Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
Thread started 04 Jan 2010 (Monday) 18:09
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Taken into custody.

 
gorgon2k
Member
Avatar
246 posts
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
     
Jan 04, 2010 19:43 |  #16

"It is also an offence under section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to take a photograph of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or possessing such a photograph. There is an identical defence of reasonable excuse. This offence (and possibly, but not necessarily the s.58A offence) covers only a photograph as described in s.2(3)(b) of the Terrorism Act 2006. As such, it must be of a kind likely to provide practical assistance to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. Whether the photograph in question is such is a matter for a jury, which is not required to look at the surrounding circumstances. The photograph must contain information of such a nature as to raise a reasonable suspicion that it was intended to be used to assist in the preparation or commission of an act of terrorism. It must call for an explanation. A photograph which is innocuous on its face will not fall foul of the provision if the prosecution adduces evidence that it was intended to be used for the purpose of committing or preparing a terrorist act. The defence may prove a reasonable excuse simply by showing that the photograph is possessed for a purpose other than to assist in the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism, even if the purpose of possession is otherwise unlawful."




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
asysin2leads
I'm kissing arse
Avatar
6,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Lebanon, OH
     
Jan 04, 2010 19:46 as a reply to  @ post 9324526 |  #17

LAWYER! Your civil rights were violated and violated in a big way. There is nothing illegal about taking photos of an oil refinery. If you were on public roadway, then they have absolutely NO jurisdiction.


Kevin
https://www.google.com ….com&ctz=Americ​a/New_York (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
asysin2leads
I'm kissing arse
Avatar
6,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Lebanon, OH
     
Jan 04, 2010 19:48 |  #18

gorgon2k wrote in post #9324927 (external link)
"It is also an offence under section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 to take a photograph of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or possessing such a photograph. There is an identical defence of reasonable excuse. This offence (and possibly, but not necessarily the s.58A offence) covers only a photograph as described in s.2(3)(b) of the Terrorism Act 2006. As such, it must be of a kind likely to provide practical assistance to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism. Whether the photograph in question is such is a matter for a jury, which is not required to look at the surrounding circumstances. The photograph must contain information of such a nature as to raise a reasonable suspicion that it was intended to be used to assist in the preparation or commission of an act of terrorism. It must call for an explanation. A photograph which is innocuous on its face will not fall foul of the provision if the prosecution adduces evidence that it was intended to be used for the purpose of committing or preparing a terrorist act. The defence may prove a reasonable excuse simply by showing that the photograph is possessed for a purpose other than to assist in the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism, even if the purpose of possession is otherwise unlawful."

Man, did that give me a headache. They would be hard-pressed to prove there was anything terroristic about taking a photo of an oil refinery.


Kevin
https://www.google.com ….com&ctz=Americ​a/New_York (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Karl ­ Johnston
Cream of the Crop
9,334 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jul 2008
     
Jan 04, 2010 19:49 |  #19
bannedPermanent ban

With all the stuff in the news lately I can understand the hysteria but at the same time ^ I agree with Kevin, there's still no excuse. Isn't the point of protecting freedom jeopardized when we start jeopardizing each other's rights to that freedom? Within reason of course, there isn't very much info on where this refinery is...if its gov't or private, then they can probably stop you from photographing on their property without permission but I'm not a lawyer, so I don't really know


Adventurous Photographer, Writer (external link) & Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 178
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Jan 04, 2010 19:51 |  #20

gorgon2k wrote in post #9324927 (external link)
<SNIP>

A photograph which is innocuous on its face will not fall foul of the provision if the prosecution adduces evidence that it was intended to be used for the purpose of committing or preparing a terrorist act. The defence may prove a reasonable excuse simply by showing that the photograph is possessed for a purpose other than to assist in the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism, even if the purpose of possession is otherwise unlawful."

Which I take to mean the burden of proof is squarely on the Prosecution which must prove intent.

I really wouldn't wish it on anyone but just once, I'd like to see them jack up someone with great gear, tons of cash and plenty of time just to run this through the courts once to prove how rediculous it really is.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NeutronBoy
Goldmember
2,052 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2007
Location: LI, NY
     
Jan 04, 2010 19:55 |  #21

Sure, it's all ridiculous until something gets blown up ... don't you watch the news? These things are real, people are out there trying to get back at us. We ARE in a war status now and the enemy is in our country. Smell the coffee.


Sony A7C, Sony A6000, 5D Mark II, 40D, 350d
Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS II L | Canon 100-400 IS L [COLOR=black]| Canon 24-70 L | Canon 100mm Macro f2.8 | Canon 50 f1.4| Canon 10-22 | Canon MP-E 65 | Rokinon 14mm f2.8 | Sigma 17 - 70 macro
MT-24 & 430 flashes | other junk

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Karl ­ Johnston
Cream of the Crop
9,334 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jul 2008
     
Jan 04, 2010 19:59 |  #22
bannedPermanent ban

NeutronBoy wrote in post #9325017 (external link)
Sure, it's all ridiculous until something gets blown up ... don't you watch the news? These things are real, people are out there trying to get back at us. We ARE in a war status now and the enemy is in our country. Smell the coffee.

Irony is George Orwell's book 1984 talks a lot about the influence of media and government and propaganda.

Not trying to insinuate anything but it's an interesting perspective to remember. Without going into politics we need to take care of our liberties, imo, and continue to live in respect to each other as we always did ..otherwise isn't that giving our enemies an (albeit small) victory?


Adventurous Photographer, Writer (external link) & Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S30L28
Senior Member
Avatar
448 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: États-Unis
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:00 |  #23

I would have walked away and if they tried to do anything, I would have called the 'actual' cops.

EDIT: Recover your photos and post. :D


-Brian

Equipement d'appareil photo
Seller Feedback:1 (external link), 2 (external link), 3 (external link), 4 (external link), 5 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
breal101
Goldmember
2,724 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Aug 2006
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:05 |  #24

NeutronBoy wrote in post #9325017 (external link)
Sure, it's all ridiculous until something gets blown up ... don't you watch the news? These things are real, people are out there trying to get back at us. We ARE in a war status now and the enemy is in our country. Smell the coffee.

Are they, just who is the enemy? Is it OK to take away freedom to protect it?:rolleyes:


In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell


"Try to go out empty and let your images fill you up." Jay Maisel

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MT ­ Stringer
Goldmember
Avatar
4,652 posts
Likes: 6
Joined May 2006
Location: Channelview, Tx
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:24 |  #25

It sounds ridiculous to me when Google probably has better detailed photos available to anyone on earth.


MaxPreps Profile (external link)

My Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Karl ­ Johnston
Cream of the Crop
9,334 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jul 2008
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:29 |  #26
bannedPermanent ban

I can see and make out the make of my car in the driveway using google maps....


Adventurous Photographer, Writer (external link) & Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 178
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:33 |  #27

Under the heading of "Don't Agonize, Organize!"

Is there any advocacy group doing anything to educate and inform the public (and security-related organizations) on the advantages of having a watchful and active press (and by extension, group of photographers?)

In the Aviation World, we have both AOPA and EAA working hand in hand in an effort to make people see the light as it relates to aviation in general and General Aviation in particular and how important it is to the American way of life. Contrary to what USA Today would have you belive, flying is not exclusively the domain of the uber rich. In a similar vein, photography is not the domain of only the uber sneaky or malicious but I guess no one thinks photography is of suitable importance to "push back" on some of these security-related falicies...


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
asysin2leads
I'm kissing arse
Avatar
6,329 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Lebanon, OH
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:34 |  #28

NeutronBoy wrote in post #9325017 (external link)
Sure, it's all ridiculous until something gets blown up ... don't you watch the news? These things are real, people are out there trying to get back at us. We ARE in a war status now and the enemy is in our country. Smell the coffee.

Really? You're going with that? Just how much recon do you think the 9-11 terrorists did? They blended in. They were trying to stay under the radar, which they did. Have you seen Google Earth lately? I can see the CIA HQ at Langley clear as a bell. I can see roads in and out of the facility. They could stop all 227,208 members of POTN and still couldn't make a case for terrorism.


Kevin
https://www.google.com ….com&ctz=Americ​a/New_York (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 620
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:39 |  #29

NeutronBoy wrote in post #9325017 (external link)
Sure, it's all ridiculous until something gets blown up ... don't you watch the news? These things are real, people are out there trying to get back at us. We ARE in a war status now and the enemy is in our country. Smell the coffee.

Smell the coffee yourself. Where has there ever been a case of terrorists wandering around with great big dSLR cameras looking as obvious as possible?

Doesn't it seem like they would just use Google Earth? Or a cell phone pressed inconsipicuously to one ear?

This whole thing reminds me of that time when the airline ticket agent had to ask you 'Did you pack your own bag?" Guess what? If you packed a bomb into your own bag the answer is still 'yes'!

So much of what passes for 'security' in our reaction to terrorism is simply mindless authoritarianism. We could not profile a Nigerian on a watch list who had been to Yemen several times, paid cash and was traveling with no bags.

But we can hassle a guy standing outside a refinery with a great big camera.

Smart.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
john-in-japan
Goldmember
1,208 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2008
Location: Kamogawa City, Chiba in Japan
     
Jan 04, 2010 20:40 |  #30

Are we not getting ahead of ourselves?
He was NOT arrested - They were NOT the police.
He was asked to delete the photos - he had a choice to make - comply with request or not comply.
No indication of rudeness on anyone's part. If taken from public property, no foul. Where is the beef?
OP had the option to comply or not comply with a request. Over reaction on the part of security - perhaps - perhaps not? OP gives minimal information on what was said, so really can't tell if these were security folks simply trying to do their job or worse. Getting "busted" was not true. Lets get the full story. What was said and what was done?
John


JohnW
5D Mark II Dual Battery Grip, [COLOR=black], 200 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L II IS, 24-70 f/2.8L 180Macro f/3.5L[COLOR=black], 85 II f/1.2L[COLOR=black], 17-40 f/4L, 50 f/1.4, 50 f/2.5 Compact Macro, MPE-65, 550EX, 400L f.2.8L IS, 580EXII, Canon RingFlash, RRS Perfect Portrait Pkg., Velbon with PH275 and Slider, bunch of filters, Canon 1.4X & Having Fun! http://kamogawa.smugmu​g.com/external link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

12,903 views & 0 likes for this thread, 45 members have posted to it.
Taken into custody.
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
2720 guests, 155 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.