Paulw Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Watch yourself around the Port of Tyne! http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/01/port_of_tyne_security_hassled_photographer_public_road/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Watch yourself around the Port of Tyne! http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/01/port_of_tyne_security_hassled_photographer_public_road/ Needs a mass photo shoots from the public road! Noble should have made a complaint to the police about his treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The goons have been well trained- they know they can't touch people but that interfering with property is debatable as a criminal offence. Hence the hand on the tripod. Perhaps the officers told them the facts of life. Still outrageous that they are so ignorant though- this sort of nonsense is all but extinct in the South-East. The northern powerhouse needs its legal batteries charged up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TokyoM1ke Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 It's such a difficult one - the guys from the port obviously handle it extremely badly, totally over the top. However, there are circumstances where they should be vigilant and report odd activity. There are always going to be situations of over reach... Ultimately the balance at the moment probably isn't too bad and won't be so long as photographers keep asserting their rights... and posting the videos on YouTube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Naturally your average terrorist is going to conduct hostile reconnaissance in plain sight with a fluid-head tripod and a DSLR. Why be inconspicuous with a camera phone? By over-reacting, pillocks like these actually make it less likely that suspicious activity will be uncovered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Since he has on record the security guard's comment that he cannot leave the scene, the tog has clearly been detained unlawfully. He should sue them and their employer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 That is ridiculous, typical short man security guard syndrome! Maybe because Mr Noble is young, the boneheads thought they had a nice easy job. Of course terrorism is a threat, but if your security guard can't assess a situation and ask someone what he was doing and ascertain what Mr Noble is up to, I'm pretty sure a terrorist would have a better plan and not be acting suspiciously with a tripod and a camera? He could have said it, or questioned in so many ways, but it was a classic bullying act. When terrorists start wandering around with cameras attached to tripods, they might be justified, by the way, I'm not sure how you can act suspiciously with a tripod, unless he was waking down the street swinging it at people! At least the police seemed to have a better handle on it. I'm pretty sure terrorist have access to the internet, Google maps shows more than the lads video, ridiculous & with security guards "protecting" us in such way, heaven help us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inchiquin Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 If a few of these heavy-handed and ignorant security guards were charged with wasting police time the message would soon get through. But they're not going to be, are they, despite the fact that they've clearly done so? Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 So the security guards are terrorising the photographer. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Since he has on record the security guard's comment that he cannot leave the scene, the tog has clearly been detained unlawfully. He should sue them and their employer. That's arguable.. Detention doesn't require laying on of hands, it can be by words or behaviour. If two men told me I wasn't going where I wanted to go, and one interfered with my property, I'd certainly say I'd been intimidated into remaining. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it) it was only for a short period. Not much mileage for an ambulance-chaser. If there's enough publicity to make the Port of Tyne look like twerps that'll help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TokyoM1ke Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 If a few of these heavy-handed and ignorant security guards were charged with wasting police time the message would soon get through. But they're not going to be, are they, despite the fact that they've clearly done so? Alan So difficult (I am NOT defending them) - you don't want to put people off reporting what they perceive to be suspicious, however misguided/incompetent they may be. Being more practical, perhaps it's the employer who should really be in trouble for not training them adequately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 No but we do want to put them off intimidating photographers. The authorities have form for this in the UK but the police usually know the facts of life now and it's high time private so-called security did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 If a few of these heavy-handed and ignorant security guards were charged with wasting police time the message would soon get through. But they're not going to be, are they, despite the fact that they've clearly done so? Alan So difficult (I am NOT defending them) - you don't want to put people off reporting what they perceive to be suspicious, however misguided/incompetent they may be. Being more practical, perhaps it's the employer who should really be in trouble for not training them adequately? True. And because it's not on their own territory they should call the cops. Just like I have to do when it's not in my garden. I can walk up though and ask the person politely what his/her business is. Offer some help maybe ;-) It's these hi-viz jackets. That's why I have one in my car too. wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brooks Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 It really makes you wonder about security and their attitude to cameras, when you can case a place much easier on Google. Like this Nuclear power station. https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Pickering,+ON/@43.8094172,-79.0689461,1207m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x89d4d9abfae88d1d:0x4bd24862b12786d8!6m1!1e1?hl=en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 ...........and you can see everything the complainant could see of the Port from here, where he put his tripod. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.9784846,-1.4462645,3a,75y,308.9h,91.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Xms6NeCg6WMaBmNetVzFg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 The Google car even drove past the barrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TokyoM1ke Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 ...........and you can see everything the complainant could see of the Port from here, where he put his tripod. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.9784846,-1.4462645,3a,75y,308.9h,91.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Xms6NeCg6WMaBmNetVzFg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 The Google car even drove past the barrier. That's really hilarious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisC Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I did say ...........and you can see everything the complainant could see of the Port from here, where he put his tripod. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.9784846,-1.4462645,3a,75y,308.9h,91.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_Xms6NeCg6WMaBmNetVzFg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 The Google car even drove past the barrier. That's really hilarious! I did say Google maps had a better view, but I meant the photographers view and of course, they can travel the perimeter. Why go there Friday afternoon, it's always cold in the North East, (or whenever I've visited) when they can sit in a local cafe, or at home etc? https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.9782795,-1.4462056,3a,75y,351.51h,76.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snoFjNAEqtdXi1PvIraUraQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 But of course a terrorist wouldn't do that would he, he'd roll up with a tripod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertSnapper Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Funny when the filming guy says to the security bloke 'You've got lovely blue eyes. Tired eyes' . That shuts him up for a bit ! If businesses, organisations etc. don't want their signs/ shop window displays/ logos/ here we are type of stuff etc. to be seen by others...... ....then don't put up signs/ shop window displays/ logos/ here we are type of stuff etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Morrison Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I keep a copy of this letter in my pocket - http://www.theiac.org.uk/resourcesnew/filming-in-public/ACPO_Guidance_PhotographsPublicPlaces.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I keep a copy of this letter in my pocket - http://www.theiac.org.uk/resourcesnew/filming-in-public/ACPO_Guidance_PhotographsPublicPlaces.pdf Thanks John, I've just printed myself a copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'd expect security guards to know that. In this case the ignorance was about the extent of the restricted area but it might occasionally get one out of a sticky spot. One wonders why he didn't dial 999 himself when he was effectively detained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I keep a copy of this letter in my pocket - http://www.theiac.org.uk/resourcesnew/filming-in-public/ACPO_Guidance_PhotographsPublicPlaces.pdf Thanks John, I've just printed myself a copy. Thanks from me too. I have printed four copies, just in case. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I keep a copy of this letter in my pocket - http://www.theiac.org.uk/resourcesnew/filming-in-public/ACPO_Guidance_PhotographsPublicPlaces.pdf Thanks John, I've just printed myself a copy. Thanks from me too. I have printed four copies, just in case. Allan I have filed and printed a copy for my camera bags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickfly Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'd expect security guards to know that. In this case the ignorance was about the extent of the restricted area but it might occasionally get one out of a sticky spot. One wonders why he didn't dial 999 himself when he was effectively detained. He was using his phone to film the 'heavies'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'd expect security guards to know that. In this case the ignorance was about the extent of the restricted area but it might occasionally get one out of a sticky spot. One wonders why he didn't dial 999 himself when he was effectively detained. He was using his phone to film the 'heavies'. Ah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.