Seig Heil.


This is the government that dares to arrest opposition MPs then
threaten them with life imprisonment just for leaking embarrassing
facts that have a public interest, right to know, and a government
that employs covert surveillance on parents that mistakenly thought
they could have a say as to which school educates their kids

So, where on their concerns might you think rail photographers come?

An un-elected Prime Minister who has opposition politicians arrested,
rubbishes the economy and then claims only he is capable of fixing it.

We're all Zimbabweans now.

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 08:20:16 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

On Apr 17, 3:23 pm, "Kev Lawrence"
wrote:
See also

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...an-deletes-tou...

!
Indeed, I've just read that in the Guardian - here's a link to their
article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/ap...tourist-photos

The incident appears to have happened at Walthamstow bus station. One
suspects that the police bods in question are likely to have been
PCSOs rather than proper police officers, though that's just
supposition. Whatever, the police really need to get their act in
order.

While I have yet to encounter any lunacy at Walthamstow (where I live) I
have had the following happen within the last month or so.

Be accused of being a potential terrorist for taking a photo at
Hammersmith Butterwick Bus Station. This was followed up with the
management of TfL Surface Transport the next working day.

Be told it is illegal to take a photo of a bus by a First Group Bus
driver at Ealing Broadway. This incident has been referred to Director
level within First Group following a post of mine on a non Usenet group.

On Wednesday of this week be "interviewed" by a Plastic Policeman in
Wood Green for taking a photo in the street. I happened to be at
Turnpike Lane where the High Rd was closed due to a RTA (not in sight
from where I was). I took one photo of the deserted stretch of road.
Barely 5 minutes later Mr PP turns up and asks what I am doing with a
camera. I tell him. He starts filling out his stupid yellow form. I
point out to him that I am doing nothing wrong or illegal. He says he
has to ask because I was beside a tube station. He asks for my name and
address and I refuse to provide it. Instead I identified myself as a
security cleared LUL senior manager and ask if he would like the name of
my director to verify that I hold the position with LUL that I have
stated. I further point out that it is not illegal to photograph a road
or a station not that I had done the latter. (The fact I can draw the
plan of Turnpike Lane station from memory is neither here nor there.)

Eventually Mr PP gives up and decides to go and direct the traffic.

On getting home I sent an E Mail to my MP advising that he (& his
successor) and his party have lost my vote for as long as their stupid
legislation remains in place and for as long as it remains their policy.
I suggested that given the woeful state of the government's standing and
that of the economy they could ill afford to be losing votes through the
inadvertent criminalisation of the general public off the back of their
policies. It will be interesting to see if I get a reply.


As you might detect I am not a little fed up with being treated in this
way for simply trying to enjoy a hobby. If I am hassled at Walthamstow
or anywhere else by the police for using a camera then I am afraid the
Prime Minister is the next person to hear from me.

I would also point out that the response Mr Thant got about not being on
the station for more than 10 minutes is not remotely helpful and creates
a potential source of conflict. Given that it is perfectly possible on
some parts of the network to legitimately wait more than 10 minutes for
a train does this mean that waiting passengers who also have a camera
require a permit? I must remember to go and have a chat to the Film
Office people.

I'm coming to London soon. Maybe I should just leave my camera at home :-/

In message
, at
11:00:11 on Fri, 17 Apr 2009, remarked:
An un-elected Prime Minister who has opposition politicians arrested,
rubbishes the economy and then claims only he is capable of fixing it.

But hasn't he gone now? Or did I dream him saying in Glasgow the other
day:

"I take full responsibility for what happened - that is why the person
that was responsible went immediately...."
--
Roland Perry

"redcat" wrote in message
m...
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 08:20:16 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

On Apr 17, 3:23 pm, "Kev Lawrence"
wrote:
See also

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...an-deletes-tou...

!
Indeed, I've just read that in the Guardian - here's a link to their
article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/ap...tourist-photos

The incident appears to have happened at Walthamstow bus station. One
suspects that the police bods in question are likely to have been
PCSOs rather than proper police officers, though that's just
supposition. Whatever, the police really need to get their act in
order.

While I have yet to encounter any lunacy at Walthamstow (where I live) I
have had the following happen within the last month or so.

Be accused of being a potential terrorist for taking a photo at
Hammersmith Butterwick Bus Station. This was followed up with the
management of TfL Surface Transport the next working day.

Be told it is illegal to take a photo of a bus by a First Group Bus
driver at Ealing Broadway. This incident has been referred to Director
level within First Group following a post of mine on a non Usenet group.

On Wednesday of this week be "interviewed" by a Plastic Policeman in
Wood Green for taking a photo in the street. I happened to be at
Turnpike Lane where the High Rd was closed due to a RTA (not in sight
from where I was). I took one photo of the deserted stretch of road.
Barely 5 minutes later Mr PP turns up and asks what I am doing with a
camera. I tell him. He starts filling out his stupid yellow form. I
point out to him that I am doing nothing wrong or illegal. He says he
has to ask because I was beside a tube station. He asks for my name and
address and I refuse to provide it. Instead I identified myself as a
security cleared LUL senior manager and ask if he would like the name of
my director to verify that I hold the position with LUL that I have
stated. I further point out that it is not illegal to photograph a road
or a station not that I had done the latter. (The fact I can draw the
plan of Turnpike Lane station from memory is neither here nor there.)

Eventually Mr PP gives up and decides to go and direct the traffic.

On getting home I sent an E Mail to my MP advising that he (& his
successor) and his party have lost my vote for as long as their stupid
legislation remains in place and for as long as it remains their policy.
I suggested that given the woeful state of the government's standing and
that of the economy they could ill afford to be losing votes through the
inadvertent criminalisation of the general public off the back of their
policies. It will be interesting to see if I get a reply.


As you might detect I am not a little fed up with being treated in this
way for simply trying to enjoy a hobby. If I am hassled at Walthamstow
or anywhere else by the police for using a camera then I am afraid the
Prime Minister is the next person to hear from me.

I would also point out that the response Mr Thant got about not being on
the station for more than 10 minutes is not remotely helpful and creates
a potential source of conflict. Given that it is perfectly possible on
some parts of the network to legitimately wait more than 10 minutes for
a train does this mean that waiting passengers who also have a camera
require a permit? I must remember to go and have a chat to the Film
Office people.

I'm coming to London soon. Maybe I should just leave my camera at home :-/

Absolutely not! I assume your comment was tongue in cheek, but I am sure
many others are thinking it's too much bother to risk taking photos, even
though it's perfectly legal. Which means that "they" have won, whether
"they" be the real terrorists, the police, the politicians or whoever.

Take your camera, take photos, and tell any pretend official who gives you
hassle where to shove it.

"redcat" wrote in message
m

I'm coming to London soon. Maybe I should just leave my camera at
home :-/

Nope -- bring it and snap away, like millions of others. Despite the
justified complaints on this newsgroup, you're actually unlikely to be
troubled by any ignorant jobsworths (I never have), and if you are, they
probably won't have any idea of the actual laws.

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Mr Thant wrote:

I've asked them to update the page (no response yet)

I believe others have also asked them, over the course of a few years, to
no avail as of yet. Good luck with your attempt!

tom

--
Teach us how to die well

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Mizter T wrote:

Whatever, the police really need to get their act in order.

Oh, you noticed that?

I am really utterly perplexed by how the police maange to get away with
being a bunch of incompetent thugs. Not that there aren't good individual
policemen, but there are certainly some very bad ones, and the
organisation as a whole is a disaster. It just seems that nobody with the
power to do anything about it gives a toss. Or has it just not occurred to
people that things could be any better?

tom

--
Teach us how to die well

Recliner wrote:
"redcat" wrote in message
m

I'm coming to London soon. Maybe I should just leave my camera at
home :-/

Nope -- bring it and snap away, like millions of others. Despite the
justified complaints on this newsgroup, you're actually unlikely to be
troubled by any ignorant jobsworths (I never have), and if you are, they
probably won't have any idea of the actual laws.


No one's ever bothered me at all before. No, I lie! Actually, some
citizens of the capital do give me the evil eye when I'm out being a
tourist. I don't know what it is, but it seems that in many cities the
person out there with the camera, the tourist, is considered a blemish
upon the landscape. I have gotten snarled at -- especially in Soho for
some reason. LOL, particularly on Wardour St.

I realize this is going off topic, but it's an interesting point. There
seems to be contempt for the camera.

Tom Anderson wrote:

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Mr Thant wrote:

I've asked them to update the page (no response yet)

I believe others have also asked them, over the course of a few years, to
no avail as of yet. Good luck with your attempt!


Over the course of a few years?

This particular page on the website only went live in the last few days.

Tom Anderson wrote:

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Mizter T wrote:

Whatever, the police really need to get their act in order.

Oh, you noticed that?

I am really utterly perplexed by how the police maange to get away with
being a bunch of incompetent thugs. Not that there aren't good individual
policemen, but there are certainly some very bad ones, and the
organisation as a whole is a disaster. It just seems that nobody with the
power to do anything about it gives a toss. Or has it just not occurred to
people that things could be any better?


The government is well aware of the problem. A couple of years ago it
tried to bounce police forces into merging into a much smaller number of
much larger forces. Unfortunately for the government, the police
rebelled, and so did the local councils whose ineffectual police
authorities may well be at the root of the problem.

I don't pretend to know whether bigger would be better, but the Home
Office seemed to be convinced that it was.

Of course the other problem is police recruitment. There are too many
people of low intelligence in the police. The problem is, attempts to
promote better educated officers to senior positions have been strongly
resisted by less well educated policemen who believe that promotion to
high office is their right, as it had been for many decades.

The police therefore still contain too many ignorant, brutal, racist and
misogynist officers who have no respect for the law and for civil liver
ties in particular. These people are at the root of the problems
policing major demonstrations and are behind the seemingly orchestrated
hostility to people taking photographs.