Shooting cops may get you jailed

[Mark W]

Just paying cartch up - the guy with the m phone was a fool and the video IS made by lentil eating police haters.

I am not a polivce hater - in fact I had to stop doing ' lefty ' video cos they all hate me round here cos I dobbed in some fools for daft acts of vandalism a few years back and it all belw up in my face.

I disgree with those above who dont think this is scary.

I dont really care much if people ask me to stop filming - I know that law and ither pretend to be Polish or just ignore them - my size and er look usually mean I am left alone.

However many non enthiusuasts I know really do think you cant film and that the police can stop you as they see fit. That worries me.

I got folloed in London once by 2 rozzers with MP5s after I filmed a rozzer for context - that is TWSTED and smacks of a police state. I was scared that time.

And frankly they have a bloody cheek asking you not to film them when they have a FIT team with camcorders at EVERY even minor thing round here - many people I know find this intimidating and dont go on actions because they fear being filmed - I chatted to a rozzer in the FIT team once - he tolds me they dont usually have tapes in those cameras.... nasty...

[Marc Peters]

Originally Posted by Mark W I got folloed in London once by 2 rozzers with MP5s after I filmed a rozzer for context - that is TWSTED and smacks of a police state. I was scared that time.

Mark, an insight into my world for you. This is how I would have approached the situation.

"Excuse me, hi, I'm just filming something and it would be great if I could take some footage of you guys. Would that be okay?". If they don't agree, then you don't film. I'm not saying there's a right or wrong way, but some ways you can expect to have a bit fear. Just as some people will accelerate if they see an amber traffic light, others will step on their brakes. Neither is right, but they have different associated potential outcomes.

[Mark W]

Yea obviously that is how I approach sitiuations where I may get close to someone who doesnt expect me to film them.

But hang on a sec here - filming a public servant in public from across the other side of the street for fifteen seconds???

We dont live in bloody China do we?

The police must be open to public scrutiny and oversight.

[Mark W]

Oh yea- the day the armed police follwed me I was up in london to film a demo for a group campainging against er - I forgot - anyway 12 of them unfulrred a banner and got sigs at te entrance to H.O.P. - that was a few years ago - now that would be a criminal act cos of other parts of the act - not good.

[Marc Peters]

I look at it this way: I don't often see police officers with guns, even though I work in the financial district of London. When I do, I assume that they are there to protect something, and if I look suspicious, they'll pick up on it. I think that's the difference between the UK and many other countries. Carrying fire arms is still the exception. As such, there's a greater distinction between how you can expect to behave.

Just as at an airport you'd be arrested for joking about carrying a bomb (you wouldn't be arrested for shouting that in a crowded pub), looking suspicious with a camera in front of police with firearms is bound to end with being given a lecture.

I don't want to lose rights, and they should of course be defended. We clearly have very different outlooks on life Mark. Niether of us has the right outlook.

[Mark W]

" Niether of us has the right outlook. " - lols.

[Mark W]

There really is a dark side to this.... lots more like this on the net.

Editorial Photographers UK | "Photographers being arrested to seize evidence" claim at NUJ Photographers' Conference

[Marc Peters]

Naughty Mark. That's an attention grabbing headline that precedes a balanced article.

[Mark W]

Not my headline.

Here is another then - Editorial Photographers UK | Birmingham police officer 'forced press photographer to delete images'

This is happening and it is getting worse I fear. And these are card carrying journos - often it is worse for us ' normal' people.

[Marc Peters]

Seeing as this is now legislation in the UK, be armed with facts and not myths. Here is the relevant extract. Essentially it is up to YOU to prove why you are filming, so get this right before arguing:

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. (2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their action. (3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable— (a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine, or to both; (b) on summary conviction— (i) in England and Wales or Scotland, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both; (ii) in Northern Ireland, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both. (4) In this section “the intelligence services” means the Security Service, the Secret Intelligence Service and GCHQ (within the meaning of section 3 of the Intelligence Services Act 1994 (c. 13)). (5) Schedule 8A to this Act contains supplementary provisions relating to the offence under this section.”. (2) In the application of section 58A in England and Wales in relation to an offence committed before the commencement of section 154(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44) the reference in subsection (3)(b)(i) to 12 months is to be read as a reference to 6 months. (3) In section 118 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (c. 11) (defences), in subsection (5)(a) after “58,” insert “58A,”. (4) After Schedule 8 to the Terrorism Act 2000 insert the Schedule set out in Schedule 8 to this Act.