Feeds

back to article No snapping: Photographers get collars felt

Fancy getting your camera out this Bank Holiday weekend? Best be careful who you point it at. For instance, don’t go taking snaps of unmarked police cars. This was the mistake made by amateur photographer David Gates, who photographed a Police BMW parked illegally at a bus stop in Portsmouth, Hants. Before you could say “Cheese …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Black Helicopters

Police powers

The argument "if you've done nothing wrong...." simply isn't good enough.

Over the years, politicians have enacted so many laws that it's impossible for us all to be 100% law-abiding or for the police to enforce them all. So in practice it boils down to which laws the police choose, or are leant on, to enforce.

What the cameras do is create a library of potential offenders that the authorities can trawl through at their leisure safe in the knowledge that they'll be able to find <something>

This is an approach that Kafka would recognise & the Stasi approve of.

0
0
Black Helicopters

Unmarked Police Car?

I would have thought that if you were in an unmarked police car the last thing you would want to do is give away its identity by jumping out and arresting anyone who just happens to include it in a photograph.

0
0
Happy

@No snapping

>For instance, don’t go taking snaps of unmarked police cars.

Um, do we assume all cars are now unmarked police cars.

One for WJ me thinks, no doubt followed by a statement from D.O.P.E

0
0
Black Helicopters

I'm not in favour...

...of ambulance-chasing lawyer types, but I wonder whether this is a case where one might come in handy. Obviously, I don't know the details of the specific cases, but I wonder whether there would be grounds for any kind of wrongful arrest or harassment civil liberties case against the officers or forces concerned.

Remember people - with certain exceptions and provisos, taking photos in a public place in the UK is NOT illegal. There's a useful photographer's rights guide at:

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php

I'm not affiliated with that site/guide in any way - just found it one day and thought it might be useful. I also don't know how up-to-date it is with the latest legislation since it's a few years old now. Anyway, there are bound to be others out there.

I always wondered what it might be like to be stuck living in a police state. If things keep following the current trend, it looks like we might all be finding out...

0
0
Go

FIT watch - watching them watching you

I think the police are referring to an organisation called FIT watch, who turn up at demonstrations and document the activities and identities of the Forward Intelligence Team.

http://www.fitwatch.blogspot.com/

This seems perfectly reasonable to me; having been photographed at demonstrations several times myself, I know how uncomfortable and intimidating it feels. It's good to know that there are still people out there trying to contest the use brash and undemocratic tactics by the Police.

Bring on the flash photography flash mobs!

0
0
Pirate

Police

Did the police also mention how they use cameras at demonstrations to wind up protesters?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Jacqui Smith was a teacher

She would stand at the front of the class and order people around using her elevated teachers authority.

So this

"teachers are pretty cool about using CCTV to spy on their pupils – even in the toilet – they are a little worried about the appalling notion that the same cameras could be turned on them in the classroom."

Kind of sounded familiar. Somehow I expect any leader to have held positions where they exercise control by *negotiating* with *adults* on the *same* level in an adult to adult negotiation leading to a consensus, with ideas from both sides, but that's not what we get.

What you get is someone desparately looking for a textbook to guide her. What you get is someone barking out a lesson plan to pupils. What you get is someone marking scorecards and issuing pass or fail grades. What you get is her justifying her classes poor grades to the headmaster.

So pipe down in class. Put that cigarette out. No running in the playground. 10 minutes late and you'll get a tardy slip.... or do you want detention? Yes you, I'll put you in detention.

0
0

Cliche

Who watches the watchmen?

0
0
Black Helicopters

Nothing new...

One law for them, another for us.

"Don't do as I do, do as I say!"

0
0
Paris Hilton

But then again

But then again , if ten million dear old loveable grannies all pulled out cameras and started taking photographs of everything that crosses their path , nine million nine hundred and ninety nine thousand nine hundred and ninety times out of ten million , the wowsers won't even say one word to them, merely just look at the dear old loveable granny with the camera and then walk away and go about their normal business as usual as though they did not exist !

Granny power strikes again !

0
0
Alert

WTF?

"use cameras at demonstrations as a means to wind individual officers up. Undoubtedly, this happens – although as with any such abuse, perhaps it should be punished appropriately when it does."

Just because a police officer doesn't like something, doesn't make it illegal. Nor should it.

It disturbs me that you even try to justify this attitude on their part.

The general trend of attitude and behaviour of many police officers and forces is extremely negative and I have to say that I don't see it ending well.

Is anyone surprised that the very loosely worded 'anti-terror' legislation is abused? Not I, what we're seeing is exactly the outcome you'd expect.

Though it seems we've got to a point where they don't even bother on relying on actual laws to do things...

0
0

Photographers Rights

The following site has some very useful information on your rights in the UK as a photographer, I carry a copy of it in my camera bag :)

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php

0
0
Flame

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander indeed.

"As New Labour increasingly looks to pry into every detail of our private lives, some sort of reciprocal right to peer into theirs seems only fair, doesn't it?"

Were i in a position to make decisions on monitoring the general public, and had myself been subject to the invasions of privacy and harrassment routinely carried out by the British tabloid media, I would be very much inclined to say "fuck 'em, see how they like it".

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Photographing police cars

It was a marked police car that was photographed at the bus-stop, not an unmarked one.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Quizzed-over-terrorism-and-all.4332791.jp

0
0
n
Thumb Down

calling el reg trolls!

"Of course, there can be legitimate reasons for opposing the use of cameras. In talking to El Reg about the law on photography, several Police Forces made the fair comment that there were individuals who had learnt how to use cameras at demonstrations as a means to wind individual officers up."

"of course" NOTHING!...."fair comment" NOTHING!

Taking a picture to wind officers up is illegal then is it?

So when rodney king was filmed the camera man was winding them up?

So when Mr Dziekanski was tortured to death in vancouver airport by police the person filming it had his film confiscated because he was "winding officers up" was he?

Why is reg justifying this position? Disgraceful.

I want an answer from the usual el reg trolls who sniff around the forums leaving pointless uninformative posts.

WHERE ARE YOU NOW TROLLS!

0
0

Piss poor reporting

"...several Police Forces made the fair comment that there were individuals who had learnt how to use cameras at demonstrations as a means to wind individual officers up."

They're talking about FITwatchers. When the Forward Intelligence Team turn up at a demo they follow peopl around taking photos and trying to intimidate them. If you try and take a photo of them doing this, they'll nick you for obstruction.

We pay for the work they do so if they've got nothing to fear, why are they trying to hide their work from the public? And why is the Reg helping them run propaganda on us - when did you go plod?

0
0
Dead Vulture

Are you insane???

"use cameras at demonstrations as a means to wind individual officers up. Undoubtedly, this happens – although as with any such abuse, perhaps it should be punished appropriately when it does."

If an officer can be wound up by someone taking photographs of them, then they should be relieved of duty, evaluated, and quite possibly permanently barred from working in any security position, public or private, ever. You can not abuse a police officer by taking pictures of them doing their job, and even suggesting that such a thing is possible undermines your credibility on this topic.

-Daniel

0
0

I am waiting day and night

But I will eventually get the picture which will make me thousands when I sell it to the press. of a smug bastard pig using his mobile phone whilst driving.

It will happen, I know it happens, I just need it to be in front of me with camera in hand

0
0
Thumb Down

Say again?

> several Police Forces made the fair comment that there were individuals who had learnt how to use cameras at demonstrations as a means to wind individual officers up.

Am I the only one seeing the problem in this? Anyone capable of being wound up by having their picture taken should not be in the police farce. End of story.

0
0

CCTV in classrooms

Hmmm, given (a) recent news -- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/17/gossip_work_check/ -- that CRB checks can now contain allegations, assertions, and vague fingerpointings that did not result in arrest, and (b) that CRB checks will be required for just about every possible employment under the sun if it might ever involve contact with vulnerable populations, perhaps teachers might welcome CCTV in the classrooms to stand as witness against twerps who might make retaliatory baseless allegations against teachers who dare give shite classwork a failing grade. Not that this is an especially positive development overall.

Ditto perplexion as to why undercover cops would call attention to themselves by arresting a photographing passer-by, wtf? These same cops would probably welcome such evidence of law- breaking by mere citizens.

0
0
Silver badge
Coat

The voice of experience

Nobody - but NOBODY is as fascist, authoritarian and downright dictatorial as the left, once they come into power.

Maggie (amongst others - not least Reagan) had the wonderful idea that "Small government is best".

How they were vilified, and subject to character assassination by the left through the most outrageous, cynical and blatant untruths and most of the rest of us, led by the superior, condescending liberal twats at the BBC just accepted it.

In the same way, Broon thinks that if he chants "Prudence" at us often enough, it will stick in our minds and the word will automatically be associated with him.

I'm hoping that those of us who were never fooled will coalesce with those upon whom realisation is dawning, and ensure that these idiots who take "1984" for an instruction guide are removed ASAP, and these Stasi-like controls and restrictions are consigned to the dustbin.

Alas, I feel that it may be too late even for another Maggie, and perhaps another Wat Tyler (with greater success this time) is needed.

Mine's the one that's been in the cloakroom for the last 42 days...

0
0
Stop

WTF reprise

"It disturbs me that you even try to justify this attitude on their part."

Felt it was worth repeating...

0
0
NT
Joke

@ John Ozimek

Oh, and one more thing (if they've published my last, that is; otherwise this is just 'one thing'):

"Mr Carter was abused, had his camera knocked to the ground, arrested, bundled into the van and finally held in police cells for five hours."

What was Mr Carter doing while the police were arresting his camera, bundling it into a van and holding it in a cell for five hours?

0
0
W
Black Helicopters

Pledge

You might like to play along with this one at where you are...

I get the train to and from work.

The station near my home is in a city centre and has the expected few CCTV cameras.

The station near my work is in a satellite town. An unassuming little stop. But there are a quite surprising number of CCTV cameras. I'm presuming that the rerason is one of public safety in terms of personal attacks.

Whatever.

As a matter of interest, I'm going to try and muster the balls to keep taking cameraphone pictures of the CCTV cameras in full view of thos cameras and see if they take the bait. I've already done it a couple of times. But it's surprisingly easy to feel guilty about something that is entirely innocent once someone random comes along gives you a funny look.

But I've got nothing to... etc ... and if they've got nothing to ...etc. ;-)

We're in public. 'They' can snap me on the proviso that I snap 'them'.

'They're' supposed to be keeping tabs on folk breaking the law, not folk with nothing better to do than take pics of CCTV.

So let's make a new pastime out of snapping CCTV cameras. Create a few Flickr groups etc etc. Make a 'thing' of it. Just for the sheer obtuse joy of it.

It's not civil disobedience, it's civil eccentricity.

0
0
Alert

Ever watched the TV reality Police shows..

Every time a suspect is caught on camera in "Police,Stop Action", "Road Wars" or the latest police clip show on SKY, in the UK and they complain about the Film crew pointing a camera in their faces, the plod with the cuffs is always quick to say "They are in a public area and can film what they like!"

So it's OK to film people being man handled if the film makers are with the police (i.e. plod friendly view) rather than a member of the public shooting a normal daily scene...

Orwell would be spinning in his grave if he didn't see this coming.....

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Paparazzi activity is a different matter though

"Were i in a position to make decisions on monitoring the general public, and had myself been subject to the invasions of privacy and harrassment routinely carried out by the British tabloid media, I would be very much inclined to say "fuck 'em, see how they like it"."

Nice try but the motive for increasing surveillance of the public has nothing to do with getting even with paparazzi activity.

If politicians wanted to put a stop to the paparazzi problem they could very easily tax them out of business: Impose an extremely heavy tax on the sale and publishing of close up photos of celebrities or persons otherwise in the public spotlight with a provision that the tax is automatically to be waived if written permission has been obtained from the individual shown on the photo, for example:

1) tax on sale of photo to newspaper: 10000% but not less than £1m

2) tax on printing the photo: £10 per copy

3) tax on posting the photo on news/blog website: 10£ per hit or 110% of advertising revenue whichever is the higher

==> paparazzi problem solved

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Counting down

Perhaps the UK police should learn to control their fear of photography. Otherwise they run the risk, four years from now, of attracting unfavourable comparisons with the current regime in China.

0
0
Flame

Shrinkage of Rights

I think we should rename Britain to China.

0
0

Starting to see the same in Canada

We are starting to see the same attitude by police in some cities in Canada:

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/story/4216362p-4809372c.html

(snip)

In Winnipeg this week an amateur photographer alleged police confiscated his camera's memory card when they detained him.

Both incidents highlight the way police respond to being caught on tape in a new technological reality.

The B.C. lawyer who helped Paul Pritchard get back his video of a Polish man who died after being repeatedly Tasered by Vancouver Mounties said the Winnipeg photographer has the option of taking the Winnipeg Police Service to court.

Paul Pearson said police face added scrutiny today because of the proliferation of cameras.

"It's much more timely and common because virtually everyone now is walking around with cameras in their pockets, because of cellphones."

He also said police should be open to the added attention.

"The police hold a special position in our country. They have special powers, they carry weapons, they can take people into custody, they can do all kinds of things... If they're in the public, they should be open, and not resistant, to being recorded."

One expert said a rush towards "video democracy" has accelerated since the Rodney King beating in Los Angeles in 1991.

"It only partly works because police often have a certain amount of power in controlling the situation if there is video footage and film out there that might make them look bad," said Aaron Doyle, a Carleton University sociology and anthropology professor, who has written on how technology influences policing.

In the Winnipeg case, amateur photographer Paul St. Laurent, 38, maintains that after he photographed police interacting with car theft suspect they Tasered and arrested Tuesday afternoon in Elmwood, a police officer beckoned him over for questioning.

St. Laurent said four officers surrounded him, questioned him about biker and gang ties, and lectured him about how taking photos was for professional media only.

St. Laurent said after about five minutes of questioning, police handcuffed him, put him in the back of a cruiser, and confiscated his Manitoba Liquor Control Commission identification card, digital camera and portable phone after removing the phone's battery in front of him.

St. Laurent said the camera was returned to him missing a memory card.

The police have said, repeatedly, they took no property from St. Laurent.

Pearson said St. Laurent should launch legal action as a last resort.

"Sometimes it takes the cleansing powers of the courts to try to get through some of these conflicts."

A motion in Queen's Bench could sort out "very conflicting evidence" presented by witnesses, St. Laurent and police.. Pearson said.

"If Mr. St. Laurent wants to get on a witness stand, put his hand on a Bible, and say 'That officer took a memory card from me,' it's going to take somebody else to say the exact opposite to refute that. It would be very interesting to see what the various stories are."

After the incident, a police spokesman said St. Laurent had breached an area where officers were investigating and that the photographer was being obstructive. They said he was detained for his own safety.

Residents from three Keenleyside Street homes interviewed separately by the Free Press Thursday said St. Laurent was at least 30 feet from where the suspect had already been handcuffed by police.

"All (the officer) had to do was just give it back to me... It comes down to my word against his," St. Laurent said.

He said Thursday he wasn't sure he can afford a lawyer to represent him. "I don't know if it's worth spending thousands of dollars to get a $30 chip back."

St. Laurent said he has filed a complaint with the Winnipeg police professional standards unit.

He said if he was in the same situation again, he would not take the photos, because he now understands that officers are afraid photos taken by civilians could be used by gang members to identify them and hurt them.

Officers told St. Laurent he could have accidentally identified a young offender -- which is forbidden by law. The man being Tasered was 21, but that was not known at the time.

Pearson also said getting in the way of police work is "totally unacceptable" and people should provide copies of photos or videos if police request them.

"The difference comes ... where their desire goes from access to exclusive access and suppression."

In the Vancouver airport incident Pritchard was a bystander who lent his footage to RCMP to copy, and then had to launch a legal battle to get it back.

(snip)

0
0
Paris Hilton

@ Ruairi Newman

Exactly. I can also be very interesting if someone starts to document every single instance of police powers abuse when such a picture is taken.

The ultimate end of that approach is being served a bullet when you take a picture of another Mendez, so it should be stopped before then..

It's time to put the terrorist argument back in the closet where it belongs: an exception rather than rule. I can't remember such malarky and abuse of power in London during 10 years of IRA campaigning, so why is this supposed to be different?

Paris, because she knows all to well how cameras and police power can be abused

0
0
Alert

drifting towards a police state

We are slowly drifting towards a police state here in Canada.

In recent years it has sounded like New Labour is rushing the UK towards a police state.

0
0
Unhappy

Politics by name has nothing to do with it.

I get extraordinarily bored with postings that say "New" (or even worse) "Nu" Labour are to blame for everything. Does anybody really think things would be different if the Tories or the LibDems or even the Raving Monster Loony Party were in power?

We have a ruling party that we have very little, if any, power over and it doesn't matter what they call themselves. Their closeness to the doctrines of their underlying political philosophy is embarrassingly difficult to spot. Does anyone, for one moment, believe that whomever takes over at the next general election will rip out all the CCTV and/or the speed cameras that they have been deriding this government about? Of course not. They'll just breathe a sigh of relief that someone else got to do the dirty work that they intended to do.

At least, at the moment, we still believe that we have some form of freedom of speech, although how much effect that freedom actually has on our lives is probably regrettably very little. But the tabloids give us "bread and circuses" which shuts most people up, sadly.

0
0
Max
Flame

French coppers

The first time I was in Paris I was getting ready to take a perfect photo of a church with the shadows just right at the time just before the sunset. I was standing away from the church at the opposite end of a foot bridge, I lined up my shot, and before I could stop my finger, 4 coppers started walking on the foot bridge towards me. I had taken the shot of the church with them now annoyingly standing in the foreground. They heard the camera snap and ran up to me. One of them, the ringleader, was very very short and very very aggressive (Napolean complex anyone?). He puffed up his chest and demanded to see my ID and wrote down all the info. All the while the others were surrounding me with their hands on their guns in case I "tried anything". They asked when I was leaving and I told them a week, and they said 'watch out until then'. On their exit they all took the liberty of bumping into me and almost knocking me to the ground. The icing on the cake was that by the time the whole ordeal was over, the sun had set and the light was now gone from my shot.

Fucking bastards.

0
0
Thumb Down

Thatcher.....

Thatcher would have been proud. No wonder Brown has been rambling about giving the evil old witch a state funeral. He stole all his favourite policies from her.

0
0
dek

@Ruairi Newman

What exactly are you saying? That it is understandable that politicians introduce such laws because the poor darlings have been hounded by the press? Assuming you are not trolling and actually believe what you wrote, you need to apply some critical reasoning before making such crass comments.

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Flame

Err... Wrong perspective

It is not the erosion of public liberties which is frightening, it is the fact that the "good old PC statement" is no longer considered sufficient to collar a suspect. It now has to be confirmed by CCTV.

As a result of this the population is quickly descending into the mental state where "anything is fair game if it is not captured on camera". The UK is no longer a state with a rule of law, it is a state with a rule of the camera. This is most clearly evident in the police behaviour. They will no longer nick you if you are puking all over the sidewalk. However, though shalt not yield the holy artefact of law and order - the camera. If you will, you will get nicked.

Really sad...

0
0
Bronze badge
Stop

Lies, damn lies, and large numbers.

You are aware this "4.2million cameras" number is mostly bogus? If you look for sources, normally you just get another page/paper quoting the same number.

For all I know, they've taken a 200yard stretch of Oxford street, counted cameras, and multiplied it by street lengths in the UK. Or selected street lengths (discarding rural roads). Or divided the number of cameras by the number of pedestrians on the stretch and multiplied it by the British population size. Or otherwise. They being a class of 12y olds on a project, a first year politics student, or any of a number of Quangos (ah, favourite suspects).

Now, I'm definitely not a reporter so please indulge me and show us the root documents, clarifying the method.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Happened to me....

There was an incident near to where I live. I took a few photos and was then stopped by a PC who wanted all photos deleted - which I did. No reason was given but he knew I wasn't going to be happy in a police van.

Now, if I have photographic evidence, I won't give it it to the police, I'll just go straight to the press and sell the photos there! Stuff them.

Looks like the terrorist have won! BTW, how come when the IRA killed 3000 people nowt was really done about it, but when Al Queda Kills 60 in London all hell breaks loose?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

The innocent have nothing to fear?

This applies to everybody, right? Even when politicians say it? So, given that there is arguably sufficient evidence to put Tony Bliar up before the beak for waging an illegal war, let's set a very public example of how we want the country to perceive the forces of law and order and justice (bearing in mind that justice and the law are often unrelated or even opposites at the moment).

Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime. Let's make it *mean* something.

It is time the criminal elements started being afeared of justice, rather than laughing in the faces of their victims as they mostly do today. If the forces of the establishment will not provide justice, then who will?

Impeach Blair. If he is innocent, he has nothing to fear. If he is found guilty, it will be very very clear that justice still has a meaning in this country, whoever you happen to have as your mates.

0
0

Other info. on public photography

I wrote these two articles on the subject of public photography a while ago after requesting info. from the courts and the national police database:

http://www.chapterthirteen.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=64&Itemid=35

http://www.chapterthirteen.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=66&Itemid=35

Recently I have been getting several letters a week from amateur photographers requesting advice after what appear to be wrongful arrests, illegal searches and other forms of harassment. To say I am becoming increasingly disturbed by what appears to be wholesale abuse of police power and deliberate targeting and harassment of photographers is an understatement.

D

0
0
r
Unhappy

how do I know i have nothing to hide

until someone draws attention and arrests me for it. It appears taking photos is now 'something to hide'.

That is the fundemental flaw of a host of laws acting under the banner of terrorism and anti-social behaviour.

And that is the main problem with any form of ID card. Say i trust this goverment with all my details in one place which can easily be accessed at any point by anyone they see fit without my knowledge, once that information is there I am trusting all future goverments for as long as I exist. Also, I have no right to know what information is held about me.

To me that is like jumping into a pit I cant see the bottom of as I trust there is something to break my fall at the bottom. Put it this way, jewish people had nothing to hide in germany to the nazi party came into power....

I have nothing to hide right now. If dont change my behaviour or what I own, then at any point in the future I could have something to hide.

0
0

Police car not unmarked

It wasn't unmarked. Original story and photo here:

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Quizzed-over-terrorism-and-all.4332791.jp

0
0
Stop

Iffy Stats

As an amateur photographer who feels distinctly uncomfortable using his camera in public I applaud this article and El Reg's stance on the issue as a whole. However, I wish people would stop using the "4.2 million cameras, one for every 14 people" statistic as evidence to back up their arguments. Those numbers were arrived at by counting the cameras in a single street in London (Putney? Peckham?) and then extrapolating for the rest of the country. They hold absolutely zero credibility.

0
0

A handy pocket size guide...

The link Alex Threlfall linked above is very good and I too have long since kept a copy of it handy, but a much more pocket friendly 'guide' is this:

http://billythebrain.deviantart.com/art/Photographers-Rights-87482274

A kind soul scanned and uploaded theirs, it was originally supplied by the Association of Freelance Photographers as a guideline to their members. I understand it has been 'approved' by lawyers before it was issued and offers a good 'laymen' guide to what can and can't be done, and has proved useful to others when faced with a jobsworth security guard/police. Though clearly getting bolshy isn't going to help you at all, it can be used to clarify a situation. Thankfully so far I have never had cause to use mine, but I have one print out in the car, one in my jacket and one in my main camera bag. Hopefully the link will prove useful to others as I had a nightmare finding it after hearing about it.

0
0
Thumb Down

snap happy

from amateur photographer's website:

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/uk_police_order_amateur_photographer_to_delete_pictures_at_tourist_hotspot_news_180714.html

"... A photographer says he was left humiliated and feeling like a criminal after police ordered him to delete his pictures - telling him he first needed permission before taking photographs.

The incident, which occurred in the seaside resort of Blackpool, Lancashire, is the latest in a spate of clashes between police officers and photographers taking pictures in public places in the UK.

Amateur photographer John Kelly claims a police community support officer (PCSO) ordered him to delete pictures, which included the officer in the frame.

Kelly told us that the PCSO then added: 'You can't take pictures of people without asking their permission.'...."

if that's the case, i'd like to state publicly that in future i require any of the millions of CCTV operators spying over us continually to ask my permission before photographing me. i suggest everyone else does likewise.

or could it just be that the pigs are making up the law as they go along again?

0
0
Paris Hilton

If the plods have done nothing wrong...

“if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear”

Should that not work both ways?

Paris, working both ways.

0
0
Silver badge
Flame

@Ruairi

We read:

Were i in a position to make decisions on monitoring the general public, and had myself been subject to the invasions of privacy and harrassment routinely carried out by the British tabloid media, I would be very much inclined to say "fuck 'em, see how they like it".

That would mean INSTAFAIL at being a politician and hopefully bring about the political death penalty.

1) You would have not standing at taking a stab at retribution and collective punishment

2) Two wrongs do not make a right

3) The cattletrucks are lying in wait - for the next time. This thinking enables the next time.

0
0

@johnB

Indeed: “If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him” - Cardinal Richelieu

0
0
Alien

Us Against Them

Police training does not teach mutual respect and rights of citizens. It's an "us against them" mentality. You will all eventually be considered some sort of terrorist or domestic threat.

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.