Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So was mine, and at least I had exactly the same situation, but changed it to a child for added effect. You invented an entirely new scenario.


You cannot go around photographing people's genitals without their consent, whatever the situation. As you say, you either accept the law or you don't, you can't pick and choose what is legal and what isn't.

The OP was photographing an act of law breaking. The OP was not setting out to photograph genitals. The display of genitals was an act of that law breaking. That's how the law would see it. When you break the law you lose the right to consent to reasonable acts to catch you committing that crime. In the absence of a law enforcer (i.e. police) use of photography and CCTV is perfectly reasonable.


It's blatently clear to all why the OP was offended and why the OP took that picture. To suggest otherwise is nonsense. Equally, to challenge the right to confront those behaving in an unlawful way is also nonsense.


I do think location is key here. We are not talking about some discreet alley in the dead of night. We are talking about an open space, next to a children's playground, a busy throughfare for pedestrians, and ironically the wall of an open bar/ restaurant that has toilets inside. Put all of that together and I see very little in terms of defense of this guy, and fail to see anything to criticise in the actions of the OP.

Have you been to Charing Cross recently after 8PM


Open air toilets is the new thing, :)




Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Don't know if I read the OP wrong but to me the

> most offensive part is that he apparently chose to

> pee on a piece of street art.

>

> Peeing openly in the street is unarguably

> antisocial. I accept there are mitigating

> circumstances sometimes but it's certainly not

> acceptable social behaviour or people would do it

> totally openly, wouldn't they. If a man walked up

> to the entrance of Sainsbury's on a Saturday

> morning and casually peed against the glass he'd

> be arrested before he'd zipped his trousers up. It

> seems that as long as a man makes a half-hearted

> attempt to conceal what he's doing then some

> people think it's OK, which is a bit strange when

> you think about it.

Well here's the list if you're caught out and don't want to buy a half in the pub or a coffee in Nero's.


http://www.southwark.gov.uk/a_to_z/service/405/public_toilets


So as a society we get what we deserve maybe.



PokerTime Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The OP was photographing an act of law breaking.

> The OP was not setting out to photograph genitals.

> The display of genitals was an act of that law

> breaking. That's how the law would see it. When

> you break the law you lose the right to consent to

> reasonable acts to catch you committing that

> crime. In the absence of a law enforcer (i.e.

> police) use of photography and CCTV is perfectly

> reasonable.

>

> It's blatently clear to all why the OP was

> offended and why the OP took that picture. To

> suggest otherwise is nonsense. Equally, to

> challenge the right to confront those behaving in

> an unlawful way is also nonsense.

>

> I do think location is key here. We are not

> talking about some discreet alley in the dead of

> night. We are talking about an open space, next to

> a children's playground, a busy throughfare for

> pedestrians, and ironically the wall of an open

> bar/ restaurant that has toilets inside. Put all

> of that together and I see very little in terms of

> defense of this guy, and fail to see anything to

> criticise in the actions of the OP.

'Having asked to use the pubs toilet and they declined i had little option with my bladder problem but to go outside. There seemed little cover in the area so used a wall and was startled by someone shouting at me and taking pictures. I tried to laugh it off to show that i wasnt dangerous or intimidating, shook myself dry and then just walked away to avoid confrontation'.

Actually I've known a few people who stopped going out when they had

issues such as this or if they did planned every movement around the

availability of a WC. You don't even think about it if you don't.


It's worse if you have a stoma or such.


mako Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 'Having asked to use the pubs toilet and they

> declined i had little option with my bladder

> problem but to go outside. There seemed little

> cover in the area so used a wall and was startled

> by someone shouting at me and taking pictures. I

> tried to laugh it off to show that i wasnt

> dangerous or intimidating, shook myself dry and

> then just walked away to avoid confrontation'.

adonirum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> sean dillion Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Am taking bets on our many pages we get on

> this,l

> > say 8 do l hear a 9?

>

> Nearly there Sean was a good guess

>

> Despair not, Steveo, should stop soon.


Thank you kind sir/lady

Lilliers HQ, 1914


...We all waited about in the lane outside the chateau. There were perhaps two or three hundred of us and we made a large crowd. Whilst standing about, a French courting couple came down the lane arm in arm. They were talking one with the other and walked past us on their way to the village. When they had got about fifty yards past us, the chap stopped and passed water in the gutter, his girl still having her arm through his and quite unconcerned, was chatting away to him.


This of course, the men could not help noticing and they acted in different ways. Some turned away their heads, others roared with laughter, while others called out to the couple that they ought to be ashamed of themselves. The couple, who took not much notice of any of it, perhaps wondered what it was all about for the French sense of decency was far different from out own.


Extract from "Harry's War: a Tommy's experiences in World War One"



Plus ca change

She's a killer qu....::


"you don't. You can't pick and choose what is legal and what isn't."


Sounds reasonable. Know ANYONE who is that holy? You don't knowingly break any laws? None?


Unrelated sidenote. Ivy house is doing well. Many said it wouldn't you know

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> She's a killer qu....::

>

> "you don't. You can't pick and choose what is

> legal and what isn't."

>

> Sounds reasonable. Know ANYONE who is that holy?

> You don't knowingly break any laws? None?

>

> Unrelated sidenote. Ivy house is doing well. Many

> said it wouldn't you know


xxxxxxx


Very naughty, Strafer Jack :))

If they are in a public space you can photograph them without consent


-------------------------------------------------------


> You cannot go around photographing people's

> genitals without their consent, whatever the

> situation. As you say, you either accept the law

> or you don't, you can't pick and choose what is

> legal and what isn't.

dennis Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If they are in a public space you can photograph

> them without consent


You can photograph them, but purposely photographing their genitals is an entirely different offence to simple photographic consent. See all the cases of 'upskirt' offences.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • My understanding is the "free event" is 100% Gala, nothing to do with the council. Obviously Gala will still make money from the food & drink that they are trying to coerce punters into buying on their social media posts. Their costs will be negligible due to already having the infrastructure in place for Gala. So Gala are trying to appear community minded by providing this "free event", but the real goal is to set a precedent for a fourth day's festival - which surely no one could possibly object to?!? - in preparation for applying (again) for two three-day festivals spread over two weekends. It's only another two days, right, and the site & equipment is already there, so why would anyone object?!? More money for the council, much more money for Gala, win-win right? But yet another week of our park taken away from us, too, and another 18,000 people trampling & littering the park, and another week of disturbance for the native birds & wildlife...
    • Meson Don Felipe on The Cut was my go to place for many years. Though it's now many years since I was there. 10-15 minute walk from the Tate. If you go can you tell me what it's like nowadays?
    • Doubt you would have got much change out of £150.00 for battery and certainly having forked out for it, best to use your car. I recently sold  my car via webuyanycar.com - very pleasant experience & was roughly what I was expecting. Pop your bangers reg jnto their website to get an idea of price - they do send e mails once a fortnight/month just as an aid for you. Easy enough to delete - don’t even have to read valuation. They literally buy any car - if you can’t get it to them, they will charge you to get it there or recommend a co that will do it for you. Must say, mine was a 2014 reg and whilst a bit suspicious, paid extra to get money into my account as needed it for next car but was assured funds had I not gone down route I took would be in my account within 5 days. I now live in the country - every time I have been back to Dulwich and surrounding area, normally get a fine for driving at wrong time or parking at  wrong time so if I drive now, park in West or East Dulwich and do everything else by public transport and walking.  Were I still to be living in ED then before I left was pondering this very issue but since I have been back regularly for health reason I no longer drive but take the train and then buses, walk or Uber. Much cheaper than running a car and had I stayed, that would have been the course I would have taken. I don’t go out everyday, have an allotment or job to go to or family so in my case, would be cheaper not to have a car.  Was truely shocked   at the cost of second hand cars…..but where I now live only has a smattering of buses so no choice but to have wheels to get from A to B etc.          
    • If you don't use the car often then suggest disconnect the battery between use by undoing the earth (negative / minus sign) cable from the battery and the battery will then last longer between use. Remember, central locking, alarm, clock, etc won't work with battery disconnected and wit ours I have to lock the doors with central locking before disconnecting battery as only have key on one door (leave bonnet open before locking doors). Hope this helps  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...