Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 54 of 54

Thread: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

  1. #41
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    Thumbs up for you. And to answer your question, they cannot force you to delete your photos, the most anyone can ask you to do is to leave the premises, thats about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by mattlock
    alot of photography location scouting I do, I don't ask for permission. I know I'm not breaking the law. I like Kenny Sia's mentality. show me the regulation and I'll follow it.
    asking permission and all is great but there's a great tradition in photography of going to extremes to get a photo. I'm sure photojournalists break rules on a regular basis.
    now, whether a person can force me to delete my photos even if I've done something that displeases them is questionable. so kudos to Kenny Sia for being a daring example.

  2. #42
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    I think we shouldn't confuse the issue and make it one of nationality or politics - thats merely just a red herring which detracts from the main issues.

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    東京 Tokyo
    Posts
    10,193

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    I think we shouldn't confuse the issue and make it one of nationality or politics - thats merely just a red herring which detracts from the main issues.
    the title of the thread itself is confusing the issue

  4. #44
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    heh, thats entirely possible!

    Quote Originally Posted by eikin
    the title of the thread itself is confusing the issue

  5. #45
    Senior Member poohbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    1,163

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    Quote Originally Posted by judeseah
    bro pooh,

    i read that guy's post n thread,
    did u see wat he actually said?
    he does not like to be told wat to do!
    and those northerners saluting him for sticking one up at us?
    AND our own brethren cheering him on?
    to think i wasted close to 3 yrs trying to protect these _____!
    should hv just post a bond,
    dodge for 28yrs,
    give up the bloody citizenship,
    come back to visit parents and pay fine 5K.
    singapore is getting more n more less like home.

    btw, wat's that kenny's job?
    being an a*s?

    i m not angry,
    just very disappointed.

    jude
    Quote Originally Posted by poohbear
    End of the day, we all got work to do and the man is just trying to get his work done. Hope our friend from malaysia can be more understanding . Relax and peace ~!
    Disappointed? Yes!

    Anyway I was referring to the SMRT Officer that has a job to be done. If we just take a step back and understand the impt issue behind it. I'm sure most of the people (be it locals or foreigners) would be more accomodating lah. But alas, every now and then , there will be some 'different voice' around , just gald that it does not represent the majority of the nation can liao.
    Last edited by poohbear; 3rd December 2005 at 10:23 AM.

  6. #46

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    BRAVO!

  7. #47

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    Yo people

    Tink everyone is a lil upset on tis issue. Frankly speakin can anyone differentiate b/w a terrorist or some ordinary fellow. I tink nobody can. So the MRT personnel are simply doin their jobs.

    I do admit sometimes wen takin a train ride or in one of those new train stations, u just have the urge to take photos. I'm sure everyone noe the reason y photography is not allowed in the train stn (or at least wat they say). Why kick such a big fuss. Do u really have to take that particular photo in the train or train stn. Die die must take?

    Guess not rite. The rules can be ridiculous but wat if someday someone who pretended to be a tourist do get away with such things n lead to some act which i shall not even dare to mention. Who will Singaporeans blame? The MRT personnels who take no action or people who wan to continue to take photos in train and train stations.

    Wat so difficult if u die die have to take that photo n if approached by a mrt personnel just show ur pic to them. If it's really harmless i'm sure they will let u off. Again they'r just doin their job.

    FYI, i was in Santa Rossa (US) a couple of months back where i was stopped by a security officer for tryin to take a picture of a statue in front of a shoppin mall. He gave me his reason(terrorist bla bla) and i have to admit he has his point. I stopped takin the pic, or rather i didnt manage to get a gd shot. So this thing takes place everywhere, it just a matter of respecting the rules/law of where u are at. So wat's the big deal of not being allowed to take photos in mrt stn or the train itself. Get on with life. Dont tell me there's nothing else to photograph.

  8. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    near the Equator
    Posts
    1,255

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    DA managed to overturn the New York Transit Authority ban on photography in subways.
    We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities. - Oscar Wilde

  9. #49

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    Look, the issue here is not that the security guy shouldn't be doing his job.
    The issue here is that if a regulation is not stated properly and the guard is just randomly spouting nonsense which he can't back up with authority, why should a photographer cut him any slack? If he was doing his job properly he would know where to find the regulation to back up his claims. So in a sense, the security personnel was NOT doing his job properly, he was poorly trained.

    Regulations have their reasons, that's fine. but find me the regulation as it is written before I accept it. There's a reason why in the army there are so many rules which are clearly written down. So that people know the boundaries of what is acceptable and what is unacceptable.

    Please don't confuse the LAW with some companie's REGULATIONS, btw. I hate it when security personnel and security guards threaten to call the police for every single tiny thing that pisses them off.
    As a child I always equated security personnel and guards with police, but then as I grew older I learnt that security personnel and guards have little to do with the police, much less the authority which the police have.

    If a policeman comes up to me one day randomly and tells me to strip so he can search me in the name of security, I want to know whether he has the authority to, and how far his authority extends. I am not going to just accept it simply because it's in the name of "security"

    judeseah you really should control your emotions. letting random people push you around and quietly accepting it simply in the name of "security" of the nation does not prove that you care for the country.

    adyH, yes some of us actually feel that images taken in MRTs can be important. It's also part of the bigger picture. I'm sure you notice that along Orchard Road even most of the pedestrian walkways are owned by companies. The bridge connecting Far East Plaza to the other side of the road is owned by Far East Organisation. This is a popular spot where many people take photos of the Christmas lights. Most of the spaces around the Esplanade including the walkways near the river are also owned by the Esplanade, etc etc. They could easily ban photography in the name of "security". What I'm trying to say is that if companies wanted to, they could prevent photography in most spots where you usually take photos. Are you going to sit back and just accept that?

    I'm sure that being aware of where the limits are will enable us to take the best pictures we can take, without worrying about whether we can get random people threatening us in the name of security.

    I guess I better stay in my underground bunker and we better put security cameras that are linked to the ISD's office in everyone's home, just in case some terrorist is among us in a HDB flat making a bomb.
    Last edited by mattlock; 4th December 2005 at 02:49 PM.

  10. #50
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    Thumbs up for Mattlock's post. Just to add that company regulations only have force in areas within their jurisdiction and are not laws of the land which are applicable outside their jurisdiction. Even then, such regulations may have limited effect depending on what the "regulations" are purporting to enforce and are not absolutely enforceable. When in doubt, all they can make you do is to leave the area within their jurisdiction, nothing further.

  11. #51
    Senior Member wrx_sti_22b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Compassvale Lane
    Posts
    4,952

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    I didn't have any problems taking photos at a few MRT stations... i didn't ask for permission...









    From Pentax to 4/3, back to Pentax and then back to M4/3 !?!?

  12. #52
    Senior Member wrx_sti_22b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Compassvale Lane
    Posts
    4,952

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    I didn't have any problems taking photos at a few MRT stations... i didn't ask for permission...







    From Pentax to 4/3, back to Pentax and then back to M4/3 !?!?

  13. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    1 Dalvey Road
    Posts
    474

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    Thumbs up for Mattlock's post. Just to add that company regulations only have force in areas within their jurisdiction and are not laws of the land which are applicable outside their jurisdiction. Even then, such regulations may have limited effect depending on what the "regulations" are purporting to enforce and are not absolutely enforceable. When in doubt, all they can make you do is to leave the area within their jurisdiction, nothing further.
    this u r wrong,
    the 'regulations' of SMRT r law of the land,
    believe its passed in parliament
    and u can find them post in all stations.
    it even has a clause similar to
    22D of the GO of SAF,
    a clause that covers 'non of the above'
    type of phrasing.
    it is enforceable.

  14. #54
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: It takes a Malaysian to stand up for Singapore photographers' rights

    First thing, I was commenting on company regulations in a general sense, not specifically to SMRT.

    Second, my sentence on the "law of the land" refers to company regulations being applicable only in areas within their jurisdiction. Laws of the land refers to things which are applicable throughout Singapore. Also I was refering to company regulations which are not passed as laws but internal regulations devised by themselves - again this is speaking about corporations in general and not directed at SMRT.

    Third, I would be grateful if you could tell me what is the specific Act/Subsidiary legislation name (and if possible Section) of the "Law" that you are referring to and which you say was passed in Parliament - save some time in searching since you already know it.

    Fourth, it would also be useful if you could advise on what "Clause 22D of the GO of SAF" says as I don't quite understand what you mean by "a clause that covers 'non of the above' type of phrasing".

    Cheers!

    Quote Originally Posted by judeseah
    this u r wrong,
    the 'regulations' of SMRT r law of the land,
    believe its passed in parliament
    and u can find them post in all stations.
    it even has a clause similar to
    22D of the GO of SAF,
    a clause that covers 'non of the above'
    type of phrasing.
    it is enforceable.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •