The bobby doesn't need reasonable suspicion to see the operator ID. I think you are confusing Section 8 with Section 9 of the Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021. SCHEDULE 9 Unmanned aircraft: powers of police officers relating to ANO 2016 Provision by remote pilots of evidence of competency 1(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 for the flight, and (b)has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a relevant competency requirement is or was applicable as respects P and the unmanned aircraft and the flight. (2)The constable may require P to provide such evidence as the constable considers reasonable of P’s compliance, as respects the unmanned aircraft and the flight, with a relevant competency requirement.
Is an operators ID a competency requirement though? Because you don't have to pass any test to have it, it doesn't prove any competency in drone flights 🤔 I would read that as competency requirements meaning actual training, such as that required to fly a drone between 250g and 500g in built up areas. Note how each subsection is ended with 'and' rather than 'or', so all elements must be present for them to exercise that power. Good point though and would make for an interesting court battle over the legislative wording.
blog.uavhub.com/whats-the-difference-between-a-flyer-id-and-an-operator-id So this blog is interesting, there's mention of competency requirement with regards to the flyer ID but not with regards to an operator ID. Therefore I'd conclude, albeit from limited information at this stage, that an operator ID is not a competency requirement and thus not subject to schedule 9.
@@powertotheproletariat Several weeks ago I was watching an interview with two drone officers and what they were saying was in Section 9 they could ask for your operator ID as they can ask for your driving license. It was a lengthy interview covering many points including sections 8 & 9 paragraph by paragraph. I'll try and find it again.
An officer needs "reasonable grounds for suspicion to exercise "any" statutory authority as a police officer, otherwise we'd be living in a police state
Ignorant, arrogant and aggressive policing. They are childish and petulant only because you do not bow down to their perceived authority. Instead of acknowledging that what you are doing is perfectly legal they resort to stupid what if scenarios to defend the indefensible. They really are pathetic.
What happened to innocent until proven guilty? I'm going to report him for impersonating a police officer cos I cannot ascertain that he is an actual police officer. Then it's for the CPS and the courts to decide if he is an actual police officer. Then I'll report the judge cos I cannot ascertain that the judge/CPS is a real judge and not impersonating a judge/CPS.
THE POLICE DO NOT HAVE POWER THEY ONLY HAVE AUTHORITY WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME AUTHORITY THAT WE THE PEOPLE HAVE UNTIL WE ARE IN CRIME. ONLY A JUDGE AND JURY HAVE POWER.
This fool of an Inspector uses the word 'potential' too easily for my liking, as in "potential investigation" and "potential offence". I get the impression he has based his whole career on potentially viewing anyone he didn't like as a potential criminal. A bit like the way lawyers use the 'allegedly" regarding an accused.
yes but its ok for them because they are police and totally trustworthy so anything they do that might seem a but dodgy is ok because we know we can trust each and everyone of them. especially if your called wayne couzins.
It's embarrassing at how much time the police spend on people filming , people are being mugged , burgled and murdered through stabbings , yet they would rather arse around doing pointless things like this I hate them as they are getting worse
@@chrisbevis7725 The bullied at school tossers are the useful idiots turning this country in to a shiiiiiithole, just to get there own back and get power that doesn't actually exist. If Parliament was a real place, 'sir' Starmer would bring up the great energy scam but all I hear is 'bughhhhhhh'. There's a video on the scam, it took me 18 minutes to get it and realise I'm being raped of my money. If the powers that be didn't want dumb pigs, there wouldn't be any, everything is planned. Trouble is, not many people realise the UN controls everything on behalf of trillionair families. Governments are just sound walls for us to shout at.
Meanwhile five more young men were stabbed in the policing area. But all the drone laws were adhered to on this occasion so all’s we’ll with the world.
Wow great interaction so far. The mental gymnastics these people are willing to undertake to keep the boot on the necks of the public is astonishing. So far, very good PttP. Thank you
That was really interesting. They seem determined to get you for something. I really don't agree with the "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about" mentality. It's not up to you prove you're doing something lawful and they seem to get bent out of shape when you won't agree to help with their enquiries. It's one reason I'm so cautious about flying my 249g drone
We are innocent in this country until proven guilty. I would let them arrest me if they don't know the law and then when they HAVE to release me I would citizen arrest them for kidnap, false imprisonment and abuse under the colour of law. We should use our laws to make them accountable because it seems to me that nobody else will.
33:50 The inspector is trying his hardest to abuse the legal process for his own personal needs and to satisfy his ego and to assert his authoritah. And each time he tries he makes himself look more and more like a tyrant than a police constable.
exactly that was the point people are missing he was trying to abuse legal process to obtain something he knew he wasn’t entitled to. Note he acknowledged he wasn’t entitled to ID but was determined to extract information PTTP didn’t have to assist them with. Can’t wait to see the continuation of this battle of wits.
PTTP… it’s so blatantly obvious that the senior guy’s ego is so bruised, that he just can’t let it, or you, go! They really don’t like it up ‘em. Can’t wait for pt. 2.
The sergeant is that Old Skool of cop that thinks that everyone has a high potential of being a criminal and they must bend over and whistle every time a cop demands anything. In his world, you are guilty until proven innocent and he is the epitome of the police being the Enemy of The People.
Yet again more corrupt police officers and a police sergeant as well what a disgrace to the uniform keep up the good videos and our free time in bringing us these videos
It would be great for you to upload the Police footage as this shows the Police theatening a member of the public just because they cannot get thier own way.GOOD ON YOU
wtf the inspector could not let it go, it is CRAZY! basically he said he could report everyone he wants for any offence he wants without any suspicion or reasonable grounds... CRAZY!!
Unfortunately, this is typical of the pitiful standard of policing that we get in this country when the educational requirements for the occupation is just 2 GCSEs (and 18 weeks training). To become a hairdresser (advanced apprenticeship) it's FIVE GCSEs and a TWO year training.
We are innocent in this country until proven guilty. I would let them arrest me if they don't know the law and then when they HAVE to release me I would citizen arrest them for kidnap, false imprisonment and abuse under the colour of law. We should use our laws to make them accountable because it seems to me that nobody else will.
Wow just pull out some rubbish from the thin air and the unkempt laps it up. You’ll need a minimum Level 3 qualification such as an A-Level or equivalent. need to do better.
@@RM-qv9rb that's incorrect - the BASIC entry requirement is TWO GCSEs - English language and Maths. Whether you like it or not. Just go on any forces recruitment page and you'll clearly see. People can join with A levels and degrees (if they wish) but the very basic entry requirement is still just TWO GCSEs (the bare minimum).
@@RM-qv9rb The Level 3 Access to Higher Education (HE) Diploma (Policing) is a nationally recognised qualification. It's for people who are considering a career as a police officer but who don't yet have the necessary entry qualifications, such as A levels or BTECs. To achieve the Level 3 Certificate in Knowledge of Policing learners must complete the 10 mandatory units. Total Qualification Time (TQT) is the total amount of time, in hours, expected to be spent by a Learner to achieve a qualification. TQT and QLH = 386 hours total. Which equates to 9.6 weeks guided and self learning modules. So, the minimum requirement is basically an NVQ - and that explains everything.
So basically the inspector will go ahead and do what he wants and let the CPS sort it out. In all of this the inspector must know what you were their to do.
It’s a bit of a piss take when these fools demand you educate and assist them in the performance of their duty yet we the public have no obligation to assist them if they don’t mind the payout when they get it wrong. They are potentially endangering an aircraft in flight by talking to the pilot, because they haven’t got the patience or time to wait, why is there no senior more knowledgeable police officer available to the everyday plods to advise them.
I think it's scary that you have people who finish (or sometimes not finish) high-school with all sorts of grades, and are able to just walk to a police recruitment centre, grab 20 weeks of police training and go out there nabbing people based on what they think they know, making you have to go through tons of red tape with courts ect. Quota hiring has killed this country's police force. Educated police? There simply is none anymore.
We would like you to educate us on drone law so that we can spot any flaws in your behaviour. Always easier for the police if people incriminate themselves.
So he worked out you wanted a reaction (but tried to make it sound like you wanted a bad one) and yet he still came out and gave his bad reaction and refused to stop giving his reaction. He then made it sound like he was forced into giving a reaction when all he had to do was leave you alone or be polite..... The only reactions you see in audit videos are the ones where people come up to the auditor instead of walking away.
Wow...an Inspector who doesn't understand the basic tenet of English law of reasonable articulate suspicion. He just couldn't grasp the idea that you have to have a crime
It's not surprising he doesn't understand it because "Reasonable Articulable Suspicion" is a legal test in American law, not English. The English equivalent is "Reasonable Grounds", in other words what a reasonable person might believe if they had the same facts that a police officer did. This is a higher test than mere suspicion. In this case the officer suspected an offence but had no reasonable grounds to effect a search to prove it as PttP correctly pointed out.
@@tttt4029 The blackshirted scum wasted our time and our money because of their imbecile incompetence. They should be in prison for wasting our money and lying.
Don't want you seeing them doing dodgy stuff in the yard. Inspector has a huge ego and has hurt feelings that he is looking weak in front of his underlings. Dangerous person. Met rightly in Special Measures.
@Chris WIlson - the ego was definitely showing there. From the hundreds of videos I've seen over past 6 years I think about 90% of officers, if not more, cannot handle anyone who questions what the police assert without going into stubborn child mode. The lengths that those 'officers' went to to denigrate and try to incriminate PTTP so their ego's weren't bruised was astounding.
You would think that with all the knife crime going on in London, those 3 officers would not be fussing around a guy with a small drone.The new intro is really good to.
Correct! Knife crime, illegal moped gangs, drugs widely and easily available on the streets, but the Met. (under special measures) are so understaffed they do not respond to any burglaries, even if the offender is still on the premises. However they have multiple officers and constables hanging around in police stations, with time enough to engage on a fools errand. PTTP v Met. Police? What do you reckon? I know where my money is!🤣
That would be why they are. Nine times out of ten if they can burn a few minutes or hours of their shift haranguing someone who isn't a threat to them they'll do that rather than put that attention somewhere that might put them in harm's way.
Remarkable that no police seem capable of doing a little reading now and then at night to cover common encounters with the public. You'd think they would have the professional pride to improve themselves by doing so. Apparently not. This inspector is bull-shit on legs. He proposes that he can report and arrest anyone for any crime on the books to collect evidence because he currently can't prove he or she has or hasn't done it. Needs retraining on half pay for three weeks to teach him a lesson.
The only offence being committed is by the sausages, its not you making them look stupid they do it to themselves because they can not give the public the respect they deserve because of their over inflated egos. They are ridiculous and it starts at the top with inspectors like this one who will twist the law to fit his own ends, this allow's PCs like the murderer of Sarah Evans to do as they please. Another great video and thank you for your hard work.
Worst crime you can commit is to NOT ALLOW these PUBLIC EMPLOYEES to abuse your rights witb their paranoia. I am annoyed as i was enjoying the night flights view until the COERCIVE, CONTROLLING AND INTIMIDATING BEHAVIOUR STARTED. Go to Court and let them justify on Oath (perjury)the above crime.
32:10 No section 24 of PACE doesn't apply. To make an arrest without a warrant and he needs reasonable articulatable and objective suspicion that a crime is about to occur or has occurred. He won't have that if he can't see the drone.
The inspector wouldn't waste his time submitting a full file to the CPS knowing full well it would be turned down. He's just playing with words and you trying to prove he knows more. It's ego driven.
31:25 The inspector is the one who needs to think things through a bit further after spouting a whole serious of threats. Yes it is a threat when he states that he will make a report that will go to the CPS and through the legal system. The bit he needs to think about is how is going to start the process when he has no ID. And he can't get the ID without acting unlawfully. Mic Drop.
Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021, Schedule 9 part 2. The reasonable grounds being that the drone has a camera and if it does then a registration is required. Now he can require the ID of the person or persons who are or were the UAS operator for the flight, or the person or persons who made the unmanned aircraft available for use.
@@PINACI there's no reasonable suspicion that he doesn't have an operators ID. That's the offence. Refusal to give your operators ID isn't enough suspicion to warrant an arrest. If, however, they saw the drone come down and the operators ID wasn't visible, then that WOULD be reasonable suspicion, but since that didn't happen, and since it did have an operators ID, there's no reasonable suspicion that he has committed a crime
@@PINACI The constable can request the identity of the operator, but they don't need the operator ID. To be able to see the operator ID they need to use schedule 9, paragraph 3 of the ANO 2021. It is being pedantic, but it's like s163 of the RTA 1988 doesn't authorise getting identity, just the stopping. s164 is the section to use for that. But since nearly all constables (and inspectors) are clueless about the law if they come across a well versed individual they can't use the fact that the identity isn't given the moment it's asked for without quoting the relevant section against the individual. Police like to be pedantic and picky because it makes them feel better. But the same pedanticness can be used against them to highlight that they don't know the laws they are trying to enforce. If police used their discretion more and performed more professionally rather than only pick on drone users who fly over police stations or over property owned or used by a snowflake then there wouldn't be any need to be pedantic. On either side.
It does seem like the Inspector is in a catch 22 and he knows it.....and he's not happy about it. He wants the ID but knows he can't get it. So he claims that not producing the ID is reason enough for the pilot to be held on suspicion of not having the ID. The same ID he has no right to see.
16:45 Correct PttP. The act of flying the drone and filming is different to the act of publishing or sharing or using the footage. The act itself is never unlawful if done within regulations. It the use that the footage is put to that matters. But as you say, they have to find that out themselves and no one is obliged to help them find that out.
You would hope that if you asked a police officer why they joined the force they would say to uphold the law and protect the public but we all know why they joined….it’s because of the power, they’ve had something done to them in the past and this is their way of dealing with the feeling of being inadequate.
If they say 'uphold the law' I would argue that's a red flag right there. All laws? Even one's you don't agree with? Unjust laws? Why would you uphold an unjust law? Why would you uphold a law you don't agree with? Is there any point at which you would resign due to level of unjustness of a law?
Drone footage taken at night, fantastic. Please edit a bit of footage of your landing into part 2. Thought the female pc was pretty good, certainly an example to the others, first straight apology for not advising body cam recording I have heard on your channel. Don't forget that the PCs were not uninvolved in the eyes of the CAA when they approached and talked with you. Looking forward to part 2.
I'm sure the inspector could indeed have used his tenuous [flawed] logic to report you, but as he could prove no reasonable suspicion whatsoever (other than by virtue of his ignorance), it would be very easy to make a case for any report to have been done either a) maliciously, or b) acting beyond his powers. Any associated arrest/detention to obtain your details would surely therefore have been illegal. Neither would help his career or public relations. Well done for politely refusing to engage in that way rather than giving too much away or trying to elicit negative responses as some so called "auditors" do. This is exactly how it should be done.
Very hard to hear what everyone is saying in the first part, had to put my headphones on. 😁 The coppers came around to misinterpret the law, as usual. I have to say you're getting better and better as you go along. Outstanding work.
Wow the police dont actually know what reasonable suspicion is they seem to think 'because i think so' is enough, any crap lawyer would wipe the floor with them.
Love the new intro, noice 👍 Cop: "I don't 100% know things" that's a massive exaggeration of his abilities. How many Acton cops does it take to read drone regulations? More than 3, obviously. You should wear a warning "police officers approaching me are dumber than they appear in the mirror" He's not "potentially investigating an offence" he's "investigating a potential offence". Jeez - if I lived there I'd have to spend all my time teaching them how to speak properly.
@@rickc8865 oh diddums. Did the nasty man make you look stupid on TH-cam. Well why don't you learn the law, stupid, instead of guessing and infringing on people's rights. Only people that complain about cameras are people with something to hide
@@rickc8865 oh, losing the argument so run away. Poor sad man-child. I'm sure to have a happier festive period than you. After all, I don't mind being photographed, photographers don't anger me, and unlike you I won't be worried about being caught
4:35 Good job you checked the sign and say the PSPO notice. But I doubt that anyone else knows about it Just putting a notice on a sign doesn't mean that people will read it. There is an effect known as sign blindness caused by too many signs. Too many and people don't read them or even notice when new ones have been put up.
In addition, at 12:46 a motorbike almost crashes into a car (right hand side). The footage would have actually been extremely beneficial if there was a serious accident.
When you’ve spent a career thinking reasonable suspicion is “wondering” about stuff you’d like to know it would take a chisel to hack through the concrete between the ears of that idiocy.
Under section 163 of the Road Traffic Act, police can stop any vehicle without grounds and demand details... but this applies only to "mechanically propelled vehicles on a road'. No such legislation exists for drone pilots hence reasonable grounds are required. The inspector compares apples and oranges here. Does he do this on purpose or is it just incompetence?
Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021, Schedule 9 part 2. The reasonable grounds being that the drone has a camera and if it does then a registration is required.
@@PINACI Sure, a Mavic Mini needs an operator ID. No one debates that, but that's not how reasonable grounds work. Police can't search you for weapons just because you have pockets.
@@agargul All a constable needs is 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. If you tell him your drone has a camera then he now has grounds to suspect that your drone needs an operator registration.
@@agargul lol, No he doesn't. Where in the legislation does it say a PC needs reasonable grounds that the operator ID is missing from the drone ? (( "has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a relevant registration requirement is or was applicable" )) And if it has a camera then it's applicable !
I was watching another video from a UK auditor and someone in the chat mentioned something interesting. Apparently some of the top brass weren't too happy with that memo going out so now their way of combating auditors is to try and change the narrative to make it seem like it's abnormal to film the police or that the person filming could have some kind of mental health issue, thus allowing them to abuse other sections to search, detain or intimidate members of public filming police. I've definitely noticed it more lately in videos of officers mentioning how abnormal it is to be filming a police station.
That's an old tactic. Asking people if they're alright or if they need help (under the false assumption of a mental health issue) has been occurring for years.
I didn't realise victims walked about with signs on identifying that they're a victim... Yes it's awful... But it's only these cops telling other people... Otherwise we wouldn't know. Like you could determine the difference between 250 grams and 350 grams at night 80ft up ☺️ Can't wait for PT 2
Are we to assume that everyone standing outside a police station smoking is a SA victim and might get triggered by a drone? In this case a drone flying at night, well above their heads, so high up they can't see or hear it?
27:19 Police do need reasonable suspicion that an offence has been committed. And saying that the suspicion has been raised because the drone is flying over the police station is not the a valid reason to use to assume that the drone doesn't have an operator ID. It's totally disconnected. The inspector is spouting words in the hope that his authoritah will be bowed down to. Well news for you inspector, it doesn't. Proper suspicion that a drone doesn't have an operator ID could only be raised if PttP hadn't mentioned all the points about the drone being sub 250g. And since the inspector didn't hear that it has no grounds whatsoever.
Inspector EGO is having a real hard time with the fact that you know the law better than him and can articulate it with more clarity and authority... can't wait for part 2, hurry up. Totally owned the other clowns lol
when you have intelligence like yourself and have them fumbling. seems like they'll make up any crap to get you or intimidate with non sensical hypothetical nonsense fair play to you 👏
'Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse'....unless you are a member of this particular Organisation... Their Ignorance is well known and widespread because their Training is so, Poor.....intentionally, some would say. Well done you in Educating these two Organisation members.
It's obvious these Cops prefer to bother members of the public and waste their time than sort out the high crime levels in Acton. That Inspector is on an ego trip.
Under sections 163 and 164 of the Road Traffic Act. You can be stopped for no particular reason by a police constable and required to provide evidence of your lawful entitlement to operate the motor vehicle that you are operating. There are no similar requirements to provide details for operating a bicycle, baby buggy, rollerskates, skateboard or drone.
Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021, Schedule 9 part 2. The reasonable grounds being that the drone has a camera and if it does then a registration is required.
@@PINACI Yes, a registration is indeed required, but it does not authorise the police to order the operator to land and show the operator ID on a whim like they can to check a driving licence. The police can stop me for no reason to check my driving licence, but they have to have reasonable suspicion to be able to breathalyse me, or search my vehicle.
@@PINACI That is correct. That's the whole point of the Legislation, is that it now gives the Police some Powers as set out in that Paragraph. They can indeed insist on you landing the aircraft in order to make sure it has (in this case) a relevant Operator ID. Not sure they can ID you from it though (assuming the person piloting is also the Operator).
@@smithbrownjones Actually they can't insist you land the drone unless they have reasonable ground that you are or have been committing an offence as per Schedule 8, part 1 of the Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021.
It's staggering that an inspector is willing to use the fact that you will not give him information that you do not legally have to give him, as the grounds to detain you to get that very same information from you!!!
To paraphrase the Inspector; "I can report you for being guilty of an offense that I have no reasonable grounds to suspect has occurred and then it will be up to you to prove you are innocent". To paraphrase the Inspector more concisely; "You are guilty until proven innocent because, you know, I say so".
@@thetruth9210 if people out in the real world don’t know how bad it is for policing in the UK (2022) just watch Channel 4 Dispatches from last night frightening how many new recruits have a criminal record WOW!!!!
Catching real criminals may involve strenuous effort and some danger,and the biggest draw back for them, there'll be no fine attached to most crime, just non profit jail time.
I heard the minimum education standard to join the police is just a C or above in English….. nothing else….. every time I watch an interaction with an inspector I’m reminded of this.
The bobby doesn't need reasonable suspicion to see the operator ID. I think you are confusing Section 8 with Section 9 of the Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021. SCHEDULE 9
Unmanned aircraft: powers of police officers relating to ANO 2016
Provision by remote pilots of evidence of competency
1(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 for the flight, and
(b)has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a relevant competency requirement is or was applicable as respects P and the unmanned aircraft and the flight.
(2)The constable may require P to provide such evidence as the constable considers reasonable of P’s compliance, as respects the unmanned aircraft and the flight, with a relevant competency requirement.
Is an operators ID a competency requirement though? Because you don't have to pass any test to have it, it doesn't prove any competency in drone flights 🤔
I would read that as competency requirements meaning actual training, such as that required to fly a drone between 250g and 500g in built up areas. Note how each subsection is ended with 'and' rather than 'or', so all elements must be present for them to exercise that power.
Good point though and would make for an interesting court battle over the legislative wording.
blog.uavhub.com/whats-the-difference-between-a-flyer-id-and-an-operator-id
So this blog is interesting, there's mention of competency requirement with regards to the flyer ID but not with regards to an operator ID. Therefore I'd conclude, albeit from limited information at this stage, that an operator ID is not a competency requirement and thus not subject to schedule 9.
@@powertotheproletariat Several weeks ago I was watching an interview with two drone officers and what they were saying was in Section 9 they could ask for your operator ID as they can ask for your driving license. It was a lengthy interview covering many points including sections 8 & 9 paragraph by paragraph. I'll try and find it again.
@@powertotheproletariat 8mins 42 secs of this video. th-cam.com/video/QHuMwoamCts/w-d-xo.html
An officer needs "reasonable grounds for suspicion to exercise "any" statutory authority as a police officer, otherwise we'd be living in a police state
Ignorant, arrogant and aggressive policing. They are childish and petulant only because you do not bow down to their perceived authority. Instead of acknowledging that what you are doing is perfectly legal they resort to stupid what if scenarios to defend the indefensible. They really are pathetic.
Hilarious tho seeing "adults" acting like seven year olds.
pathetic is the word.
Well said 👏
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
I'm going to report him for impersonating a police officer cos I cannot ascertain that he is an actual police officer. Then it's for the CPS and the courts to decide if he is an actual police officer. Then I'll report the judge cos I cannot ascertain that the judge/CPS is a real judge and not impersonating a judge/CPS.
Never has been innocent until proved guilty with the cops, everyone is guilty in their eyes.
Haven't had a lawful parliament or judiciary here in Australia since 1960 so lot's of people impersonating judges.
UNTIL? I hate that wording disrespectful
Enjoy wasting your time making pointless complaints to the same people you are complaining about.
We are all criminals. Only police are innocent....
There was only one group breaking the law in this video and it wasn't PttP.
The final part of this conversation with the inspector is nothing but hypothetical threats. Christ, this is the most pathetic display.
Thank-you for helping the ordinary public in raising awareness on protecting and exercising their rights.
Yes 😊 human rights are very important
When will the police understand the thresholds they need to meet in order to use their powers and that the public are innocent until proven guilty.
THE POLICE DO NOT HAVE POWER THEY ONLY HAVE AUTHORITY WHICH IS THE EXACT SAME AUTHORITY THAT WE THE PEOPLE HAVE UNTIL WE ARE IN CRIME. ONLY A JUDGE AND JURY HAVE POWER.
Not nowadays it isn't, Guilty until you prove otherwise.
Must be embarrassing when a member of the public is informing u of laws that your supposed to know.
@@Crashawsome they committed section 26, criminal justice and courts act 2015 offences 🥹
This fool of an Inspector uses the word 'potential' too easily for my liking, as in "potential investigation" and "potential offence". I get the impression he has based his whole career on potentially viewing anyone he didn't like as a potential criminal. A bit like the way lawyers use the 'allegedly" regarding an accused.
It's clear that the cops continue to record people without making them aware and thus violating their policy
They're violating the law as well!
Those supposed PC's have already made up their mind, so it's no use talking to them.
yes but its ok for them because they are police and totally trustworthy so anything they do that might seem a but dodgy is ok because we know we can trust each and everyone of them. especially if your called wayne couzins.
And the rights of the people which is unacceptable.
@@chrisbevis7725 yep, this is who they’ve always been.
£17 BILLION we paid last year through our taxes for this level of incompetence, arrogance and ignorance.
Moneys well wasted
They care more about being filmed than the child trafficking and Albanian gangs flooding in the country or the countless old folks getting burgled .
Wonder how much of that went on kebabs and hamburgers ?
That's what it cost the rulers to keep you subjugated. They printed that money out of thin air to enable this slavery.
And they say they need more money.
It's embarrassing at how much time the police spend on people filming , people are being mugged , burgled and murdered through stabbings , yet they would rather arse around doing pointless things like this
I hate them as they are getting worse
Yeah, but they need police intelligence to find them and as you can see that's like rocking horse 💩.
That is because most of them are cowards like playground bullies. They thought they had a soft target with the auditor.
Little wonder they are still in special measures.
@@chrisbevis7725
The bullied at school tossers are the useful idiots turning this country in to a shiiiiiithole, just to get there own back and get power that doesn't actually exist.
If Parliament was a real place, 'sir' Starmer would bring up the great energy scam but all I hear is 'bughhhhhhh'. There's a video on the scam, it took me 18 minutes to get it and realise I'm being raped of my money. If the powers that be didn't want dumb pigs, there wouldn't be any, everything is planned. Trouble is, not many people realise the UN controls everything on behalf of trillionair families. Governments are just sound walls for us to shout at.
Those things aren’t important to them, but toys that fly are.
Meanwhile five more young men were stabbed in the policing area. But all the drone laws were adhered to on this occasion so all’s we’ll with the world.
That's London city
Wow great interaction so far.
The mental gymnastics these people are willing to undertake to keep the boot on the necks of the public is astonishing.
So far, very good PttP. Thank you
That was really interesting. They seem determined to get you for something. I really don't agree with the "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about" mentality. It's not up to you prove you're doing something lawful and they seem to get bent out of shape when you won't agree to help with their enquiries. It's one reason I'm so cautious about flying my 249g drone
... and they seem to think an in flight assesment will determine whether it is 251g or 249g. What?
We are innocent in this country until proven guilty. I would let them arrest me if they don't know the law and then when they HAVE to release me I would citizen arrest them for kidnap, false imprisonment and abuse under the colour of law. We should use our laws to make them accountable because it seems to me that nobody else will.
@@chrisbevis7725
Who would “you” hold liable
The man or woman or the Police Constable/officer
Just a question
"Go away i dont want interaction"
"Is this so you can put me on youtube".
Oh the stupidity on some people. 🤦♂️
33:50 The inspector is trying his hardest to abuse the legal process for his own personal needs and to satisfy his ego and to assert his authoritah. And each time he tries he makes himself look more and more like a tyrant than a police constable.
THE MASK ALWAYS SLIPS TO REVEAL THE MONSTER BEHIND IT!
@@chrisbevis7725 There hasn't been a mask on these clowns for decades.
exactly that was the point people are missing he was trying to abuse legal process to obtain something he knew he wasn’t entitled to. Note he acknowledged he wasn’t entitled to ID but was determined to extract information PTTP didn’t have to assist them with. Can’t wait to see the continuation of this battle of wits.
The inspector is a wannabe Action man - but is just an Acton man. waste of plastic.
@@judithmatthews8460 " Battle of wits" it was a no contest.
PTTP… it’s so blatantly obvious that the senior guy’s ego is so bruised, that he just can’t let it, or you, go! They really don’t like it up ‘em. Can’t wait for pt. 2.
There's a lot of folk that don't like it up em these days!
'
He got outed as a bit of a numbskull.
The sergeant is that Old Skool of cop that thinks that everyone has a high potential of being a criminal and they must bend over and whistle every time a cop demands anything. In his world, you are guilty until proven innocent and he is the epitome of the police being the Enemy of The People.
Yet again more corrupt police officers and a police sergeant as well what a disgrace to the uniform keep up the good videos and our free time in bringing us these videos
It would be great for you to upload the Police footage as this shows the Police theatening a member of the public just because they cannot get thier own way.GOOD ON YOU
Well said 👏
wtf the inspector could not let it go, it is CRAZY! basically he said he could report everyone he wants for any offence he wants without any suspicion or reasonable grounds... CRAZY!!
Sociopath at best!
Yes, we really need 20,000 more of these to preserve public safety.
Its just meat in cloths.
Another 20 k and that will be another 20 k B M W S on the road to drive around in 👻
Unfortunately, this is typical of the pitiful standard of policing that we get in this country when the educational requirements for the occupation is just 2 GCSEs (and 18 weeks training). To become a hairdresser (advanced apprenticeship) it's FIVE GCSEs and a TWO year training.
We are innocent in this country until proven guilty. I would let them arrest me if they don't know the law and then when they HAVE to release me I would citizen arrest them for kidnap, false imprisonment and abuse under the colour of law. We should use our laws to make them accountable because it seems to me that nobody else will.
EXACTLY.
Wow just pull out some rubbish from the thin air and the unkempt laps it up. You’ll need a minimum Level 3 qualification such as an A-Level or equivalent. need to do better.
@@RM-qv9rb that's incorrect - the BASIC entry requirement is TWO GCSEs - English language and Maths. Whether you like it or not. Just go on any forces recruitment page and you'll clearly see. People can join with A levels and degrees (if they wish) but the very basic entry requirement is still just TWO GCSEs (the bare minimum).
@@RM-qv9rb
The Level 3 Access to Higher Education (HE) Diploma (Policing) is a nationally recognised qualification. It's for people who are considering a career as a police officer but who don't yet have the necessary entry qualifications, such as A levels or BTECs.
To achieve the Level 3 Certificate in Knowledge of Policing learners must complete the 10 mandatory units. Total Qualification Time (TQT) is the total amount of time, in hours, expected to be spent by a Learner to achieve a qualification.
TQT and QLH = 386 hours total. Which equates to 9.6 weeks guided and self learning modules.
So, the minimum requirement is basically an NVQ - and that explains everything.
So basically the inspector will go ahead and do what he wants and let the CPS sort it out. In all of this the inspector must know what you were their to do.
It’s a bit of a piss take when these fools demand you educate and assist them in the performance of their duty yet we the public have no obligation to assist them if they don’t mind the payout when they get it wrong.
They are potentially endangering an aircraft in flight by talking to the pilot, because they haven’t got the patience or time to wait, why is there no senior more knowledgeable police officer available to the everyday plods to advise them.
I think it would be very different if the payouts came out of their pension pots rather than the council tax payers pot.
Exactly!
I think it's scary that you have people who finish (or sometimes not finish) high-school with all sorts of grades, and are able to just walk to a police recruitment centre, grab 20 weeks of police training and go out there nabbing people based on what they think they know, making you have to go through tons of red tape with courts ect. Quota hiring has killed this country's police force. Educated police? There simply is none anymore.
@@Phinkinfurmiself lt would certainly make them behave themselves.
We would like you to educate us on drone law so that we can spot any flaws in your behaviour. Always easier for the police if people incriminate themselves.
So he worked out you wanted a reaction (but tried to make it sound like you wanted a bad one) and yet he still came out and gave his bad reaction and refused to stop giving his reaction. He then made it sound like he was forced into giving a reaction when all he had to do was leave you alone or be polite.....
The only reactions you see in audit videos are the ones where people come up to the auditor instead of walking away.
they are like pawlow dogs in pig form, they cant help themselves.
It's the Met. ...something to do with IQ levels, apparently.
@@jimmyccam Yes, they don’t have a clue what an IQ is.
@@jimmyccam
Any I.Q. above 60 and you need a licence ☺️
Or even call the police go to person on drones if they have one and preferably before they interferred with the auditor.
Wow...an Inspector who doesn't understand the basic tenet of English law of reasonable articulate suspicion. He just couldn't grasp the idea that you have to have a crime
It's not surprising he doesn't understand it because "Reasonable Articulable Suspicion" is a legal test in American law, not English. The English equivalent is "Reasonable Grounds", in other words what a reasonable person might believe if they had the same facts that a police officer did. This is a higher test than mere suspicion. In this case the officer suspected an offence but had no reasonable grounds to effect a search to prove it as PttP correctly pointed out.
He definitely had reasonable grounds that PTTP was wasting working people's time to make money on you tube !
@@jannenreuben7398 well put m8!
@@tttt4029 still he could not let it go, which makes pttps work useful no matter what you think of his motives.
@@tttt4029 The blackshirted scum wasted our time and our money because of their imbecile incompetence. They should be in prison for wasting our money and lying.
Don't want you seeing them doing dodgy stuff in the yard. Inspector has a huge ego and has hurt feelings that he is looking weak in front of his underlings. Dangerous person. Met rightly in Special Measures.
But what will that achieve?
The met needs a total clean out.
Scorched earth policy and start again.
Seeing their so called authority evaporate because a member of the public knows his Lawful rights. Never gets old. Awesome PTTP Cheers👍
Plods ego was really starting to eat him up to the point he was trying to find ANY reason to try and get your ID
They have to earn that hate... they can't help themselves 😂
@Chris WIlson - the ego was definitely showing there. From the hundreds of videos I've seen over past 6 years I think about 90% of officers, if not more, cannot handle anyone who questions what the police assert without going into stubborn child mode. The lengths that those 'officers' went to to denigrate and try to incriminate PTTP so their ego's weren't bruised was astounding.
He should do what, Jeff Gray, does and carry those magnetic fridge letters of a "I" and "D" ☺️
Yep, it’s always about power and control with the blue cowards.
@@realfreedomofspeechoriginal it’s who they are. Just petulant children.
Fantastic composure from PTTP when being questioned by the tyrants. One of the best UK auditors.
This is NOT policing it's OPRESSION.
‘Oppression’
brith cops are NAZIS of the 21st century
@@stanmonzon5788 That too,🥴 lol
@@andreleboncitoyen shut up Andre. Go and have a lie down. Have you got any idea what the Nazis actually did?
Don't oppress me.......oh shut up you bloody peasant............see the violence inherent in the system .......help help im being oppressed
Well done PTTP - especially for pronouncing Practicable properly.
You would think that with all the knife crime going on in London, those 3 officers would not be fussing around a guy with a small drone.The new intro is really good to.
Correct! Knife crime, illegal moped gangs, drugs widely and easily available on the streets, but the Met. (under special measures) are so understaffed they do not respond to any burglaries, even if the offender is still on the premises. However they have multiple officers and constables hanging around in police stations, with time enough to engage on a fools errand. PTTP v Met. Police? What do you reckon? I know where my money is!🤣
That would be why they are.
Nine times out of ten if they can burn a few minutes or hours of their shift haranguing someone who isn't a threat to them they'll do that rather than put that attention somewhere that might put them in harm's way.
🥈
Police take talking bollocks to a whole new level
As I am aware, no person is allowed to interfere with a flyer of a drone, model aircraft etc ?
Remarkable that no police seem capable of doing a little reading now and then at night to cover common encounters with the public. You'd think they would have the professional pride to improve themselves by doing so. Apparently not.
This inspector is bull-shit on legs. He proposes that he can report and arrest anyone for any crime on the books to collect evidence because he currently can't prove he or she has or hasn't done it. Needs retraining on half pay for three weeks to teach him a lesson.
@1977ajax - yes 'bull-shit on legs' - a perfect description. By no means a one off, there's a large percentage of them that fit that description too.
He needs sacking the butt stops with him so if he’s bent then so the rest become because there robots
They should be trained at work but of ourse nobody knows anything at the police station either.
I don't think this inspector should be re-trained, he should just be fired.
@@chrisbevis7725 worse, he is the one training others ...
Well done, it’s always good to hear your articulate interactions.
The only offence being committed is by the sausages, its not you making them look stupid they do it to themselves because they can not give the public the respect they deserve because of their over inflated egos. They are ridiculous and it starts at the top with inspectors like this one who will twist the law to fit his own ends, this allow's PCs like the murderer of Sarah Evans to do as they please. Another great video and thank you for your hard work.
Gosh, I love watching this. Whatever the officers say PTTP has a great answer for them each and every time. A well educated man.
Worst crime you can commit is to NOT ALLOW these PUBLIC EMPLOYEES to abuse your rights witb their paranoia. I am annoyed as i was enjoying the night flights view until the COERCIVE, CONTROLLING AND INTIMIDATING BEHAVIOUR STARTED.
Go to Court and let them justify on Oath (perjury)the above crime.
32:10 No section 24 of PACE doesn't apply. To make an arrest without a warrant and he needs reasonable articulatable and objective suspicion that a crime is about to occur or has occurred. He won't have that if he can't see the drone.
The inspector literally flung the kitchen sink into your face
Figuratively.
Not literally.
I hope the police are disbanded and we get the service we deserve and pay for.
The inspector wouldn't waste his time submitting a full file to the CPS knowing full well it would be turned down. He's just playing with words and you trying to prove he knows more. It's ego driven.
31:25 The inspector is the one who needs to think things through a bit further after spouting a whole serious of threats. Yes it is a threat when he states that he will make a report that will go to the CPS and through the legal system. The bit he needs to think about is how is going to start the process when he has no ID. And he can't get the ID without acting unlawfully. Mic Drop.
Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021, Schedule 9 part 2. The reasonable grounds being that the drone has a camera and if it does then a registration is required. Now he can require the ID of the person or persons who are or were the UAS operator for the flight, or the person or persons who made the unmanned aircraft available for use.
@@PINACI there's no reasonable suspicion that he doesn't have an operators ID. That's the offence. Refusal to give your operators ID isn't enough suspicion to warrant an arrest. If, however, they saw the drone come down and the operators ID wasn't visible, then that WOULD be reasonable suspicion, but since that didn't happen, and since it did have an operators ID, there's no reasonable suspicion that he has committed a crime
@@PINACI The constable can request the identity of the operator, but they don't need the operator ID. To be able to see the operator ID they need to use schedule 9, paragraph 3 of the ANO 2021. It is being pedantic, but it's like s163 of the RTA 1988 doesn't authorise getting identity, just the stopping. s164 is the section to use for that.
But since nearly all constables (and inspectors) are clueless about the law if they come across a well versed individual they can't use the fact that the identity isn't given the moment it's asked for without quoting the relevant section against the individual.
Police like to be pedantic and picky because it makes them feel better. But the same pedanticness can be used against them to highlight that they don't know the laws they are trying to enforce. If police used their discretion more and performed more professionally rather than only pick on drone users who fly over police stations or over property owned or used by a snowflake then there wouldn't be any need to be pedantic. On either side.
It does seem like the Inspector is in a catch 22 and he knows it.....and he's not happy about it. He wants the ID but knows he can't get it. So he claims that not producing the ID is reason enough for the pilot to be held on suspicion of not having the ID. The same ID he has no right to see.
@@greenpoisonivyy A PC doesn't need suspicion that it hasn't got an operator ID, he only needs suspicion that it needs one. Read the legislation.
Excellent part 1. Wow that inspector is throwing everything at you lol.
Literally flung the kitchen sink into his face
He just threw the same thing repeatedly. PTTP just kept swatting everything back at him, as casual as you like.
Very hard to make out the audio. Would be great if you had a mic that clips on to your clothing
Cops really need to learn to leave their egos at home. I wonder how it wouldve gone if they didnt know you were recording.
Great content as always PTTP. Can't wait for part2 👀🍿🍿. P.S Love your intro 👍❤. Stay safe out there bro.👊👊
You should have told him to look up the section that says "it is an offence to interrupt the operator ........"
16:45 Correct PttP. The act of flying the drone and filming is different to the act of publishing or sharing or using the footage. The act itself is never unlawful if done within regulations. It the use that the footage is put to that matters. But as you say, they have to find that out themselves and no one is obliged to help them find that out.
no words for special measures Met police or any other force, But once again PTTP top class schooling, eagerly awaiting part 2
'I'm a copper, I'm ignorant and loud and I will try to get you for bleeding SOMETHING' !
You would hope that if you asked a police officer why they joined the force they would say to uphold the law and protect the public but we all know why they joined….it’s because of the power, they’ve had something done to them in the past and this is their way of dealing with the feeling of being inadequate.
@@Crashawsome that's a false equivalence fallacy and you come across ad a right plonker.
@@Crashawsome so you know my qualifications and where I work…..you must be a chief detective then, no wonder this has upset you.
If they say 'uphold the law' I would argue that's a red flag right there. All laws? Even one's you don't agree with? Unjust laws? Why would you uphold an unjust law? Why would you uphold a law you don't agree with? Is there any point at which you would resign due to level of unjustness of a law?
1st class analysis.
@@Crashawsome i smell 🐷
Drone footage taken at night, fantastic. Please edit a bit of footage of your landing into part 2. Thought the female pc was pretty good, certainly an example to the others, first straight apology for not advising body cam recording I have heard on your channel. Don't forget that the PCs were not uninvolved in the eyes of the CAA when they approached and talked with you. Looking forward to part 2.
I'm sure the inspector could indeed have used his tenuous [flawed] logic to report you, but as he could prove no reasonable suspicion whatsoever (other than by virtue of his ignorance), it would be very easy to make a case for any report to have been done either a) maliciously, or b) acting beyond his powers. Any associated arrest/detention to obtain your details would surely therefore have been illegal. Neither would help his career or public relations. Well done for politely refusing to engage in that way rather than giving too much away or trying to elicit negative responses as some so called "auditors" do. This is exactly how it should be done.
section 26
Very hard to hear what everyone is saying in the first part, had to put my headphones on. 😁 The coppers came around to misinterpret the law, as usual. I have to say you're getting better and better as you go along. Outstanding work.
@@thetruth9210 You would expect them to tell you that, but it's more convenient for them not to tell you.
Excellent , You need to start charging these cops, for the on job training. 💲
Copper sounds like he should've had a speaking role in Hot Fuzz!!!
Carrot muncher
Yarrrrppp
@@donmacrae3855 Naaarp!!!
how flabbergasted they are when you just agree to do things you are legally obliged to lol
Wow the police dont actually know what reasonable suspicion is they seem to think 'because i think so' is enough, any crap lawyer would wipe the floor with them.
Love the new intro, noice 👍
Cop: "I don't 100% know things" that's a massive exaggeration of his abilities. How many Acton cops does it take to read drone regulations? More than 3, obviously.
You should wear a warning "police officers approaching me are dumber than they appear in the mirror"
He's not "potentially investigating an offence" he's "investigating a potential offence". Jeez - if I lived there I'd have to spend all my time teaching them how to speak properly.
Thanks man!
You can always tell a Metropolitan Police Constable, but you can't tell him much!
@@rickc8865 oh diddums. Did the nasty man make you look stupid on TH-cam.
Well why don't you learn the law, stupid, instead of guessing and infringing on people's rights.
Only people that complain about cameras are people with something to hide
@@rickc8865 oh, losing the argument so run away. Poor sad man-child. I'm sure to have a happier festive period than you. After all, I don't mind being photographed, photographers don't anger me, and unlike you I won't be worried about being caught
🥇
By far the best U.K. auditor keep up the good work love your stuff.
Focus Pocus is pretty darn good too.
It's a wonder he didn't stomp his feet saying "but I WANT it!" like a toddler.
Why won't you help me try to abuse my authority and your rights 🤔
4:35 Good job you checked the sign and say the PSPO notice. But I doubt that anyone else knows about it Just putting a notice on a sign doesn't mean that people will read it. There is an effect known as sign blindness caused by too many signs. Too many and people don't read them or even notice when new ones have been put up.
I've just passed my driving test and have always struggled with roundabouts, the drone footage was very helpful. Cheers!
In addition, at 12:46 a motorbike almost crashes into a car (right hand side). The footage would have actually been extremely beneficial if there was a serious accident.
When you’ve spent a career thinking reasonable suspicion is “wondering” about stuff you’d like to know it would take a chisel to hack through the concrete between the ears of that idiocy.
Under section 163 of the Road Traffic Act, police can stop any vehicle without grounds and demand details... but this applies only to "mechanically propelled vehicles on a road'. No such legislation exists for drone pilots hence reasonable grounds are required. The inspector compares apples and oranges here. Does he do this on purpose or is it just incompetence?
Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021, Schedule 9 part 2. The reasonable grounds being that the drone has a camera and if it does then a registration is required.
@@PINACI Sure, a Mavic Mini needs an operator ID. No one debates that, but that's not how reasonable grounds work. Police can't search you for weapons just because you have pockets.
@@agargul All a constable needs is 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. If you tell him your drone has a camera then he now has grounds to suspect that your drone needs an operator registration.
@@PINACI No, in this case the PC would need reasonable grounds that the operator ID is missing from the drone.
@@agargul lol, No he doesn't. Where in the legislation does it say a PC needs reasonable grounds that the operator ID is missing from the drone ? (( "has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a relevant registration requirement is or was applicable" )) And if it has a camera then it's applicable !
Meanwhile, nearby, thugs will be terrorising a neighbourhood while the police pursue a theoretical discussion with a drone owner.
There not Taft
Well played "Power To The Proletariat". You was on the ball tonight, can't wait for part 2.
Nip and tuck whether the inspector has him arrested. Nail biting stuff this...
Looking forward to them showing themselves up some more in part 2 🤣🤣.
Another great video, thank you sir!
This Inspector will do anything to get his way, even if it means breaking the law. This is a dangerous man driven by ego.
Wear a just stop oil t shirt and flash it! They'll love you up.
I was watching another video from a UK auditor and someone in the chat mentioned something interesting. Apparently some of the top brass weren't too happy with that memo going out so now their way of combating auditors is to try and change the narrative to make it seem like it's abnormal to film the police or that the person filming could have some kind of mental health issue, thus allowing them to abuse other sections to search, detain or intimidate members of public filming police. I've definitely noticed it more lately in videos of officers mentioning how abnormal it is to be filming a police station.
That's an old tactic. Asking people if they're alright or if they need help (under the false assumption of a mental health issue) has been occurring for years.
I didn't realise victims walked about with signs on identifying that they're a victim... Yes it's awful... But it's only these cops telling other people... Otherwise we wouldn't know.
Like you could determine the difference between 250 grams and 350 grams at night 80ft up ☺️
Can't wait for PT 2
Are we to assume that everyone standing outside a police station smoking is a SA victim and might get triggered by a drone? In this case a drone flying at night, well above their heads, so high up they can't see or hear it?
27:19 Police do need reasonable suspicion that an offence has been committed. And saying that the suspicion has been raised because the drone is flying over the police station is not the a valid reason to use to assume that the drone doesn't have an operator ID. It's totally disconnected. The inspector is spouting words in the hope that his authoritah will be bowed down to. Well news for you inspector, it doesn't. Proper suspicion that a drone doesn't have an operator ID could only be raised if PttP hadn't mentioned all the points about the drone being sub 250g. And since the inspector didn't hear that it has no grounds whatsoever.
It's gone over my head.He said. Freudian slip. 14.21
Props to you for holding your ground. One of your best videos.
Inspector EGO is having a real hard time with the fact that you know the law better than him and can articulate it with more clarity and authority... can't wait for part 2, hurry up. Totally owned the other clowns lol
Great intro - excellent content - brilliant !
He has to be one of the best guys on here. 10/10 for keeping so calm
25:10 haha! love it. Not very PC of our PC is it?! Gender stereotyping tut tut tut. Proper took the wind out of his sails that 😂
when you have intelligence like yourself and have them fumbling. seems like they'll make up any crap to get you or intimidate with non sensical hypothetical nonsense fair play to you 👏
So Plod has decided the Official CAA Drone rules allow PTTP “ Wriggle Room “ in his explanation to him . :(
'Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse'....unless you are a member of this particular Organisation... Their Ignorance is well known and widespread because their Training is so, Poor.....intentionally, some would say. Well done you in Educating these two Organisation members.
It's obvious these Cops prefer to bother members of the public and waste their time than sort out the high crime levels in Acton. That Inspector is on an ego trip.
Under sections 163 and 164 of the Road Traffic Act. You can be stopped for no particular reason by a police constable and required to provide evidence of your lawful entitlement to operate the motor vehicle that you are operating. There are no similar requirements to provide details for operating a bicycle, baby buggy, rollerskates, skateboard or drone.
You forgot part 165
Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021, Schedule 9 part 2. The reasonable grounds being that the drone has a camera and if it does then a registration is required.
@@PINACI Yes, a registration is indeed required, but it does not authorise the police to order the operator to land and show the operator ID on a whim like they can to check a driving licence.
The police can stop me for no reason to check my driving licence, but they have to have reasonable suspicion to be able to breathalyse me, or search my vehicle.
@@PINACI That is correct. That's the whole point of the Legislation, is that it now gives the Police some Powers as set out in that Paragraph. They can indeed insist on you landing the aircraft in order to make sure it has (in this case) a relevant Operator ID. Not sure they can ID you from it though (assuming the person piloting is also the Operator).
@@smithbrownjones Actually they can't insist you land the drone unless they have reasonable ground that you are or have been committing an offence as per Schedule 8, part 1 of the Air Traffic Management and Unmanned Aircraft Act 2021.
It's staggering that an inspector is willing to use the fact that you will not give him information that you do not legally have to give him, as the grounds to detain you to get that very same information from you!!!
To paraphrase the Inspector; "I can report you for being guilty of an offense that I have no reasonable grounds to suspect has occurred and then it will be up to you to prove you are innocent".
To paraphrase the Inspector more concisely; "You are guilty until proven innocent because, you know, I say so".
If you start reviewing the song and giving opinions on it then it is covered by fair use
I hope auditors show a jury of footage and let them decide hpw to deal with tyrants id is becoming a drug to them.
The logic of the Inspector is deeply worrying,. No wonder the Met are in total disarray with leaders like him around
Should’ve told him he was breaking the law for persistently interrupting a pilot during a flight…
I love how much the police struggle to understand something even as they're reading it and being told by PTTP.
You can't teach those that do not wish to know. OR, you can't teach stupid.
They should be investigating the met police see how many criminals they .
I’ve said it many times! No wounder crime is up everywhere when these clowns stop someone doing a legal activity rather than catching criminals 😅😅😅
How right you are.👌
@@thetruth9210 if people out in the real world don’t know how bad it is for policing in the UK (2022) just watch Channel 4 Dispatches from last night frightening how many new recruits have a criminal record WOW!!!!
Catching real criminals may involve strenuous effort and some danger,and the biggest draw back for them, there'll be no fine attached to most crime, just non profit jail time.
We need some horse-back auditors.
The police would hate people going around on horseback!
Unusual to see an Irish bloke join the British Police force.
I heard the minimum education standard to join the police is just a C or above in English….. nothing else….. every time I watch an interaction with an inspector I’m reminded of this.
He does have reasonable grounds for suspicion that you are outwitting him . Give him credit 🤣