From Today's Daily Telegraph.
*******************************************

Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby

By Laura Clout

Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008


A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
paedophile.

Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
time may have come to hang up his camera.

The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers
"appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who are suspicious
of his motives.

The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, told the
Gloucester Citizen: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a
crackdown.

"The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the
most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police
over-exercising their authority.

Mr McCaffrey, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby
without harassment. I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a
terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really
hurts.

"We don't want to harbour people doing something illegal, but while
the police are wasting their time with me, a terrorist could be
planning his next atrocity."

Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
McCaffrey's photos.

Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
public rasied concerns about his behaviour.

A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
matter with the photographer.

"However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
the individual."

----
Alasdair.

Alasdair wrote:
> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
> *******************************************
>
> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
> paedophile.
>
> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
> time may have come to hang up his camera.

Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to being 
branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police interest in 
photographers has increased, and no doubt this is sometimes rude & 
intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.

In message , Steve Walker 
 writes
>Alasdair wrote:
>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>> *******************************************
>>
>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>> paedophile.
>>
>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>
>Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to being
>branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police interest in
>photographers has increased, and no doubt this is sometimes rude &
>intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.
>
He was interviewed on today's PM (Radio 4). Listen Again, 53 mins, 55 
secs in.
-- 
Ian

Alasdair presented the following explanation :
> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
> *******************************************
>
> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>
> By Laura Clout
>
> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>
>
> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
> paedophile.
>
> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>
> The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers
> "appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who are suspicious
> of his motives.
>
> The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, told the
> Gloucester Citizen: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a
> crackdown.
>
> "The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the
> most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police
> over-exercising their authority.
>
> Mr McCaffrey, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby
> without harassment. I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a
> terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really
> hurts.
>
> "We don't want to harbour people doing something illegal, but while
> the police are wasting their time with me, a terrorist could be
> planning his next atrocity."
>
> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
> McCaffrey's photos.
>
> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>
> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
> matter with the photographer.
>
> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
> the individual."
>
> ----
> Alasdair.

I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo 
of me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is 
the world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some 
eejit pointing a camera at you ?

-- 
Count Baldoni

A
> McCaffrey's photos.
> 
> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
> 


   Do PCSO'S have the same access to records and "databases" that a 
police officer would?

Fred wrote:
> A
>> McCaffrey's photos.
>>
>> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
>> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
>> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>>
> 
> 
>   Do PCSO'S have the same access to records and "databases" that a 
> police officer would?

It's possible, but not necessary. All a PCSO has to do is persuade a 
Police Officer to take an interest, which shouldn't be hard. The actual 
database access would be made by an authorised person (Not necessarily 
the same thing as a Police Officer) at the police station. The 
appropriate information would then be passed back to the PCSO.

-- 
Tciao for Now!

John.

Ian Jackson wrote:
> He was interviewed on today's PM (Radio 4). Listen Again, 53 mins, 55
> secs in.

Thanks for the tip!

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:56:01 +0100, Baldoni 
wrote:


>I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo 
>of me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is 
>the world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some 
>eejit pointing a camera at you ?
But don,t you have cameras pointing at you and others from steping
outside your front door to going back in again  I know that I and all
round here have even when we step on a bus . Has you have said what is
the world coming to .

mymail@hotmail.co.uk expressed precisely :
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:56:01 +0100, Baldoni 
> wrote:
>
>
>> I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo 
>> of me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is 
>> the world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some 
>> eejit pointing a camera at you ?
> But don,t you have cameras pointing at you and others from steping
> outside your front door to going back in again  I know that I and all
> round here have even when we step on a bus . Has you have said what is
> the world coming to .

Not the same thing though is it and like I said it was 20 years ago.

-- 
Count Baldoni

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:56:01 +0100, Baldoni  wrote:

>Alasdair presented the following explanation :
>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>> *******************************************
>>
>> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>>
>> By Laura Clout
>>
>> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>>
>>
>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>> paedophile.
>>
>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>
>> The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers
>> "appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who are suspicious
>> of his motives.
>>
>> The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, told the
>> Gloucester Citizen: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a
>> crackdown.
>>
>> "The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the
>> most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police
>> over-exercising their authority.
>>
>> Mr McCaffrey, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby
>> without harassment. I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a
>> terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really
>> hurts.
>>
>> "We don't want to harbour people doing something illegal, but while
>> the police are wasting their time with me, a terrorist could be
>> planning his next atrocity."
>>
>> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
>> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
>> McCaffrey's photos.
>>
>> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
>> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
>> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>>
>> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
>> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
>> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
>> matter with the photographer.
>>
>> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
>> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
>> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
>> the individual."
>>
>> ----
>> Alasdair.
>
>I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo 
>of me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is 
>the world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some 
>eejit pointing a camera at you ?

The Bollox of Baldoni, it never ends!

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:56:01 +0100, Baldoni 
wrote:

>Alasdair presented the following explanation :
>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>> *******************************************
>>
>> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>>
>> By Laura Clout
>>
>> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>>
>>
>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>> paedophile.
>>
>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>
>> The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers
>> "appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who are suspicious
>> of his motives.
>>
>> The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, told the
>> Gloucester Citizen: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a
>> crackdown.
>>
>> "The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the
>> most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police
>> over-exercising their authority.
>>
>> Mr McCaffrey, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby
>> without harassment. I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a
>> terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really
>> hurts.
>>
>> "We don't want to harbour people doing something illegal, but while
>> the police are wasting their time with me, a terrorist could be
>> planning his next atrocity."
>>
>> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
>> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
>> McCaffrey's photos.
>>
>> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
>> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
>> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>>
>> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
>> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
>> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
>> matter with the photographer.
>>
>> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
>> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
>> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
>> the individual."
>>
>> ----
>> Alasdair.
>
>I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo 
>of me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is 
>the world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some 
>eejit pointing a camera at you ?

Why the fucking X posting, cunt?

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 at 21:09:12, Steve Walker  wrote 
in uk.legal :

>Alasdair wrote:
>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>> *******************************************
>>
>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>> paedophile.
>>
>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>
>Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to being
>branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police interest in
>photographers has increased, and no doubt this is sometimes rude &
>intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.
>
I do not agree - he is doing nothing illegal, so the police should leave 
him alone!

If the public allows itself to succumb to paranoia, the terrorists have 
already won.
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

In message , LennyL 
 writes
>On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:56:01 +0100, Baldoni  wrote:
>>
>>I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo
>>of me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is
>>the world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some
>>eejit pointing a camera at you ?
>
>The Bollox of Baldoni, it never ends!

That's when he had his soul stolen. He's been soulless ever since.
-- 
Ian

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:09:12 +0100, "Steve Walker"
 wrote:

>Alasdair wrote:
>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>> *******************************************
>>
>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>> paedophile.
>>
>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>
>Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to being 
>branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police interest in 
>photographers has increased, and no doubt this is sometimes rude & 
>intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.

No, he's reacting EXACTLY as he should be, i.e. complaining about an
activity that is new in Britain, namely interference and crass
accusations from nitpicking busybodies in the police, local
authorities and the general public. As I keep saying, there is not
ENOUGH complaining! We need more, many more people complaining, not
fewer. The last think we need is to somehow portray the bloke as a
Victor Meldrew, otherwise more and more busybodies will be encouraged
to see a pervert not just behind every hedge, but in front of every
hedge as well.

MM

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:42:24 +0100, Ian Jackson
 wrote:

>In message , Steve Walker 
> writes
>>Alasdair wrote:
>>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>>> *******************************************
>>>
>>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>>> paedophile.
>>>
>>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>
>>Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to being
>>branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police interest in
>>photographers has increased, and no doubt this is sometimes rude &
>>intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.
>>
>He was interviewed on today's PM (Radio 4). Listen Again, 53 mins, 55 
>secs in.

He sounds like an eminently sensible chap who presents absolutely no
threat at all. We should be outraged that these persecutions of
photographers are allowed to go on, with the "Steve Walkers" of this
world saying it's all overreaction.

MM

In message , Paul Hyett 
<pah@invalid.invalid> writes
>On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 at 21:09:12, Steve Walker  
>wrote in uk.legal :
>
>>Alasdair wrote:
>>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>>> *******************************************
>>>
>>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>>> paedophile.
>>>
>>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>
>>Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to being
>>branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police interest in
>>photographers has increased, and no doubt this is sometimes rude &
>>intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.
>>
>I do not agree - he is doing nothing illegal, so the police should 
>leave him alone!
>
>If the public allows itself to succumb to paranoia, the terrorists have 
>already won.

Last night, I found I had sunk to the level of watching the 'Dave' 
channel on TV. On an ancient repeat of 'Have I Got News For You', it was 
revealed that at a Labour Party conference (I believe it was the one 
where that guy was assaulted and illegally detained by the hired thugs), 
Austin Mitchell had had his camera snatched by the police, and his all 
his photos erased. This was well before his recent contretents, and his 
EDM1155.
-- 
Ian

MM wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:09:12 +0100, "Steve Walker"
>  wrote:
>
>> Alasdair wrote:
>>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>>> *******************************************
>>>
>>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>>> paedophile.
>>>
>>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears
>>> the time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>
>> Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to
>> being branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police
>> interest in photographers has increased, and no doubt this is
>> sometimes rude & intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.
>
> No, he's reacting EXACTLY as he should be, i.e. complaining about an
> activity that is new in Britain, namely interference and crass
> accusations from nitpicking busybodies in the police, local
> authorities and the general public.

New....?      I really don't think so.   The petty busybody has been a 
central part of British life for centuries, a comedy staple and a social 
curse.

"Baldoni"  wrote in message 
news:6cd5atF3be0qbU1@mid.individual.net...
> Alasdair presented the following explanation :
>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>> *******************************************
>>
>> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>>
>> By Laura Clout
>>
>> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>>
>>
>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>> paedophile.
>>
>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>
>> The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers
>> "appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who are suspicious
>> of his motives.
>>
>> The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, told the
>> Gloucester Citizen: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a
>> crackdown.
>>
>> "The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the
>> most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police
>> over-exercising their authority.
>>
>> Mr McCaffrey, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby
>> without harassment. I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a
>> terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really
>> hurts.
>>
>> "We don't want to harbour people doing something illegal, but while
>> the police are wasting their time with me, a terrorist could be
>> planning his next atrocity."
>>
>> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
>> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
>> McCaffrey's photos.
>>
>> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
>> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
>> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>>
>> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
>> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
>> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
>> matter with the photographer.
>>
>> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
>> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
>> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
>> the individual."
>>
>> ----
>> Alasdair.
>
> I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo of 
> me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is the 
> world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some eejit 
> pointing a camera at you ?
>
> -- 
> Count Baldoni
>

If your tale is true, I hope you served time in HMP for assault and criminal 
damage. If not, you should have done.
The world does not need ***** who think they can do what they want when they 
disagree with other people's actions.

Bevan

"Alasdair"  wrote in message 
news:9uh264d5l8i45nl4il3n4d1f4qtuvnbg5m@4ax.com...
>
> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
> *******************************************
>
> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>
> By Laura Clout
>
> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>
>
> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
> paedophile.
>
> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>
>>
> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
> McCaffrey's photos.
>
> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>
> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
> matter with the photographer.
>
> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
> the individual."
>
> ----
> Alasdair.

Whilst the police have a duty to try and stop terrorists, some of them seem 
too dim to realise that by antagonising innocent people taking photographs, 
they probably ensure that these people will in future be very reluctant to 
report anything to the police.

I once reported some missing equipment to the "works" police and was 
questioned as if they thought that I might have taken it. Never again did I 
bother to report anything that had "disappeared".

Bevan

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:31:15 +0100, "Steve Walker"
 wrote:

>MM wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:09:12 +0100, "Steve Walker"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Alasdair wrote:
>>>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>>>> *******************************************
>>>>
>>>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>>>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>>>> paedophile.
>>>>
>>>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>>>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears
>>>> the time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>>
>>> Being asked questions on two occasions in a year hardly equates to
>>> being branded a terrorist and a paedophile.  I'm sure that Police
>>> interest in photographers has increased, and no doubt this is
>>> sometimes rude & intrusive, but he's overreacting a bit IMHO.
>>
>> No, he's reacting EXACTLY as he should be, i.e. complaining about an
>> activity that is new in Britain, namely interference and crass
>> accusations from nitpicking busybodies in the police, local
>> authorities and the general public.
>
>New....?      I really don't think so.   The petty busybody has been a 
>central part of British life for centuries, a comedy staple and a social 
>curse. 

But then such people had no power. They were merely irritating. Now
they have the power to issue instant fines or call the police. Look at
the guy who got arrested for making a citizen's arrest of the yobs
throwing stones. It's endemic now, this nightmare of officialdom gone
completely overboard with snooping, probing, questioning, "advising".
I tell you, before long there WILL be a backlash and you know whom the
French turned against around the end of the 18th century? Those they
perceived as having the upper hand, the privileged, the people who
never had to answer for anything, just like the authorities today, who
get away with murder, sometimes almost literally.  And it doesn't help
when YOU give these jobsworths the oxygen to breathe by saying some
ordinary bloke is overreacting when there is every justification for
the complaint he made.

MM

In article ,
Bevan Price <meVIAfreeukFULLSTOPcom> wrote:
>Whilst the police have a duty to try and stop terrorists, some of them seem 
>too dim to realise that by antagonising innocent people taking photographs, 
>they probably ensure that these people will in future be very reluctant to 
>report anything to the police.

And they can then hardly complain when a real crime occurs and they'd
really rather like if someone happend to have a photo which would help.

In message , Charles Bryant 
 writes
>In article ,
>Bevan Price <meVIAfreeukFULLSTOPcom> wrote:
>>Whilst the police have a duty to try and stop terrorists, some of them seem
>>too dim to realise that by antagonising innocent people taking photographs,
>>they probably ensure that these people will in future be very reluctant to
>>report anything to the police.
>
>And they can then hardly complain when a real crime occurs and they'd
>really rather like if someone happend to have a photo which would help.

Immediately after the 7/7 London tube and bus bombings, they did appeal 
for people to look at any photos that they had taken in the area, and 
see if they contained anything which might possibly be of use to the 
police. Less than three years later, you could get arrested for taking 
photos in the same places. It's a funny old world.
-- 
Ian

MM wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:31:15 +0100, "Steve Walker"
>  wrote:
>>> No, he's reacting EXACTLY as he should be, i.e. complaining about an
>>> activity that is new in Britain, namely interference and crass
>>> accusations from nitpicking busybodies in the police, local
>>> authorities and the general public.
>>
>> New....?      I really don't think so.   The petty busybody has been
>> a central part of British life for centuries, a comedy staple and a
>> social curse.
>
> But then such people had no power. They were merely irritating. Now
> they have the power to issue instant fines or call the police.

That's just not true.  Remember the air raid warden in Dad's Army, Blakey in 
On The Buses?  The days when BT had to approve your answering machine, an 
angry teacher could beat you with a stick, or you saved up a deposit to 
satisfy the bank manager's view of the mortage you deserved?     We've 
always had our "little Hitlers" and they've always exercised petty, 
irritating powers.

> I tell you, before long there WILL be a backlash and you know whom the
> French turned against around the end of the 18th century? Those they
> perceived as having the upper hand, the privileged, the people who
> never had to answer for anything, just like the authorities today, who
> get away with murder, sometimes almost literally.  And it doesn't help
> when YOU give these jobsworths the oxygen to breathe by saying some
> ordinary bloke is overreacting when there is every justification for
> the complaint he made.

You're misjudging me MM.   I despise petty officialdom, CCTV, ID Cards, DNA 
etc like any decent Englishman should.   But if someone spends a large 
amount of time on their hobby, and is spoken to by the Police twice in a 
year, that's really not on a scale with harassment.   There are plenty of 
examples of real, serious abuses of power* and it makes no sense to get into 
a lather over a minor one.

* www.epuk.org/News/818/police-officer-forced-photographer-to-delete-images

MM wrote:

> He sounds like an eminently sensible chap who presents absolutely no
> threat at all. We should be outraged that these persecutions of
> photographers are allowed to go on, with the "Steve Walkers" of this
> world saying it's all overreaction.

Persecution?   You evidently have no fear of hyperbole....  :o)

Steve Walker wrote:

> You're misjudging me MM.   I despise petty officialdom, CCTV, ID Cards, DNA 
> etc like any decent Englishman should.   But if someone spends a large 
> amount of time on their hobby, and is spoken to by the Police twice in a 
> year, that's really not on a scale with harassment.   There are plenty of 
> examples of real, serious abuses of power* and it makes no sense to get into 
> a lather over a minor one.
> 

If we let them get away with minor attacks on civil liberties, they'll 
move on to more major attacks.  That's the idea behind "zero tolerance".

-- 
Mike

In message <4862d23d$0$78072$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>, Mike 
 writes
>Steve Walker wrote:
>
>> You're misjudging me MM.   I despise petty officialdom, CCTV, ID 
>>Cards, DNA  etc like any decent Englishman should.   But if someone 
>>spends a large  amount of time on their hobby, and is spoken to by the 
>>Police twice in a  year, that's really not on a scale with harassment. 
>>There are plenty of  examples of real, serious abuses of power* and it 
>>makes no sense to get into  a lather over a minor one.
>>
>
>If we let them get away with minor attacks on civil liberties, they'll 
>move on to more major attacks.  That's the idea behind "zero tolerance".
>
That's a little unfair. 'Zero Tolerance' is about cracking down on minor 
crimes. Taking photographs isn't a crime - the Home Office said so (even 
though the police will sometimes stop you from committing these 
non-crimes).
-- 
Ian

Ian Jackson wrote:
> In message <4862d23d$0$78072$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>, Mike 
>  writes
>>
>> If we let them get away with minor attacks on civil liberties, they'll 
>> move on to more major attacks.  That's the idea behind "zero tolerance".
>>
> That's a little unfair. 'Zero Tolerance' is about cracking down on minor 
> crimes. Taking photographs isn't a crime - the Home Office said so (even 
> though the police will sometimes stop you from committing these 
> non-crimes).

I think you misunderstood my comment.  I meant that the general public 
should apply zero tolerance to infringements of their civil liberties.

-- 
Mike

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:42:23 +0100, "Steve Walker"
 wrote:

>MM wrote:
>
>> He sounds like an eminently sensible chap who presents absolutely no
>> threat at all. We should be outraged that these persecutions of
>> photographers are allowed to go on, with the "Steve Walkers" of this
>> world saying it's all overreaction.
>
>Persecution?   You evidently have no fear of hyperbole....  :o)

Well, what else would you call it? We have increasing accounts of
these things happening. It never used to happen. Ever. The only time
we heard of photographers being stopped was abroad, i.e. Greece and
planes.

MM

In message <48634a78$0$78077$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>, Mike 
 writes
>Ian Jackson wrote:
>> In message <4862d23d$0$78072$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>, Mike 
>> writes
>>>
>>> If we let them get away with minor attacks on civil liberties, 
>>>they'll move on to more major attacks.  That's the idea behind "zero 
>>>tolerance".
>>>
>> That's a little unfair. 'Zero Tolerance' is about cracking down on 
>>minor crimes. Taking photographs isn't a crime - the Home Office said 
>>(even  though the police will sometimes stop you from committing these 
>>non-crimes).
>
>I think you misunderstood my comment.  I meant that the general public 
>should apply zero tolerance to infringements of their civil liberties.
>
Yes, I maybe didn't put that too well. I completely agree with you, of 
course.

It's pretty obvious that some do really believe that photography is 
illegal (especially photos of children, buildings, trains, buses, police 
and , I suspect, aircraft). I wanted to imply that, in the minds of 
certain people, this 'minor crime' of photography, if unchecked, can aid 
and abet the commission of something much more serious.
-- 
Ian

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:54:14 +0100, "Steve Walker"
 wrote:

>MM wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:31:15 +0100, "Steve Walker"
>>  wrote:
>>>> No, he's reacting EXACTLY as he should be, i.e. complaining about an
>>>> activity that is new in Britain, namely interference and crass
>>>> accusations from nitpicking busybodies in the police, local
>>>> authorities and the general public.
>>>
>>> New....?      I really don't think so.   The petty busybody has been
>>> a central part of British life for centuries, a comedy staple and a
>>> social curse.
>>
>> But then such people had no power. They were merely irritating. Now
>> they have the power to issue instant fines or call the police.
>
>That's just not true.  Remember the air raid warden in Dad's Army,

That depicted wartime. We are not at war. (Even though George W Bush
and the neocons try to fool us we are.)

> Blakey in 
>On The Buses?

That was a "comedy" programme. Bus conductors generally served a very
useful purpose. Buses could move away from the bus stop immediately,
for one thing.

>  The days when BT had to approve your answering machine,

Now my garage has to approve my car and stick an MOT sticker inside
the windscreen. I don't see that as typical behaviour of a jobsworth
in the same way that police or security guards demand photographers to
destroy or hand over their films.

> an 
>angry teacher could beat you with a stick,

Angry? I would say, "maintaining discipline". I was caned, rarely.
Maybe twice in my whole school lifetime. It should be re-introduced,
along with whole-class teaching (all desks facing the front) and many
more male teachers - which may actually happen after this morning's
announcment about gender equality.

> or you saved up a deposit to 
>satisfy the bank manager's view of the mortage you deserved? 

You're grapsing at straws to lump bank managers together with the
kinds of petty officials I and others are complaining about.

>    We've 
>always had our "little Hitlers" and they've always exercised petty, 
>irritating powers.

No, you're confusing two different types of people. The kind I mean
are the officious, interferring, jobsworthy people who call the police
because some lone man is taking photos - and the police who rush to
the scene of the "crime" in their metal-grid furnished Transits. Shame
that people like Garry Newlove didn't have the same level of support
from the police, isn't it?

To classify a bank manager as a little Hitler for wanting one to save
up a deposit is surely off-the-wall ludicrous?

>> I tell you, before long there WILL be a backlash and you know whom the
>> French turned against around the end of the 18th century? Those they
>> perceived as having the upper hand, the privileged, the people who
>> never had to answer for anything, just like the authorities today, who
>> get away with murder, sometimes almost literally.  And it doesn't help
>> when YOU give these jobsworths the oxygen to breathe by saying some
>> ordinary bloke is overreacting when there is every justification for
>> the complaint he made.
>
>You're misjudging me MM.   I despise petty officialdom, CCTV, ID Cards, DNA 
>etc like any decent Englishman should.   But if someone spends a large 
>amount of time on their hobby, and is spoken to by the Police twice in a 
>year, that's really not on a scale with harassment.   There are plenty of 
>examples of real, serious abuses of power* and it makes no sense to get into 
>a lather over a minor one.

I disagree entirely. From little acorns mighty oak trees grow, but the
metaphorical oak trees our surveillance state is planting are not the
nice, arboraceous kind, but giant watchtowers over our privacy and
civil liberties by people "who know best". You should not give one
ounce of support to this programme or the people operating it.

MM

On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:27:46 +0100, Ian Jackson
 wrote:

>In message , Charles Bryant 
> writes
>>In article ,
>>Bevan Price <meVIAfreeukFULLSTOPcom> wrote:
>>>Whilst the police have a duty to try and stop terrorists, some of them seem
>>>too dim to realise that by antagonising innocent people taking photographs,
>>>they probably ensure that these people will in future be very reluctant to
>>>report anything to the police.
>>
>>And they can then hardly complain when a real crime occurs and they'd
>>really rather like if someone happend to have a photo which would help.
>
>Immediately after the 7/7 London tube and bus bombings, they did appeal 
>for people to look at any photos that they had taken in the area, and 
>see if they contained anything which might possibly be of use to the 
>police. Less than three years later, you could get arrested for taking 
>photos in the same places. It's a funny old world.

Yeah, "funny" in the sense of being sinister and malevolent - in
Britain and America, at least.

MM

"Steve Walker"  wrote in message 
news:6cfpjnF3fguvmU1@mid.individual.net...
> That's just not true.  Remember the air raid warden in Dad's Army, Blakey 
> in On The Buses?

Comedy programmes and inacurate at that.
Dad's army did a great job in promoting the idea of Home guard to people who 
would otherwise not know about it but it destroyed the true story of the 
guards who were far from the charicatures portrayed.

Blaeky - take your point. He represents every bus inspector, park keeper 
(remember them?), traffic warden or petty official.

> You're misjudging me MM.   I despise petty officialdom, CCTV, ID Cards, 
> DNA etc like any decent Englishman should.   But if someone spends a large 
> amount of time on their hobby, and is spoken to by the Police twice in a 
> year, that's really not on a scale with harassment.   There are plenty of 
> examples of real, serious abuses of power* and it makes no sense to get 
> into a lather over a minor one.

Ditto for Scotsmen

Andy

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:16:25 +0100, MM  wrote:

>Well, what else would you call it? We have increasing accounts of
>these things happening. It never used to happen. Ever. The only time
>we heard of photographers being stopped was abroad, i.e. Greece and
>planes.

I suggest that taking photographs of military aircraft from a military
airport (albeit open to the public on the day in question)  is a
completely different kettle of fish to taking photographs of everyday
things in a public place.  The Greek authority's reaction iwas *far*
more understandable than the UK police.

-- 
Cynic

Cynic wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:16:25 +0100, MM  wrote:
> 
>> Well, what else would you call it? We have increasing accounts of
>> these things happening. It never used to happen. Ever. The only time
>> we heard of photographers being stopped was abroad, i.e. Greece and
>> planes.
> 
> I suggest that taking photographs of military aircraft from a military
> airport (albeit open to the public on the day in question)  is a
> completely different kettle of fish to taking photographs of everyday
> things in a public place.  The Greek authority's reaction iwas *far*
> more understandable than the UK police.
> 

Particularly as most sensible UK aviation enthusiasts, via dedicated 
magazines, are fully aware of the attitude of the Greek authorities 
towards matters of "national security".

-- 
Moving things in still pictures!

Bevan Price formulated the question :
> "Baldoni"  wrote in message 
> news:6cd5atF3be0qbU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Alasdair presented the following explanation :
>>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>>> *******************************************
>>>
>>> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>>>
>>> By Laura Clout
>>>
>>> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>>>
>>>
>>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>>> paedophile.
>>>
>>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>>
>>> The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers
>>> "appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who are suspicious
>>> of his motives.
>>>
>>> The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, told the
>>> Gloucester Citizen: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a
>>> crackdown.
>>>
>>> "The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the
>>> most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police
>>> over-exercising their authority.
>>>
>>> Mr McCaffrey, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby
>>> without harassment. I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a
>>> terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really
>>> hurts.
>>>
>>> "We don't want to harbour people doing something illegal, but while
>>> the police are wasting their time with me, a terrorist could be
>>> planning his next atrocity."
>>>
>>> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
>>> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
>>> McCaffrey's photos.
>>>
>>> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
>>> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
>>> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>>>
>>> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
>>> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
>>> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
>>> matter with the photographer.
>>>
>>> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
>>> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
>>> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
>>> the individual."
>>>
>>> ----
>>> Alasdair.
>>
>> I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo of 
>> me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is the 
>> world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some eejit 
>> pointing a camera at you ?
>>
>> -- Count Baldoni
>>
>
> If your tale is true, I hope you served time in HMP for assault and criminal 
> damage. If not, you should have done.
> The world does not need ***** who think they can do what they want when they 
> disagree with other people's actions.
>
> Bevan

Quite right the guy had no business to be taking photos.

-- 
Count Baldoni

Jack Spratt was thinking very hard :
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:56:01 +0100, Baldoni 
> wrote:
>
>> Alasdair presented the following explanation :
>>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>>> *******************************************
>>> 
>>> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>>> 
>>> By Laura Clout
>>> 
>>> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>>> paedophile.
>>> 
>>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>> 
>>> The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers
>>> "appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who are suspicious
>>> of his motives.
>>> 
>>> The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, told the
>>> Gloucester Citizen: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a
>>> crackdown.
>>> 
>>> "The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the
>>> most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police
>>> over-exercising their authority.
>>> 
>>> Mr McCaffrey, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby
>>> without harassment. I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a
>>> terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really
>>> hurts.
>>> 
>>> "We don't want to harbour people doing something illegal, but while
>>> the police are wasting their time with me, a terrorist could be
>>> planning his next atrocity."
>>> 
>>> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
>>> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
>>> McCaffrey's photos.
>>> 
>>> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
>>> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
>>> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>>> 
>>> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
>>> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
>>> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
>>> matter with the photographer.
>>> 
>>> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
>>> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
>>> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
>>> the individual."
>>> 
>>> ----
>>> Alasdair.
>> 
>> I had a hotel barman by the throat 20 years ago because he took a photo 
>> of me.  He refused to give me the film so I took it from him.  What is 
>> the world coming to when you can't go for a quiet drink without some 
>> eejit pointing a camera at you ?
>
> Why the fucking X posting, cunt?

Why does this guy have to multi-post all day long for fucks sake.

-- 
Count Baldoni

Alasdair explained on 24/06/2008 :
> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
> *******************************************
>
> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>
> By Laura Clout
>
> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>
>
> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
> paedophile.

Bus spotter for fucks sake.  What a fucking nobber and a waste of 
space.

-- 
Count Baldoni

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:10:26 +0100, Baldoni 
wrote:

>Quite right the guy had no business to be taking photos.

On the contrary, the guy had every right to take photographs, and you
had no business whatsoever in interfering with his activity.

-- 
Cynic

"Bevan Price" <meVIAfreeukFULLSTOPcom> wrote in message 
news:1214422271.8766.0@proxy01.news.clara.net...
>
> "Alasdair"  wrote in message 
> news:9uh264d5l8i45nl4il3n4d1f4qtuvnbg5m@4ax.com...
>>
>> From Today's Daily Telegraph.
>> *******************************************
>>
>> Bus-spotter branded a 'terrorist' for his favourite hobby
>>
>> By Laura Clout
>>
>> Last updated: 10:36 PM BST 23/06/2008
>>
>>
>> A bus-spotter says he may be forced to give up the hobby he has
>> enjoyed for 40 years, after being branded a terrorist and a
>> paedophile.
>>
>> Rob McCaffrey, 50, has collected 30,000 photos of trams and coaches,
>> but after being questioned by police twice in 12 months, he fears the
>> time may have come to hang up his camera.
>>
>>>
>> Last September in Pontypridd, Wales, a bus driver became angry after
>> he was caught in shot and called the police, who demanded to see Mr
>> McCaffrey's photos.
>>
>> Later, in Monmouth, a Police Community Support Officers approached him
>> and ran his name through the police database, after a member of the
>> public rasied concerns about his behaviour.
>>
>> A Gloucestershire Police spokesman said: "If a member of the public
>> becomes suspicious of an individual taking photos in public and makes
>> a complaint to a police officer, the officer will first discuss the
>> matter with the photographer.
>>
>> "However, if the officer remains suspicious as to the content of the
>> images or the photographers intentions they have the authority, under
>> the Police and Criminal Evidence Act to seize the camera and arrest
>> the individual."
>>
>> ----
>> Alasdair.
>
> Whilst the police have a duty to try and stop terrorists, some of them 
> seem too dim to realise that by antagonising innocent people taking 
> photographs, they probably ensure that these people will in future be very 
> reluctant to report anything to the police.
>
> I once reported some missing equipment to the "works" police and was 
> questioned as if they thought that I might have taken it. Never again did 
> I bother to report anything that had "disappeared".
>
> Bevan
>
> Wonder if they would have tackled a few hoodies doing the same, they only 
> pick easy targets, it is NOT illegal anyway, tell them to pick on cyclists 
> on pavements, or something that could injure somebody. I saw two PCSOs the 
> other day, a hoodie rode past them on the pavement, they never said 
> anything to him at all, onlt tried to say hello to him, he ignored them 
> and rode off, still on the pavement what a waste of space they are
>