[punky]

All cops are different and when presented with woolly law descriptions from the government, they always apply it differently. That would the government's fault for wording the laws so loosely.

From all the coppers I have ever known (and I have known a lot), none have ever refused a photograph or argued against having a photo taken providing the photographer had good intentions (like DW's photo). However, that doesn't extend to:

1. The pond life that turn up to photograph a pedestrian or motorist smeared across the road so they can take the photo home and furiously masturbate over it later.

2. When cops are struggling to control violent, drug-crazed and mostly armed clients/customers/****, they don't need wannabe papps a few inches from their face shouting and trying to incite the situation.

If anyone agrees with #2, I could turn up while they are at work, constantly videoing goading them and threatening to post it on Youtube, and see how well they do their job. Its not easy, even without the violent, armed, drug-crazed criminals.

This law was drafted to prevent a reoccurence of the situation we had before when a Muslim British soldier was targetted for kidknapp and summary (Youtube) execution. To think anyone who has a hi-vi jacket in the corner of their photo should just turn themselves in is rubbish.

---------- Post added at 13:21 ---------- Previous post was at 13:09 ----------

Also, another thing to bear in mind: coppers are people too. Like others, they might be photophobic and not want their photos taken and plastered all over the public. It would be nice if photographers respected that as well as the others who don't want their photo taken and (mis) used.