3 11 months ago
The police and security officers did an excellent job. The photographer was a dick. I'm a photographer. I have a degree in journalism. The photographer was just harassing the guys doing their job. Life isn't black and white. People have to use judgement. This photographer just has too much ego.
barclayjb 11 months ago 2
i cant belive that policeman had to ask a mall guard about what the police can or cant do.......
and yes it looks like a usb stick 8:48
mickytwoknives 11 months ago
You can see their point though.... why push it, they have a job to do and i am glad they are doing it. I am a street photographer also but i respect others.
quickshooter100 1 year ago
Part 1 of 2
@quickshooter100 wrote, "You can see their point though.... why push it, they have a job to do and i am glad they are doing it. I am a street photographer also but i respect others."
UTTER RUBBISH!
This entire incident is what is properly called "security theater" ("security theatre" in the U.K.).
Neither the police in the U.S.A. nor the U.K. have EVER foiled a terrorist plot by grabbing people with cameras off the street and searching their cameras.
IT'S A LIE!
IT'S FRAUD!
TheOriginalDecider 1 year ago
@TheOriginalDecider No not UTTER RUBBISH at all .
quickshooter100 1 year ago
@quickshooter100
REALLY!
Please list all examples, or a single example, of a terrorist plot being foiled by this variety of keystone kops charlatanism.
You're obviously either being paid taxpayer money to engage in this security theatre or a simplistic rube.
Do you suppose as police flip through pictures they're going to run across a frame with a picture of a notebook with the words "Terrorist Attack Plan" scrawled across the cover?
You really are a compliant little sheep.
SAD. SAD. SAD.
TheOriginalDecider 1 year ago
Part 2 of 2
@quickshooter100
It a big show, a circus, performed so police can claim "we're doing something," even when that something is 100% ineffectual.
Those aren't uniforms, they're costumes for the performance.
Here in the U.S. the police act almost identically and react just as poorly when they run across individuals who know their rights and are willing to stand up to officers' coercive tactics.
These videos are great teaching tools for citizens on both sides of the Atlantic.
Bravo!
TheOriginalDecider 1 year ago
haha... ya, it's not the US ... but the UK is way more paranoid of this stuff than we are here. I usually tell security to fuck off (in a nice way) when they approach me.
pinkeye00 1 year ago
Good for you buddy. fight for your rights
hesselden 1 year ago
Brilliant!...It just goes to show that these bobbies don't really know what they're doing...besides, if they really thought that our man was a real terrorist, they would have run a mile in the opposite direction! ...To call them hapless would be a complete misnomer. They should be charged with wasting their own time!..meanwhile the terrorist walked straight into the building unchecked!
MrRaff007 1 year ago
we wont just wait a second scotty policeman, and your behaviour is the only behaviour that is suspicious around here, not declaring who you are or your badge number. are you impersonating a policeman.
are you a naughty policeman, moonlighting as head of security, for extra cash, which is not allowed, by statute which of course you have to obey.
wonder if we should report you !
no ! your just a dick !
markscott7777777 1 year ago
Stupid coppers, should have raised obstruction right in the beginning.
alexlok 1 year ago
In the US, if terrorism is suspected during photographic activity, they may seize the camera, but MUST obtain a search warrant to view the camera's content. I believe that an individual educated in their rights, and police authority, is the best guard against police abuse.
trentlot1 1 year ago
Having been in law enforcement, I know that police often abuse their authority. We have to remember that although we have laws that counter terrorism, we, the people, have rights too. The police, at least in the US, can't search at camera unless they have specific reason to believe that terrorism is afoot. I applaud this guy for respectfully standing up for his rights. The police can't do whatever they want under the color of law!!!!!
trentlot1 1 year ago
Its definitely bad for them to stop you like this but wouldnt it have been easier just to appologise and leave the building rather than being a cocky prick?
MrKho1 1 year ago
There are hundreds of thousands of street CCTV cameras all over the UK. Are they breaking the law? Why can't we video anywhere we like. It's a case of one law for them and another for everyone else.
LiveVideoBox 1 year ago
Dude, you seriously are my hero =D
Whatevah232 1 year ago
Should have let them arrest you, then sued the police
Boodieman72 1 year ago
terrorism is a joke of the decade!!
mixmaxmuxmexmox 1 year ago 4
When photographers say they are going to 'shoot' something, they mean taking pictures, not becoming a terrorist... This is, for lack of a better word, STUPID. How is it a national threat?
SecretAgentKiko 1 year ago
What a waste of time for the coppers.
ddnn3 1 year ago
the world has lost it's mind. Section 44....bullshit.
JusticeProduction 1 year ago 3
the first officer looks like jason kid
steveluvbar 1 year ago
That's the thing about S.44 of the terrorism act. The police don't need to have 'reasonable suspicion'. Whereas anything non-terrorist related requires 'reasonable suspicion' to stop and search.
The police and security guards were behaving fully within the law and the camera man was simply ignorant of the law which is no defense.
begood20000 1 year ago
The guys a pratt no wonder legitimate photographers are getting hassle from police or security. fu**ing Journalists throw him in the tower...
docopod 1 year ago
I understand that he's trying to prove that its not against the law, but he was definitely trying to provoke the policeman and it makes sense why they don't want any pictures of security cameras and things like that.
theeuphioquestion 1 year ago
@theeuphioquestion - Why was he provoking the orificer ,.....just because he was questioning their mal practise and inquiring as to what his rights were???
It seems that folk like yourself love nothing better than to falsely imply that an individual is been provoking because he asked questions and is concerned that his rights are being taken away and there is an abuse of power being made!! clearly!!
Pikesterful 1 year ago
Filming the police in an official stop is illegal in the US. Not really surprised at this.
MandrakeCigars 1 year ago
Cameras are terrorist weapons ?????????????????
England is WACK.
Ramondequeens02 1 year ago
@Ramondequeens02 ...if he was stood in your garden, without your permission, taking pictures through your windows, you'd want him arrested. This is no different. He was stood on their property doing exactly that. The UK law is quite clear, and very fair. If it's private, you need the owners permission to enter and take pictures. He chose not to, purely to provoke a reaction and film the results - thats lame. We understand the rules and work by them. This idiot is not a street photographer.
JClavinPhotography 1 year ago
@JClavinPhotography You need permission to ENTER and take pictures, but according to law youre allowed to photograph and video tape anything if youre on the street. The only thing you cant do is sell those pictures without the authorization/model releases of any distinguishable person or piece of art in the picture.
Also, wth? youre not allowed to film in the street, but they are allowed to assume youre a terrorist, without any proof, and violate your privacy by illegally searching you?
davidgzmn12345 11 months ago
@davidgzmn12345 He wasnt on the street, ...thats the point. He had enterered ONTO private property, the plaza. ...no different than if he was stood in your garden taking pictures of your house. you know, theres a big difference in being on private property thats made available for public use, like a tesco car park, and actually being on public property like a pavement, park or roadway, where you and me have every right to photograph what we want. He was NOT in a public place. end of.........
JClavinPhotography 11 months ago
@JClavinPhotography Only at the beginning, he is standing inside the structure (and even there, he is not inside, hes just under the outer ceiling, but well enough) the he is asked to leave, which he does, then continues filming from outside, on the sidewalk.
He WAS outside, he WAS legally able to photograph, but we all know something as stupid as the law wont stop a stuck up cop from doing whatever he wants.
davidgzmn12345 11 months ago
@JClavinPhotography You clearly don't know the law.
thecuriouscritic 11 months ago
Maybe im missing the point but, firstly, he was on private property. If it was my property and he was shooting through my windows, I'd be pissed with him too. Secondly, if i'm not mistaken thats the Gherkin in the city, a prime terrorist target, they have every right to be wary. Thirdly, his whole attitude is offensive, trying to provoke a reaction for his buddy with the video cam. Its practically staged for gods sake. He's not doing us any favours with this.... just a good story for his paper.
JClavinPhotography 1 year ago 2
Boy, those watchdogs are stupid! They immediately bark as soon as they see big video camera or DSLR, that happens everywhere. They not even realizing that filming in such open way is what terrorists would NEVER do. But they bark loud so that their bosses see that they are "working". Because when real terrorist threat or act happens they are the first out with tails between their legs.
tommyFSK 1 year ago
@tommyFSK Thank you. Like any self respecting terrorist would be that overt.
ElleEstTrois 1 year ago
@MrAwangK No,not all Muslims are terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslims. Most Muslims give moral support to terrorists as they beleive terrorists fight for Islamic cause.
Islam is to blame for most of this world's evil which makes big news everyday.
Gavoora123 1 year ago
@Gavoora123 Jews can terrorists too. How do you think they got Israel?
alanbstard4 1 year ago
disgusting....
they should just make it clear and put a sign that says photography is prohibited in that particular area...
and if i am really a terrorist i won't bloody be holding a actual camera will i?
i'll just use one of those pen camera nonsense and stick it in my pocket...
oh and did i mention that the "spy" pen also comes in HD?
this is ridiculous...
hayashiyuuzen 1 year ago
god job
indomaniac567 1 year ago
Try that in Ukraine or Russia :(
Flameberg2k 1 year ago
Why blame the Police?. Why they do this in the first place?
It's happening not just in Europe but in many parts of Asia and North America. Islamic terrorism has turned around everything. Police have to be vigilant to avert any attacks. Police are just humans without any magical power to spot the real culprits.
Blame Islam not the police who try to protect us from any attacks. We are losing our libery but still there are people amidst us who harbor and protect Islamists in our socities.
Gavoora123 1 year ago
@Gavoora123
What make you wanted to blame Islam ??
Are all Muslim a terrorist..
MrAwangK 1 year ago
@Gavoora123
Why blame Islam for this ?
MrAwangK 1 year ago
Section 44 was a dream come true for the police.
This guy, like most of us, isn't sure what his rights are.
The police were, most likely, bluffing.
They mentioned the magic word "arrest", the guy folded.
I understand why he folded (I'm not saying I would have done any different).
But, the police know íf you get 'awkward', and try to call their bluff, they just drop the magic word...
gyoza007 1 year ago 7
lol pommies gone mad
farang82 1 year ago