Jump to content

Taking piktures of floods is now a crime


Sleepyman
 Share

Recommended Posts

Neutral Newbie

Last time during ns,i tried handcuffing my own hands before.It wont leave a mark as shown in papers and photos. But when there are lots of hand movement or struggle,of course there will be some mark.

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

errrr........... name some good stuff ............ :ph34r::ph34r:

 

ERP - where London is copying Singapore

COE - don't know which countries will copy this

WC2010 - only one in SEA have to pay to watch

HDB flats - affortable !!!

................etc...etc...etc... [sweatdrop]

 

you see all the headlines abt the "spectacular" quarterly GDP number? You go and search the 140+ media archives if u free enough.

 

i just miss the other founding fathers. the goons in the current lineup CMI, only know quick fix.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last time during ns,i tried handcuffing my own hands before.It wont leave a mark as shown in papers and photos. But when there are lots of hand movement or struggle,of course there will be some mark.

 

Read the article again...

 

The photographer was handcuffed on his right hand and then dragged away using the handcuff...

 

Wouldn't that leave a mark?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypersonic

Read the article again...

 

The photographer was handcuffed on his right hand and then dragged away using the handcuff...

 

Wouldn't that leave a mark?

 

If he resist being dragged, then will leave a mark.. But if he had followed, unlikely..

 

I think this photographer is being kwai lan.. Ask to move on, still want to take picture. Hand cuff laio, still want to resist, now cry peh cry bu play victim.. This is what you get for acting hero.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody make mistakes....you mean you don't???

what if it's real?? and just becos they don't have enough evidence to charge him, let him go and something serious happens??

why don't you put yourself into that man in blue's shoe?? and the photograher is snapping away while you trying to do your job to make sure no one gets injured in the flood, like falling into the drain or worst the canal....where you can hardly see it in the flood

 

You are definitely pro Blue. We are not small boys or small girls here.

 

For the 1st case, the police can just take down the particulars, including his NRIC no. Afterall, it is just a hoax call, not that he must be arrested for causing IMMEDIATE harm. Worse still, no solid evidence on the spot.

 

For case 2, snapping photo might cause danger to others? Falling into the drain? Come on.

 

I punched somebody's nose out of his face, causing more harm, but Police will not do anything.

 

What are you talking about???? Wake up la.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

thought the press reported that the photo journalist was not wearing the reporter's tag? If so, as a bystander I would feel that this uncle xiaoz one...so dangerous still trying to get a picture....haha. but then, handcuffing him might seem deraconian given that it's his own life and if he wanna risk it, so be it. Why bother? just make sure there are witness beside that can testify that MIB tried to stop him but he not willing to listen...anything happens after that is no longer under anyone's control. =p

Edited by Andrewl
Link to post
Share on other sites

At first, was to handcuff the uncle for the sake of his own safety.

 

Then, he was handcuffed because he obstructed the policeman carrying out his duties.

 

My questions:

 

1) Beside uncle, there are some other people there taking photos. Why are they not taken to task? Why only pick on old uncle?

 

2) So uncle now committed an offence. Why did he not bring back to the police station for further investigation?

 

Police clearly had mismanaged the incident. Taking que from their big boss, they will not apologise.

 

Honest mistake, let's move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he resist being dragged, then will leave a mark.. But if he had followed, unlikely..

 

I think this photographer is being kwai lan.. Ask to move on, still want to take picture. Hand cuff laio, still want to resist, now cry peh cry bu play victim.. This is what you get for acting hero.

 

Even if kwai lan, you do not drag someone using the handcuff...

 

But did the photographer commit a seizable offence in the first place?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

As a newspaper photo journalist, uncle is probably used to pushing his way around to shoot photos.. so i wouldn't be surprised if he ignored verbal warnings to get out of the way.. i'm inclined to believe the police side of story in this instance.. anyway he was handcuffed n moved out of the way.. not changed with offence..

Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

As a newspaper photo journalist, uncle is probably used to pushing his way around to shoot photos.. so i wouldn't be surprised if he ignored verbal warnings to get out of the way.. i'm inclined to believe the police side of story in this instance.. anyway he was handcuffed n moved out of the way.. not changed with offence..

 

Okay, let's assume he did ignore verbal warnings. However, what kind of verbal warning? "Uncle, dangerous for you to be there. Move away." Or, "Uncle, by standing there, you are obstructing me in carrying out my duty. Can you please move away?"

 

If it is the first one, which I presume uncle is not commiting any offence, so what if he ignore the warnings? Uncle is so older than than that police officer, you mean he cannot even spot danger threat to his personal safety and need the policeman to warn him? Okay, maybe uncle really too engross in taking photo and failed to spot the danger. Why do you need the handcuff to bring uncle to safety?

 

Next, if it is second kind of warning. When we talk about obstruction to police officer, we need to be more specific. In what way is he obstructing? Just because he did not move away as told by the police, he was deemed obstructing? That cannot be the case.

 

Until I read anything from the police to clarify on the obstruction, I am more keen to believe the uncle.

Edited by JumpySpeedFiend
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess he was merely doing his job...

 

I mean, everyone is just doing his/her job....

 

Maybe there's some confusion which i guess bah .... [:)]

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if kwai lan, you do not drag someone using the handcuff...

 

But did the photographer commit a seizable offence in the first place?

 

Agree.

 

Sometime I see those young police officer acting like ya ya papaya when doing crowd control. But comes the real thing for action, they act blur.

 

I especially tulan those CISCO officers...kept shouting and acting like big fcuk. They are after all, just security guards wearing something like police uniforms. I respect my condo security guards much much more than them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess he was merely doing his job...

 

I mean, everyone is just doing his/her job....

 

Maybe there's some confusion which i guess bah .... [:)]

Ya............. everyone is doing their job......

 

Like some ppls, stand there and see and when approach by policemen and been question has he seen anything or to be witness, they run far far...... [sweatdrop][sweatdrop][:p][:p]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

i believe both the uncle and the young mata were not polite with their words at that time

(in other words, maybe both were kuai lan to each other)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a newspaper photo journalist, uncle is probably used to pushing his way around to shoot photos.. so i wouldn't be surprised if he ignored verbal warnings to get out of the way.. i'm inclined to believe the police side of story in this instance.. anyway he was handcuffed n moved out of the way.. not changed with offence..

 

I think you are missing the point here...

 

The use of handcuff is not to be taken lightly...

 

If he has to be handcuffed, then he needs to be charged...

 

But he is not charged - does it mean that the move to handcuff him was wrong in the first place?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i believe both the uncle and the young mata were not polite with their words at that time

(in other words, maybe both were kuai lan to each other)

 

Being kuai lan is one thing but has any laws been broken by being kuai lan?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

the polisman was in the car when unkle was taking piktures. how can he be obstructing the polis???

 

Maybe got one naked woman swimming and unker reporter blocking the polisman's view [laugh]

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...