A mate of mine was heading south on the M18 today and the police actros drew up alongside, and the nice police officer in the passenger seat whipped his little camera out and started filming him.
Unusually, he wasn’t eating/picking his nose ect, but, he didn’t have his seat belt on.
So,what do we think,will he get a nip,or,if they were a nickin would he have been pulled?
Oh yes and watch out for the inglorious chaps in the silver solo actros.
ROADRANGER:
A mate of mine was heading south on the M18 today and the police actros drew up alongside, and the nice police officer in the passenger seat whipped his little camera out and started filming him.
Unusually, he wasn’t eating/picking his nose ect, but, he didn’t have his seat belt on.
So,what do we think,will he get a nip,or,if they were a nickin would he have been pulled?
Oh yes and watch out for the inglorious chaps in the silver solo actros.
I did put out warning not to do it last week
ROADRANGER:
A mate of mine was heading south on the M18 today and the police actros drew up alongside, and the nice police officer in the passenger seat whipped his little camera out and started filming him.
Unusually, he wasn’t eating/picking his nose ect, but, he didn’t have his seat belt on.
So,what do we think,will he get a nip,or,if they were a nickin would he have been pulled?
Oh yes and watch out for the inglorious chaps in the silver solo actros.
I reckon a neatly printed NIP will be in the next post to the vehicle operator.
If you are doing 56mph on a motorway and a solo unit is catching you, chances are it is plod 
Will most probably get shot down for this but i was wondering what the implications were, “for someone filming you without your consent”, please dont confuse this with static cameras which are there to photograph a speeding offence. Or a patrol car following you with a video recorder to record your speed. Just wondering what the implications are. Tin hat on ready for the replies
Naff all you can do.
How do you think all these tv programmes are filmed, road wars, crime uk doing drug busts in your house and filming.
Yes indeedy, it would appear that the plod are not keen on being filmed or photographed
“because they don’t like it”.
motionlotion:
Will most probably get shot down for this but i was wondering what the implications were, “for someone filming you without your consent”, please dont confuse this with static cameras which are there to photograph a speeding offence. Or a patrol car following you with a video recorder to record your speed. Just wondering what the implications are. Tin hat on ready for the replies
Its not a crime to film anyone without their consent,there was a thread on here a few weeks ago with some interesting Youtube videos…the Tabloids would be out of business if there was such a law!! 
motionlotion:
Will most probably get shot down for this but i was wondering what the implications were, “for someone filming you without your consent”, please dont confuse this with static cameras which are there to photograph a speeding offence. Or a patrol car following you with a video recorder to record your speed. Just wondering what the implications are. Tin hat on ready for the replies
There are no implications, as far as I’m aware it’s not illegal to film people who are in public places.
coca cola kid:
ROADRANGER:
A mate of mine was heading south on the M18 today and the police actros drew up alongside, and the nice police officer in the passenger seat whipped his little camera out and started filming him.
Unusually, he wasn’t eating/picking his nose ect, but, he didn’t have his seat belt on.
So,what do we think,will he get a nip,or,if they were a nickin would he have been pulled?
Oh yes and watch out for the inglorious chaps in the silver solo actros.I did put out warning not to do it last week
You did indeed sir.
And I in turn told the soft get.
But there you are,you can lead a horse to water.
Filming in a public area of anything and anyone, is perfectly legal. The police can (usually insist) that you do not film them and in desperation state that they feel you are causing a breach of the peace or some such BS. The only cause for them to stop you is if they have proof that the film is to assist terrorist activity. This is usually a flawed argument as if they can’t say who you are, they can hardly say you are a person with known terrorist activities!
However, the inside of your cab… I would argue that this is NOT a public area and just the same as if you walked up a street filming inside someones house, you could be prosecuted for being a peeping Tom. Wouldn’t that be an interesting case.
And really, the plod driving about wasting fuel in a truck to catch someone without a seatbelt, WOW. We can all sleep safe in our beds tonight guys…
Wait until they get alongside then stand on brakes, the look on angus face priceless 
He might have just not been wearing a seat belt, but in the next truck the driver might be eating, reading a book or playing on his laptop. Do you reall think that is acceptable behaviour that should go un detected?
He would only be able to film my hand because of the frilly curtains 
The laws regarding what you can film on public land are quite complex but if you can prove that it is in the public good then you can pretty much film what you want and where you want. I think this would classify as in the public good. That is how shows like Rouge Traders, Watchdog et al get away with filming in private land but prevents East Enders from turning up on your doorstep at a moments notice
funny thing with that vid is, thats colindale/west hendon, couple of mile from peel centre the met training college,sombody didnt learn to much lol
Sub_tone:
The laws regarding what you can film on public land are quite complex but if you can prove that it is in the public good then you can pretty much film what you want and where you want. I think this would classify as in the public good. That is how shows like Rouge Traders, Watchdog et al get away with filming in private land but prevents East Enders from turning up on your doorstep at a moments notice
No, they are very, very simple. In a public place you can film anything you want to. In a non-public place, shopping centre etc, you can film only with the owners authority. Rogue traders is filmed on the property of the person who has the grievance and therefore allows you to film there. No-one is allowed to film on your property without your say so, however the police, immigration etc are doing so and, at the moment, getting away with it using the ‘In the public interest’ stance. But there is a case being brought against them at present about this and the powers that be are doing everything to hold it up. Another interesting case is also being prepared, which uses a twist about filming mode as if it is done in digital format, it is data and therefore comes under the data protection act. One of the ‘cops with Cameras’ type programs inferred a guy was a drugs dealer, filmed a bust at his home with cameras running. Nothing was found, no charges made but then this footage went out on a TV program. Again, it’s being held back and the last I heard, it may bypass the British system and go straight to Europe as it has some powerful backers.
One other thing about CCTV, few people know this, but you are allowed to insist the owners of such systems send you a copy of any footage of you they may have, at their expense. Now that could cause the operators of the motorway network cameras, train stations etc, a bit of a headache…
is eating at the wheel such a bad crime that you should get done for it?
im not talking about actually preparing food…im talking about something thats already to hand made or whatever?
Wheel Nut:
ROADRANGER:
A mate of mine was heading south on the M18 today and the police actros drew up alongside, and the nice police officer in the passenger seat whipped his little camera out and started filming him.
Unusually, he wasn’t eating/picking his nose ect, but, he didn’t have his seat belt on.
So,what do we think,will he get a nip,or,if they were a nickin would he have been pulled?
Oh yes and watch out for the inglorious chaps in the silver solo actros.I reckon a neatly printed NIP will be in the next post to the vehicle operator.
If you are doing 56mph on a motorway and a solo unit is catching you, chances are it is plod
no seat belt is an on the the spot fine, so no nip will be sent through the post as there is no points envolved. 
DoYouMeanMe?:
Sub_tone:
The laws regarding what you can film on public land are quite complex but if you can prove that it is in the public good then you can pretty much film what you want and where you want. I think this would classify as in the public good. That is how shows like Rouge Traders, Watchdog et al get away with filming in private land but prevents East Enders from turning up on your doorstep at a moments noticeNo, they are very, very simple. In a public place you can film anything you want to. In a non-public place, shopping centre etc, you can film only with the owners authority. Rogue traders is filmed on the property of the person who has the grievance and therefore allows you to film there. No-one is allowed to film on your property without your say so, however the police, immigration etc are doing so and, at the moment, getting away with it using the ‘In the public interest’ stance. But there is a case being brought against them at present about this and the powers that be are doing everything to hold it up. Another interesting case is also being prepared, which uses a twist about filming mode as if it is done in digital format, it is data and therefore comes under the data protection act. One of the ‘cops with Cameras’ type programs inferred a guy was a drugs dealer, filmed a bust at his home with cameras running. Nothing was found, no charges made but then this footage went out on a TV program. Again, it’s being held back and the last I heard, it may bypass the British system and go straight to Europe as it has some powerful backers.
One other thing about CCTV, few people know this, but you are allowed to insist the owners of such systems send you a copy of any footage of you they may have, at their expense. Now that could cause the operators of the motorway network cameras, train stations etc, a bit of a headache…
Think there is a law about filming children, or did I read that in the Mail?