anyone else listen to radio 4 news quiz this evening?
apparently (to do with new anti-terrorism laws) as of monday coming (16th feb) it will be a criminal offence to photograph a police oficer!!!!!!


my question is this...






WTF?
( blaireau69 , the Cumbrian Travis Bickle., Fri 13 Feb 2009, 19:30, 15 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

Dunno, but this guy even let me wear his helmet!

( Batshitmentalist is sane for once, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 19:41, Reply)

Monday 16th Feb, Scotland Yard
The union of British Photojournalists are having a big rally. There have been a bunch of new "privacy is only for MPs" laws recently, hadn't you noticed?
( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 19:46, Reply)

yeah, had noticed...
but feds ain't members of parliament...

edit: at least not that i am aware...
( blaireau69 , the Cumbrian Travis Bickle., Fri 13 Feb 2009, 19:51, Reply)

Huh
So under those laws the entire Rodney King thing would have wound up with the person videoing it getting arrested? Something is kinda wrong there.....
(Fredz A graveyard of hopes, a dump of ambition, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:19, Reply)

Hmmm.
I think that the law you have in mind is the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 (available via www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga_20080028_en_1), section 76.

Offences relating to information about members of armed forces etc
(1)After section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (collection of information) insert—
“58AEliciting, publishing or communicating information about members of armed forces etc
(1)A person commits an offence who—
(a)elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who is or has been—
(i)a member of Her Majesty’s forces,
(ii)a member of any of the intelligence services, or
(iii)a constable,which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or
(b)publishes or communicates any such information.
(2)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their action.

That is to say, if you photograph a policeman in a manner that's likely to be useful to a terrorist, with the intention of being useful to a terrorist, then you're in trouble. But that's no biggie. On the other hand, if you have a reasonable excuse, you're OK. Finally, and more importantly, even if you don't have an excuse, and there's no reason to think that you are taking the photo for nefarious purposes, then you won't have to worry about your case, simply because there'll be no case to answer.


I mean - really - do you honestly think that it'd be made illegal to photograph a copper? Really?

This dose of sanity was brought to you by the letters ENZYME. No charge has been made on this occasion.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:25, Reply)

if the entire rodney king had occured in the uk..
and after this coming monday, then perhaps?

don't know, i'm a plumber and not a lawyer...


thank you enzyme for the diligence and research x
( blaireau69 , the Cumbrian Travis Bickle., Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:25, Reply)

Well yes, If the RK thing had been in the UK ect...
Was mostly using it as an example of what the various implications of the law could be given a similar sort of case - someone videoing or photographing police brutality for example. So, If I read that correctly it mostly applies to people who may be suspected of taking photgraphs for the purposes of Terrorism? IN the manner that may be useful for terrorism? Surely if you're doing that there's a fair few more things you could be arrested for than photographing a police officer? And thanks again for the clarified law and such.
(Fredz A graveyard of hopes, a dump of ambition, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:37, Reply)

Enzyme
Sure, you couldn't get found guilty. Do you really think that's going to stop you getting arrested and thrown in the cells for the night? It's intimidation more than anything.
( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:41, Reply)

So
Pretty much anyone at a demo with a camera phone?
(Fredz A graveyard of hopes, a dump of ambition, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:42, Reply)

TLIC
good point!
( blaireau69 , the Cumbrian Travis Bickle., Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:43, Reply)

@TLiC/Fredz
I doubt it. There's a few coppers who'll take any excuse, but the majority is perfectly sensible. Moreover, the onus will always be on the police to demonstrate that they had a specific reason to intervene. So even if, in the early stages, there are a couple of instances of heavy-handedness, my guess is that the senior officers, advised by their lawyers and the Home Office, will come down hard on over-enthusiastic PCs.

There's a lot of "security" legislation that really is worrying - but I don't think that this falls into that group. I think it behoves us to pick our targets a bit more carefully and to be a bit careful in the claims we make.


Right - pub time, I think. Or a cup of tea. *ponders*
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 20:55, Reply)

What?
Have you SEEN all the coverage of police trying to stop people taking pictures in public despite it not being against the law? And you think they're going to act better when it IS?
( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Fri 13 Feb 2009, 21:33, Reply)

I think
This might be useful to stop this battle of the camcorders type shit that happens when chavs "know their rights, innit". I'm no right winger, but it really fucking boils my piss when you have one of these out of control dole spongers whip out a camcorder every time they see a cop.
(knackerz is skinning up, Sat 14 Feb 2009, 3:50, Reply)

Does this mean
there will be no more of those Police Cops 5! style reality camera action shows? If so, then I for one support this law.
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Sat 14 Feb 2009, 16:09, Reply)

Ah welcome to Airstrip One
To be honest (and speaking as a member of both Privacy International and No2ID) I feel the hysteria pendulum has swung too far in favour of the establishment.

What is the point living in "Freedom" if the price is constant vigilance? We've already seen too many of our hard won liberties quietly erased, I consider it my duty to fight tooth and nail to preserve what's left.
(Bicycle Repairman "you're also a bit of a wanker", Sun 15 Feb 2009, 22:20, Reply)