Giving Us a Power We Don't Have

[johnastovall]

"I am stunned to learn, from a comment written by Peter Adamski to the previous post, that

"On the 16th of February, the U.K. Government passed a law (in the Counter Terrorism Act) making it illegal to take a photograph of a police office, military personnel or member of the intelligence services—or a photograph which 'may be of use for terrorism.' This definition is vague at best, and open to interpretation by the police—who under Home Secretary guidelines can 'restrict photography in public places.' "
​

To say this is a huge blow to freedom is an understatement. It is antithetical to the ideals and practices of a free people, and illustrates that the creep of totalitarianism continues apace in the West."


Full essay here.


Also read Bruce Schneier essay 'Are Photographers Really a Threat?'

 

[LJL]

Take heart, John. At least the U.S. has dropped that entire "enemy combatant" thing, and most of the dictatorial concepts that brought it to light for seven plus years. While there is a concern over how "terrorists" could use this sort of information, we are essentially losing that war every time we erode the existing freedoms we are fighting to preserve.

LJ

 

[beamon]

While I'd float the thesis that a greater advocate of civil rights than I does not exist; I do have the greatest empathy for the quandary that any PM or President in a western democracy faces.

Yes, good photographs of a police officer could reveal the necessary uniform detail such that an antagonist bent of terrorism would be more able to replicate to better carry out an attack. Stretching a point? Perhaps, but where to draw the line? Damned if you do, damned if you don't would seem an apt description. Better to err in the safe direction is the order of the day.

That said, the important thing is that the public MUST insist on and convey to their elected representatives that such legislation or fiat be written with "sunset provisions" that will terminate within a reasonable time frame. These "sunset provisions" would have to be specifically voted upon to be extended. This is not being done AFAIK at this time.

Here in the US, for the last 25-30 years, civics is scarcely, if at all, being taught K-12. Therefore, the younger element of our electorate knows next to nothing about how our Constitution, and by extension, government works. A democratic republic without an informed electorate is lick smacking prey for a corrupt government. Our founders must be very uncomfortable!

 

[johnastovall]

You don't need photographs for all the necessary uniform detail. Just stop in at your local police supply store, tell them what department and buy it.

 

[Oxide Blu]

You don't need photographs for all the necessary uniform detail. Just stop in at your local police supply store, tell them what department and buy it.

Ooooooh! You're going to Gitmo for saying that.

 

[beamon]

You don't need photographs for all the necessary uniform detail. Just stop in at your local police supply store, tell them what department and buy it.

But, would terrorists know that much about the way it might be done? I say 'might be done' as I doubt that all supply stores are that lax, and most will require credentials before selling to unknown patrons.

 

[fotografz]

When they outlaw cameras, only outlaws will have cameras.

: -)