I have posted this story in the news section but thought I would post it here as well.
clicky



Serves him right for lurking with the intention of being tall.
im lost for words <for once>

A demonstration is planned for Saturday 15th august.
More informtion can be through the below link
link

Damn! It's a real shame I shall be in Dorset that Saturday. Otherwise I'd make it my business to be there at that demo.

What is happening to the country? Why are we letting it happen?

We let it happen because the general public is apathetic and when you put people in power they will inevitably abuse it.
Just look at the Stanford experiment to see how quickly those in authority can go bad.

Evil prospers when the the good stand by and are silent.

Yup. Sadly.

wow England really is turning into a "police state"

As I said in the other thread, if you oppose this sort of thing I suggest everyone donates a tenner or so to Liberty.

Oi, it affects Scotlandshire, too, you know.

I wonder if it’s the camera. I get the feeling that if I turned up to a location with my Canon, I will be more likely to be a target for a challenge that if I turned up with my Leica, which is a compact.

Both the Canon and the Leica have the same size CCD. I can fit a comparable lens onto my Canon which will give me much the same focal range as the Leica has. Both cameras also shoot in RAW, and both operate like an SLR (both are usually on manual or aperture priority).

The Canon looks like a beast. I have the battery grip fitted, which makes it look bulkier. The Canon looks the business. Turn up with that, and I look like I know what I’m doing. Turn up with the other camera, and I look like any old muppet with a compact point and shoot. The question here is perception. A BIG camera, or at the very least a (D)LSR is more obvious and could indicate semi-pro or pro activities. A small camera is less obvious. Surely if you were up to no good, a smaller, compact camera would be more discrete and would be easier to claim that you were just a tourist? By extension, a mobile phone would be even less conspicuous.

Firstly, I’d like to know if only (D)SLR touting individuals are targets because they are easier to spot. Secondly, I’d like to know the % of (D)SLR stops against mobile phones or compacts. I doubt that data is available, but it would be interesting to know the numbers if they exist.

I suppose the experiment would be to take a set of pictures with the compact, then return to the scene and do the same with a DSLR and see what happens.

If it is the camera, then someone didn't take their common sense tablets.

What self-respecting terrorist, scoping out a likely target, is likely to stand in full view waving an SLR and expensive lens?

If this law was to be applied fairly, the police should be stopping everyone with a mobile phone as well. That's what I'd use if I was wanting to take surreptitious images of a target. Not a mahoosive camera, that's for sure.

Someone needs to get their priorities sorted, I think.

Exactly! That's what they want you to think, see?
Of course, they're all at home using Google Earth to plan their nefarious, uh plans.

Yes they all using Streetview, much safer - no pesky dimwits from Ruralshire Constabulary.

Here’s another story.

http://www.fivecomputers.com/2009/02/stop-search.html

I like the paragraph at the end:



It does sound like this was slightly more cordial than the Chatham incident, despite being an intrusion.

*holds head in hands and sobs*

Someone needs to start standing up to these retards. If a Police Officer asked my for ID I'd want to know why he wanted it, just what crime does he have reasonable suspicion of me committing/planning to commit.

Failure to provide ID is NOT in itself good enough for reasonable suspicion.

Of course in London where a S.44 authorisation is in place its one thing. But outside of London where there's unlikely to be a S.44 authorisation then the idiot coppers are fair game. I really wonder if pictures of Chatham highstreet or the onions (sorry, coppers) involved are really likely to be useful to a person planning an act of terrorism.

I don't see why people should feel the need to answer every question the Police throw at them for fear of arrest. As far as I'm concerned if the Police arrest you under the Terrorism Act and subsequently can't justify it, then the matter should be referred to the IPCC and the Constabulary should be sued for false imprisonment and wrongful arrest.

Well, it seems that the Home Office do not collect statistics on arrests & prosecutions according to this FIA request:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/s ... _to_incide

It seems that generally records of such incidents are not kept as other factors trigger the arrest. Even so, the camera is clearly the catalyst for the process.