Terror Law To Make Photographing Police Illegal

Stretch

Stretch

House Member
Feb 16, 2003
3,924
19
38
Australia
'New laws set to be passed in England and Canada would make it illegal to use bad language or take photographs of police officers, moving us further away from the idea of police as public servants and more towards the notion of cops assuming God-like status.
According to the British Jpurnal of Photography, the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, which is set to become law on February 16, "allows for the arrest and imprisonment of anyone who takes pictures of officers 'likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism'." The punishment for this offense is imprisonment for up to ten years and a fine.'
UK Terror Law To Make Photographing Police Illegal
 
Praxius

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Now that's just foolish..... what happens at a parade when the local police have their float come down the road and everybody takes pictures?

Break out the tear gas and clubs?

Family of 5 jailed for 10 years.

What happens when you have the media come out to a riot or a crime and they film the scene with police in it?

Does this mean now the media can't cover anything the police are at so there will be no reports or evidence of what they may or may not be doing?

Turning a blind eye to a public service in the name of terrorism doesn't sound like a good idea.... and I doubt it'll go much further then concept.
 
karrie

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
I don't know about there, but here we don't have enough officers to cover undercover work AND daytime beat, so officers do both. As such, media can find themselves being given directives at accident scenes, etc., to photograph only certain areas required in their story, and to keep certain officers off of their cameras. This sounds much the same. Except of course that those officers take their security into their own hands and don't expect a blanket law to do it for them.
 
Cannuck

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
Of course, other than conspiracy sites, there isn't much talk about this. There will be no such law in Canada or The UK
 
Ron in Regina

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
23,172
8,025
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
I can see, if this law comes to pass in England or elsewhere, lots of wiggleroom for
abusing that law. Knowledge that personal cameras (video, still, cell phones) can be
anywhere at anytime is one of the very few real checks and balances in the system to
help prevent abuse of authority. I hope this proposed law dies a quick death.
 
Stretch

Stretch

House Member
Feb 16, 2003
3,924
19
38
Australia
Cannuck said:
Of course, other than conspiracy sites, there isn't much talk about this. There will be no such law in Canada or The UK
Click to expand...

the register is a conspiracy site?
Comments on “New terror guidelines on photography” • The Register

what about..........
UK Terror Law To Make Photographing Police Illegal

or...........
Newsvine - UK Terror Law To Make Photographing Police Illegal

or maybe.......
UK Terror Law To Make Photographing Police Illegal // Current

UK Terror Law To Make Photographing Police Illegal *LINK*

Digg - Who dugg or blogged: UK Terror Law To Make Photographing Police Illegal
just remember mate, a conspiracy is only a conspiracy till it becomes a fact.
 
U

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
karrie said:
I don't know about there, but here we don't have enough officers to cover undercover work AND daytime beat, so officers do both. As such, media can find themselves being given directives at accident scenes, etc., to photograph only certain areas required in their story, and to keep certain officers off of their cameras. This sounds much the same. Except of course that those officers take their security into their own hands and don't expect a blanket law to do it for them.
Click to expand...

Here is a good deal of information on the matter.

Ambientlight.ca - Laws
 
lone wolf

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Yeah ... the old Norman Rockwell image of a friendly, blue-shirted guy with a peaked hat loses something in today's black armour and storm-trooper hat. Terrorist? Which one?...
 
Last edited:
Praxius

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
lone wolf said:
Yeah ... the old Norman Rockwell image of a friendly, blue-shirted guy with a peaked hat loses something in today's black armor and storm-trooper hat. Terrorist? Which one?...
Click to expand...







Storm Trooper? More like Borg minus the extra cables.
 
Stretch

Stretch

House Member
Feb 16, 2003
3,924
19
38
Australia
its kinda becoming an "us and them" scenario.................
us being the "dangerous peasant", whom tptb want to disarm, and them, the heavily armed and armoured, balaclava'd aggressor.
 
gopher

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
When police engage in criminal actions, they routinely steal cameras from people who are filming their crimes. Politicians know it but don't give a damn about the crimes of those jack booted thugs.
 
gopher

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Here in Minnesota police arrested several people for carrying cameras just before the Republican national convention. The cops alleged that the camera people were engaging in civil disturbances and possessing marijuana.

When the trial started the judge asked the police for proof of their claims. As usual, they presented absolutely nothing.

Result? Case dismissed.

To me, that's utter bullsh*t as the stupid judge should have thrown the crooked cops in jail for violating the Constitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom