There is no UK law stopping anyone filming activities in a public place. All police forces in Great Britain adopt the Metropolitan Police guidelines on photography. Their official advice clarifies the point. "The police have no power to stop you filming or photographing incidents or police personnel".
Yes there is a UK law saying we can film anything from a public place, including the Police and their personal cars but they seem to think they have soecial privileges and are exempt from being filmed
Freedom to photograph and film "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 website
@yoochoooob The terrorism act states they have to have reasonable grounds (proof/evidence) that you ARE a terrorisr, not because they "think" you may be
The guidelines in question originated from the then ACPO in response to being forced by a professional photographer to appear on the BBC Breakfast TV programm. CC Andrew Trotter answered all questions regarding the police and photography openly, clearly and without any and, if's or buts. The guidelines that subsequently appeared were adopted by many police forces, the Met being just one. On the NPCC superseding ACPO those guidelines were adopted and have been revised several times which make it even more clearer what the legal situation is and remains regarding photography in or from a public place and how the Police have no powers to subject any member of the public to the sort of scrutiny that we see here and in many other encounters. The Met are the biggest offenders of ignoring the instructions of the NPCC and the College of Policing and they will pay for it in the same way that Section 44 of the 2000 Terrorism Act was removed because of so much abuse, namely by the Met. Some people are already calling for Section 43 of the act to be revised in such a way that it would been a criminal offence by any Police Constable, Officer etc to abuse a member of the public in the way that is done now. I hope the above clears up any misunderstanding that the guidelines are those of the Met, they are the biggest abusers of those guidelines.
Brilliant. Seeing as the act states they have to have reasonable grounds (proof/evidence) that you ARE a terrorisr, not because they "think" you may be. Highly abused peice of legislation
Admittedly that memo came out a year or two ago when auditors started making a scene, they do have a right to ask what your doing wether you see it as intrusive or inquisitive but there is many more problems right now aside from the filming alone, the use of the law needs highlighting as clearing the meaning of if hasn't done anything for anyone for the last few years
Freedom to photograph and film "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 website. So, it's easily found, but these tyrants rely on people not knowing this, and try to bully them with threats of terrorism act, which states they have to have reasonable grounds (proof/evidence) that you ARE a terrorisr, not because they "think" you may be
so at the end of the video the acting Sgt says you are preventing us from responding to other calls, so their concerns override public safety? great admission.
Isn't abusing there oath for personal gain ( preferential treatment that's not afforded to the public ) a section 26 charge. The egotistical nature of these scumbags is perverse.
Private number plate nonsense. I fail to see how it’s a risk. Lots of professional people who engage with the public drive to and from their place of work. Nurses and doctors have to who frequently get attacked at work. But people aren’t threatened with being searched who film near hospitals. That pretend Sgt using threats of searches to enforce a non law.
You could give them an invalid reason and you still wouldn't be breaking the law! Security risk and personal vehicle bo**ocks again! Who on earth do they think they are?
"Your presence alarms me and causes me distress. I do not wish to engage with you. Leave me alone, constable." Try this approach, see how happy they are to knowingly harass you.
Moron Inspector demonstrates how little power he actually has. How is is possible to give a valid reason for not breaking the law, and what is a threat risk.
Record all vehicles owned by police constables because in a recent survey its them that break the law the most with no insurance no MOT and no road tax. So just say your getting their numbers whilst being driven. As soon as they approach you ask them to confirm time and date that will put them off guard. You're only making our roads safer.
We all knew it was building up to the inevitable ''tail between the legs'' conclusion.Those tyrants knew it too, but their egos wouldn't let them leave.
In absence of a conversation, I'm going to have a conversation with you. All about why I can't shave and present myself professionally. The Silent Treatment (which I worship) removes all options from the monsters. They HAVE to go hands on and physical - UNPROVOKED, OR.........nothing. Keep up the great work. (Ironically, all of that become moot at 5:45 I couldn't tolerate your debate anymore, it wasn't helping. Please just let THEM go on and on and stop egging them on. It's absurd how MUCH they love to talk.)
You are right if you're having a conversation you are negotiating a contract, loose lips sink ship (your own) that's why a still tongue keeps a wise head 💪
Those poor lads had their heads shoved down the pan that many times in the past - do you expect them to just forget about it and be nice to everyone? (Not a chance!)
They've got to start leaving their "personal vehicles" at home, and get the bus. Their cars are secret and any Tom Dick or Harry can access DVLA and find personal details can't they? Paranoid plod. They make themselves look very silly.
Overt recording cannot be used as a suspicion of terrorism or hostile reconnaissance or anything nefarious. The police can ask what you are doing but they have no right to ask you to leave or stop doing you lawful business. Recording or taking photos in a public place or in a place with implied public access is perfectly acceptable and legal.
Back to work constables, or perhaps you should start doing some work in the first place (you're feeble crime figures prove this). We're watching you, your personal cars and your movements, so tough, there is nothing you can do about it.
Yaki Dai, keep it going mate. Next time one of them says they have concerns about you taking video of police officers private cars ask them if they're okay with you filming the public's cars. If they say yes, ask them why they think they should be subject to special treatment. It's just more copsplaining bollocks!
Imagine if those two were outside Buckingham palace in the Summer. 100,000 tourists would get told to move on and not take pictures of the Royal cars entering and leaving. These two are very paranoid. Often a sign of drug abuse
You should have stayed. Remind them of the memo that personnel, stations are vehicles can be filmed and its not grounds for a section 43. Even if they do search you they have no powers under 43 to get your details.
"We don't know anything about what you're doing which is why we can suspect you of everthing This gives us grounds to search you" Jeez...I hope that promotion is indeed temporary.
How the hell can they enforce the law when they don't know it or they make it up as they go. They may know the headings ie section 5 public order or in this case when he's hinting/ suggesting at terrorists sec 43 terrorist act when clearly it doesn't fall under that category
Why should anyone require a reason or excuse for performing a lawful action. The slovenly appearance of the first officer, who I will assume is an Inspector, is an indicator of how far standards have fallen. As soon as they mention a specific criminal matter such as terrorism, demand that they read you your rights as to self incrimination, which includes the part about not answering questions.
I live in Southport and the police station has a carpark at the front with private houses opposite ,people can watch or film police private cars aLL day long if they want
Were just trying to be pleasant while we try our best to abuse your rights and bully you into doing what we want , It's no wonder they have lost all trust from the public , They are certainly earning their nicknames , Good on you for standing up to their bullying tactics
PC 5702 Davies needs reporting, if nothing else. Hassling someone legally filming in public does not merit that "civil conversation". Threatening the Terrorism Act for legally filming proves that he doesn't know the law, so both he and the Inspector at the start are in positions that beggar belief. Staff are not exempt from being filmed and the personal vehicles thing is bloody stupid. Also, did you notice that an elderly lady had to divert around a police car, because it was parked on the pavement?
There is a strange argument whereby officers come out to ‘investigate’, but then follow that with “you could be telling us anything”, which begs the question, how can somebody engage and give information for your investigation you WOULD believe? If they can’t do that, why do YOU engage in you ‘investigation’? Either start with an arrest, or ignore. When you do neither, you tend to threaten people with searches under terrorism legislation, whilst not believing them to be terrorists. Ironically, THAT’S illegal.
Logic isn’t their strong point. If his statement is true then the whole conversation is moot, as there is no certainty that either side is being truthful.
Officer in the absence of a conversation what we the public are not comfortable with is the clear threat you continue to abuse Lie on the public record and threaten action under section 43 your clearly putting a member of the public who is legally conducting his business at risk We have very serious concerns Yea Temporary promoted I’ve go an idea that will be very temporary after this
"We are trying to engage in a conversation!" . . . no you are not - you are trying to carry out an interrogation - question after question after question is NOT a conversation . . . Oh, and there is no terrorist threat to police stations - not one terrorist attack for 50 years.
3:05 Filming people leaving the police station is not a crime. Not even under any terrorism law. If it was then passing dashcams, or Ring doorbells in the area would be committing a crime. And any CCTV in the area would have to be removed.
If filming a private car could be a terrorism offence then filming random cars on the street could also be a terrorism offence. The police do not have any special treatment or protection by terrorism laws. In fact, terrorists steer clear of police as they want to succeed in their terrorism and so will attack the defenceless public. Police anti terrorism training specifically does not list police stations as a potential target of terrorists, just places used by the public from shopping centres to hospitals. But never anywhere were security is high.
2:10 That's a threat. An inappropriate threat which has no chance of being enforced except by unlawful means because security concerns are not a criminal offence. Such a threat is pure intimidation tactics. When it's not necessary since there has been nothing happening or happened that could give rise to it's need. Except for the police being upset that their authoritah is being ignored.
2:40 Pure gaslighting. The terrorist threat according to the MI5 threat level is at the lowest it's ever been since it started being published on the website. So the terrorist threats are at a low level, not heightened.
'Kin'ell! How dumb are these morons? Not being hostile? Well telling someone to move on and breaching rights is absolutely hostile. Threat of arrest or search without grounds is illegal.
Comfortable feelings are not law just because you don't like it so you abuse your powers. Threat to the country filming a local police station really I don't think so. The officers lack of experience of people filming is making him nervous I think you are in the wrong job.
PC5702 only has a little gang badge, obviously he's hoping to get a big one soon! They would be totally lost if they didn't have that "terrorism threat" to waffle on about!
5702 was desperately trying to escalate the situation in the hope the auditor would lose his composure, at which point, for "officer safety", he would have been on the floor.
give these knuckleheads a badge and they think they are above the law...these officers probably have personal insecure issues ...the type of bullies one finds in a school playground , now older but they can't change or control their habits...sad pitiful men in black.
The current terrorism threat level is the lowest it’s been for years. Cops quoting “ the current threat level” are pathetic. Them asking you to leave isn’t just pathetic, it’s a violation of your rights.
Once again the police fail will they ever learn it’s not against the law for anyone to film a police station, police officers or officers private cars it’s a shame they don’t have the same regard for the public as they do for their colleagues
