The naked scanner.
- Thread starter Norcon
- Start date
Anyone seeing those images as provocative/indecent/titillating, needs an immediate injection of common sense, coupled with a trip to Specsavers.
Want to bet?
I was taking a video of my 2 grandchildren at 6 months old in the local swimming baths. There was only one other lad of about 7 or 8 in the water. An attendant came over and asked me to stop. When I asked why he said it was against the law to photograph other people with out their permission. I showed him the video did not show anyone else but he insisted that I delete it. I refused, he threatened me with the police, I called this other chap over and explained the situation. He had no objections and I even showed him the video. The pillock was still insistent so I said go ahead. 10 minutes later 1 PC and 1 WPC turned up. After explaing what was happening they viewed the video said it didn't contain others and there was no need to delete it, however it would be in everyones best interest if I didn't take any more photos.
F**K the PC brigade, if I want to film MY grand kids I will and to hell with anyone who gets in the view finder!
R
RedHerring
Conny, I understand both sides of the discussion. Local Councils (Your representatives) decide the policy in order to protect themselves. They then issue a universal edict to all LA run buildings that are open to the public, "No photographs without prior approval!"
Unfortunately the guy was 'just doing his job'. Had he failed to stop you and another parent had complained (or images had found their way onto the 'net) there would have been an almighty ruckus.
Yes I agree,a bit of leniency, flexibility goes a long way. The police obviously are more capable of interpreting the 'edicts' of the LA in a more flexible way than the attendants.
But it's a waste of time ranting at the attendant, you need to either work within the LA rules (gain prior approval) or work to change 'em. (They are your representatives). And yes I think it's OTT as well.
Unfortunately the guy was 'just doing his job'. Had he failed to stop you and another parent had complained (or images had found their way onto the 'net) there would have been an almighty ruckus.
Yes I agree,a bit of leniency, flexibility goes a long way. The police obviously are more capable of interpreting the 'edicts' of the LA in a more flexible way than the attendants.
But it's a waste of time ranting at the attendant, you need to either work within the LA rules (gain prior approval) or work to change 'em. (They are your representatives). And yes I think it's OTT as well.
When i worked for an insurance approved frame repairer we used to have to take multiple photos of any damaged frames after a break in, we were told that under no circumstances that children could be in any of the pictures as these photos were to be stored on the companies database, we were told to politely ask the customer to remove the kids from the room if there was a chance of them peeking into shot.
This we were told also applies to school sports days, parents who want to take pictures or make a video of their child has to get permission from all the other parents. Crazy world!
This we were told also applies to school sports days, parents who want to take pictures or make a video of their child has to get permission from all the other parents. Crazy world!
R
RedHerring
Sorry guys, but again, I understand the flip side:
When you are running a database and it is possible to contain personal information, you'll be required to register it with the authorities.
All potential personal information has to be declared (and you'll be required to set up procedures for supplying info' on request to appropriate parties). You have to declare why you are collecting the info', how long you intend to keep it, who else might have access to it, etc.
Any info' (and images are info') not registered or that you cannot justify will carry consequences.
When you are running a database and it is possible to contain personal information, you'll be required to register it with the authorities.
All potential personal information has to be declared (and you'll be required to set up procedures for supplying info' on request to appropriate parties). You have to declare why you are collecting the info', how long you intend to keep it, who else might have access to it, etc.
Any info' (and images are info') not registered or that you cannot justify will carry consequences.
RH, yes I agree with you, I can see the 'flip side' also but I had made sure there were no others in the shot and even showed it to this other chap. He said he wouldn't have been bothered if his lad had strayed in to view. As for 'ranting at the attendant,' at no time did I even raise my voice as I feel I get more response when I talk in a calm manner. I know you weren't suggesting that I did rant at him, I just wanted to clarify it.
But I stand by my principles, if I want to film my G/kids then I will and any establishment that forbids it will not get my custom.
Just curious, has anyone ever tried to obtain prior permission to film at a school event or public amenity and what was the outcome?
But I stand by my principles, if I want to film my G/kids then I will and any establishment that forbids it will not get my custom.
Just curious, has anyone ever tried to obtain prior permission to film at a school event or public amenity and what was the outcome?
R
RedHerring
I have been on the 'other side' of requests and there is, you've guessed it, a form for everything.
As long as all parents/guardians have provided signed permission for the images of the children, the LA is cleared of their responsibility of ensuring the 'safety' of the children, as far as images are concerned.
Unfortunately, either the attendant did not know about the requirement, the particular amenity did not provide the appropriate training for that situation or the appropriate documentation, or the attendant thought it easier to prevent the photographing than to adhere to the correct procedure, or he was unable to leave his post in order to comply with procedure, we'll never know.
The difficulty is of course, obtaining that signed permission from the parents of any/all children that might also wander in to shot.
Next time, try picking a quiet time when there are few or no other people likely to wander into shot, (not easy I know) and prepare yourself by discussing it with the manager first and ensure that you have the signed permission of all relevant parties. The manager might have appropriate forms available.
Yes I know, it's a pain. Data protection laws have more flaws than benefits imo. Sign of the times; rushed, topical, popular regulation!
Incidentally, sorry about my assumption re: ranting.
As long as all parents/guardians have provided signed permission for the images of the children, the LA is cleared of their responsibility of ensuring the 'safety' of the children, as far as images are concerned.
Unfortunately, either the attendant did not know about the requirement, the particular amenity did not provide the appropriate training for that situation or the appropriate documentation, or the attendant thought it easier to prevent the photographing than to adhere to the correct procedure, or he was unable to leave his post in order to comply with procedure, we'll never know.
The difficulty is of course, obtaining that signed permission from the parents of any/all children that might also wander in to shot.
Next time, try picking a quiet time when there are few or no other people likely to wander into shot, (not easy I know) and prepare yourself by discussing it with the manager first and ensure that you have the signed permission of all relevant parties. The manager might have appropriate forms available.
Yes I know, it's a pain. Data protection laws have more flaws than benefits imo. Sign of the times; rushed, topical, popular regulation!
Incidentally, sorry about my assumption re: ranting.
Similar threads
