Comments on: Street photography in Britain http://neildixon.com/street-photography-in-britain/ neil dixon's blog, journal, and list of stuff he does Sat, 28 Aug 2010 03:05:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Alasdair http://neildixon.com/street-photography-in-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-80868 Alasdair Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:14:23 +0000 http://neildixon.com/?p=1604#comment-80868 Neil, I think you're looking at the wrong act if you are discussing photographing the Police. You need to read the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/pdf/ukpga_20080028_en.pdf , particularly section 76 which states:- 76 Offences relating to information about members of armed forces etc (1) After section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (collection of information) insert— “58A Eliciting, publishing or communicating information about members of armed forces etc (1) A person commits an offence who— (a) elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who is or has been— (i) a member of Her Majesty’s forces, (ii) a member of any of the intelligence services, or (iii) a constable, which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or (b) publishes or communicates any such information Note they now seem to regard a Constable as being a member of the armed forces. Note the guilty until you prove your innocence clause. How are you suppose to know if someone has ever been a constable or member of the armed forces? On the street, it is the officer who decides what is "useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism". You also have to look at the legal definition of "terrorism". A simple search shows how often these anti-terrorism laws are being abused by the police and the police are not held to account for their transgressions. An educated public is the best defence and I don't believe that to be scare-mongering. That said, I'm not solicitor, and the above is just my opinion. Neil,

I think you’re looking at the wrong act if you are discussing photographing the Police.

You need to read the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/pdf/ukpga_20080028_en.pdf , particularly section 76 which states:-

76 Offences relating to information about members of armed forces etc
(1) After section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (collection of information) insert—
“58A Eliciting, publishing or communicating information about members
of armed forces etc
(1) A person commits an offence who—
(a) elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who
is or has been—
(i) a member of Her Majesty’s forces,
(ii) a member of any of the intelligence services, or
(iii) a constable,
which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or
preparing an act of terrorism, or
(b) publishes or communicates any such information

Note they now seem to regard a Constable as being a member of the armed forces.

Note the guilty until you prove your innocence clause.

How are you suppose to know if someone has ever been a constable or member of the armed forces?

On the street, it is the officer who decides what is “useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism”. You also have to look at the legal definition of “terrorism”.

A simple search shows how often these anti-terrorism laws are being abused by the police and the police are not held to account for their transgressions.

An educated public is the best defence and I don’t believe that to be scare-mongering.

That said, I’m not solicitor, and the above is just my opinion.

]]> By: neil http://neildixon.com/street-photography-in-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-80867 neil Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:20:35 +0000 http://neildixon.com/?p=1604#comment-80867 I agree entirely, Nick. The public paranoia has also been hugely inflated by the media sensationaism, I feel, but all the more reason we need to understand our rights. It's certainly a disturbing mentality entering the public consciousness. I agree entirely, Nick. The public paranoia has also been hugely inflated by the media sensationaism, I feel, but all the more reason we need to understand our rights. It’s certainly a disturbing mentality entering the public consciousness.

]]> By: Nick Turpin http://neildixon.com/street-photography-in-britain/comment-page-1/#comment-80866 Nick Turpin Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:12:02 +0000 http://neildixon.com/?p=1604#comment-80866 Whilst I agree that scaremongering is unhelpful and a clarification of the law is always welcome, I have found a change of attitude at street level not just by the Police but also by members of the public. Yesterday afternoon I was making street photographs on the South Side of London Bridge when a Policeman stopped me and questioned me because a member of the public had reported 'A man taking photographs', this ill informed paranoia has been fed if not created by the Home Office and the Met Police in London with their poster campaign and new ill defined legislation. I think it is a mistake to brush these changes off too lightly. The fact that you are under suspicion simply because you are making pictures in a public place is wrong. Whilst I agree that scaremongering is unhelpful and a clarification of the law is always welcome, I have found a change of attitude at street level not just by the Police but also by members of the public. Yesterday afternoon I was making street photographs on the South Side of London Bridge when a Policeman stopped me and questioned me because a member of the public had reported ‘A man taking photographs’, this ill informed paranoia has been fed if not created by the Home Office and the Met Police in London with their poster campaign and new ill defined legislation. I think it is a mistake to brush these changes off too lightly. The fact that you are under suspicion simply because you are making pictures in a public place is wrong.

]]>