| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/10/2005 10:27:26 PM · #1 |
Tonight here in NYC, there was an interesting story on the news.
Here is the text version: Should Cell Phones Be Banned?
Very interesting. Whats your thought?
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:32:28 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:36:46 PM · #3 |
It's already the law here in Japan and in South Korea that all cell phone cameras make a sound of at least 65 decibels when taking a picture and all manufacturers abide by it. While the police will not spend a lot of time enforcing that law, it can be used to help punish people who are caught taking surreptitious photos of others, especially low-angle shots of women.
To say that this is law is useless because police will not enforce it is not much of an argument. It's the law to have car insurance, but police don't go door-to-door to make sure everyone is insured. They just check for it when an accident takes place and the deterrent of potential punishment forces most people to have it in the first place. At least that's my opinion.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:41:22 PM · #4 |
My camera doesn't make a 65 decibel noise when taking a photograph. Just because it's not a phone how's it any different? That's bull. If they make that a law here in the states (which I already said it's not going to happen) but if they did, I think I'll just quit my job and live on the streets and become psychotic and never shave ever again.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:43:02 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by PhilipDyer:
It's already the law here in Japan and in South Korea that all cell phone cameras make a sound of at least 65 decibels when taking a picture and all manufacturers abide by it. While the police will not spend a lot of time enforcing that law, it can be used to help punish people who are caught taking surreptitious photos of others, especially low-angle shots of women.
To say that this is law is useless because police will not enforce it is not much of an argument. It's the law to have car insurance, but police don't go door-to-door to make sure everyone is insured. They just check for it when an accident takes place and the deterrent of potential punishment forces most people to have it in the first place. At least that's my opinion. |
I've also heard that in some of the European countries I believe that cell phone cameras are banned in anyplace that is concidered to be semi private. You know, locker rooms, public bathrooms and the like. Makes sense to me. If I take my DRebel into a public restroom and point it at a local celeb, it's pretty obvious I'm takin' his picture... If I'm holdin' my phone like I'm checkin' my messages...
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:43:55 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by deapee:
My camera doesn't make a 65 decibel noise when taking a photograph. Just because it's not a phone how's it any different? |
Yeah, but it's pretty obvious that it's a camera and that you're pointing it at someone...
Message edited by author 2005-01-10 22:44:25.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:45:33 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by deapee:
My camera doesn't make a 65 decibel noise when taking a photograph. Just because it's not a phone how's it any different? |
Yeah, but it's pretty obvious that it's a camera and that you're pointing it at someone... |
Not when you have a 500 mm lens (converts to a 800 mm lens when multiplied by the 1.6 factor in 35mm terms) and are pointing it 100 yards away at the cheerleaders practice squad or into someone's house.
If someone wants to take pictures of people when they're not supposed to, it's going to happen.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:45:38 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by deapee:
My camera doesn't make a 65 decibel noise when taking a photograph. Just because it's not a phone how's it any different? That's bull. If they make that a law here in the states (which I already said it's not going to happen) but if they did, I think I'll just quit my job and live on the streets and become psychotic and never shave ever again. |
Well, pointing a camera at someone is very straight forward. It does not need to make a noise. The person would know what your intentions are.
With a cell phone, you have no idea which person has the camera or not. Anyone can hold up a cell phone, and you wouldn't have an idea what they were doing, unless of course you heard the noise.
As far as the law... regardless of its intent, it is rediculous. I can very easily hide a pinhole camera or something and still get the same result.
This will be just like a Jaywalking law. What cop enforces Jaywalking these days?
Its a waste of time.
Message edited by author 2005-01-10 22:46:15.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:49:13 PM · #9 |
Won't happen in Korea.... not with 90% people happily clicking away most of the time..:-)
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:52:26 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by vince31874:
This will be just like a Jaywalking law. What cop enforces Jaywalking these days? |
That's a law that is mostly enforced by the people. If you see someone jaywalking, it's your duty to run them over I say.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2005 10:53:29 PM · #11 |
LOL. Definitely works here in NYC I must say. Never jump in front of a Yellow Cab.
Sometimes I tell tourists that the Yellow Lines in the street are a result of people being run over and dragged by Taxis, because they Jaywalked, and didnt pay attention to traffic rules. ;)
Message edited by author 2005-01-10 22:54:36.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 12:20:47 AM · #12 |
I read an article in Cosmo a few months ago that said to be watchful of other people around you because they had a number of complaints from women stating that people with cell phone cameras were pointing them up their skirts an photographing them without permission and then of course those photos were ending up on the net for all the world to see and then also photos were being taken of peoples credit cards in lines at stores so as people could take their info and spend their money.
I don't know if this is very common or not, but I could see where concern could come up in these situations. |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 12:28:26 AM · #13 |
I must have the cheapest cell phone cameras manufactured, Samsung. If I stood in line and and took a picture of someone holding a credit card, I wouldn't be able to distinguish Visa vs. MC or any other. Determining the numbers would be impossible.
Is there dslr versions of cell phones with micro telephoto lenses? |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 12:31:03 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by garrywhite2:
Is there dslr versions of cell phones with micro telephoto lenses? |
Check at The Spy Store. |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 12:34:11 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by vince31874:
This will be just like a Jaywalking law. What cop enforces Jaywalking these days?
Its a waste of time. |
I thought it was too... till not one, but 2 of my co-workers got jaywalking tickets. One for $35 and the other for $77!
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 12:35:52 AM · #16 |
this is just another case of the mass media making news up to scare the public. Sure they are reporting something true, as I have seen the news stories myself, but they just love to make people scared about ONE thing.
If someone wants your photo they will find a way, if they want to photo some other object, they will find a way.
The spy camera business has been aroud a LONG time and its not going away.
James
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 12:40:26 AM · #17 |
A bloke here in Oz was recently convicted of breaching some law after using his moile phone camera to take photos of topless women at Bondi Beach then posting them on a web site. He was detained after a complaint to a life guard. I'm not sure of the exact charge, but I know that there are no specific laws relating to mobile phone cameras. I have heard that new laws will be drafted soon.
Thommo |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 01:05:43 AM · #18 |
What's next? Banning all forms of eyewear since people can hide cameras in eyeglass frames?.. Come on......
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 01:16:11 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by Bran-O-Rama:
What's next? Banning all forms of eyewear since people can hide cameras in eyeglass frames?.. Come on...... |
What don't you people get? Camera phones are being MASS MARKETED TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC which has as a component sickos and criminals... I don't want some psycho following my kid into the bathroom and taking messed up pics of him and immediately uploading to the internet... You can NOT do that with most cameras.
Yes there are other types of cameras available.... Eyeglass cameras, lipstick cameras that can be taken into the same places as cell cameras, but their NOT BEING MASS MARKETED...
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 01:17:36 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Not when you have a 500 mm lens (converts to a 800 mm lens when multiplied by the 1.6 factor in 35mm terms) |
Not being mass marketed and given away free to the general public just for signing a contract...
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 01:19:42 AM · #21 |
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to see any photographers rights taken away, but there are certain places that cameras don't belong and camera phones are too common and too easy to sneak in. They also don't look like cameras so have the potential to put victims at ease when they should be on guard...
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 01:28:13 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by jab119:
this is just another case of the mass media making news up to scare the public. Sure they are reporting something true, as I have seen the news stories myself, but they just love to make people scared about ONE thing.
If someone wants your photo they will find a way, if they want to photo some other object, they will find a way.
The spy camera business has been aroud a LONG time and its not going away.
James |
The restaurant i work in has 18 cameras - inside and outside, customer and employee areas. They can be moved (rotated, panned, etc). They are color and do a nice job at 30fps.
The images are recorded on a hard drive. they are accessible via the web by the district manager and corporate folks.
We have about 10,000 folks a week thru our place. There are about 360 restaurants in the chain, all similarlry equipped.
Walmart is also similarly equipped and records it all too. (You cannot take a pic of walmart without permission, but they can take your photo...another thread there)
So i don't see how the cell phone camera is any different. Your pic is taken 10s of times a day, what is a few more?
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 01:48:28 AM · #23 |
I don't care who takes my picture. I'm not doing anything I am particularly worried about others knowing what I am doing, or even making a record of it. If I was, I wouldn't be doing it around others in the first place.
Sure it is possible for some sicko to take unwanted pictures (upskirts, down blouses, restrooms, etc.), and while some senarios are not particularly pleasant to think about in the end they are simply pictures -- and we should know better than the common Joe on the street that a picture is easy to come by. They don't do any lasting harm.
There is a far greater risk of my credit card number being taken by the attendant at the convienance store or waitor at a resturant than there is from someone standing near me with a camera.
Sure there are sickos, people perverted in ways I can not even imagine, but it is simply not worth making society even more collectively paraoid than it already is. Those of us not perverted do not need tob e weighted down by laws aimed (very poorly) at those who are.
David
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 07:41:08 PM · #24 |
I think it's important to note that lawmakers in Japan didn't rush to require that cell phone cameras make a relatively loud noise on the day that these cameras were introduced. They reacted to the problem of so many people taking surreptitious photos of unsuspecting young women on trains and in video game parlors, where it's either too crowded or their attention is focused too intently to notice that some guy has just put his cell phone below her skirt. When this became a serious problem here in Japan, lawmakers reacted by requiring that cell phone cameras make a sound. Even though it won't prevent this kind of thing from happening all the time, I have to say that I'm happy that this law is in place.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 08:45:56 PM · #25 |
What I don't get in this one is ....
If you only want to use your phone camera for legitimate pics, what is the problem with it making a noise?
Banning them completely is one thing, but it seems they are more looking at making them go BEEP!
Why would people have a problem with that unless they are trying to use the camera covertly?
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 11/15/2025 04:00:28 AM EST.
