Made my blood boil !

[Adrian Kelland]

Originally Posted by Steve S

What's DIR got to do with it?

Safe diving,
Steve

Why bring Tina Turner into it?

[Andy the Coastie]

Originally Posted by cgrosart

Now, I am a healthcare professional and the public face of the ambulance service. It is the closest I have ever come to actually seriously considering thumping someone !!!!

Grrrrrr

And reeeelaaax....

I point you into this direction.... http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006...0060039_en.pdf

It was pointed out to me last year ,,,,,, And is a useful thing to have under ya belt

[scuba steve irl]

unfortunately . it doesnt cover photographs . from a distance are they hindering ?

that law doesnt apply in ireland

[Cussy]

I'm not trying to stir things up as I agree that this story was out of order.

But, documentary photography has a place, always will have. I've just seen this on the BBC:
BBC NEWS | In Pictures | In Pictures: Austria road crash

Now surely there is nothing wrong with someone documenting this accident, in fact the photos of the emergency crew paint them in an extremely positive light. I did notice that the photos are carefully chosen and the injured aren't shown, but I would guess plenty of photos were taken. I think some of these images must be from the public.

As a photographer I think people taking photos with their camera phones is important, some of the best images from the bombings in London have come from these sources, and there is no way a journo would be allowed down the underground. So you can't ban it.

Personally I hate taking photos in public places as I'm always worried someone is going to accuse me of something I am totally innocent of. That's why my camera tends to only point at fish or my own kids.
Rob

PS respect to our emergency services!

[Garf]

there was an interesting discussion on the radio4 today programme yesterday.

It concerned a court case for Naoimi Cambpell, the model, where picture sof her had been taken coming out of a rehab centre, and the case centred around whether this was legal or not.

The outcome of the case was that a celebrity or other person shouldnt expect a right to privacy when, and the example given was "out buying a pint of milk", that same person DOES have a right to privacy when its personal life matters, such as medical treatment.

However, this was all about publishing photos rather than taking them.

Well done for not ripping the camera out of the guys hands and jumping up and down on it in front of him whilst screaming "F**K OFF YOU C**T". That sort of self control is exactly why I could never do the job you do.

[wilbo]

Originally Posted by Pigpen

Bit of weakness from the copper, I fear.

Why didn't he consider that the guy had 'abandoned' his car on the road, possibly unlocked, engine running etc? Could certainly have asked him to return to the vehicle, maybe do a thorough check, documents, tyres etc? Could certainly have 'distracted' him long enough and made his time a bit uncomfortable.

Not having a go at Police (I was one), so I know what I'd have done!

I agree. Weakness from the policeman possibly. While he might legally have been powerless to stop him - he could have applied the law in other ways - such as doing a check on the tossers car - checking tax and tyres etc.

We called an ambulance to a league softball game last year - where one of the players suffered a compound fracture of his ankle - one of the other players decided it would be a laugh to take pictures of him on the trolley breathing entonox. The paramedic told him to stop - because it was illegal to take pictures of the inside of an ambulance - True? doesn't matter - it made him stop sharpish..

Well done for doing such a great job cgrosart.

[witchieblackcat]

Originally Posted by rustferret

I agree this guy is sick but what I do find interesting is that the police did not react more strongley, recently the police in Hull stopped a photographer taking pictures of shoppers in Hull city centre, seem to remember they arrested him will look back through local press and see if I can confirm it.

Rustferret

The police have since apologised to the photographer who was acting within the law. This whole issue is a very hot topic in the world of amateur photography.

I agree with the senitiments of the OP that the gentleman shouldn't have been taking photos as it seems that it was inappropriate. However, there are times when people take pictures for the news. For example, the images of the 7/7 bombs in London were mainly taken by amateurs as were a lot of the 9/11 images. We may well think that these pictures are inappropriate but we watch the news and we buy the papers etc.