I can understand the no photography rule INSIDE the MRT grounds as those can be conceived as 'private property'. But when you are outside the MRT grounds, there is no law that can stop you from taking pics. This is why it is important not to go with them to the control station as you can not prove anymore that you were outside their grounds....
I am not sure about Singapore (it looks like they have), but many countries have rules against photographing airports, railwaystations, harbours for security reasons (which I think is obvious and we must respect)......
And their act also disturb other (for example : the station manager asked the bus driver - it was a free shuttle bus from Great World City - to not leave until the matter settled (that is : until I come outta bus).
And their act also disturb other (for example : the station manager asked the bus driver - it was a free shuttle bus from Great World City - to not leave until the matter settled (that is : until I came outta bus).
I think I can understand their point of view for this one: if you go to City Hal on a Friday evening or Saturday evening, you will see the good points to have a rule like this.....
There will be hundreds of people just standing there waiting for friends, but by doing this they block the exits from the MRT!......Just try to get out of that stations during those periods and you will see yourself
I am not sure if the Harbourfront was very crowded when you were there, but it could have been due to this happening at a few stations that has a big crowd......
According to the name card, he works @ Bomb & Explosives Investigation Division - Criminal Investigation Department. POWER ???
City Hall and Raffles Place are 2 prime examples when you see crowds but then again the station is big enough to accomodate a large crowd. There is always a higher percentage passengers will meet at nearby the control station. I do not see anything wrong doing that.
Again I would like to repeat myself, if I was obstructing traffic it's my fault. I would just move on.
Second, I was minding my own business playing PSP when they ask me to leave because I was loitering more than 10 mins.
Third, I did offer them to search my bag and show them my identification but they refuse.
Fourth, there is no sign stating you can't stand in an MRT station loitering. I would not want to wait to long either as it's just an MRT station. It is a rather boring place to wait but when an appointment is made, why should I change? Isn't it easier to wait for someone in a MRT station when some MRT stations have more than 6 exits......
It's not that I am trying to be funny with them but it's them trying to be funny with me. I have wrote to newspaper ST forum and to SMRT itself but it seems they are ignoring my emails. Avoiding me? Maybe?
I think we have to do self help also. Writing to papers may or may not help. I tried to write in and my letter was rejected .
I think there's a lot of point to writing here. Because next time a fellow CS-er encounters this, they can rememebr what we said here about their rights and give SMRT a good substantive rebuttal instead of feeling lost or confused or disoriented, which is likely for first time encounters.
one thing i notice in singapore anyway, people take being approached by security personnels as something that's shameful and embarrassing, and always want to bear some grudges for being checked. ask yourself if this is not true? people will always think of themselves as the ultimate rights owner and any behaviour that questions them as insults, but hardly make any consideration for others nor having any broader perspective.
if there's anything i'm even more against, it'll be the extremely narrow perspectives some people here like to promote in this forum. instead of promoting cooperative behaviours, the talk here just surrounds endlessly over self-centered bitching over rights and legal jurisdiction. it's always ''my rights,'' ''my freedom,'' ''call the police,'' ''i'm lawful and you're not etc.'' such is not the formula for work towards sensible solutions nor behaviour of a civilised society.
Last edited by eikin; 10th September 2007 at 06:18 AM.
From your post above, I understand that if you're on my situation, you'd call the police. Man, just look at what the police (and bomb squad) did on this particular case.
I welcome healthy discussion.
none of us here was there with you, none here can be a good judge of your situation. if you feel so needing to claim your rights of the matter, you can always continue writing letters to the media demanding explanation and apology. last i remember someone also provided a link to free of charge legal advice services http://forums.clubsnap.org/showpost....4&postcount=26 it'll be better seeking advices from qualified experts than letting off steam in internet forums, where the latter usually attracts misleading feedback from parties who are not in the know.
for the rest, you can just ask yourself, how do you feel or react
> when requested to be shown the pictures you've taken
> when requested to have your particulars taken down
end of the day MRT staffs need to do their job, just be patient and cooperate, no one stands to lose. as much as i see the MRT staffs need to have their part of responsibilities covered, i don't see any need for them to come after you if they have enough information taken down. other than the salaries they earn, they don't do this job for themselves or to show power. errant behaviours are not tolerated, but there's no need to stereotype every single person related as your public enemy.
Last edited by eikin; 10th September 2007 at 07:39 AM.
I guess when someone steps on your own rights, you may be singing a different tune. It could be that you take a cavalier attitude towards shooting of MRT stations, but if it affects something you think is important to you, I'm sure you will be taking a different approach.
Just because you do not think its important to shoot MRT stations does not mean others do not either. When it comes to things of your interest, I'm pretty sure you won't be allowing it to lapse easily without ensuring or checking on the legalities of the matter. You are only dismissing legalities discussions or enforcement of rights, or denouncing of overstepping of rights here because you do not have a personal interest in the subject matter, not so much the legal discussion and/or enforcement of rights or denouncing of overstepping of rights.