# Section 76.



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

Section 76 is a new piece of moronic legislation that has just come in to force.
This badly worded law, is part of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 and states that, anyone "eliciting, publishing or communicating information on members of the armed forces, intelligence services and police officers which is likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism", could face a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.
Now, although the authorities insist that taking photographs of police officers would only be an offence "in exceptional circumstances" I fear that it may be used by individual policeman to prevent legitimate photography in public places (as has already been happening through he misuse of the4 Terrorist Act 2000).
*Peter Smyth* (chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation) said in a statement.. "My organisation shares photographers' concerns".
He supports calls for a photography code to be drawn up between the Home office and bodies representing both the police and photographers.
He added " Its aim should be to facilitate photography wherever possible, rather than seek reasons to bar it".
"As things stand, there is a real risk of photographers being hampered in carrying out their legitimate work and of police officers facing opprobrium for carrying out what they genuinely, if mistakenly, believe are duties imposed on them by the law".
I personally have taken it a step further and have written to my local MP with my concerns... I suggest you do the same.
In the mean time, mind what you take pictures of... a single bobby, soldier, spy, police station or barracks in the background of your image, could land you in jail.:doublesho:doublesho


----------



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

I am amazed that this post has not been made sticky.
Have you guys bordered to actually read it?
This new law could land you in jail for taking pictures of something as innocuous as Buckingham palace. 
The government, under the "war on terror" umbrella, Is taking our civil liberties away one at a time. 
Read the post, and write to your local PM ASAP.


----------



## jcmac (Sep 13, 2008)

Bah... Another naff law. I have a book on stupid laws and this should be in the next edition.


----------



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

Well, this may just look like another naff law to you. I am a freelance photog and I can promise you I am far from happy. 

For instance, If I were to find myself in a position to take pictures of a "heavy handed" arrest during a protest or a demonstration. I am sure, with this new power, the police will be very much inclined to arrest me under section 76, so as to keep things "under control".

A pi$$ed of Bobby could easily slam average Joe citizen (or foreign visitor)with section 76 for taking pictures of the guard change at Buckingham palace, that's how bad it is.

This law is badly worded, it leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation and should not have been passed.

I urge everyone to contact their local MP at once... if we unite the law will be at the very least reviewed and reworded.

Don't leave it until is too late.


----------



## Lloyd71 (Aug 21, 2008)

IGADIZ said:


> Well, this may just look like another naff law to you. I am a freelance photog and I can promise you I am far from happy.
> 
> For instance, If I were to find myself in a position to take pictures of a "heavy handed" arrest during a protest or a demonstration. I am sure, with this new power, the police will be very much inclined to arrest me under section 76, so as to keep things "under control".
> 
> ...


The amount of people on this site who would really be affected is miniscule, which is probably why it hasn't had many replies. It's another one of these laws that _could_ affect someone, but it's very vey unlikely unless we go out and actively seek out people who could be considered a threat to photograph.


----------



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

That's where you are mistaken.

It doesn't just apply to pro photogs with pro gear... dare you take a picture of a police man, soldier at work or a "protected building" with your mobile phone...In fact, take a picture of anything a police man doesn't approve off and chances are, section 76 will be very much on your face.
So don't assume this isn't going to affect you.

I know this sounds apocalyptic but it is a very serious matter... your civil liberties have been breached, don't stand by and watch your country become a police state... do something now!


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

When at Canary Wharf 2 years ago there were people taking pictures of Canary Wharf from the outside, security came over and made them delete the pictures off their cameras.


----------



## spitfire (Feb 10, 2007)

I can't help but think this is being blown out of proportion. I sincerely doubt that joe blogg police man even knows the detail of the counter terrorism act let alone section 76. No one is going to be arrested for taking a picture of the changing of the guard unless the pictures are used in connection with terrorist activities. Lets be sensible here


----------



## Stew (Jul 9, 2007)

IGADIZ said:


> That's where you are mistaken.
> 
> It doesn't just apply to pro photogs with pro gear... dare you take a picture of a police man, soldier at work or a "protected building" with your mobile phone...In fact, take a picture of anything a police man doesn't approve off and chances are, section 76 will be very much on your face.
> So don't assume this isn't going to affect you.
> ...


:lol::lol:

Hardly!

I'm sure all the tourists aren't going to get locked up for taking pics of Buckingham Palace etc.

Ok, if misused the law could be very bad but I would be surprised if anyone other than people taking pics at top secret locations where cameras are banned would be prosecuted.

It's like saying that because you have urged us to take action by writing to our MP etc ads you don't like this law you are going to get done for treason.

Blown out of all proportion in my opinion.


----------



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

Stew said:


> :lol::lol:
> 
> Hardly!
> 
> ...


Mate I am not forcing you to do anything.
Take it as you will... the fact is, this law is badly worded, it needs to be revised and reworded so that there is no room for misinterpretation. As it is, it can be misused if the police so chooses... living you well and truly F***ed. .
Yes my scenario is a worst case one. But this law allows it.

For instance, last year a policeman threatened arrest because I refused to delete some images I took... that was while the law (as it was for photography in public places), allowed me to shoot pretty much anything I wanted... that has changed... now the threat of arrest, and possible imprisonment is very real. If they abused their power then... imagine now.

I for one have already written to my local MP. like I said... I suggest you do the same.

If you do nothing...Don't come crying to me when a pi$$ed of Bobby takes his anger at you with section 76, just because you happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time taking pictures with your mobile phone.


----------



## Stew (Jul 9, 2007)

IGADIZ said:


> Mate I am not forcing you to do anything.
> Take it as you will... the fact is, this law is badly worded, it needs to be revised and reworded so that there is no room for misinterpretation. As it is, it can be misused if the police so chooses... living you well and truly F***ed. .
> Yes my scenario is a worst case one. But this law allows it.
> 
> ...


I accept what you say and appreciate your view however I really doubt it'll affect normal people taking normal photos.

You think the police are going to be standing at Buckingham Palace in Riot gear ready to imprison all the tourists snapping away? I don't think so.....

That is the picture you're painting. Am I likely to be rugby tackled by the police for if I take my mobile phone out to snap a pic of an army parade?

I don't think the police have the time or manpower to make all our lives a misery as you suggest. I think you are a little excited by it all.

If I do get imprisoned the next time I take my camera out though I'll happily inform you so you can say 'I told you so' to me on DW.:thumb:


----------



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

You missing the point mate...this is not about whether or not you are likely to be arrested for taking pictures at parades or at Buckingham palace... this is about a law which gives the police power to do so.
Under the umbrella of counter Terrorism, your civil liberties are being chipped away by this government...one at a time... do nothing at your own peril.


----------



## Colt Man (Dec 3, 2008)

unless your planning on taking photo's to commit a terrorst act and are worried the law will find out i cant see why you are so worried mate 

there would be an investigation and all that jazz

it wouldnt be 

"CLICK" "RAAAWWWWRRR THOU SHALT ROT IN JAIL" they wouldnt put you in the slammer without saying a word to you abotu why you took the photo

you would have to be proven guilty of doing it with malicious intent.

chill your beans mate, have a beer, you wont get banged up


----------



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

I am chilled mate.

Is not about the wham bang you nicked son!... is about the police having that power over me (or anyone for that matter).

I am a freelance Photographer. I cover a plethora of events in which the police are all but happy about having a camera pointed at them. This puts me firmly on the firing line... Like I said, I have been threatened with arrest before this law came to be. I can't even imagine how is going to be now.

Until proven innocent you say... Well, this is part of the Terrorist act mate... there is no such thing as being proven innocent. They can lock you up and throw away the key until they are satisfied you are not a threat... there is no time limit as to how long they can keep you locked up... get the picture?.

You choose to do nothing, and that, as sad as I find it, is your given right. I choose to get active and try to defend my liberties.

I will not be answering any more post on this thread. I have said enough... should you need more info please read this (old now) or get in touch with your local agencies.

PS: for those who read the article in full...I was there on the 16th, showing the police and the government I care about my rights.


----------



## IGADIZ (May 21, 2006)

*arrested for alleged sewer-grate photography*

For those of you who think this is all silly stuff.
Take a look a this news report from Manchester.
NIce! ...


----------



## snoop69 (Jun 16, 2007)

Scenario - you are on the receiving end of Police heavy handedness & a tog 
is taking pictures.Under section 76, any evidence gathered would now be
useless 

As for being banged up for taking pics & then being set free after an investigation,
I would rather not spend a couple of hours in the cells for taking pics in the
first place.

The Police struggle with photographers rights enough as it is & this just makes
matters worse Imo.

The people it will hurt most will be news journalists i think.


----------

