Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

He IS my son....:)

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

New PortraitPro 12 SALE + 10% OFF code EPZROS814
Overread
Overread  63746 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 1:51 PM

But is it really right that we react with such all sweeping reactions to the whole population when individual cases like that are far more rare than the media might lead us to belive (by intent or accident). And again it shows that the two involved were close before (the article leaves me unsure if it is her child or another persons since it only mentions her as a mother and the child as a 12 year old with no name for protection - however I'm guesing that if it were his mother the article would have had a very different lean and title to it) the incident took place.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
26 Feb 2010 - 1:51 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139395 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 1:58 PM

The security jobsworth's intellectual level was probably below even that which we have come to expect of persons in such positions!

It should be noted, however, that the incident occurred on private property, so the owners of that property are entitled to make up whatever daft rules they please.... including "No photographs of your own children", if they so wish.

It is heartening, though, that this story has been picked up by the media. It is when it becomes so commonplace it is not worth reporting, it will be a real worry!

Overread
Overread  63746 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 2:04 PM

The thing is if the security guard had approached and quoted the no photography allowed rule I would have been on his side and glad that the rule (which is fully allowable on private property) was being applied to someone with a little camera when so often its only applied to someone with a big camera and those with point and shoots/purse cameras and mobile phones get away without any trouble.

TonyBrooks
26 Feb 2010 - 2:59 PM

I was stopped not so long ago and challenged for taking pictures of my Grandaughter
My response to the Guy was how do you fancy having the rest of your meals through a straw!! he then retreated swiftly some people in life are not happy unless their interfereing - unless they can prove that your activities in photographing the chlidren that you know is one of suspicion then tell em to get St***ed or your ram your Manfrotto where the sun don't shine (fully extended)

Hanners
Hanners e2 Member 8875 forum postsHanners vcard Ireland10 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 4:18 PM

but what if it wasn't his child? and if someone was shooting your child would you still be banging on about photographers rights? Just thought I would flip the coin over Wink

Last Modified By Hanners at 26 Feb 2010 - 4:18 PM
Xiaoli
Xiaoli  5661 forum posts South Africa14 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 4:37 PM

To be honest I would MUCH rather that security and other members of the public occasionally err on the side of caution than be oblivious when something is going on! If people were a little more alert and aware and asked questions then just maybe some of the tragic incidents that occur could be prevented.

I would not be too harsh on people asking questions in what appeared to be suspicious circumstances. Personally that is far preferable to NOT doing anything!

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139395 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 5:14 PM

The point is whether this would have happened a few years ago - before paedo-paranoia became a big-seller for the media?

I am inclined to doubt it.

In any event we are told that about 70% of paedophile activity takes place within victims homes and not outside it......

Jestertheclown
26 Feb 2010 - 5:45 PM


Quote: I would not be too harsh on people asking questions in what appeared to be suspicious circumstances. Personally that is far preferable to NOT doing anything!

I think that's very valid.

I don't really know what was said here, none of us do but if the security man approached the father in an appropriate manner then he would probably have got a sensible, civil answer.

There's a danger here that this thread will go the same way as the recent one about Police and photographers in public places where I made exactly the same point; that we don't know what went on and where a member nearly had to reach for the valium, such was his insistence that he knew all about it and I was completely wrong, despite having seen nothing more than the same newspaper report that I'd read.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139395 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 5:51 PM

Oh well, at least security guards know now that if they make a bad call they are likely to be publicly ridiculed........... as in this instance - with a photo of the gent concerned put up on the web!

jimthistle73
26 Feb 2010 - 6:01 PM

FWIW I did my degree in Sunderland (still live nearby) and The Bridges shopping centre has a VERY strict no photography policy - everyone in the photo dept knew there was no point even trying - the wannabes would be on your case within minutes....

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139395 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 6:10 PM

But if they were kids or young teens taking photos/videos of each other on their mobiles, I wonder if the security guards would hesitate?

muzzeyman
muzzeyman  10293 forum posts United Kingdom
26 Feb 2010 - 8:50 PM

Beware! This country is slowly but surely imploding up it's own ar5e!!! There was me thinking we lived in a free society - how wrong am I!

cathal
cathal  9492 forum posts Ireland4 Constructive Critique Points
26 Feb 2010 - 10:58 PM

Anybody remember the Brass Eye comedy that parodied the media's hysterical reporting of paedophile activity? It offended a lot of people, but I think it hit the nail on the head.

Now, paedophile activity is in now way to be condoned, encouraged or ignored. It is a moral outrage, and the perpetrators deserve to have the harshest sentences possible under law. However, what is the population of the UK? Could we agree on 60,000,000 people? Now what percentage of that 60m are paedophiles? Isn't this a total over reaction?

Though I am a staunch supporter of the rights of photographers to take pictures in public places, I will reluctantly accept that inside a shopping centre, when you are on private land, they are within their rights to have a "No Photography" policy, and I can understand the security concerns that behind this. And if they have that, they should enforce it. But playing the paedophile card, that's just ridiculous!

Cathal (who has two kids of his own)

Last Modified By cathal at 26 Feb 2010 - 10:58 PM
monkeygrip
27 Feb 2010 - 1:05 AM

Your initial response to anyone who approches you when you are taking photos of your own kids is to wrap your camera, tripod and any other hard object around the idiots head weather he/her be a security guard or not. The longer we accept the word paedophile to persecute photographers or any parent for that matter the worse it will get.

If this man was taking pictures of any child in any shopping centre or place where people take children what is the problem if the guard looked around he would see at least 5 shops with images of children with similar clothing on massive adverts Gap. Next, Boots to name a few.

There are just as many paedophiles/ sex offenders in society today as there has ever been in our country why now do we create such a stink over cameras.

Dont let brain dead morons rule our country if you can press the shutter on a camera you are already more intelligent than 90% of security guards challenge them ask for the manager let them call the police.

You are the good guy/girl not the other way round.

Stu

monkeygrip
27 Feb 2010 - 1:13 AM

By the way if it is needed to add more weight to my argument I have 2 daughters below the age of 8.

I have a rule with my photo shoots if you dont want me to post the images on my no password website piss off and get your photos done elsewhere .

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.