Tweak comments on Is the UK Government trying to stop photography in public spaces?

UK Politics

5,750 readers

859 active

31 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 3 years ago

moderators

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 1 point 2 months ago* (2 children)

You're applying the technical terminology from The Highway Code, it's not clear that this applies here.
The leaflet itself shows no explanation of the terms "should" and "must" like there is in The Highway Code.
That kind of nuanced language really isn't appropriate in literature meant for people with a poor grasp of the English and English culture.
"Should not" and "can not" are not "legally different" - the terms have no formal legal definition, they're just used in The Highway Code like that. But The Highway Code is not written by the government, it's written by a private business called The Stationary Office. They don't come up with legal definitions, they provide a specific layman's explanation of the rules of the road, as defined in both legislation and case law.

    

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] GiveOver@feddit.uk 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Ok so the upshot is that asylum seekers don't take photos of people in public because they mistakenly think it's illegal. Doesn't seem like the worst outcome.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Tweak@feddit.uk 2 points 2 months ago*

The worst outcome is someone reading it (not necessarily an asylum seeker), thinks it's accurate because it's from the government, then uses that to justify harassing people with cameras. People legally going about their day, taking photos in public legally, but contradicting the advice in this leaflet, being harassed due to this leaflet.

The long term worst outcome is that this sentiment spreads until a new law is introduced that actually does prohibit taking photos without permission.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent