x404.co.uk
http://x404.co.uk/forum/

Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
http://x404.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=9198		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  timark_uk [ Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
Section 44 of the anti-terrorism bill looks like it's swiftly going to be coming to an end.
I, for one, will not miss it.
Article clicky

Mark
Author:  paulzolo [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 9:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
Won’t stop police from harassing you. They will fall back on other crowd-pleasing subjects when reasoned counter arguments have been exhausted. Want to be called a pedophile by a policeman because you are near children with a camera?
Author:  veato [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 10:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
In a partially related example Nic and her friend to their two 6 month olds to the local pool. It was 10am and completely dead. They took a photo of each others baby for their first ever 'swim' at the poolside.

They were both told off and advised they need to fill in the required forms to obtain some documents to allow taking a photo of the child on the property.
Author:  timark_uk [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 10:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
veato wrote:
They were both told off and advised they need to fill in the required forms to obtain some documents to allow taking a photo of the child on the property.
Whilst not entirely user friendly to the patronage if it was private property then there's really no recourse for those asked to abide by the rules - such as they are.
It's disappointing, to be sure.

Mark
Author:  belchingmatt [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
The local pool here doesn't allow cameras unless with prior written permission. Afaik these policices have been in place for many, many years.
Author:  Nick [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:38 am ]
Post subject:  Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
Yeah and I think it's perfectly fair enough, to be honest.

If I were a parent, I don't think I would want some random person taking photos of my kids swimming.
Author:  okenobi [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
I run the pool at work and we've had a similar policy for years. You can hardly compare it to section 44. That going, would be a MAJOR WIN.

If people wanna take photos of their kids, they can ask me nicely and needs to be nobody else in there. That's just how it goes. Hardly the same as being stopped and search for no reason :roll:
Author:  belchingmatt [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 12:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
Nick wrote:
Yeah and I think it's perfectly fair enough, to be honest.

If I were a parent, I don't think I would want some random person taking photos of my kids swimming.


It's always an assumption of protecting the children. They may want to take pictures of you in Speedos. ;) :P
Author:  Nick [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 12:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
belchingmatt wrote:
Nick wrote:
Yeah and I think it's perfectly fair enough, to be honest.

If I were a parent, I don't think I would want some random person taking photos of my kids swimming.


It's always an assumption of protecting the children. They may want to take pictures of you in Speedos. ;) :P


Haha!

I wouldn't blame them-have you seen this? *points hands towards torso*
Author:  veato [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 12:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
Just to clarify (as I seemed to have started something):-

1) I never compared it to section 44. I was referring to this comment "Want to be called a pedophile by a policeman because you are near children with a camera?" made in post 2, i.e. camera+swimmingpool=pervert logic

2) "If I were a parent, I don't think I would want some random person taking photos of my kids swimming." They were taking pictures of their own kids. No one elses kids were involved.
Author:  timark_uk [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 12:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
Thread tidied up.

Mark
Author:  Fogmeister [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 1:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
veato wrote:
Just to clarify (as I seemed to have started something):-

1) I never compared it to section 44. I was referring to this comment "Want to be called a pedophile by a policeman because you are near children with a camera?" made in post 2, i.e. camera+swimmingpool=pervert logic

2) "If I were a parent, I don't think I would want some random person taking photos of my kids swimming." They were taking pictures of their own kids. No one elses kids were involved.

I understood what you meant and I also agree that it's bizarre that even in the local play park I am frowned upon for taking a camera in when I'm with my little sister. As long as other people's kids aren't affected then I don't see the problem of taking photos of my sister (kids if I had any).
Author:  okenobi [ Thu Jul 01, 2010 4:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Govt. stop-and-search appeal rejected
veato wrote:
Just to clarify (as I seemed to have started something):-

1) I never compared it to section 44. I was referring to this comment "Want to be called a pedophile by a policeman because you are near children with a camera?" made in post 2, i.e. camera+swimmingpool=pervert logic

2) "If I were a parent, I don't think I would want some random person taking photos of my kids swimming." They were taking pictures of their own kids. No one elses kids were involved.


Coolio. I think my policy is pretty fair.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/