Glasgow Guide Home

Whats On Glasgow Guide
  Glasgow What's On


    Glasgow Reviews


    Glasgow Gallery


      Glasgow Links
Discuss | Guestbook | Postcard | News | Weather | Feedback | Search | About | What's New
Glasgow Guide Discussion Boards

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )                >> View Today's Topics <<

9 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Braehead In Anti-terror Photo Row, Police cite terror laws over family photo
GG
post 31st Oct 2011, 12:34am
Post #106


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 30th Oct 2011, 05:56pm) *
Nothing wrong with common sense, but that's when it's sensible. Who determined it was "best practice" here? ...

Exactly! Here we have one centre which has three different policies regarding the taking of photographs, depending on which level/area the photographer takes a photo. Madness! Surely there should be industry-wide guidelines and regulations encompassing best practice, rather than leaving it to individual managers or centres?

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alex MacPhee
post 31st Oct 2011, 01:21am
Post #107


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,741
Joined: 1st Nov 2008
From: Surrey, UK
Member No.: 6,183
QUOTE (GG @ 31st Oct 2011, 12:50am) *
Then, presumably, if a customer/photographer was to tell him, or his staff, to mind their own business as the DP does not apply, he/they would call the police?

Quite so.

Not every breach of the Data Protection Act is a criminal offence, and the police have no powers whatsoever to act in civil law, only criminal law. The obvious examples are where other crime, tax evasion, and the like, are involved ; but mere photography, where photographs are not to be associated with other information that might be covered by the DPA, do not fall within the scope of the DPA, so the police, even if called, have no powers to act. The obvious exceptions would be if there was indecent photography involved, say, of a minor, but the police would have powers in any case that did not depend on the DPA, for such cases. (Don't take my word for it : all this can be verified on the Information Commissioner's Office web site.) Police powers extend only to criminal law, not civil law.

What's crazy about this is that most people support the efforts of the police in matters of criminal law. If someone wants to take pictures for terrorist or criminal purposes, no one will know about it. It makes perfect sense to allow members of the public to take normal photographs every single day because these photographs could turn out to contain vital information should something dreadful happen. I can think of several 'missing children' enquiries where the police asked for members of the public to submit photographs of the area of last sighting. If no photographs are allowed, the only photographs to be taken will be those no one knows about and will almost certainly be unwilling to surrender. It may sound a bit like a paraphrase of the pro-weapons lobby that 'if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will carry guns', an argument I find unconvincing in general ; but in this case, banning photography would be incredibly counter-productive. And who'd want to be the person whose interference with photography turned out to be the person who prevented vital clues for the police being recorded?


--------------------
Alex
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 31st Oct 2011, 06:51pm
Post #108


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
That's a very interesting point, Alex, regarding the use of public photos as evidence. Also, there are already very sophisticated high-resolution still and motion cameras which can be fairly easily concealed when in use, so anyone who really wants to take photos, say of storefronts in a shopping centre, will probably have no problem doing this surreptitiously.

Here's an example of your point regarding evidence gathering:
QUOTE
Appeal over Jeep used in attack, 1 July 2007

Police have appealed for information regarding the vehicle which was used in a terrorist attack at Glasgow Airport.

They want to hear from anyone with information about the green Jeep Cherokee, registration number L808 RDT.

Assistant Chief Constable John Malcolm, of Strathclyde Police, said he was keen to know where the car had been in the last few weeks and days.

He also appealed for any photos and videos taken by members of the public during and before the attack
. ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6259032.stm

That said, it must be difficult for security staff in high-traffic public areas to make so many decisions, and be right all the time. As one of the Cumbernauld managers said, a common sense (not to mention polite) approach is what's probably required to make things work. One thing the 'Brahead incident' has done, I think, is to make people think a bit more about the range of issues involved.

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alex Saville
post 1st Nov 2011, 10:57am
Post #109

City Key Holder
******
Posts: 629
Joined: 27th Jan 2006
From: Glasgow Scotland
Member No.: 2,890
One point that has not been raised in this matter is the power of Security Guards.
In fact, they dont have any more power than anyone else.
Member's of the public have the right of Citizens Arrest, however, they had better be sure they get it right as the consequences of them making a mistake can mean they are charged with breaking the law.
Security companies go to great lengths to give the public the impression that they have powers of arrest, which, other than Citizens Arrest, they dont.
Some paint their cars with battenberg patterns replicating police vehicles to give the impression they are official.
There is also a trend to put orange flashing beacons on the roofs, which is illegal as they are not on the list of permitted vehicles that are allowed to do so.
They dress their employees in uniforms that seek to give the impression that they have authority, which again, they dont.
If, for example, a security guard asks someone who has left a shopping mall or store to return because he/she or the Store/Mall believe they has committed an offence, the security guard has no right in law to force anyone to do so.
If they lay a hand to restrain the, in the Guard/Store/Mall's eye's, suspect, they are in danger of being charged with assualt.
If they do this to someone who is innocent then the roof could fall in on them.
As has been pointed out elsewhere, come Christmas Shopping time and the mall's themelves advertise on TV with video of their clients shopping.
Where does that put Strathclyde Police and the various shopping malls policy on photograph's then?
Can the answer be 'Do as I say, not as I do?'
Alex

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jupiter
post 1st Nov 2011, 01:02pm
Post #110

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 4,104
Joined: 27th Oct 2009
From: Home in the`burbs.
Member No.: 7,675
Alex, a very informative post the contents of which members of the public should make themselves aware.An ordinary member of the public can only make an arrest if he or she sees a criminal act being committed and a security guard for example cannot make an arrest on the say so of someone else, another witness,although I have no doubt that this does happen.
Twice I have walked out of supermarkets and the buzzer has gone off.Now I have never stolen anything so clearly there is a malfunction.Twice I have declined the invite to go back in the shop by a security guard and that has been the end of the matter.
Our local supermarket has a buzzer at the door which goes off frequently and very few folk bother with it.Co-incidentally the buzzer at the Marks and Spencer store at Braehead goes off if you look at it sideways. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
*Shirley*
post 1st Nov 2011, 08:07pm
Post #111






Alex, thank you also from me as I must also admit that was not actually aware of the legal aspect of the powers of these vast armies of private security staff. Not that I am likely ever to come into conatct with them but you never know as I do frequent the shopping malls. It does kinda make you wonder that none of these lobbying groups haven't tried to get them powers of arrest or at the least detainment. Shoosh! Might start something! biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 5th Dec 2011, 07:24am
Post #112


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
Looks like the 'photo fiasco' had no long-term effect... ?
QUOTE
... Capital Shopping Centres, which owns Braehead, near Glasgow, claimed its shops were welcoming “record” visitor numbers but declined to provide figures.

Warning of more exits from the UK high street
http://www.scotsman.com/business/warning_o...treet_1_1991108

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 22nd Mar 2012, 12:38am
Post #113


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
Looks like this story is set to re-appear in the media tomorrow after it was announced that the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland (PCCS) recommended that the police need to issue an apology to the man who was stopped taking photos of his daughter in Breahead shopping centre.

QUOTE
An amateur photographer who was stopped after taking pictures of his daughter eating an ice-cream says Scotland's police watchdog has urged the Strathclyde force to issue an apology. ...

Full story here:
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/...ews_311934.html

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rab-oldname
post 22nd Mar 2012, 10:59am
Post #114


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 7,959
Joined: 28th Aug 2003
From: East Sussex.
Member No.: 413
Looks like this story is set to re-appear in the media tomorrow

I hope not GG. The story is as dead as a dodo now with so many counter allegations and conflicting evidence.nothing new has appeared and it seems doubtful the Police will take it any further. Best let it drop. (Made me wonder - is there a man alive who has never forgotten to do up his flies?)
Rab.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ashfield
post 22nd Mar 2012, 11:04am
Post #115


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 8,342
Joined: 3rd Mar 2009
From: Brigadoon
Member No.: 6,611
Gulp.......thanks for that Rab ohmy.gif tongue.gif


--------------------
If you want to make God laugh, tell him about your plans (Woody Allen)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Scotsman
post 22nd Mar 2012, 11:22am
Post #116


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 1,279
Joined: 22nd Jan 2007
From: Edinburgh Road
Member No.: 4,353
Ignoring ashfields comment....?? Rab I have to disagree with you on this one because I think there have still to be answers given about the allegations the police made about this man. Even the police complaints people think that he has a case and that is saying something!! I hope we do hear more about it in the press as it is the only way that the police will be made to be brought to task for what they said about this man. I am going to search to see what I can come up with in the online newspapers....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ashfield
post 22nd Mar 2012, 12:22pm
Post #117


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 8,342
Joined: 3rd Mar 2009
From: Brigadoon
Member No.: 6,611
Don't you worry about not understanding my post Scotsman, I'm sure Rab (to whom the post is addressed) will know what it's about.


--------------------
If you want to make God laugh, tell him about your plans (Woody Allen)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jupiter
post 22nd Mar 2012, 12:31pm
Post #118

Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 4,104
Joined: 27th Oct 2009
From: Home in the`burbs.
Member No.: 7,675
I agree with Scotsman here.It might be dead for many but the man concerned will not take that view.If the police acted improperly and if that has been established then the man requires an apology.Nothing less will do.He isnt asking for monetary compensation.
This kicked off for no good reason I could see.Security then called the Police who should have known better than to get involved.If anything the man was in breach of Braeheads policy on photography and he should have been told to desist or leave the premises.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rab-oldname
post 22nd Mar 2012, 10:17pm
Post #119


Mega City Key Holder
******
Posts: 7,959
Joined: 28th Aug 2003
From: East Sussex.
Member No.: 413
'Security then called the Police who should have known better than to get involved'
Jupiter, absolutely correct. But the facts of why they did are still in dispute!

My point is that this is a dead duck as far as the rest of us is concerned! I agree that the man has a grouse with Strathclyde Police, but they deny any wrongdoing based on what they were told before they took what action they did. The chap can pursue it for whatever result he wishes, for as long as he wishes but whats it got to do with us? I for one will not lose any sleep over the eventual outcome whichever way it goes. I'm sorry that it causes so much angst for others. Lifes too short! Far more interested in my reduced pension. I don't belieeeeeeeve it!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GG
post 22nd Mar 2012, 10:26pm
Post #120


Administrator
Group Icon
Posts: 9,121
Joined: 25th Jul 2003
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 1
Strathclyde Police has just given a short response to a request from a reporter at the Amateur Photographer magazine for the article mentioned above. A police spokesperson said:

QUOTE
"The PCCS (Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland) have asked for clarification surrounding witness statements. At this time we have not been instructed to apologise to Mr White."

Personally, I think that the police will be forced to apologise to Mr White. Apparently, the police's own witness statements contradict later claims made by the force that Mr White appeared to be under the influence of alcohol.

GG.


--------------------
Help: Register :: Login :: Forgot password? :: gg@glasgowguide.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 >
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th Aug 2019

All material in the site Glasgow Guide is copyright of the Glasgow Guide Organisation. This material is for your own private use only, and no part of the site may be reproduced, amended, modified, copied, or transmitted to third parties, by any means whatsoever without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. All rights reserved.

Glasgow Hotels: book cheap hotels in Glasgow online now.