UK Ministry of Defense can arrest you without warrant for taking pictures, grazing animals near NSA and drone outposts


#1

[Permalink]


#2

MSF, huh? A dangerous nest of commie terrorists if I ever saw one.


#3

you sure they aren’t simply extending existing laws to additional sites to make it uniform across the UK? Both the quoted part and the Independent article are not very clear.


#4

while they are at it, can extend the power of arrest for not picking dog turds to the whole UK?


#5

The movie “V” is not a manual in governance.


#6

When I was in the US Air Force, I was stationed in the UK - specifically at RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk. This was the late 80s, so the SR-71 was still flying out and we were the base from which it did so. The flights weren’t usually announced, yet somehow the locals always seemed to show up along the fence around the base with some pretty powerful cameras and telescopes about two hours or so before a flight. The really funny part to me was that the fence (and the main road out front of the base) actually had an area to accommodate these people and their cameras, - including a small parking lot.

I’m guessing they’ll be redesigning those fences and tearing down the parking area now, huh?


#7

Dang! There goes my plan to have trained poodles shit out mini cameras all around the bases. Gonna have to go to plan B - squirrels with parabolic mikes.


#8

It would be nice if they could deal with all of the proto-fascists who look to their government to punish rather than just clean up tiny problems themselves.


#9

It’s not the UK, it’s airstrip one. It’s also not the Ministry of Defense, it’s the Ministry of Love. And it’s not a warrant, it’s smothering with love. Also, it’s not David Cameron, it’s your beloved Fuhrer.

I do like the dog turd rule though, I think we should introduce that worldwide. Indefinite detention for not picked up dogpoop. Count me in.


#10

Well realistically speaking, who would take photographs besides a terrorist, or their supporters, or somebody the Government deems a threat such as abusers of so-called “freedoms?” Who the hell needs a warrant when guilt is obvious? Also, anybody who disagrees.


#11

Once again, we could deal with the USSR without giving up everything, but not our own internal dissent now?


#12

I guess Mark Thomas won’t be flying a balloon over RAF Menworth/NSA listening post again soon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBksQsAZ2hQ


#13

Really, forbidding photography of sites that are in plain view of the surrounding countryside is taking the mickey. Croughton’s radomes loom over the nearby dual-carriageway like a clutch of Godzilla eggs. If there are secrets to be hidden, perhaps they shouldn’t have been put in such a public place.

I took a few pictures of Croughton a couple of years ago, through or over the perimeter fence. No-one objected; though I made no attempt at hiding what I was doing, it’s possible that no-one noticed.


#14

Also, where does this put air-show enthusiasts when they attend the Air Tattoo at RAF Fairford and such places? Will the armed police that attend be confiscating cameras from all the plane-spotters?

Edit: And if it’s legal to take pictures of a given airbase during an airshow, how does it become illegal for the rest of the year?


#15

Kindly let me point out the mistake you’re making here. You try to apply logical thinking to bureaucracy.


#16

Let me just borrow what I would usually to an American at this point, Cory: “You must be soo proud to be a Brit, eh?”


#17

Interesting letter on the subject of photography and policing on twitter earlier Adam Shaw- police letter from 2010


#18

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.