Announcement

Collapse

December's CHALLENGE

The topic to inspire your creative juices this month is BOXES

See more
See less

Photography in Public Places

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Photography in Public Places

    I think your comments are about public places. In private places, the owner can set their own rules about who is welcome and who isn't, and what behaviours are unacceptable. If a visitor becomes no longer welcome for any reason, then the owner (or their agents, who may be security guards) can ask them to leave, and if they refuse to leave, the owner (or their agents) can use reasonable force to remove them. This applies to someone who visits your home and then does something which you dislike, and also applies if you are in someone else's space and do something they don't like.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Photography in Public Places

      Originally posted by RobEW View Post
      I think your comments are about public places. In private places, the owner can set their own rules about who is welcome and who isn't, and what behaviours are unacceptable. If a visitor becomes no longer welcome for any reason, then the owner (or their agents, who may be security guards) can ask them to leave, and if they refuse to leave, the owner (or their agents) can use reasonable force to remove them. This applies to someone who visits your home and then does something which you dislike, and also applies if you are in someone else's space and do something they don't like.
      My comments applied to both public and private places and relate to UK private security officers (SIA licensed) and any member of the general public within the UK.

      All the available information clearly states a UK security guard has no additional legal powers than any other member of the general public. This means reasonable force may only be used in the case or reasonable suspicion that an indictable offence has been or is liable to be committed. An indictable offence is one that can be tried in a crown court, in front of a jury. Examples include but are not limited to, criminal damage, theft, assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

      I am always willing to learn and aware of the possibility I may be incorrect. With that in mind, perhaps you would be kind enough to post a link to your source of information where it states reasonable force may be used by UK private security officers or agents to remove a person from private or public property. ( when no indictable offence has been committed )

      I really would be most interested to read it but in the meantime, you may find this link of interest https://www.get-licensed.co.uk/get-d...eratives-have/


      Jax

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Photography in Public Places

        Originally posted by RobEW View Post
        I think your comments are about public places. In private places, the owner can set their own rules about who is welcome and who isn't, and what behaviours are unacceptable. If a visitor becomes no longer welcome for any reason, then the owner (or their agents, who may be security guards) can ask them to leave, and if they refuse to leave, the owner (or their agents) can use reasonable force to remove them. This applies to someone who visits your home and then does something which you dislike, and also applies if you are in someone else's space and do something they don't like.
        I wonder how this would apply to taking photographs of the sky at an outdoor music event, such as a Spitfire flypast? Presumably this is not an indictable offence?

        Also, what qualifications do the Securitate need to decide whether a camera is an amateur or professional model? Does using a 'professional' camera amount to an indictable offence?
        ---------------

        Naughty Nigel


        Difficult is worth doing

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Photography in Public Places

          Originally posted by Naughty Nigel View Post
          Does using a 'professional' camera amount to an indictable offence?
          Waving a mobile phone around on a Selfie Stick at a crowded public event certainly should !


          Jax

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Photography in Public Places

            Originally posted by Jax View Post
            ...I am always willing to learn and aware of the possibility I may be incorrect. With that in mind, perhaps you would be kind enough to post a link to your source of information where it states reasonable force may be used by UK private security officers or agents to remove a person from private or public property. ( when no indictable offence has been committed )

            I really would be most interested to read it but in the meantime, you may find this link of interest https://www.get-licensed.co.uk/get-d...eratives-have/


            Jax

            I think my claim is common knowledge, based on the law of trespass. There's a brief discussion here: https://www.theguardian.com/money/20...urrights.legal


            Also here: https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/p...and-wales.aspx

            "In most circumstances trespassing is still a civil rather than a criminal matter. A landowner may use ‘reasonable force’ to encourage a trespasser to leave but not more than is reasonably necessary."

            The person who escorts a trespasser off a property doesn't have to be a security guard (though they may be). They have to be either the property owner or someone the owner authorises to enforce their rights.

            In practice, the definition and interpretation of "reasonable force" can be a bit problematical, based as it is on emerging case law.

            A trespasser can be someone who was invited on to the property but is no longer welcome. E.g. Someone who refuses to stop taking photos.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Photography in Public Places

              Originally posted by RobEW View Post
              I think it's common knowledge, based on the law of trespass. There's a brief discussion here: https://www.theguardian.com/money/20...urrights.legal
              Interesting link Rob but hardly relevant to the claims you have previously stated. With no supportive evidence or linked documentation, I can only assume your previous posted comments are based on heresay or misunderstanding of the true facts and legalities. It still makes for an interesting discussion though

              Jax

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Photography in Public Places

                Hearsay???? I think this is very basic English law (though I never studied law). It seems to be widely known. If I have time I'll try and find something authoritative rather than media articles.

                As for the article not being relevant, did you read this bit?

                "If someone trespasses on your property despite due warning the practical remedy is to ask them to leave. If they don't you are entitled to use no more than reasonable force to eject the trespasser."

                Here's another take on it, from the point of view of people planning occupations of private places as a form of protest: https://netpol.org/law-and-occupations/#1

                Note this bit: "Some malls and department stores make it a ‘condition of entry’ that you don’t take photos, in which case taking a photograph might make you a trespasser. But you would still not be committing a criminal offence."


                And here's something from a law firm: https://www.rollits.com/news/article...ase-thank-you/

                "There are various options open to the occupier or landowner faced with trespassers. Seeking a court order to remove trespassers whilst effective, can be costly with the costs incurred rarely being recovered …

                One option is for a landlord/occupier to exercise the common law right of a land owner/occupier to remove the trespasser themselves. This 'self help' remedy consists of a person using 'reasonable force' to remove trespassers."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Photography in Public Places

                  Originally posted by RobEW View Post
                  Hearsay????

                  This is probably in GCSE level law (though it didn't exist as an O level when I was that age). If I have time I'll try and find something authoritative rather than media articles.

                  As for the article not being relevant, did you read this bit?

                  "If someone trespasses on your property despite due warning the practical remedy is to ask them to leave. If they don't you are entitled to use no more than reasonable force to eject the trespasser."
                  Sorry Rob but I think you are missing the whole point of this thread. As such, and because I feel the topic has now reached the point of boredom..... I'm out.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Photography in Public Places

                    Ah - I edited my post to be a little less patronising but you quoted me before I did so.

                    Yes - the thread was originally about public places, I agree on that. But we meandered on to private places as well, where the law of trespass applies.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Photography in Public Places

                      For members of public, security guards, and Police community officers powers exist relating to 2 pieces of legislation as below. In other words anyone.



                      Common law - Self defence and citizens power of arrest (note citizens power of arrest often mis understood and can leave a person open to legal challenges such as false imprisonment and/or assault)

                      Criminal law

                      Section 3 replaces the common law rules on self-defence in English law, such as the duty to retreat. It simply requires that any force used must be "reasonable in the circumstances". It is still in force today and states:

                      3. — (1) A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large.

                      (2) Subsection (1) above shall replace the rules of the common law on the question when force used for a purpose mentioned in the subsection is justified by that purpose.


                      The only slight variation, which may differ is the powers granted to Police community officers as can differ from force to force. Chief constables dictate which powers are given to PCSO,s. PCSO’s can also be granted powers to deal with certain local authority issues as well again varies from local authority to another. I’m not aware of any local by laws relating to pcsos and photography. Taking photos wouldn’t warrant someone being detained unless there was an indictable offence taking place.

                      Police officers have fallen foul in the past shoving the press and members of the public for filming them. However if the actions are preventing an officer in lawful execution of their duty may change this.


                      Suppose it boils down to common sense if you are taking loads of photos of young children in a playground of no connection to you should expect to be challenged if you have not requested consent from the parent imo. Regardless of views times have changed.


                      Security guards would rely on section 3 when removing people from shops, i.e banned people from store who have shoplifted. Just wanted to provide a real lifeexample where the power may apply.

                      On the face of it relating to the original post the PCSO may not have had any reason to tell someone to cease taking photos instead better approach may have been to engage in conversation to gather more information/facts.
                      EM-1 MK1 - No website containing any of my photos until I'm good enough!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Photography in Public Places

                        On the face of it relating to the original post the PCSO may not have had any reason to tell someone to cease takingphotos instead should have engaged in conversation to gather more information.
                        He actually just said make sure you don't have any children in your pictures.
                        Impossible as it was a funfair.
                        He didnt actually say anything else after I said i will try.
                        He just left.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Photography in Public Places

                          Originally posted by royd63uk View Post
                          He actually just said make sure you don't have any children in your pictures.
                          Impossible as it was a funfair.
                          He didnt actually say anything else after I said i will try.
                          He just left.
                          Sorry got carried away typing should have re read original post doh. You did ask if he was to ask you to stop. Or ask to see the photos. He wouldn't have the power to demand to see your photos. I probably react differently to most and would actually welcome him to see my images if I knew I had some good ones, but thats just me I don't get bothered by things like that.
                          EM-1 MK1 - No website containing any of my photos until I'm good enough!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Photography in Public Places

                            An indictable offence is one which can be tried in the Crown Court and is therefore more serious than one with which the magistrates can deal. The hurdle for a successful citizen's arrest is very high and seldom worth attempting.
                            David

                            EM1ii, EM10ii

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Photography in Public Places

                              Originally posted by MJ224 View Post
                              I think if you were there with a large telephoto lens, he might have had a point.
                              Sorry I don't agree, simply an overenthusiastic PCSO - anyway I stood there just the other day with a 12-100 rather than the 12-40 and no one said anything to me

                              Regards
                              Andy
                              My Kit (OK I'm a hoarder...)
                              4/3 E500, E510, E30 + 35macro, 50macro, 7-14, 11-22, 14-45 (x2), 14-54, 40-150 (both types), 50-200, 70-300, 50-500,
                              m 4/3 EM1MkII + 60 macro, 12-100 Pro
                              FL20, FL36 x2 , FL50, cactus slaves etc.
                              The Boss (Mrs Shenstone) E620, EM10-II, 14-41Ez, 40-150R, 9 cap and whatever she can nick from me when she wants it

                              My places
                              http://www.shenstone.me.uk
                              http://landroverkaty.blogspot.com/
                              https://vimeo.com/shenstone
                              http://cardiffnaturalists.org.uk/

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Photography in Public Places

                                Yes it was just the one time normally I have no problem.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X