Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry? Have I missed something? Where have I said anything personal or distorted against you?


If you mean PRs posts they were, perhaps, a little defensive, but they weren't personal against you. I read them as simply the frustration of someone who is tired of being singled out and patronised for being childless. But I suppose we all read from our own perspective, don't we.

An initial subjective reaction often gives way to a more objective view after due consideration. It is sometimes wise not to act on the knee-jerk reaction. I experienced this transition during the wheelie bin stabbing thread and was accused of appearing inconsistent.

I don't want to seem like I'm also jumping on your original post jenren, as you've copped it a bit, but it's worth pointing out one fallacy:


including my right to not have my child's image on someone's "photography" webpage


UK law says that you have no rights over your, or your child's, image if it is taken in a public place. Photographers are free to use their photographs of people taken in public places as they wish - including for commercial gain.


There is no legal restriction on photography in public places, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place.

Erm... I'm not too sure it's others that are making it more personal than you are jenren. No no I'm not jumping on the bandwagon with the others who you feel are trying to personall attack you. No really I'm not. I just dont see why the feeling of this thread has picked up tension.


:-S

Sorry annaj, I didn't mean you. There just seemed to be a run of threads by several people that took a definite "f*&k you jenren!" tone. I was childless for a very long time, but it never occurred to me that I could or should really understand what it felt like. I didn't feel patronized, it just is what it is. I guess because I have experience on both sides (which actually is what perspective is) I forget to clarify that I understand and can consider both sides. Didn't feel that here today.

Loz Wrote:

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


There is no legal restriction on photography in public places, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place.


But I think this is changing under counter terrorism laws which is, at least on some occasions, used incorrectly to stop perfectly innocent photography of trains, planes, ships, street scenes, fairs, etc etc.


I'm tempted to go along Whitehall and take a photo of the police at entrance to Downing Street - I fear that I'd be at least cautioned if I did so.

Oh boy, this certainly has become a bit, odd? No tension intended.


I don't believe in laws against taking pictures either. I spent years on amateur photography and loved it. But even then I had the sense to approach children differently. I absolutely support any photographer's right to public visual interest. What I was trying to say (badly, agreed ) is that if he was doing nothing wrong than perhaps sneaking (maybe? juries still out on that one) photos of individual children in a park setting is bound to raise a few eyebrows, especially with parents, who, admittedly ,spend every minute of our lives with a nervous twitch). If I was sitting by myself and a stranger walked up to me and discreetly took a photo I'd feel kind of the same way (without the 'get away from my child, creep! thing we tend to do. Yes I do get it :)

going back to the original post the best course of action if you are suspicious of someone talking photos of you or your children is to take a photo of them - if they are just innocently taking pictures in a public place then they won't mind you doing the same.

i put a thread on this last year while in dulwich park this man done the same thing but by the time i questioned the ladys who was sitting with thier childern he had dissapeared.

Sorry to say but taking pictures of childern in public without parents permission is not acceptable and as this man is known if i see him i know what i am going to do if he tries to take a photo of my child

No my lurker comment wasn't aimed at you or anyone else on the forum. I'm also relatively new to the forum and East Dulwich, welcome. I was just adding to Loz's joke comment about staying indoors by saying the internet is also a potentially dangerous place - although i obviously failed. I think taking a photo can be effective. My mate has this sort of stalker and I happened to be with her one time when he appeared and commenced following her round lots of shops. I took a photo of him really obviously and he then left. She didn't see him for a few months (very unusual for him) but sadly he reappeared a couple of weeks ago. She also had a photo to show the police, which she did.

Ban all photography in public places!

Ban all cameras in public places!

Ban all old men in public places!



Ban public places.

Ban public events.



I wonder



Whilst


?They walked him home and told him not to go back to the festival.?


What crimes were being committed?


Maybe the crime of dressing kids like teenagers?


Dressing children MJ style ?masks etc? maybe the only solution.



I can see a fortune to be made out of such clothing would do a cracking business on LL.



The kid mask shops anyone.



Would that be ironic?

and going back to the OP....rather than the hysteria of ban all photos in public/defend photography to the death


"The man may have been innocently taking photos however I am confused why he wouldn't look through the lens and take them. Why would he hold a camera by his knee, press the button and then walk quickly away."


Is the camera by the knee and the run away a new reportage technique?

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

    • “What do councils spend all the money on?” Is, in my view, one of the most profoundly emblematic of our times  we go about our lives, backed up by councils and governments and complain they aren’t needed  reform win elections based on “we’re gonna go in and slash all the waste!” Only to later admit there effectively isn’t any oh and by the way we need to increase council tax   Now all we have to offer is racism and ineptitude sorry about that  https://www.gbnews.com/money/reform-elon-musk-doge-failed-savings So where does the money go? On a multitude of services - but the increasingly aged population and the care provision required is a large part of it  the government could give councils more money to avoid council tax rises  - but the we would have to pay more in jewels taxation  and as a country we tend to pay less than other similar countries  so we end up with an expensive mend and make do approach  I don’t see any political parties offering a solution   Starmer is obviously lacking in many areas but he is the result of a hostile media and a reluctant population willing to hear truths  (wait until we hear how much we will need to increase defence spending by in the coming years) If a party stopped pretending all the money was wasted but published a list of costs, projections and proposals that wasn’t gutted to suit the landscape of needing to not bemonstered by the press or deemed too expensive by voters I would be very interested      can’t see that happening tho  (also worth reminding ourselves of all the brexiters who said things like “I don’t care how much it costs   I don’t care if I lose my job  it’s about taking back control!” And yet now we find them complaining about increasing costs. As they always will complain about everything  because it’s always someone else’s fault)   
    • I wouldn't be going all the way to Dobbies  just to take flowerpots! 😀 It's a very good garden centre with a wide range of well kept  plants and helpful staff, at least it was on the only occasion I've visited it, last year!
    • Why do Councils need more funding? What are they spending our money on, how efficiently are they running? are they performing an adequate service as is? Are they viewing the public with contempt, that we will continually foot larger bills to cover all and any costs? Do our counsellors do their best, for us? why are they adding this on to the residents, on top of tax already paid? Council tax is not insubstantial. The service provided is not great. I do not believe they use our money effectively.  Our CT Bill is £50 a week.  
    • Jesse Jackson, US civil rights activist, 84
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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