Please note: The drone flyer is NOT the producer/narrator

@fuzz7263

Ай бұрын

It's BP Visits.

Why did you give up any identification you didn't break a law sorry you melted.

@tc5042

Ай бұрын

Definitely she took a photo of his opperater id she can find out all about you from the CAA bit stupid .I M O

@charlesdixon52

Ай бұрын

Agreed

@RoryLaird-tc6xp

Ай бұрын

Defo

@TallSilentGuy

Ай бұрын

I suspect he fancied one or both of them so there was a simping factor.

@TheBrawlBox

Ай бұрын

ATM 2021 Schedule 9 1) (a) (i) (ii) merely requires reasonable grounds that a flight is or has taken place. The recommendation is to register the drone flyer ID in someone else's name.

The police addiction for names is like a druggie for heroin.

@Ray186

Ай бұрын

Cop Crack

@pifapaul

22 күн бұрын

Trouble is not enough people know their rights and just do what the police ask. It should be police policy to say in these situations where no crime has been committed..."Can I ask your name? You're not obliged to give it to me"

@createbelief8678

8 күн бұрын

​@@pifapaulexactly, we are men and women not names

DECLINED to give details,always correct them.

@george-ev1dq

Ай бұрын

Yet he did give them his details

You shouldnt have shown your flyer id. That just held you up, and now they are identifying you and putting you on a watch list.

@tc5042

Ай бұрын

Definitely

@ryanwilson368

Ай бұрын

Yep. He wasn’t even flying , didn’t have to and shouldn’t have

Dropped a bollocks there fella showing the op ID

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

They can require the operator ID for a camera drone flight. Since she was on the phone to the drone unit, she could probably even have quoted the legislation empowering her.

STOP giving ID your make it difficult all other Auditors !!!

@peterwooldridge7285

Ай бұрын

Exactly...all in all a very poor audit

@bensmith5231

Ай бұрын

Stop telling folk what to do ! Just nwcause you sit there w4nking off to DJ ya hero 😂 . Not every Auditor is a total D1ck Head ! So he wants to ID. That's up to him !

@rogerbroadbelt3424

Ай бұрын

The best on here is Charles Veitch. He always gives his name, he never hides his face, hes been on here longest and is the best. I dont have to give my name, I look like a bank robber to intimidate people, is what the numpties do.

no arrest no ID

The big cop is gonna be a problem,as long as she is a cop.😢😢

@malcolmcooper4430

Ай бұрын

Hopefully, she's no longer a cop.

@robwilson8673

22 күн бұрын

A BIG problem 😁😂😁😂😂😁🤡 Keeps bull sh🤬ting 🥱🥱🥱🤮🤮🤮

If the Police fined businesses for using 999 / wasting police time, they WOULDN'T do it again.

Pure Audits needs to brush up on his drone laws..HE GAVE HIS ID WITHOUT REASON...

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

They can require the operator ID for a camera-drone flight. The legislation is schedule 9 of the air traffic control and unmanned aircraft act 2021

@stevedawg9588

2 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge Now check the sub 250g section for the CORRECT legislation.

@JonCookeBridge

2 күн бұрын

@@stevedawg9588 That schedule doesn’t have a sub 250g section. It has section 1, applying to flights requiring a pilot competency and section 2, applying to flights with a registration requirement. Section 1 only applies to 250g+ and is used for requiring pilot information - it does not apply, here. Section 2, however applies both to 250g+ AND sub 250g drones that have a camera fitted, so does apply. That is used to require operator details. As I’m sure you know, registration in the form of an operator ID is required to fly a camera-drone, even a light one. So, they can’t require the pilots details but they can require the operator info. The audit King Focus Pocus explains all this beautifully in a recent video called Q and A (starts explaining about three minutes in). The police very rarely know any of this so rarely require the details they are entitled to under the correct legislation. In this case, she was on the phone to the drone team, so there’s a good chance this was all explained to her and is probably why she stopped pushing for his ID and settled for just the operator info she’d been given. Her parting shot was to bollock him under the “being awkward and not pandering to a cops ego act 2024” that she seemed to believe exists.

@JonCookeBridge

Күн бұрын

@@stevedawg9588 ?? Section 2 of schedule 9 applies.

@stevedawg9588

Күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge Try reading the sub 250 legislation, the filth make the same mistake every time.

NEVER show the filth your operator ID..unless they have grounds to suspect a crime..they are NOT entitled to "just have a look"..while copying the numbers

@maunsell24

Ай бұрын

Unfortunately that is incorrect. See Section 9.2 of the Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021. A constable only requires reasonable grounds to believe that a drone is being or has been flown in order to check that it is registered per sub-section 9.2(3). The question of it being under/over 250g then determines the applicable distance it must be from buildings and people.

@stevedawg9588

Ай бұрын

@@maunsell24 ONLY if they suspect an offense has been committed

@Angel-Adramelech

Ай бұрын

@@stevedawg9588 So in other words,.... anytime they want 🤔😇

@sailingshipp

23 күн бұрын

@@stevedawg9588 Incorrect, they can require you to provide details if they believe you are or have been flying... www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/12/schedule/9 Provision by remote pilots of information about UAS operators 2(1)A constable may exercise the power conferred by this paragraph in relation to a person (P) if the constable- (a)has reasonable grounds for believing that- (i)a flight by an unmanned aircraft is taking place or has taken place, and (ii)P is or was the remote pilot of the unmanned aircraft, and (b)has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a relevant registration requirement is or was applicable as respects the UAS operator for the unmanned aircraft and the flight. (2)The constable may require P to provide such information as the constable considers reasonable as to the identity of- (a)the person or persons who are or were the UAS operator for the flight, or (b)the person or persons who made the unmanned aircraft available for use by P. (3)In this paragraph “relevant registration requirement” means a requirement imposed by, or referred to in, any of the following provisions of the ANO 2016- (h)article 265A(9)(b) (specific category: display of UAS operator's registration number);

@stevedawg9588

2 күн бұрын

@@maunsell24 No need to explain, i fly a drone myself...and you are wrong, sub 250g, camera or not can be flown as low as you want within reason, you DO NOT need to show your operator ID UNLESS an offence is reasonably suspected. There was no offence, ergo, NO requirement to even show the ID AND definitely NO rights to copy the ID.

She was not entitled to copy that operators licence.

@sailingshipp

23 күн бұрын

She is, and she's also entitled to his name and address.

Blue lights for filming... That's resources well spent!!! By the time they've dealt with this "incident" possibly there's lots of actual crimes taking place!

@RoryLaird-tc6xp

Ай бұрын

Spot on m8,there just a complete embarrassment fae top tae bottom

He become a victim of his own stupidity ,he melted straight away..

Doesnt matter if they are young girls. Pureaudit needs to get a little more assertive. They sense your weakness and now trying to bully you.

@RoryLaird-tc6xp

Ай бұрын

There aw bullies,it's how there trained to treat the public,intimidate, frighten and do whatever it takes to get our details,fucking morons,what a complete waste of police resources, I thought police scotland were bad 😮

so... they have established that no crime has been committed, and they still won't leave him alone? That is causing alarm, harassment and distress.

Not detained, walk away.

Just because they are police women you gave them EVERYTHING they ask for....poor audit 😞

@robwilson8673

22 күн бұрын

Poor Zpolice idiots

Mate tell them nothing.

The state of those two women

@Joeistheking

Ай бұрын

Pure monsters

When they say are you willing to give me your name, you should say " I'm going t decline your offer"

@brimkathstampex2306

Ай бұрын

Or , if you give me your address.

Wouldn't of got my drone id

@Donotwillnot

Ай бұрын

I thought the law had changed recently and if requested you do have to give them the operator id??

@alexanderevanska4274

Ай бұрын

​@@Donotwillnot show them, not give them. It's there in case the drone is lost or causes a accident. They have no right to ask for it especially for ID purposes. No crime has been committed.

@Donotwillnot

Ай бұрын

@@alexanderevanska4274 understood i hadn't realised that. So they cannot ask for it just as a way to identify you? It must be because they believe a crime has happened? Im sure alot of coppers do use this to get id though? Thanks for that 👍

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

@@alexanderevanska4274 No, that’s auditing myth. They can require the pilot gives the operator information (which is potentially distinct from the pilot’s) under schedule 9 of the Air Traffic Control and unmanned Aircraft Act 2021.

Here’s a tip. You’re only required to display the operator ID whilst flying the drone. As soon as it lands you can destroy it and just print another one the next time you use it.

Why show your drones operator ID unless they believe you have broken the law? If you haven't flown your drone - no offence! You haven't got to prove your innocence. They have to prove your guilty of an offence....

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

The constables are entitled to require the operator ID if they reasonably suspect he’s flown a camera drone.

Usually pure audits is OK. Total fail on this one though. I know he's newish, but has to learn on the job quickly. Gave to much information, talked to much, didn't pull the Constables up on anything. More concerned about gdpr? By handing operaters I.d. over if he wasn't on the prnc before, he definitely is now.

"Wasting police time" they do it themselves, WHY is it not a crime to waste PUBLIC time?

@pinac-audit

Ай бұрын

It is it a section 5 of the criminal law act 1967 subsection 2 it States. )Where a person causes any wasteful employment of the police by knowingly making to any person a false report tending to show that an offence has been committed, or to give rise to apprehension for the safety of any persons or property, or tending to show that he has information material to any police inquiry, he shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for not more than six months or to a fine of not more than [F3level 4 on the standard scale] or to both.

@RoryLaird-tc6xp

Ай бұрын

They should av been gone by now,they are harassing this man now

@stevedawg9588

Ай бұрын

@@pinac-audit I KNOW the law, he didn't call the filth, they did, THEY committed the crime of making false reports and wasting police time. What I meant is, the filth are ALWAYS wasting time attending NO CRIMES. A man with a cam.... Wasting THEIR time..and more important..OURS..

Just tell them they are dismissed and go back to work.

@RoryLaird-tc6xp

Ай бұрын

I wouldn't even conversate with them and carry on about ma business, daftys the pair of them,no emergency, waste of time,total joke

DO NOT let her take the details down.

WOW BLUE LIGHTS FOR A CRAMRA 😅😅😅😅😅😅😅😅

@phillipbeach5899

Ай бұрын

Because who ever called lied about what was happening.

@RoryLaird-tc6xp

Ай бұрын

The person who called should then be arrested for wasting police time but they won't,divvies,the man's done nowt wrong

Blue light for a man doing a legal hobby. Yet phone up for a burglary and you'll be given a crime number to give to your insurance. Case closed. Off the books. 😡👊🙏🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

@RoryLaird-tc6xp

Ай бұрын

Spot on m8,there an embarrassment the lot of them,fae the east coast of fife,oor polis are just corrupt fae top tae bottom and are involved in a lot of bad murky shit,never speak to these people,ever

Stop helping them trying to incriminate you. Before it bights you in the arse.

Young girls!!!! Soo bloody WHAT???? Equality.

Drone details are not required unless they are SURE THAT A CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED !

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

No. They can require the operator ID for a camera-drone flight.

@Nellyontheland

3 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge Nope. Only IF they suspect foul play. It's then up to the operator to call their bluff and then take them to court.

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

@@NellyonthelandTry Focus Pocus Q and A video from about 3mins in. Or read schedule 9 of the Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021.

@Nellyontheland

3 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge I have. Only upon SUSPICION. FFS, everyone forgets the basics. They have NO RIGHTS unless they SUSPECT foul play.

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

@@Nellyontheland Why not check out the resources I pointed you to before replying? Schedule 9 of the Air Traffic management and unmanned aircraft act 2021, entitles a police officer to require the operator info for a flight with a registration requirement (a camera drone is captured by this, regardless of weight). Rather than just replying “wrong”, I encourage you to actually read that legislation or watch the video I pointed you to, first. They have to reasonably suspect a flight has occurred, not that a law has been broken.

TELE TUBBIES IN BLUE

Cars with dash cams going in...best tell them not to film young girls

This need to be a lesson how to not doing things. He gave up his rights straight away. No of fence no name. No crime no id. Simple

Once your given id out they will expect it of everyone 😮

Never ever give those clowns your operator ID, you can show that you have it on the drone but they have no right to record it as you have just given your personal details away.

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

Where did this myth come from? The police seldom know the legislation, but they are entitled to require the operator ID for a camera drone flight.

@george-ev1dq

3 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge only if a crime has been committed, you can show there is an operator I.D but they can not legally record it unless a crime has been been committed.

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

@@george-ev1dq No that’s just popular auditing myth. If it has a camera it requires UAS registration (an operator ID) and under schedule 9 of the Air Traffic Control and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021 the police can require it if they reasonably believe it’s been flown. Look it up.

@george-ev1dq

3 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge they can require it to be shown but they can not legally record or document the ID, that would be an unlawful way to obtain the operators details and a crime that would be dealt with in a criminal court. look it up.

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

@@george-ev1dq I have read the legislation and discussed it with an officer from the met’s drone team. The relevant part is schedule 9 part 2 which says an officer can require the details of the drone operator from the pilot for a flight with a registration requirement. A sub-250g with a camera does have a UAS registration requirement (operator ID). What do you want me to look up? I’ve been pretty specific about what I’m pointing you in the direction of.

“It’s a FREE COUNTRY. I have a RIGHT to be as awkward as I want and it’s NONE OF YOUR F’ing business” !!!! “Also, I’m not talking to you so GET LOST” ! Then SILENCE.

🎵Feelings......🎶🎶🎶 Never mind the LAW!

Dnt give id until charged

The security guard looks like he knows all about young girls - and probably young boys.

I dont understand why he let the cop take a record of his flyer id from the drone....knowing that they could check and get his details??

Why was he actually showing his drone ID

Good job he didn't run they were a little bit away from the car 🙄

9:02 -Refused Details- Correct these clowns ---> DECLINED to VOLUNTEER details which are NOT REQUIRED and can not be COMPELLED ! 😉👍

ugh... why did he let her take a pic of his operator ID. He was not obliged to show them.

They should’ve asked permission before deleting it. He’s committed an offence and these officers have done nothing? Jokers 🤡🤡

The Operator ID should not be given to the police unless you have been suspected for a crime. Also, it only gives the name of the person who owns the drone and not who flies it.

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

That’s auditor-myth. The police have the power to demand the operator ID if they reasonably suspect a camera drone has been flown.

It's not illegal to record juveniles, it is illegal to record juveniles in a compromising situation. Dressing room, toilets, sexual nature, and distribution of such records. Juveniles walk the street and captured by multiple CCTV cameras of private and public buildings, traffic cameras, dash cameras and nobody, but nobody has a problem with that. Why is it only when a camera attached to a person it becomes a problem?

No need to give name, but they always say you are being awkward

@brimkathstampex2306

Ай бұрын

Be as awkward as you like.

Refused to give them their fix. That’s what she meant.

@18:06 PC requires consent to take a photograph of a Person , as PACE 1984 section 64A (1A) to take Photograph elsewhere than a police striation (a) with the appropriate consent. ; or (b) if the appropriate consent is withheld it is not practicable to obtain it, case law :- Wood v Commissioner of Police 2009 overturning high court decision, found Wood "right to privacy"b had been infringed by taking the photographs by "retention of photographs " of Wood by Police Note: :- The "retention" of photographs was the key element of this case 👆🏻 hence even in the police guidance :- code :- D512A Photographs taken under PACE s. 64A (a) may be taken with persons the consent 👆🏻 UNLESS (1B) A person falls within this subsection if he :- (a) has been arrested by a constable for an offence; (b) taken to custody Section (6A) In this section, a "photograph" includes a moving image " all the best 🙏

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

@@TheBILLANDERSON All this changed in 2018 when GDPR came in. It is covered by that data protection legislation and, unsurprisingly, given all police officers use them pretty much all the time, body cam images do not require the permission of their subjects to be captured.

@TheBILLANDERSON

3 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge geeeeeeezz GDPR 2018 is for required for registered companies , The Data Protection Act of 1998 varies from the DPA Data Protection Act of 2018 due to the changes in the technology and the much-needed additions. The latter one includes many new principles and provisions of individuals and their security both online and offline. Such as the right to erasure, the right to access data, and added web safety for individuals. The Data Protection Act of 1998 did not take into account the use of web cookies and similar technologies for example, which it does not with this revision. Hence with BWV under PACE 1984 section 64A (1A) ,,, under DPA 1998 there are are 7 principles . section 2, Principle 1 officers must be 👉🏻able to explain how to get copy of BWV by SAR ,,, Section 1 , Principle 3 BWV must be "overt" ect. GDPR is regulated of how they can share your details eg your GP can share your details unless you signed a declaration to opt out of it , in January 2014 , ""Care.data opt out form"" before GDPR 2018 NOT many know of this ,, I signed early 2014 ..If you wish ,,,ask at your GP "line manager ""for the form , but GP staff , when I asked did not know of this ,,,did not know of it ,,,but its is there ,, , ask the "line manager " at your GP that is the advantage of GDPR .. DPA 1998 does not

@TheBILLANDERSON

3 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge PACE section 64A(1A) hence case :- Wood V Commissioner of police 2009 ,, "retention of of images" WOOD had not taken part in any unlawful activity's , covert recording , section 1 Principle 3 = BWV must be "overt"

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

@@TheBILLANDERSON GDPR (DPA 2018 since we left the EU) most certainly applies to public agencies. The police can capture BWV without permission, but it must be overt unless it falls under a particular exemption. It’s pointless quoting data protection legislation that predates GDPR. Section 64A PACE 1A applies to arrestees and people detained as suspects; it’s covering evidence gathering protocols for suspects. If it’s not followed properly, under DPA you may be able to get them to delete photographs so they can’t use them in a case against you. Also, you have an old version. The college of policing publish guidance on BWV use - the last version was 2022.

@TheBILLANDERSON

2 күн бұрын

@@JonCookeBridge nooooooooooooooooo 🤣🤣 1B is when arrested ,, try again 😆😆🤣🤣 next 🤷‍♂ , love this 😁😁

The security guys are getting paid…..

Never show them anything

Here come the brave girls in blue. Can’t attend a burglary but can harass a man with a camera.

Did blondie really say "i'm not a fan of being recorded" while she's got a bodycam switched on??? She also admitted he's doing nothing illegal, then fatty claims he's "refusing" to ID. It's like a French and Saunders sketch.

Always ask them why they need to know? They often say because you have to, then they come unstuck and disappear down the rabbit hole of section 26 offences!

Great review. I like pure audits 👍

Rice v. Connolly (1966) is an English legal precedent holding that there is no strict, general legal duty to assist a police officer prior to any possible arrest or caution, with even basic police enquiries nor to accompany the officer to a requested location.

apparently the new drone laws have changed and says that you must give your op id when requested by police, so they can run it, i didn't know that, even if it isn't flying apparently, and even if no crime suspected, new rules, handy for the cops and just a bit biased imo.

Not legal it’s lawful what your doing

Why aren't the Police questioning the Security plank about false reports and wasting Police time? Serious question

@patrickdaly2121

Ай бұрын

That would involve work!

Never give ID 😮 dont do it

Auditor why give up drone number, just say it is under 250 grams, nothing else. Give up ID only is Arrested. They only want your details to see if you are wanted.

A Police Lie - We are very busy. Remember the 5.8% success rate.

Aaahhh, the guy with his big brother's suit on!

Officers No Crime you dont have the authority to demand ID

If he's not flying the drone then why give the number?, Just a sly way to id him.. If your not flying it then no need to give it...

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

I think he had been flying it, and they knew that.

So she doesn’t like being filmed but I bet she’s happy to film everyone else? Wrong person, wrong job!

I think I would say oh I don't have a card, and see what they do then.

cops in a cop car nearly ran me over. They demanded my name. I said why are you ON MY PRIVATE LAND & ROAD? They argued it was public, I said ok arrest me for walking on my own private road that serves my prive house. They drove off

The operator ID does not identify the flyer. They can be two different people.

@JonCookeBridge

2 күн бұрын

Usually does, and he does actually say it’s his in this case. But yes, pilot and operator don’t have to be the same. I doubt the officer had a clue, but she was on the phone to the drone unit, so she probably had that explained to her eventually.

You had zero legal obligation to give them anything so now they will write you up in an incident report with all your details which could hinder you in the future, never give pigs your details willingly because they use your information with malicious intent.

I think the Information Commission needs to be brought into this, why is the Civil Aviation Authority giving police information without a Court Order, the Data they hold falls under GDPR

Never talk to them they cant handle it 😂😂 remain silent as is your right

Rear end talking cop

If your drone isn't up you don't need to give the I'd number

These Police call outs for camera men are beyond... the even crazy part is they turn up on blue HAHA

Op id is nothing to do with police without an offence .

I would definitely get a FOI request put in to their station and they need to learn more about the law and not waste their time e on this?

Coppers still not accepting that we need thousands of people filming and recording everything it doesn’t matter about comfort as they are quick to inform us when they decide to stop and search, detain and question applying handcuffs which aren’t built for comfort. So let’s all abide by the law and forget about common courtesy it’s nice but not required legally. Keep the coppers under scrutiny at all times and report them the second they put a foot wrong.

seen as he admits to deleting the picture and breaching GDPR, I'd send the video to the ICO, make a complaint and get a payout from it.

You gave up ID, not cool. Not cool

@cliffordbuttle4529

Ай бұрын

Agree%%%

I wouldn’t even talk to them.

A concern is not a crime

"we've got young girls here 18/19" And? Nobody is spying on them, they are adults walking in public... Trying to make it something sexual is disgusting

Bad cop should be asking for that

They are not young girls are they ,if they are eighteen they are adults and are at majority.

My understanding is you dont have to give Operator ID

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

That’s just auditor myth. The police can require the operator ID for a camera drone flight. There’s a nice explanation video on Focus Pocus channel called Q and A, 3 mins in.

No crime ,no id

I wouldn't give them the id. They will use it to identify you and put you on file as a "trouble maker"

You should not allow her to photo the drone ID. Decline NOT refuse. The rooky was there just to learn how to abuse the public's rights and to fish for information and twist it to incriminate people.

Very poor you need to put a piece of insulation tape over your operators ID they have no right to it unless you are committing an offence

@JonCookeBridge

3 күн бұрын

No. They can require the operator ID if they reasonably suspect he’s flown it and it required one. (Camera flight means it did)

13:02 The security guard should invest in a suit that fits him!

Bloody hell, it’s like Fat sweaty copppers from the Fast Show!

We've all had a fat Welsh bird wanting our number ... the answer is always no fella

@pinac-audit

Ай бұрын

Now that funny 😄

He was NOT INTERESTED in what you said whatsoever, he simply wanted his own way. He then pulls the young girl cards. Be very careful giving your I.D in these situations you never know what he will say.

Bloody hell wake up! No offence has been committed so she has no right to see the drone take it's ID, nor does she have any right to question the auditor. Sorry, but I just don't understand this repeated infringement of people's rights.