Concerned mum wants law changed

Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
Not sure if this has already been posted. But a news story goes on to say, a mum wants the law changed, to protect the most vulnerable in society. This was after a group of photographers were spotted taking photos of her daughter, and with a zoom lens too. It was done sneakily she goes on to say.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/lifestyle...at-shopping-centre/ar-BBZDhSS?ocid=spartanntp

As I said, not sure if anyone else has spotted it, and posted it.

I wonder what law she wants bringing in, no photography of children, or not done sneakily, with a zoom lens? This was in Scotland.
 
Messages
9,041
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
#2
Advanced paranoia , has the danger of anyone with a tele lens being branded a paedo . I wonder what these photographers were actually taking .
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#3
Advanced paranoia , has the danger of anyone with a tele lens being branded a paedo . I wonder what these photographers were actually taking .
A member of the public was supposed to have told the mum, that there were photographers taking photos of her daughter. The mum then confronted the photographers, who are then said to have deleted the photos of the child. Maybe the photographers simply thought the child looked photogenic.
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#4
The mum goes on to say, that she was concerned were the photos of her daughter, would end up. It was probably a photography meet up group, who would simply look at the photos they had taken that day, and discuss their photo styles and techniques, and nothing more sinister than that.
 
Messages
3,104
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
#6
Legal it may be but if a group of men did target one particular child to photograph and admitted to doing so (let’s be honest we nor the article have any idea of the actual facts) then that is a little unusual in my eyes.
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
I was thinking to get my old 70mm 300mm film lens back out as well. I do recall when using that big old lens, it certainly got me noticed.
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
Legal it may be but if a group of men did target one particular child to photograph and admitted to doing so (let’s be honest we nor the article have any idea of the actual facts) then that is a little unusual in my eyes.
Maybe she was photogenic, or she had a bright red coat on, or something simple as that.
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#10
The mum goes on to say " I really feel there should be a law to prevent people from doing this. Where is that picture now?"
 

steve_lyt

Bottoms Up!
Messages
1,691
Name
steve lythgoe
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
Two things
1) a paedo would really use a DSLR with a big zoom lens, to get covert pictures of kids, not very likely
2) parents put pictures of their kids on social media , taken on mobile phones , and we know what will happen to them don’t we, no we don’t . Not many people set up there social media properly to prevent , others getting hold of there images

so if a parent or guardian , take an image of there charge, that include another person in the background, they could Be asked to delete it,
there needs to bea bit of something lacking in society common sense, for example , I was doing a flight of my drone at 30m , someone said that I needed permission fo everyone my drone caught on video permission. At 30m I would challenge anyone to identify anybody at that distance. As long as I am not targeting one person . Without there permission.

it just requires common sense
 
Last edited:

Fuji Dave

Terminator
Messages
13,550
Name
Arnie
Edit My Images
No
#12
The only children I have ever taken a photo of were mine, and if I ever get a shot with some one elses child in it then it gets deleted. As for me I don`t take photos of other folks children.
 
Messages
14,098
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
#13
I can't see anywhere where it states 'photographers' - just 'A group of men'. They could have been simply tourists and the child maybe had something about them that stood out. I don't see photography clubs having a meet up in a shopping centre.

Either way, they weren't very sneaky if she spotted them, and there must have been something that caught their eye. Bit of "My precious child" syndrome

'Photographers' wouldn't have deleted the images, they'd have argued their rights for hours even when the police arrived and there'd be a video from their perspective on youtube already :p

I don't tend to take photos of other peoples kids either, only take them of my own when there's nothing else more interesting about :D
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
The only children I have ever taken a photo of were mine, and if I ever get a shot with some one elses child in it then it gets deleted. As for me I don`t take photos of other folks children.
I too only take photos of our own children, and grand children. Sometime other children may be in the shot, but the main focus would have been our own family.
 
Messages
2,035
Edit My Images
No
#15
My take is that it would be inappropriate for anyone to take close ups of an "unknown" child. I would also be slightly offended, or certainly suspicious of anyone else's motives if it happened to be my 7 year old daughter (40 years too late..)

I would assume if its a group of photographers, that they were on a club outing, on a challenge perhaps. They ought to know better IMHO. Also deleting photos is a sham, they are certainly recoverable later...……..

Just my take...:)))
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#16
I can't see anywhere where it states 'photographers' - just 'A group of men'. They could have been simply tourists and the child maybe had something about them that stood out. I don't see photography clubs having a meet up in a shopping centre.

Either way, they weren't very sneaky if she spotted them, and there must have been something that caught their eye. Bit of "My precious child" syndrome

'Photographers' wouldn't have deleted the images, they'd have argued their rights for hours even when the police arrived and there'd be a video from their perspective on youtube already :p

I don't tend to take photos of other peoples kids either, only take them of my own when there's nothing else more interesting about :D
But they were taking photos, so they were photographers. Probably amateur / hobbyists, but surely still photographers.
 
Messages
3,915
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#21
This does not surprise me at all and I think that at some point in the future the law will change.

Photographers will automatically take the side of other photographers, but in the age we live in it's not surprising that parents would have concerns rightly or wrongly.

For what its worth, I don't like it when strangers take photograph's of my kids.

A couple of years ago my kids where in the back garden playing on the trampoline when they came in crying because someone was flying a drone over our back garden. When I went out and had a look the drone was flying very low directly above the trampoline. At first I though it might be just an inexperienced drone user but it happened again a few days later and it was flying so low that it could have potentially been dangerous so we contacted the police.

The police did eventually find out who was using the drone and we never seen it again and they wouldn't tell us who owned it. They just said that it wouldn't happen again and that they hadn't intentionally been videoing our kids. It was made out to us that they where just practising with their new toy.

A few months later a neighbour told us they had a similar thing happen when their kids where out playing, they found out who it was and scarily for us as parents they also knew the person who owned the drone and the drone owner had been convicted for sexual assault on a minor twice previously, one of the minors was his sister, although it had been some years before.

Things escalated a bit after that and there was a few other issues around the area although nothing involving us and eventually the local hoods petrol bombed the guys house and he moved out of the area.
 

Fuji Dave

Terminator
Messages
13,550
Name
Arnie
Edit My Images
No
#22
I bet if the photographer where female the mum wouldn't bat a eye lid
Very true, as imo it seems as though it is the male with the camera gets called everything.
 

Fuji Dave

Terminator
Messages
13,550
Name
Arnie
Edit My Images
No
#25
I’m very conscious about photographing children, and wouldn’t go out my way.. but if a moment occurred right in front of me I might click

This was just on Saturday, I don’t feel bad about posting this child online.

London Street
by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

I bet the father would of loved this image, a great capture of a special moment.
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#27
I’m very conscious about photographing children, and wouldn’t go out my way.. but if a moment occurred right in front of me I might click

This was just on Saturday, I don’t feel bad about posting this child online.

London Street
by Daniel Cook, on Flickr
And a nice fun photo it is too. The adult was having a fun moment, with a child we would assume was his daughter. Had they been walking solemnly hand in hand, would it have been different? Would the adult have lashed out at you? Possibly, but there again would you have taken the photo then?
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#29
This does not surprise me at all and I think that at some point in the future the law will change...
I too think it will change, but just how though? General people photos would be OK, and isolating people maybe not. So this would rule out zooming into sunbect, and possibly close ups. :thinking:
 
Messages
5,592
Edit My Images
No
#30
And a nice fun photo it is too. The adult was having a fun moment, with a child we would assume was his daughter. Had they been walking solemnly hand in hand, would it have been different? Would the adult have lashed out at you? Possibly, but there again would you have taken the photo then?
If the elements aligned, father and daughter walking hand in hand could be a lovely image.

It would always be with Artistic intent, so I should be able to explain myself. But then I also shoot from the hip to avoid this messy stuff.

I did take another photo of a girl running through the arch of modern art install, smiling with her hair backlit - would have been a lovely image if composition were better, needs to meet a standard, so it was just deleted.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#32
If the elements aligned, father and daughter walking hand in hand could be a lovely image.

It would always be with Artistic intent, so I should be able to explain myself. But then I also shoot from the hip to avoid this messy stuff.
I have also shot from the hip, but if you get spotted, it could be seen as taking sneaky photos. As I said, I have done it also, and I know I could be accused of taking sneaky photos.
 
Messages
5,592
Edit My Images
No
#34
I have also shot from the hip, but if you get spotted, it could be seen as taking sneaky photos. As I said, I have done it also, and I know I could be accused of taking sneaky photos.
I listen to music whilst I do it to detach myself from the world, and also take photos whilst moving with high shutter speeds. Without these things I'd struggle with the courage to directly take the photo.
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#35
I listen to music whilst I do it to detach myself from the world, and also take photos whilst moving with high shutter speeds. Without these things I'd struggle with the courage to directly take the photo.
Suppose that would be an ideal shooting style, combined with not making eye contact.
 
Messages
463
Edit My Images
No
#36
I too think it will change, but just how though? General people photos would be OK, and isolating people maybe not. So this would rule out zooming into sunbect, and possibly close ups. :thinking:
Lets hope NOT this isn't North Korea. However we are now living on a mad island where the minority get their way regardless of what the majority want.
 
Messages
3,472
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
#38
Not sure if this has already been posted. But a news story goes on to say, a mum wants the law changed, to protect the most vulnerable in society. This was after a group of photographers were spotted taking photos of her daughter, and with a zoom lens too. It was done sneakily she goes on to say.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/lifestyle...at-shopping-centre/ar-BBZDhSS?ocid=spartanntp

As I said, not sure if anyone else has spotted it, and posted it.

I wonder what law she wants bringing in, no photography of children, or not done sneakily, with a zoom lens? This was in Scotland.
I have to say I don’t understand this. It’s a shopping centre so the child was being filmed constantly by CCTV generally and probably in every shop.
I also don’t know what imagined use the images are supposed to be used for. :mad:
 
OP
OP
jonbeeza
Messages
7,577
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
Yes
#39
I have to say I don’t understand this. It’s a shopping centre so the child was being filmed constantly by CCTV generally and probably in every shop.
I also don’t know what imagined use the images are supposed to be used for. :mad:
But they like to be able to do that, they just don't like us doing it. ;)
 
Messages
22,695
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
#40
I wonder what her issue is. What does she think the pictures are going to be used for and what harm does she think is being done to anyone? Perhaps she wont be able to coherently articulate her fears apart from a general feeling that men with cameras are perverts and she needs to protect her daughter from them.

How she would react if it was a group of women with phones would be interesting and if she'd react differently I'd be annoyed that I can be a part of a group which is perhaps one of the few which society feels justified in targeting, middle aged men with cameras. The reactions I get when I'm by myself are completely different to when I'm with my wife and the conclusion I draw is that some especially in my experience women and some mainly younger males are far too reactionary, judgemental and needlessly confrontational when encountering behavior they don't approve of but if challenged would no doubt not recognise themselves as being reactionary and aggressive.

Anyway. There are aspects of life in the UK that I think would be more understandable in Kabul or somewhere, it's maybe social media hysteria and group think brought into the real world.
 
Top