| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/16/2008 10:13:04 PM · #151 |
| Who's a jury going to side with, a protective parent in a changing world- or some scumbag with a nikon?... (sorry) |
|
|
|
07/16/2008 10:14:01 PM · #152 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Ivo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Ivo:
I'd rather face a lawsuit than risk my child's safety any day.
|
Unfortunately, it wouldn't just be your personal future at risk in a lawsuit. You'd be left to explain to your kids that the family is living in a refrigerator box under a freeway because Daddy over-reacted. |
It is obvious where your values are. I hope your children would feel as secure in them as you do. Your paradigm is admirable .... to some I'm certain. |
Yeah, unlike you, I think about my ability to provide for my children's future, not flipping out and losing everything the family owns in a lawsuit and get myself sent to prison because I kick the crap out of some guy with a camera at the park in a paranoia fueled rage. |
That kind of goes back to my original point. Parents and adults need to watch what they do in front of children. Children learn from their parents and other adults actions. |
|
|
|
07/16/2008 10:26:57 PM · #153 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Who's a jury going to side with, a protective parent in a changing world- or some scumbag with a nikon?... (sorry) |
ken rockingwell may be one of the juries, lol |
|
|
|
07/16/2008 10:41:14 PM · #154 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by Ivo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Ivo:
I'd rather face a lawsuit than risk my child's safety any day.
|
Unfortunately, it wouldn't just be your personal future at risk in a lawsuit. You'd be left to explain to your kids that the family is living in a refrigerator box under a freeway because Daddy over-reacted. |
It is obvious where your values are. I hope your children would feel as secure in them as you do. Your paradigm is admirable .... to some I'm certain. |
I agree with Spaz and I don't see it as any "paradigm" - simply common sense. I'm not even sure how to interpret this statement:
Originally posted by Ivo:
As a parent who is a photographer, I am especially sensitive as I know I may be driven by a parental wiring to protect my children from something which even slightly smells of a threat. |
What does that mean in real terms? If I point a camera at your kid in the park, your parental wiring kicks in and you proceed to kick my ass? If that's what you mean, then Spaz is absolutely correct about your future under the freeway. |
No Ken, nobody said that parental wiring equates with someone sticking their foot in anyone's ass. It simply illustrates the "prime directive" for most parents is to protect their children, sometimes blindly. If that equates to calling the cops, calling names or even kicking someone's ass, some parents will go to that extent. Not once had I mentioned I advocate that sort of behaviour but I did concur that it is not to be unexpected if it happens. The rationalle I stated hopefully illustrated my perspective. To be clear, it was a perspective and not an absolute. I choose my words carefully so please, do not make assumptions or create alliances based upon a need for clarity. Simply ask for it as I would do the same from you. |
|
|
|
07/16/2008 11:33:04 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Ivo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Ivo:
I'd rather face a lawsuit than risk my child's safety any day.
|
Unfortunately, it wouldn't just be your personal future at risk in a lawsuit. You'd be left to explain to your kids that the family is living in a refrigerator box under a freeway because Daddy over-reacted. |
It is obvious where your values are. I hope your children would feel as secure in them as you do. Your paradigm is admirable .... to some I'm certain. |
Yeah, unlike you, I think about my ability to provide for my children's future, not flipping out and losing everything the family owns in a lawsuit and get myself sent to prison because I kick the crap out of some guy with a camera at the park in a paranoia fueled rage. |
Thanks for the reply  Spazmo99! Pardon me as I'm not really certain how to address you, as a man, woman or otherwise. Must be your ficticious identity. I will confess though, you seize opportunity, focus stealthily, and then pounce for your shot. Let me see now, the web, an alias, and an opportunity. The web, an alias and an opportunity ......hmmmm.
Oh my, are you a ....a ...... photographer???
Of course, you're a photographer!!
Plain as day in my eyes. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 02:52:54 AM · #156 |
The original post here was about a story in the Daily Mail. Apparently a man was photographing his own children and parents of other children were so abusive to him that he had to call the police to keep them off. We sense a gender difference in the respective parents, we don't know what he looked like and we don't know how he responded to any initial approach from the other parents or indeed what the initial approach was. Nevertheless it does look as though the other parents were out of line and the police had to calm them down. The Daily Mail makes a big thing to titillate their readers, but it looks straightforward enough. We find initially for the photographer parent but would like more evidence before passing sentence.
So what's the hypothetical scenario that folks are beating their drums for here? I'm not sure. Do those of you who are campaigning for the rights of photographers to take pictures of whatever they want envisage walking into a park and starting to take pictures of kids playing, then refusing to listen to the parents of the said children when asked to stop taking pictures, following all this up by preaching loudly and righteously about how it is their right to take pictures of these people's children and that they intend to continue to do so and, of course, explaining how these parents will end up with debilitating law suits against them if they don't comply with the photographer's wishes?
At this point that's the impression I'm getting. Am I right?
Message edited by author 2008-07-17 02:53:58. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 04:28:43 AM · #157 |
Originally posted by raish:
At this point that's the impression I'm getting. Am I right? |
Sounds right. As a parent, why do I care if people take pictures of my kid(s)??? If I found out later they used them for less-than-respectable purposes, I would be disgusted, but still don't care. WHAT the hell are we protecting children from??? I have NEVER heard of a pedophile that stands there in the park taking pictures of kids. Never. I am baffled to no end as to what the paranoia is all about. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 04:46:41 AM · #158 |
| If I think about that, I don't worry about people taking pictures of my children either, or my grandchildren. If I'm responsible for other people's children I might be more edgy. If someone asked me to stop taking pictures of their kids though, I'd stop taking pictures. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 04:52:42 AM · #159 |
Originally posted by raish:
If someone asked me to stop taking pictures of their kids though, I'd stop taking pictures. |
I agree. That's a rational response to what is probably an irrational reaction to the picture taking. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 05:32:34 AM · #160 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by raish:
If someone asked me to stop taking pictures of their kids though, I'd stop taking pictures. |
I agree. That's a rational response to what is probably an irrational reaction to the picture taking. |
Right. Rational. See how they like it when their village burns.
Whoops. I'll just swiftly edit to retract that a bit and say thanks for helping me put an almost sensible 'conclusion' on this loopy thread.
Message edited by author 2008-07-17 05:38:23. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 08:07:11 AM · #161 |
I take pictures of kids at the county fair every year. No one ever questions me. In fact, I won best of show for photography at the fair one year with a picture I took of a child eating cotton candy. I suppose it depends on the environment as to when someone would find it creepy that someone was taking pictures of kids. At the fair, no one noticed me. At the playground as a lone man, you bet people would think I am weird. Common sense wins! Expect to be questioned. Take pictures of other things besides the kids. If you walk over and just take pictures of the kids, you have a much better chance of getting hassled.
Kids are great for candid shots. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 09:35:29 AM · #162 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Ivo:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Ivo:
I'd rather face a lawsuit than risk my child's safety any day.
|
Unfortunately, it wouldn't just be your personal future at risk in a lawsuit. You'd be left to explain to your kids that the family is living in a refrigerator box under a freeway because Daddy over-reacted. |
It is obvious where your values are. I hope your children would feel as secure in them as you do. Your paradigm is admirable .... to some I'm certain. |
Yeah, unlike you, I think about my ability to provide for my children's future, not flipping out and losing everything the family owns in a lawsuit and get myself sent to prison because I kick the crap out of some guy with a camera at the park in a paranoia fueled rage. |
Thanks for the reply Spazmo99! Pardon me as I'm not really certain how to address you, as a man, woman or otherwise. Must be your ficticious identity. I will confess though, you seize opportunity, focus stealthily, and then pounce for your shot. Let me see now, the web, an alias, and an opportunity. The web, an alias and an opportunity ......hmmmm.
Oh my, are you a ....a ...... photographer???
Of course, you're a photographer!!
Plain as day in my eyes. |
You're welcome. Had you actually read my profile, you would know that I am male. As for the degree to which I omit personal information from my DPC profile, that's a personal decision that has no bearing on the subject at hand.
And, of course, everything you've said about me applies equally to yourself.
|
|
|
|
07/17/2008 09:38:51 AM · #163 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
I have NEVER heard of a pedophile that stands there in the park taking pictures of kids. Never. I am baffled to no end as to what the paranoia is all about. |
Let me enlighten you. Story
Message edited by author 2008-07-17 09:39:18. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 09:54:01 AM · #164 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
I have NEVER heard of a pedophile that stands there in the park taking pictures of kids. Never. I am baffled to no end as to what the paranoia is all about. |
Let me enlighten you. Story |
Posted by  JulietNN in This Thread
Originally posted by Juliet in the other thread:
Okay I will let you deal with the real world for a moment here. I deal with pedophiles pretty much every day. Here is what it is like in the real world.
A pedophile (from now on known as P) will have a plan. This plan is well thought out and usually written down and followed to a T.
It starts like this. Usually, it is just starts out as a fantasies, then they go to graphic, then they go to videos, then the urge is too much and they go to Game A. Usually, game a,b,and c are botched attempts.
P's will go to places that are public and watch and learn. Then they will go with a camera and take pictures, they will find the children that can have their picture taken and no one knows about it because no one is bothered. Then they will take pictures and get closer and closer, just to see if the parents do anything. Some will , some wont. If the parent is completely oblivious , they store that knowledge away.
Then comes the big plan. they have observer that the parents or child minders etc are not at full attention when their kids are at the park, there are too many distractions, there is a lot of kids screaming and running around.
With all that noise and screaming and laughing and kids running around, the P just simply takes that child by the hand and walks away. It can be 5 mins up to 1/2 hour before anyone notices. By that time it is too late.
I have worked 5 playground abductions, 4 from 'I have puppies' and 2 'Your Mum sent me to pick you up'.
Yes , I could be totally paranoid, but when you have held a broken sexually abused 3 year old in your hands, then you can have the balls to tell me I am wrong
I can understand what you are saying, but as I stated earlier, in this day and age, it is difficult NOT to jump to conclusions when it comes to our kids, it is this day and age. Also as i stated, If the person would not stop takign pictures or not answer my questions, then I would do something, and no there would not be a shoot out at the park. I am nto ashamed of my kids at all adn they are dressed properly when they go out, but look around, not everyone does. Playgrounds are a "P"s paridise. |
|
|
|
|
07/17/2008 11:44:37 AM · #165 |
Originally posted by indianzfan:
I take pictures of kids at the county fair every year. No one ever questions me. In fact, I won best of show for photography at the fair one year with a picture I took of a child eating cotton candy. I suppose it depends on the environment as to when someone would find it creepy that someone was taking pictures of kids. At the fair, no one noticed me. At the playground as a lone man, you bet people would think I am weird. Common sense wins! Expect to be questioned. Take pictures of other things besides the kids. If you walk over and just take pictures of the kids, you have a much better chance of getting hassled.
Kids are great for candid shots. |
I Totally agree with the indianzfan, If I went to Lakewood Park shooting the children using all the extensive playground jungle equipment, the police and parents would be there in no time. Unless it was during a carnival-event. If I put up a sign free photos, I'd need a venders' license and city permission.
It's all Location, Time, Events and circumstances, and mainly the dialog with the parents. Why couldn't I just approach a cute kids parents and offer to take free "Steet Photos", show them my business card/Drivers' license, talk a little about yourself, even show samples or website. And then explain that impromtu shot give the most natural, amazing faces/emotions, that are almost impossible in a studio setting.
I'm sure many parents would be less fearful, you could even develop some great photo opportunities.
I was only joking about a clown mask. in my last post.
Unless both parties use common sense, it doesn't work as expected.
Respect, respect the rights of the others. Ask the mother that objected as to when it is okay to shoot your own kids. Like tell her kids to wait a moment, so they won't accidently get in the scene. Some Security Gaurds and Parents over-react, but that's the variety in life. Don't let those apparent crazies piss you off. If they see one or more parent agree, soon they may all be standing in line.
If they don't reason, then walk away. Learn to smile more.
|
|
|
|
07/17/2008 01:21:54 PM · #166 |
Originally posted by KaDi:
There should be nothing wrong...but we know better. We know there are pedophiles. We know they prey on children at parks looking for the vulnerable ones. We know there are pervs who might, at the minimum, take the pics for their own "pleasure" and, at worst might post them on the internet in inappropriate ways....
|
This line of thinking is, well, a litty nutty. Why would somebody take a picture of a kid at a park for their 'pleasure'? They could go to the park every day and see the same kid - you don't need a picture, you can see it live. And why would somebody surf the net for pictures of a fully dressed kids playing in the park? You can go to the supermarket and there's an entire magazine rack filled with pictures of children playing. Parents thinking that their particular child is under whatever kind of perverted survalance seems a little paranoid. Now if your kids happen to be playing naked in the park, I could understand. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 02:34:02 PM · #167 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
I have NEVER heard of a pedophile that stands there in the park taking pictures of kids. Never. I am baffled to no end as to what the paranoia is all about. |
Let me enlighten you. Story |
Ok, now I have heard of it. Thanks for that. Still really doesn't change my mind - parents should be wary of people even staring at their kids - especially someone like the guy from your story...
Wary, but not to the point of throwing out all common sense.
Anyway, I wouldn't have a problem with a parent walking up and talking to the photog - a pedophile is likely going to be hiding in his car or whatever trying to conceal what he is doing - not standing in front of the swing with a dslr.
As stated - location & context make a big difference and as a casual photographer who loves to photograph children, I am resigned to being mindful of parents sensitivities and avoid shooting in situations that may cause a confrontation. I just find it depressing that our quality of life is constantly degraded - more by the perceptions than the reality.
On a related note - as a parent, does anyone think that our fears and reactions to specific potential threats are proportionate to the statistical odds of the threat being real or just more extreme reaction to what we believe is the more horrible result? For example, the chances of your kid running into the street and getting hit by a car and killed vs. the chances of your kid getting molested by a stranger who took photos of your kid in the park? I'm just curious because I see a lot of parents overreact to the least likely potential threats and underreact to the highly likely and more severe threats. I guess it's along the lines of what Ivo was saying - parental wiring - emotion overrides rational thought and reason. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 02:45:35 PM · #168 |
I think it would have gone smoothly for the man if it was apparent to the slide operator that he was a devoted father making family keepsake, like if she had seen him together with his wife and kids as a family having a good time prior to him going to take pictures. Maybe he should have even gone as far as going up to her, family in tow, and asked for her permission to take pictures. She was the first person to single him out, and mark him as a target.
I'd even say that if he was loud and obnoxious, screaming up to his boys on the top of the slide, beaming with pride, and telling strangers, "Those are my handsome boys!", people would have rolled their eyes but he wouldn't be called a pervert.
Being socially outgoing alleviates people's fears, establishes you as confident, and makes you seem not creepy. It's the shy, introverted, quiet guys who give people the screaming willies. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 03:14:31 PM · #169 |
Originally posted by scrybz:
I think it would have gone smoothly for the man if it was apparent to the slide operator that he was a devoted father making family keepsake, like if she had seen him together with his wife and kids as a family having a good time prior to him going to take pictures. Maybe he should have even gone as far as going up to her, family in tow, and asked for her permission to take pictures. She was the first person to single him out, and mark him as a target.
I'd even say that if he was loud and obnoxious, screaming up to his boys on the top of the slide, beaming with pride, and telling strangers, "Those are my handsome boys!", people would have rolled their eyes but he wouldn't be called a pervert.
Being socially outgoing alleviates people's fears, establishes you as confident, and makes you seem not creepy. It's the shy, introverted, quiet guys who give people the screaming willies. |
Maybe he should have carried business cards to hand out to everyone in a five mile radius that stated he was the father of two boys and definitely NOT a pervert. He could have even offered, in the event he had a perverted thought, to let everyone redeem their card for a free chance to kick him in the testicles.
Of course, even the World's Greatest Dad is having issues. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 03:42:32 PM · #170 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by raish:
At this point that's the impression I'm getting. Am I right? |
Sounds right. As a parent, why do I care if people take pictures of my kid(s)??? If I found out later they used them for less-than-respectable purposes, I would be disgusted, but still don't care. |
I think parents fear their own embarassment should someone they know see such a "less-than-respectable" pictures. Personally, I'd be more interested in reassessing my relationship with any acquaintance who'd be looking at/for such a photo than I would be about the person who posted it.
The kids aren't even going to know about it -- I doubt it could "hurt" them either physically or psychologically.
As a "legitimate" photographer, I'd have no problem with any parent asking me what I was doing, as long as they go away when I tell them (unless they want me to email them copies). |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 03:46:38 PM · #171 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
... As a "legitimate" photographer, I'd have no problem with any parent asking me what I was doing, as long as they go away when I tell them (unless they want me to email them copies). |
You'd have a problem if they hovered around you and tarnished your experience at the park? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me... |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 03:51:57 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
... As a "legitimate" photographer, I'd have no problem with any parent asking me what I was doing, as long as they go away when I tell them (unless they want me to email them copies). |
You'd have a problem if they hovered around you and tarnished your experience at the park? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me... |
No, not that .. just they should not be harassing me or preventing me from doing whatever I was doing.
If they are interested in the photos/photography I'd be happy to share the experience with them. I thought I had implied that with the parenthetical addition in my original post ...
Message edited by author 2008-07-17 15:52:47. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 03:58:26 PM · #173 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
... As a "legitimate" photographer, I'd have no problem with any parent asking me what I was doing, as long as they go away when I tell them (unless they want me to email them copies). |
You'd have a problem if they hovered around you and tarnished your experience at the park? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me... |
No, not that .. just they should not be harassing me or preventing me from doing whatever I was doing.
If they are interested in the photos/photography I'd be happy to share the experience with them. I thought I had implied that with the parenthetical addition in my original post ... |
I understand your point, however, if someone was pointing a camera at my kids at some local park I would find that invasive. Therefore, our family outing would not be as pleasant as it would be without that lens pointing in our direction. The point I was trying to make is it's ok to impede on others but not be impeded upon yourself (from your post: "as long as they go away")? ETA - meaning YOU don't want to be bothered either.
Message edited by author 2008-07-17 15:59:42. |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 04:05:14 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
... As a "legitimate" photographer, I'd have no problem with any parent asking me what I was doing, as long as they go away when I tell them (unless they want me to email them copies). |
You'd have a problem if they hovered around you and tarnished your experience at the park? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me... |
No, not that .. just they should not be harassing me or preventing me from doing whatever I was doing.
If they are interested in the photos/photography I'd be happy to share the experience with them. I thought I had implied that with the parenthetical addition in my original post ... |
I understand your point, however, if someone was pointing a camera at my kids at some local park I would find that invasive. Therefore, our family outing would not be as pleasant as it would be without that lens pointing in our direction. The point I was trying to make is it's ok to impede on others but not be impeded upon yourself (from your post: "as long as they go away")? ETA - meaning YOU don't want to be bothered either. |
Why do you expect privacy in a public place?
If someone snaps your picture in public, how is that invasive? |
|
|
|
07/17/2008 05:51:51 PM · #175 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
... As a "legitimate" photographer, I'd have no problem with any parent asking me what I was doing, as long as they go away when I tell them (unless they want me to email them copies). |
You'd have a problem if they hovered around you and tarnished your experience at the park? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me... |
No, not that .. just they should not be harassing me or preventing me from doing whatever I was doing.
If they are interested in the photos/photography I'd be happy to share the experience with them. I thought I had implied that with the parenthetical addition in my original post ... |
I understand your point, however, if someone was pointing a camera at my kids at some local park I would find that invasive. Therefore, our family outing would not be as pleasant as it would be without that lens pointing in our direction. The point I was trying to make is it's ok to impede on others but not be impeded upon yourself (from your post: "as long as they go away")? ETA - meaning YOU don't want to be bothered either. |
Why do you expect privacy in a public place? |
Total privacy isn't expected, no, but common courtesy is. |
|
