It is getting off topic, but the increasing restrictions on photography (worldwide?) are certainly not. >Politicians just don't get it! Sadly Walter, I think they do get it. (It's just they won't ever tell you the truth) But, by thier nature, they see opportunity in everything. A disaster, a terrorist attack, a scandal. The skill is in packaging thier responses as being "in the public interest" when the sub-text is quite different. >Only the law abiding follow the rules. >The criminals will always have hidden guns and likewise a >terrorist who needs to take pictures will have a hidden camera. >It is the law abiding who pay the price and loose their freedoms. Indeed. In the UK it's becoming worse than that. The police are always being forced to "balance the books". It's easier to go for the easy targets, people who have funds to pay fines (and no means to escape) rather than lowlife that don't. The camera issue is becoming a joke: people held (illegally) by the police for taking photos in public places (eg Trafalgar square) merely because there were children in the background. >Sorry to be so far off from a bona-fide Photoforum type topic, >but I saw the parallel and couldn't help my self. If in the self-proclaimed world leader wrt freedom, equality and liberty "they" can rescind the public's rights to take pictures in public places - what chance is there for the rest of the world? What next? As you say, it won't affect the criminals. It will affect everyone else. Bob
