Taking photos in public

one thing this thread has thought me get camera insurance

All I know is I looked out of the window to see some nutter facing his lens at me.

You have a life size fibreglass lion in your front garden and think that the nutter is the bloke you chased down the street for taking a photo of it?

You make a point, and then avoid all attempts to glean any kind of explanation as to how you'd achieve your aims or substantiate your position.

 

If you disagree with people opinions, and state as matter of fact that somebody can't do something.. when they clearly can, then refuse to explain either how/why you think the law isn't applicable to you or why your opinion differs.. then yes, you are trolling!

 

or to put it another way, simply being contrary to get a reaction...

Im not disagreeing with you, I am stating my position and am reaffirming that position. I don't care what other people think of it. I am just saying how it is from my point of view and that's all, its not trolling, I don't have to justify my point of view, I just have aright to state what it is.

Your saying that they can do it but on reading the photographers rights that has been linked here I would say that they do not.

Besides that, I have the right to disregard the law if I so wish, I would just be answerable to it, but it would be mission accomplished by then so I would be happy with it.

You have a life size fibreglass lion in your front garden and think that the nutter is the bloke you chased down the street for taking a photo of it?

He could be posing a thread on a fourm now telling the story about a crazy guy that chased in down the road one time for taking a picture of his lion,

Besides that, I have the right to disregard the law if I so wish, I would just be answerable to it, but it would be mission accomplished by then so I would be happy with it.

how would it be mission accomplished? As I already mentioned you might simply get your ass handed back to you on a plate.. and photographer still has his/her pictures.. (along with any other consequences of your actions).

And.. I don't see anywhere in the photographers rights that substantiates your position, other than potentially the harassment rules or the reasonable expectation of privacy.. i.e using a long lens to capture you inside your own home.

I doubt very much that I could give you a kicking. You, on the other hand, seem - going by your posts here - to be prepared to beat up a woman.

Now that is a down and out lie and deformation. Show me where I say that or take it back.

drop me your address hard2miss. i will pop over and take a dozen pics of your house.

it will be worth the assault i get to get you banged up and off the streets. Your a dangerous bloke. the sooner your away from harming people the better.

It's a good job you didn't catch him, either you would have got the stuffing kicked out of you or you would have been arrested for assault. Ether way you were so far in the wrong you would have had no defence.

I fail to see your point. I have already said I don't care about either. If I feel you are taking the micky then I would let you know, I would of course take all things into consideration, but doubt very much I would let them steer my actions. The arrogance of people that think they can do what they wish will inevitably find out that they cannot at some time, even I.

I totally agree, but I have not said I would assault anyone, but if my request to have the photographs shown or removed then I rule out nothing.

Remarkably you are still at liberty, if you actually carry on in real life like you say you do on here its some thing of a wonder you haven't been locked up.

What do you mean carry on ?

All I said is that I chased down some nutter pointing his zoom lens at my front window and that I would have something to say if I thought someone was filming my kids. Its hardly Peter Sutcliffe material.

I have just found out that it was HE that was in the wrong according to the photographers rights, feel free to read them.

I have just found out that it was HE that was in the wrong according to the photographers rights, feel free to read them.

Please quote where it says he was wrong?