New laws set to be passed in England and Canada would make it illegal to use "bad language" or take photographs of police officers! (prisonplanet.com)
submitted 2 days ago by Phazon
553
jordanlund 38 points 2 days ago[-]
If the police don't have anything to hide then they shouldn't mind being photographed.
Isn't that what they always say?
"If you don't have anything to hide then you shouldn't mind losing your rights/being searched/being detained..."
english_guy_78 5 points 2 days ago[-]
They have plenty to hide.
Stranger2love 0 points 2 days ago[-]
How many cops in england carry guns?
Also, how many police stations in england have IQ tests?
SLAUTCAANS 1 point 2 days ago* [-]
We have discussed this in the Common Law subreddit to some degree if anyone is interested, and there is more discussion on tpuc.org/forum
Move out to the less organized parts of your country of choice and try to hide out in the noise. With the world quickly heading towards fascism you dont want to be living in a place where the police have their act together. This may mean living in a high crime zone so pick your poison.
stfudonny 4 points 2 days ago[-]
I don't exactly classify downtown Montreal as high crime, but I wouldn't say the police are doing their job either. You have 6-7 cops camping almost each metro station to make sure that students have valid, unexpired metro passes. A lot more are just going around giving parking tickets (It's impossible to walk about 5 blocks without seeing a bunch of them ticketing people)
Do we really need that many cops doing those banal things? Or is it that this produces fines, and fines make money. It's no longer about protecting the streets, it's about making as much money as poss.
SeizureMan -1 points 2 days ago[-]
With the world quickly heading towards fascism
Not quite yet. We don't have anything like this at all in Norway. Here police officers are actually servants of the people. And I strongly doubt that will change any time soon. I guess it's the benefit of having a small population and almost no guns.
sotonohito 1 point 2 days ago[-]
Probably its a response to the Grant case. If you can't film cops abusing their power it doesn't get to youtube and force them to try one of their own for murder.
There's no such thing as a good cop, if there was they'd arrest bad cops.
radicalcentrist 9 points 2 days ago[-]
There's no such thing as a good cop, if there was they'd arrest bad cops.
You're clearly not looking hard enough.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id;=6629792
http://www.dailyprogress.com/cdp/news/state_regional/article/state_police_captain_arrested/34750/
http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2009/January09/30/Katz_plea-30Jan09.html
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id;=6594211
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090110/NEWS0107/901100367
Nor is it passing a law. There are a few people trying to get a bylaw discussed in Montreal about it, it's arguable whether it'll get through, or get passed.
Montreal is indeed not Canada. There are laws here that doesn't exist anywhere else (for example, you can't turn right on a red light).
willcode4beer 1 point 2 days ago[-]
"Montreal is indeed not Canada"
Fine, but shouldn't the Canadian constitution protect its citizens from stuff like this?
If a city tried to pass a law like that in the US, it would instantly be a constitutional fight.
I guess Canada is not the place to go to escape repression...
CheeseSandwich 1 point 2 days ago[-]
You're right, the proposed law would like be in breach of the Charter of Rights.
Many laws in Canada have been struck down because of our Charter. The restriction against gay marriage, for one. If this law passes it will only be a matter of time before it is challenged.
CheeseSandwich 1 point 2 days ago[-]
You're right, the proposed law would like be in breach of the Charter of Rights.
Many laws in Canada have been struck down because of our Charter. The restriction against gay marriage, for one. If this law passes it will only be a matter of time before it is challenged.
I highly doubt Montreal will actually get something like this passed. The fact that people are just discussing whether to consider it a possibility has already gotten most of the public in an uproar means that unless they have some spectacular reason for it, it would disappear.
That said, Canada is by no means the place to escape repression. We just happen to be closer than Norway, geographically speaking.
I've noticed that a lot of Americans call us England. I wish they would get it right, especially the noisy ones who enjoy screaming about how much of a "fascist state" we are.
Dear United States of America: there hasn't been a state called England since the Acts of Union 1707. Those Acts formed one of the predecessors of what is now known as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Great Britain itself is the big island, containing England, Scotland and Wales.
Scotland has its own legal system that deals with certain areas (it's complicated), but generally speaking, any big laws you hear about will be set by the UK Parliament.
tl;dr it's been "the UK" not "England" for 300 years, please catch up, thanks
venicerocco 3 points 2 days ago[-]
To be fair, there are a lot of Brits who call the Netherlands, Holland. And that's closer. And you also always say "America" when you mean "The United States of America". For example: "In America, the food portions are really big" as you always say ;o) (disclaimer - I'm a Brit too)
Sport isn't politics. Anyway, some of the other countries of the UK have their own teams - but it's not our fault if they aren't any good, is it?
willcode4beer 2 points 2 days ago[-]
facetheglue 0 points 2 days ago[-]
He doesn't make out that it's the whole UK, he does specifically point out that it's England. Just saying.
Shoegaze99 12 points 2 days ago[-]
They're scared. Technology now puts the ability to shine a spotlight on police actions, lies and behavior, and disseminate it to the world in seconds.
This scares the living shit out of them.
Oh, they'll say it's a security issue, but it's not. It's about covering their own asses and ensuring the people don't have a means to protect themselves from corrupt and/or abusive police.
Regular, everyday people have the ability to document what law enforcement does. To document it and show it to the world. Almost ANYONE can do this, and often the cops don't even know it's happening.
They're scared.
With stuff like the BART shooting video, then know more and more of their own will be exposed in their behavior. Quickly, easily, and (for the moment) legally, in a way they cannot refute.
They're trembling.
So they'll pursue unjust laws like this one and erode basic freedoms in the name of vague and indefensible concepts like "security".
No question this will be coming to America soon, too. And that pisses me off.
[deleted] 4 points 2 days ago* [-]
The unavoidable confrontation between freedom and slavery in the minds of this generation is here. Personally I think it is inevitable and necessary that this confrontation happen, as without it we will forget totally within the next couple generations what freedom even is.
"Freedom? You mean like choosing Republican or Democrat?"
Isn't that actually the reason we even have "bad language" in the first place? Because they keep picking random words out and marking them as "bad."
Perhaps if we stopped censoring the words and just treated them like any other word the stupid stigma would go away. Maybe we could just put all words on the bad word list and then they're all equal right?
Look, I'll start. I don't like the word shoe. It offends me. It's something you wear on your feet and feet are disgusting. So, there feet and shoe are on the bad word list now too. Only a few more to go.
Peregrination 18 points 2 days ago* [-]
Watch the language! You're condemning your immortal sole to a fiery and eternal heel.
crazybones 1 point 2 days ago[-]
We need bad words in our language and they need to be universally regarded as shocking so that we have something to do when we are angry, that is an alternative to violence.
My best description of them is that they are 'magic words' - they seem to have a 'magic' effect on people. You'll notice that if you only use them rarely and at the right moments they can have a tremendously useful effect. Yet those who pour them out in every sentence simply because their vocabulary is limited get very little effect.
venicerocco 2 points 2 days ago[-]
To paraphrase Joe Rogan (very smart man that he is).. There are three magic words in the English language: cunt, nigger and love.
CRAIGTHEPICT 4 points 2 days ago[-]
They're talking about making it an offence to call police officers - specifically, it makes no mention of the public - "pigs", or "doughnut-eaters".
So, yeah. Not particularly sexual, or offensive for that matter.
rot13ubercrypto 4 points 2 days ago[-]
In a lot of European (continental) countries, there used to be laws on the books for what Germany calls "Beamtenbeleidigung" -- or "insulting an official." It's no longer a law in Germany, Switzerland or Austria, but under certain circumstances, insulting someone is punishable anyway, and in Austria's case, if it's a "beamter" being insulted, a prosecutor is obliged to pursue the complaint (as opposed to with a private person.)
I don't know how it is in non-German-speaking countries, but the term "Beamter" is historically "protected" -- so in Germany itself, you have formal levels of these, kind of like in Futurama. A whole slew of government employees, from teachers to police officers, are covered or used to be covered by that classification, although it's been loosened up a lot in the past 50 years.
There's a whole big legal concept behind what kinds of insults can be prosecuted -- i.e. if you call someone something, and it's a nasty of any kind, they can take you to court, and only if you prove that they are actually what you called them (e.g. "donut-eater") will you get off...
rot13ubercrypto 2 points 2 days ago[-]
There was a case a few years ago of a bicyclist who was tracked down and convicted of an insult after flipping off a red light camera when he ran the light (!). The court decided that, as the camera was an "official" representative of a "beamter", the man was, in fact, flipping off the beamter (I apologize, I really can't think of an equivalent English word.)
That said, as I stated it was not for "flipping off a cop" -- rather, from what I gather the process and punishment were the same as with flipping off a civilian, except that prosecution appears to be mandatory.
rot13ubercrypto 1 point 1 day ago[-]
It's a bit more than that; the "beamter" is actually a protected status in German-speaking areas (all of Switzerland, but it's not taken nearly as seriously there.)
rot13ubercrypto 1 point 1 day ago[-]
Those are actually the "protected" ones. Germany (are you German? Tell me, so I don't stupid-lecture you =) has actual formal degrees -- the German wikipedia entry has more. Actually, I just learned from that that we (CH) got rid of that stupidity in 2001, which is nice to know =)
only if you prove that they are actually what you called them (e.g. "donut-eater") will you get off...
It's like second-grade justice all over again.
"Your honour, I submit to the court this picture of myself sitting on the plaintiff's face, thus proving that he is, in fact, a butthead."
CRAIGTHEPICT 1 point 1 day ago* [-]
It wasn't. Or maybe. I don't even know any more. What was the topic?
quackmeister 5 points 2 days ago[-]
Lest I remind you, ladies and gentlemen, that in Canada we have a charter of rights & freedoms. This city bylaw, if passed, could be challenged in court and defeated.
Still, it would sure be a pain in the ass just for oinking a little.
willcode4beer 1 point 2 days ago[-]
the police pushing for it suggests that the "enforcers of the law" have little understanding of the law.
ShrimpCrackers 5 points 2 days ago* [-]
"Bad language now includes:
criticism of government as a whole
criticism of government officials
criticism of historical figures
negative comments about the war
ideas that are "funny"
words that are depressing
negative opinions
expressions of dissatisfaction
... and more!
Please be civil and refrain from bad language"
anjelina 12 points 2 days ago[-]
The fact that he says new laws to be passed in Canada when its one city that has only been asked to implement the law is the sensational lie. Doesn’t sound good enough if only the UK is doing it. Thats just one country, but implement Canada too, OMG, thats two countries and Canada is right around here. We could be next. Dum Dum Dummmmmmm. 
SeizureMan 4 points 2 days ago[-]
Doesn’t sound good enough if only the UK is doing it.
Yeah, because the UK is only one tiny country that doesn't do anything for the wor- wait, now I'm just being stupid.
And you guys already have this stuff, it's just not a law.
mrmoney -1 points 2 days ago[-]
Oh, well that makes it alright. Only Montreal... they were always known to have foul mouths.. They deserve it.
</sarcasm>
Don't you know how this works? They start it off with small groups, and then expand. Now, do I think this is going to spread everywhere? I have no idea. I've been to many countries where photographing police is illegal, so it's definitely a possibility. How tyrannical.
MisterEggs 4 points 2 days ago[-]
This is exactly why i really don't care about the slow explosion of CCTV. It's issues like this that need addressing much, much more urgently.
The right to film in public is a better measure of freedom than the right not to be filmed.
Wish i had been aware of this upcoming law before now, but i'm still going to go and give my MP grief about it right now.
CrimsonSun99 2 points 2 days ago[-]
What? I recently cussed out a cop pretty damn bad and nothing happened.
No-Bears-Here 4 points 2 days ago* [-]
at a very base level, the police and the military and the government officials and workers, have forgotten the big picture for their job's existence. They are supposed to help people, watch out for people, protect people, listen to the people, serve the people.
They all need an attitude adjustment.
willcode4beer 2 points 2 days ago[-]
"Alternative Journal"s blocked? wow, talk about filtering the news....
sensiblegirl 2 points 2 days ago[-]
Oh, relax. Both countries have very robust constitutional protections for freedom of expression. No "bad language" law is going to survive its first two minutes in court.
iancwishlist 4 points 2 days ago* [-]
4.2 million CCTV cameras watching us all the time, but we can't take pictures of the ruddy cops?
MagneticEnigma 4 points 2 days ago[-]
Making bad language illegal is going too far, I think - though the fact that the police consider it a large enough problem to illegalise shows something of what the people think of the police.
The thing that scares me most about this article is the comments, though; far too many of them are advocating violence toward the police force (the phrase "it's time to start killing cops" came up at one point). Sure, I understand that you don't appreciate how they work, but if you resort to violence does that make you any better?
Worse, does it justify their actions?
tendimensions 3 points 2 days ago[-]
You blokes need a freedom of speech clause added to your constitutions.
puppywuppy 0 points 2 days ago[-]
I knew that was coming because to much money has to be payed by the government as there true colors have been more and more caught on film.
They are all unable to do the job by the rule of law.
Slime is slime even with a badge or especially because only a slime ball would wear one so its all they have.
ajehals 3 points 2 days ago[-]
In the UK the whole ‘likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’ needs to be backed by intent these days, the courts ruled that the term "useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism" was far too broad and unenforcible, as such for a prosecution to take place there actually has to be intent. I think that came out of the 'lyrical terrorist' case, but it may have been one of the other high profile ones.
Yes but it can still be a bit of a lottery if it sticks or not.
Breach of the peace is a much abused law by the police, for example. They're only supposed to use it under certain circumstances, but they use it as a way of arresting you for no reason if they don't like your attitude.
myloprecarious 2 points 2 days ago[-]
Every Canadian Montrealer should email their MP and remind them of the Canadian Rights and Freedoms - specifically:
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
SuperHansGruber 1 point 2 days ago[-]
Im actually leaving the UK for Ireland but im quite sure these draconian laws will follow me there.
Jim_in_Buffalo 2 points 2 days ago[-]
Eastasia is our ally and has always been our ally. You are to report to the nearest re-education center immediately.
zyzzogeton 1 point 2 days ago[-]
He demands their names at the end of the video. I believe here in the US that police are required to give their names and badge number if demanded by a citizen (though I am not sure if that is true of all localities).
As long as the Government has a right to use CCTV Cameras against the public, those cameras should be allowed to be used by the public for any purpose, and the public should be allowed to film any interaction with any official acting in their public capacities.
Government should fear its people and be helpless to stop them, not the other way around.
brockers 1 point 2 days ago[-]
I know a lot of people feel strongly that the US needs to become a European style Democracy but they often forget that there is no inherit right to free speech in most of Europe. While free speech is often supported in Western Europe, there is nothing like our constitutionally protected right.
Bobby
billwoo 0 points 2 days ago[-]
On the application form for police there is the question "Have you read 1984? Yes[ ] No[ ]". I have to say though, from the limited experience I have had with police in the UK they seem much preferable to those in the US (based on US police forums I have occasionally read).
DIGGISRUNBYTHEGOVT comment score below threshold[+] (17 children)
Curmudgeon -3 points 2 days ago[-]
Holy Fuck are you people ever gullible !
The sky is falling the sky is falling.
mushroomblue -1 points 2 days ago[-]
it's only Quebec. Quebec is a fascist nation within the larger nation of Canada. this move is a pull away from benevolent fascism, and into the more scary kind.
thankfully, the rest of the country doesn't have these laws yet.
scarecrow1 65 points 2 days ago* [-]
Watch that video: Never before have I had less respect for a person than I have for those two police officers...
Watch the way they skulk off when they find out they're wrong, they don't even apologise or even say a word. Is that typical for a UK police officer nowadays?
grimster 51 points 2 days ago* [-]
Have you ever noticed that the UK police in these types of videos always seem to be slightly unsure of themselves? Like if you argued with them for long enough, you could change their minds?
I would never, ever try that with the LAPD.
[deleted] 35 points 2 days ago* [-]
LAPD is a gang and its members often have dual gang-citizenship with either the Bloods, Crips or MS13.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/lapd/scandal/
cyks 4 points 2 days ago* [-]
I cannot even begin to stress just how suspect I am toward all inner-city law enforcement in that regard.
Isn't it even common knowledge that foreign police use their involvement in gangs to push political agendas and the such?
-ronin- 15 points 2 days ago[-]
These are some of the reasons why in Germany, cops are routinely rotated to other parts of the country. To avoid corruption and criminality among the police.
justintsmith 9 points 2 days ago[-]
This is sensationalist garbage. This law would be fairly limited in scope, but more importantly the law with respect to Canada is only about bad language, NOT about taking photographs. Worse than that, the law is a BYLAW in ONE city in Quebec, which operates under a different criminal justice system than the other provinces in Canada.
R T F A
polymath22 9 points 2 days ago* [-]
Some say "This is sensationalist garbage."
others say "This is the tip of the iceberg"
iwdw 19 points 2 days ago[-]
yet others say that "This is the sensationalist tip of an iceberg made of garbage"
sife 5 points 2 days ago[-]
We don't serve them folks here, though.
dezman2003 1 point 2 days ago[-]
They are french...What are we to expect...
nebbish 26 points 2 days ago* [-]
Yes. I was stopped taking photos last year and after half an hour of pointless arguing they just sloped off without an apology. Wankers.
polymath22 1 point 2 days ago* [-]
I was stopped for taking photos, too. heres how i won...
redditors comments
Teaboy 11 points 2 days ago[-]
I can't speak for all British police, but the Met are certainly not like this. I've lived in London my whole life and I've had nothing but good experiences with the police. They're often around where I work and they are very friendly and helpful.
pixelm 9 points 2 days ago[-]
It tends to be the 'community support' officers that get it wrong and stick their noses where they don't belong.
abw 1 point 2 days ago[-]
McPlod.
Teaboy 4 points 2 days ago[-]
Agreed. They're almost pointless.
kidfury -1 points 2 days ago[-]
Community support? Is that a sort of title?
You know, the Nazis were forced to wear flair too.
MonoApe 5 points 2 days ago[-]
Yeah, same here. Apart from a couple of stern lectures for speeding, I've only had good experiences with the police. Just spend 20 minutes on YouTube comparing USA / UK cops - I know where I'd rather live.
venicerocco -1 points 2 days ago[-]
Your opinion might change as soon as government policy inflicts your way of life and you decide to protest peacefully.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...
testspecimen 16 points 2 days ago[-]
As a resident of London, I can say with some confidence: Yes.
actiondan 7 points 2 days ago* [-]
Did you notice in the video when he made the offhand comment that "the camera picked that up better than his ears did". The WPC's ears immediately pricked up and she was ready to bust him for being abusive. The "abusing a police officer" route is kind of a catch-all arrestable offence these days; it's particularly easy to employ in cases where the subject has been drinking.
umbama 8 points 2 days ago[-]
Probably not typical but in my limited personal experience, they have lied about extremely serious matters to cover up gross incompetence or worse.
crazybones 2 points 2 days ago* [-]
I'm no fan of the police but I have absolutely no respect for the guy who made the video either.
He was needlessly provocative and rude, while being paranoid and looking to be a victim. All in all a childish overreaction.
Full marks to the officers for not escalating the confrontation with this guy. He was lucky they were so reasonable and backed off.
If you're going to get annoyed with the police, find something real to get annoyed about.
Kitchenfire 3 points 2 days ago[-]
Come on now. He was legally video-taping the cops and they saw him and chose to harass him based on their limited understanding of the law. It's no stretch for anyone to take offense to this, especially as a videographer who routinely goes up against such ignorance.
crazybones 1 point 2 days ago* [-]
We must have been watching different videos. They asked him to stop videoing them and you call that harassment.
To my mind that's an insult to all those poor folk round the world who really have been harassed by police.
In most countries in the world, if you start messing around with the police while they are on duty, making smartass remarks and trying to be provocative, you'll be lucky not to be arrested or worse.
These officers showed commendable restraint.
scarecrow1 2 points 2 days ago* [-]
I do call it harassment: A private citizen asking you to stop is a polite request. A police office, in police uniform, making same request, wrongly stating that it's against the law, with in an implied a threat of arrest, that is harassment.
The police collared and threatened to arrest a normal citizen who was going about his lawful business. That is a classic definition of police harassment.
Whether it is worse or not anywhere else, is irrelevant. If it is worse in another state, you don't rectify this by letting the UK's policing standards fall to that of another country. No, you still try to improve UK policing, even if you think it is best in the world. Otherwise it won't be for long.
Finally police have a duty, whenever possible, to de-escalate any crisis they can, that's something they didn't to here: Instead they sought out trouble. Police are here to keep the streets safe, while preserving as many citizen freedoms as possible, that's the role of a police in a functioning democracy. If police routinely allowed tense situations to get out of control, so they could arrest the people they didn't like, then they are no longer servants of the public but servants of the state - which is wrong.
crazybones 1 point 1 day ago* [-]
The most striking features of the video as far as I am concerned are: the juvenile goading of the police officers that the cameraman indulges in, his lack of respect for and rudeness towards the police offcers and their admirable restraint where many of their own colleagues or counterparts in other countries might have reacted more aggressively.
Sure they were wrong about the law and maybe they could do with some customer relations training, but ultimately they are just two human beings doing a difficult and sometimes dangerous job.
The guy with the video camera was acting like a student agitator from the 1970s and has some serious growing up to do. He could also do with learning a few manners.
If you think the behavior of those police officers was harassment you need to go and take a look at how officers from police forces around the world behave in situations like that.
berkut 4 points 2 days ago[-]
Yeah, pretty much. Most police imo are just thugs with suits. I was stopped and 'cautioned' under the terrorism act last year for taking a picture of the houses of parliament in London with a 'high powered camera' (SLR). Sounds like they think it's some kind of rifle.
Worst part is, they were community support officers, but I didn't feel like arguing.
auto98 6 points 2 days ago[-]
PCSO's can't give official cautions - if they led you to believe that is what they were doing then they need reporting
uglypopstar 6 points 2 days ago[-]
In Oakland the guy provoking the cops from behind the camera would have been shot. Speaking of which, I had a lot less respect for those officers and I'm still not sure they hit the bottom of my respect barrel.
This video is just kinda funny, given the irony of the situation in Britain.
sheeep 1 point 2 days ago* [-]
He was arrested the next day, he doesn’t say why.
scarecrow1 1 point 2 days ago[-]
Did the police say why?
SuperHansGruber 1 point 2 days ago[-]
yes
MonoApe -4 points 2 days ago[-]
You're either under 14 or you've not seen much of the world.
Closure 2 points 2 days ago[-]
Looks like you got hit by the hyperbole brigade
Spudders 0 points 2 days ago[-]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
MonoApe -2 points 2 days ago[-]
hyperbole (plural hyperboles)
You did read your link before posting, right?
If the police officers who made a mistake / tried it on (depending on how you view the world), then left feeling a bit embarrassed qualify for the "least respect for a person evah!", then scarecrow1 is a clueless know-nothing. So are you, my illiterate friend.
Sudden thought - is the 'hyperbole' for scarecrow1? Not me? That would fit.
Spudders 1 point 2 days ago[-]
Am I really going to have to spell this out for you? The OP quite obviously did not mean he literally has never had less respect for another person, he was exaggerating to emphasise his point. This is called hyperbole.
MonoApe 0 points 2 days ago[-]
Poe's Law for Prison Planet wingnuts - impossible to tell hyperbole from clueless viewpoint.
supersauce 0 points 2 days ago[-]
I think you have mind plugs. If you pull them out, you can see things from different angles.
MonoApe 0 points 2 days ago[-]
Poe's Law for Prison Planet wingnuts - impossible to tell hyperbole from clueless viewpoint.