Carrying a monopod...with intent.

neil_r wrote in post #6858589
It is amazing how everyone can judge a situation when it is only presented from one side, great balance. I wold love to here the Policemans take on the situation before I called anyone a prick.

And DDCSD please do not feel too sorry for us, whilst we suffer a little as a result of the world situation our freedoms are still pretty safe. Whilst the occasional over zealous policeman may overstep the mark our "freedoms" are still pretty much in tact, we certainly do not have anything as draconian as the "Patriot Act" to restrict us.

Cheap Shot...

9/11 + subsequent incidents have made governments on both sides of the Atlantic a little nuts so let's not drag this downhill ok?

9/11 for you perhaps we in the UK have been rocked by terrorist attacks for many years prior to 9/11.

I don't understand the Cheap Shot line as my comment was neither a shot nor was it cheap.

neil_r wrote in post #6858609
So it was optional and required consent, see I knew we still lived in a democracy

Ah consented yes, but i was informed (as have the majority of people who have fallen victim to "the s.44 search"...see at the bottom) that if I failed to comply or failed to allow the search for any reason I would be arrested and charged with obstructing a police officer or declining to be searched.

I still dont see why you'd agree with this behaviour, the issues as I see them are:

1. I was seemingly targeted for carrying a monopod openly and in my hand (not hidden/in bag/stuffed up jumper)

2. I offered to show my press card (which, if I may quote the back states "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona fide newsgatherer") and it was declined as a valid form of ID and dismissed as pointless by the officer.

3. There were no grounds whatsoever to search me, certainly not using a vague and potentially unjust token of law. S.44 is not for random searches when you have no other reason.

4. The threats of "if you've nothing to hide, then why dont you give us your details/let us search your memory cards" and "if you fail to comply you will be arrested and detained" are simply totalitarian.

Now, the links to other info:

http://www.mattwardman​.com …earch-22nd-november-2008/
Photos of Met Police search record, mine is the same format except my stop code was T, reason for search code was J (not any other one which it could have been ie. D or F) and Outcome was 2 (in that i was advised that i should avoid carrying a monopod, that i should give my details when asked, and should show "proper, valid ID").

http://southwalesanarc​hists.org …earch-at-cardiff-central/
Report of a S.44 search at Cardiff Central train station and the reasons given for it by police.

http://www.boingboing.​net …visitor-to-london-vi.html
This is a good video, I would recommend everyone watching it, as it's pretty similar to my S&S.

http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk …terrorism-act/index.shtml
Liberty's advice on s.44 stop and searches etc.

James.

neil_r wrote in post #6858667
9/11 for you perhaps we in the UK have been rocked by terrorist attacks for many years prior to 9/11.

I don't understand the Cheap Shot line as my comment was neither a shot nor was it cheap.

I was referring specifically to this:

...we certainly do not have anything as draconian as the "Patriot Act" to restrict us.

The Patriot Act has had little to no effect on what average citizens can or can't do in their daily lives nor has it contributed to members of the press being seen as potential threats.

I'm at major sporting venues on many, many weekends each year and I see members of the press coming and going all day long. I've never seen police or stadium security ever treat reporters, TV cameramen or still photographers in the manner in which the OP described.

It's pretty obvious that people in America have some misconceptions regarding the current state of things in the UK but your post shows that some in the UK have equal misconceptions regarding things in America.

Much (I'm sure) to the dissapointment of Al Queda, life pretty much goes on in the US as it did on 9/10/01. We're just a little bit smarter now and we have eyes and ears working where we may not have had them (or had enough of them) before.

My apologies if I offended you...

jamesb84 wrote in post #6858719
I still dont see why you'd agree with this behaviour, the issues as I see them are:

Sorry, I did not want to come over as agreeing with his behavior, I really don't know enough to have an opinion either way.

It could have been a completely vindictive, unfounded and unjustified attack on your liberties, perpetrated by an ass of a policeman.

It could also have been a justified search because just before you walked down the road he received a call on his radio saying that someone with a black stick and a pelli case had just bought 10Kg's of semtex from Explosives "R" Us.

We just don't know.

General apology, I am not trying to be contentious or offensive.

I am just being clumsy

neil_r wrote in post #6858755
Sorry, I did not want to come over as agreeing with his behavior, I really don't know enough to have an opinion either way.

It could have been a completely vindictive, unfounded and unjustified attack on your liberties, perpetrated by an ass of a policeman.

It could also have been a justified search because just before you walked down the road he received a call on his radio saying that someone with a black stick and a pelli case had just bought 10Kg's of semtex from Explosives "R" Us.

We just don't know.

That is fair enough, however, if he were to search me under you hypothesised idea, then he would have to inform me of the reasons, and what would be more likely would be that I would have been face down on the ground with no chance to do anything with my "black stick"... I believe under the terms of the search/act they have to tell you WHY they are searching you.

My worry is that s.44 is pretty much carte blanche for photographers to be searched thoroughly and prosecuted/charged for having a photo of something (take Mystery Machine's issue with a "p word"...police see that under a s.44 search and he could be banged up right now for having pictures of children).

James.

I'm not a fan of much the Patriot Act, but I've never heard of anyone being legally stopped and searched with the officer saying "I don't care, I would like to search you under section XX of the Patriot Act". In fact I can't seem to find anyone who's rights have been illegally violated using a provision of the Patriot Act.

But I digress, it isn't necessarily the laws that I am bemoaning, it is the utter lack of common sense in administering them. Instead of using common sense, lets just make everyone's life miserable.

I've been to Britain twice and quite enjoyed it and the people. I have nothing against either.

It is the culture of fear in the name of security and privacy that has me concerned. It is spreading throughout the world, it just seems that there are many more stories from Britain lately that demonstrate that.

Should have been open and honest with him. Told him the pod is used to defend yourself from lonely women and last week they tried to rob you of your clothes.

neil_r wrote in post #6858589
we certainly do not have anything as draconian as the "Patriot Act" to restrict us.

Erm..

Whereas under the old "Prevention of Terrorism Act" Mr Plod needed reasonable grounds for a stop & search, the new, all-singing & all-dancing Terrorism act 2000 (S44) gives them the power to stop anyone in a specific area without prior suspicion. That falls under my definition of draconian. Strange how it was introduced before September 11th 2001...don't you think ?

All the officer needed to do was ask to examine the pod and take a look inside the camera case. The purpose of the aforementioned "weapon" would have been crystal clear even to a Flatfoot who sounds only fit for dishing out fines to people allowing their dogs to have a dump in the park.

jamesb84 wrote in post #6858813
That is fair enough, however, if he were to search me under you hypothesised idea, then he would have to inform me of the reasons, and what would be more likely would be that I would have been face down on the ground with no chance to do anything with my "black stick"... I believe under the terms of the search/act they have to tell you WHY they are searching you.

My worry is that s.44 is pretty much carte blanche for photographers to be searched thoroughly and prosecuted/charged for having a photo of something (take Mystery Machine's issue with a "p word"...police see that under a s.44 search and he could be banged up right now for having pictures of children).

James.

So they searched your cards and laptop, if so that is absolutely ridiculous!
If they asked me what the monopod was for I would have said it was to hold camera, if they didn't believe that I would have taken the camera out and assembled it on the monopod for them, and if they wanted to know why you had the camera or whatever I would have shown them your press card.......
If you tried that, and they wanted to search your cards/laptop still (I guess the bag is just okay as you could have a bomb in there, cards/laptop would have seriously pissed me off to the point of nearly hurting someone!) that is just ludicrous!

So how long did they search you laptop/cards for, like go through the whole bloody thing to the point of reading all your emails and stuff like that or what?

pendulum15 wrote in post #6889161
So they searched your cards and laptop, if so that is absolutely ridiculous!
If they asked me what the monopod was for I would have said it was to hold camera, if they didn't believe that I would have taken the camera out and assembled it on the monopod for them, and if they wanted to know why you had the camera or whatever I would have shown them your press card.......
If you tried that, and they wanted to search your cards/laptop still (I guess the bag is just okay as you could have a bomb in there, cards/laptop would have seriously pissed me off to the point of nearly hurting someone!) that is just ludicrous!

So how long did they search you laptop/cards for, like go through the whole bloody thing to the point of reading all your emails and stuff like that or what?

Asked me to turn on the laptop to check it "was a real laptop" and that was pretty much it for that...they wanted to physically look at the cards (but not what was on them) which I objected to and they gave up. Whole thing took probably 5 minutes or a shade less.

On a related note, and something that could lead to all of us being stopped more often...

http://www.bjp-online.com …showPage.html?p​age=831582

I would urge all UK photographers to send this on to as many people as possible and protest it wherever sensible to do so.

James.

jamesb84 wrote in post #6889236
Asked me to turn on the laptop to check it "was a real laptop" and that was pretty much it for that...they wanted to physically look at the cards (but not what was on them) which I objected to and they gave up. Whole thing took probably 5 minutes or a shade less.

On a related note, and something that could lead to all of us being stopped more often...

http://www.bjp-online.com …showPage.html?p​age=831582

I would urge all UK photographers to send this on to as many people as possible and protest it wherever sensible to do so.

James.

Oh thank god, still a bit silly, and I reckon the guy was just trying to do a power thing on you. I was assuming like 1hr immigrations interrogation where they search/read all your personal files and such! That would be bad...

Good thing I live in Perth, where when I accidentally shoot in a cordoned off area they come up to me and say "I assume you have all the right passes" and I just say "yeah, I think so" and they just walk off

A bit of petrol (gas) for the fire.

Not too good to watch....

http://www.boingboing.​net …visitor-to-london-vi.html

neil_r wrote in post #6889342
A bit of petrol (gas) for the fire.

Not too good to watch....

http://www.boingboing.​net …visitor-to-london-vi.html

I don't know what's more annoying about that video. The fact that it can actually happen in this country or the pompous attitude of the 2 BTP Flatfoot's doing the search. The reaction of Plod#1 to being asked for his ID is particularly annoying.

These people need to be given a sharp reminder that they're here to serve us, not vice-versa.

All credit to the chap with the camera, my patience would have worn very thin, very fast and i'd no doubt have ended up in cuffs.