This is why people are losing respect for the police...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ice Tea said:
I only just recently heard about this guy and there seems to be a lot of people copying him...
Click to expand...
He copied it from America. It pretty much started when a lawyer was filming police deal with a homeless man in a rough manner, so he started filming it and the police arrested him. He sued and won (Glik v. Cunniffe), and it set a precedent that it was a right to film in the police in public. People now go around filming things, including police stations to see if the police will respect their rights.

We don't have a First Amendment over here, but generally speaking, you are allowed to film the police in public:

"Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel" - Met Police
Click to expand...

PqQgBir.jpg

If the police actually followed the above, seeing a person filming and just shrugged their shoulders and went about their day, then the person filming them would get zero views on Youtube and would eventually disappear into obscurity. Too many police officers don't seem to have read the memo though.
 
Longbow said:
If police actually followed the above, seeing a person filming and just shrugged their shoulders and went about their day, then the person filming them would get zero views on Youtube and would eventually disappear into obscurity. Too many police don't seem to have read the memo though.
Click to expand...

Because for many officers it conflicts with other messaging around terrorism and being aware of people who are generally suspicious, or are actively engaging in reconnaissance of potential targets.

It's all fine ignoring them, until they blow up a shopping centre or attack a police station and then everyone ask what could have been done to prevent it.

TBH, I prefer ignoring them, but there is no win for the Police here.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Because for many officers it conflicts with other messaging around terrorism and being aware of people who are generally suspicious, or are actively engaging in reconnaissance of potential targets.

It's all fine ignoring them, until they blow up a shopping centre or attack a police station and then everyone ask what could have been done to prevent it.

TBH, I prefer ignoring them, but there is no win for the Police here.
Click to expand...


Just stick to the law like we all have to.
Are you a real police officer now or?
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Because for many officers it conflicts with other messaging around terrorism and being aware of people who are generally suspicious, or are actively engaging in reconnaissance of potential targets.

It's all fine ignoring them, until they blow up a shopping centre or attack a police station and then everyone ask what could have been done to prevent it.

TBH, I prefer ignoring them, but there is no win for the Police here.
Click to expand...
The "I'm a photographer not a terrorist" campaign was set up precisely because of this. Sure, the person not covertly filming, making it blatantly obvious to everyone, could be a terrorist, in the same way someone getting into a van could be about to drive it to the bank to rob it, but unless you've got some pertinent information to go a long with that wild speculation, the person should be left alone.

But I'm glad you ignore them.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Because for many officers it conflicts with other messaging around terrorism and being aware of people who are generally suspicious, or are actively engaging in reconnaissance of potential targets.

It's all fine ignoring them, until they blow up a shopping centre or attack a police station and then everyone ask what could have been done to prevent it.

TBH, I prefer ignoring them, but there is no win for the Police here.
Click to expand...

They could engage in a bit of common sense... sure the "auditor" types or freeman of the land lunatics are being rather provocative but there are plenty of incidents involving ordinary photographers that could have been cleared up with a very quick chat... and in those cases the officers themselves are not only ignoring common sense but also going against what senior officers have claimed publicly re: this issue.
 
BowdonUK said:
I've been following this situation too.

Don't the police have to give a the reason why a person is being arrested?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's under the Code Of Practice:
Arresting officers are required to inform the person arrested that they have been arrested, even if this fact is obvious, and of the relevant circumstances of the arrest in relation to both elements and to inform the custody officer of these on arrival at the police station.
Click to expand...
That's not to say they have to say it immediately, but it should have happened after he was handcuffed.
 
Longbow said:
Yes, it's under the Code Of Practice:

That's not to say they have to say it immediately, but it should have happened after he was handcuffed.
Click to expand...

It's not just a Codes of Practice requirement. The arrested person has to be informed of the necessity for their arrest as well which is covered by Section 24 of PACE.

Onto the video and wider subject - any time I may have had for the press has gone out of the window with the hugely biased and skewed reporting seen in the last couple of weeks with clips shown that sell the product rather than what gives the full story and I don't pretend that the cops are without sin.

The police sometimes have to go hands on and it never looks good and many who twist about it usually haven't faced an angry person or crowd in their lives
 
Longbow said:
He copied it from America.
Click to expand...

I did wonder if it originated elsewhere , A woman called Catwoman2005 was on my feed and apparently she has started doing to see if Woman are treated any differently but i get the feeling it's more about followers with all these people copying rather than them doing it for a cause.
 
I thought I'd add this story to this thread as I haven't seen the story mentioned on the forum so far at a quick glance.

GMP firearms cop who punched puppy is not suspended but will face internal investigation
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...er-news/gmp-firearms-cop-who-punched-20457849

There is video of this incident. The guy should be jailed or at least sacked from his job.

I don't know why these organisations would rather suffer bad PR by appearing to excuse this guys behaviour than just fire him off. Being a police man or woman is a privilege, especially being a firearms officer.

I hope we're not going down the same road that some American police forces do and adopt a bunker mentality.

This guy needs sacking, and in my opinion, arrested for animal cruelty.
 
BowdonUK said:
I thought I'd add this story to this thread as I haven't seen the story mentioned on the forum so far at a quick glance.

GMP firearms cop who punched puppy is not suspended but will face internal investigation
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...er-news/gmp-firearms-cop-who-punched-20457849

There is video of this incident. The guy should be jailed or at least sacked from his job.

I don't know why these organisations would rather suffer bad PR by appearing to excuse this guys behaviour than just fire him off. Being a police man or woman is a privilege, especially being a firearms officer.

I hope we're not going down the same road that some American police forces do and adopt a bunker mentality.

This guy needs sacking, and in my opinion, arrested for animal cruelty.
Click to expand...

He's already been to court and sentenced to 120 hours of unpaid work and banned from keeping animals for five years. He can't just be sacked. He's on restricted duties and the internal investigation will determine if any further action is taken by GMP.

Not to make light of his actions but chances are I could punch you in the face and not go to jail.
 
This is in the US. Clearly the officer is drunk, its even more obvious in the second video. Why are police standards so bad there? Not just his attitude but the guy couldn't run 50m being that fat. How are you supposed to protect and serve if you aren't able to even jog a short distance. There should be a fitness test every year, you pass it or you are out.

He's been suspended now.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom