Of course, the real paedophiles spend years working their way into people's confidence. They'll walk to a bench near a school and sit down to read the newspaper often enough for security guards to become used to them. Then they'll chat up the security guards and most security guards are bored to tears by their job and welcome a chat. They get known by the security guards. Then they are free to start their predatory campaigns.
Rick, I am sorry to hear this... I had a similar incident where I was taking pictures of cars in a public space and a police car stopped one of the drivers and started harrasing of all people the guy with the camera. Yep. He even went on to have me sit on the curb until another car could come and keep an eye on the driver while he began to harrass me for a permit to take the pictures in the first place. It wasn't a commercial shoot... There were no laws being broken... and I knew my rights. So while I was cooperative, I did calmly explain that I didn't need a permit to take photos in a public area all of which he didn't want to hear. He even went on to threaten me with being incarcerated... I guess it just wasn't his day. But after 20 mintues the other officer arrived and basically said we are sorry. Maybe they didn't like Canon?
coarphoto wrote:
I'm sorry if I have offended anyone with my post I'm just pointing out that the childrens safety is most important. If your child came home and said that there was a man at the park taking their picture you would'nt wonder about that? You don't think you deserve to asked beforehand? No equipment was confiscated and there is no reason not to cooperate for the sake of the kids.The idea that someone would petition the local government to stop public photography because of this Is ridiculous. I am not calling anyone a pervert I am saying that I don't know what a pervert looks like and therefore will not take any chances when it comes to my children....Show more →
No offense was taken Victor and I apologize if I came off a bit harsh. I agree that it is a touchy subject for a parent and has a very fine line. I myself have been taking pictures of my daughter at a park during an art festival and noticed another photographer with her in his frame. I didn't question him at all as I know he just saw the same moment as I. A little girl on a summer day just being a little girl.
It just really gets to me when a basic right is questioned. To be completly honest I'm more worried about the video cameras @ the local Banks and Taco Bell's than the honest fellow in the park with a camera.
Look at it from the other side of the rope. If you were 12-15 and aware of your surroundings would you be creeped out by someone snapping photos? Its hard for me to answer that question without being biased. Just a thought. It is a post 9/11 world.
I do support you 100%.
-Richard
The cop had to show up. Its their job to investigate. I get the feeling he was just being honest. I bet the LAPD has better things to do then tag the paparazzi all day. If you show up a few more times people will just get used to you and the real candids will develop.
Now where was this cop when I needed him to investigate a break-in of my storage building!!!!!! At least you should be happy that you live in a place where the police can respond quickly, .
This is an interesting subject. In my city, a Middle Eastern man was taking pictures of skyscrapers. He was questioned and arrested. Turns out he was here illegally and was deported. It's unclear whether he had terrorist connections or not, but he had gone to several cities and done the same thing.
We definitely live in a different age now. In some ways better, and some ways worse. But the one thing that is constant is that people have always had to fight to keep their rights from being taken away.
rickmorealnd wrote:
Into your life it will creep" - Stephen Stills
Wants my ID and phone number. OK, since I live in the jurisdiction, know a good number of the members of the police force, I just go with the flow and give up my ID.
This is my concern, you are now in a database, did he call it in or write it down? If you are not breaking a law, why does he need your phone number. What are they going to do call you up next time?
Police and all other authority figures count on people not know their rights and not knowing the law. By going with the flow, you avoided any confrontation which was probably good because you were with your daughter but you also confirmed the cops idea that he can bluff Joe Citizen. If you know a good number of members of the force, go over and talk to them and see how much they really know about photography and the law. They might even be interested in the Krages paper.
And the old line "...we've been getting a lot of calls."
RSines wrote:
Look at it from the other side of the rope. If you were 12-15 and aware of your surroundings would you be creeped out by someone snapping photos? Its hard for me to answer that question without being biased. Just a thought. It is a post 9/11 world.
9/11 and a 12 - 15 year old being creeped out by a photographer? 9/11 had to do with terrorism and photographers taking pictures of 12 year old boys are usually accused of being pedophiles. The two have nothing to do with each other.
I am old, but I did not realize how out of touch I am. Please enlighten me. To what insidious end would one put a photograph of some one in this public circumstance, be it an adult or child? I am at a loss.
Mike Ditz, he did write down the info. I am going to the station and ask for a copy of the report.
For either pedophiles or terrorists, looking like a photographer would be too obvious and a lousy cover.
Yet, how many muggings, rapes, robberies, and murders occur out in the open?
Most of the public are morons when it comes to knowing what to be suspicious about. Cops have to serve that public. So just be careful out there when carrying your big cameras, and remember that we allowed things to get this way.
mauriceramirez wrote:
For either pedophiles or terrorists, looking like a photographer would be too obvious and a lousy cover.
Yet, how many muggings, rapes, robberies, and murders occur out in the open?
Most of the public are morons when it comes to knowing what to be suspicious about. Cops have to serve that public. So just be careful out there when carrying your big cameras, and remember that we allowed things to get this way.
-m
Good point.
But then there are the grey areas. For example, about 10 seconds after I took the pic below with a rented Mamiya 7, Grand Central Station security escorted me out of there. I was in NYC not long after the Spain train station bombings in 2004 and even though my subject wasn't necessarily the tracks, I can understand why security thought my photography was a little suspicious. Being half Persian probably didn't help either.
Sorry Ted, but they probably wouldn't have escorted you out if you were half Swedish. Or better yet, all Swedish. (no offense to any Swedes)
There was a time when they were banning all photography in the subways, but I think they
have relaxed that rule.
I suspect the problem is that anybody that looks like they might possibly be Islamic whether by dress, skin colour or beard style might be seen as a terrorist. The problem is though that security guards (who're not well paid nor intelligent) read the gutter press and expect terrorists to look like Islamic fundamentalists or more moderate versions thereof. The sad fact is that many al-quada aligned terrorists aren't anything like that. Look at John Lindh and some of the London underground bombers. Heck - half the UK underground bombers were born and brought-up in Britain, were married and had children! How far off the typical terrorist is that?
Exactly. While ignorant rent-a-cops are busy checking innocent photographers in stupid malls and middle eastern travelers are getting pulled aside in airports, any white, older-looking, terrorist with a southern accent and a press pass can get onstage at a political rally.
It's not gonna happen next on an airplane. And nothing's gonna be masteminded by some guy carrying a 70-200IS in a park shooting kids or flowers.
right now there's an obese tourist in san francisco is saying "oh my gawd honey, them there iraqis be photographin' that there bridge."
coarphoto wrote:
I can understand the anger expressed here However, the world can be a dark place and as a father of 2 little boys If I see you photographing them you should expect a confrontation of some sort. If it is a sanctioned sport and you are a parent of an athlete thats one thing but how could I possibly seperate you from John Q. Pervert? Remember we teach our children to be leary of strangers and I think the boys did what was safe. we should not be upset by the inconvience of childrens safety.
But that just isn't rational. If you see someone with thousands of dollars in visible equipment shooting kids playing in a park, it makes absolutely no sense to jump to the conclusion that they have some evil designs in mind. Real sex offenders and terrorists know that this sort of voyeurism or reconaissance would be highly suspect, and would hence operate very discretely. That means they would not acquire multiple L lenses and EOS bodies that anyone can see from a mile away; they would probably work with something much smaller and easier to conceal. Further, taking pictures of kids at play would have little appeal to a child pornographer because, as someone has already noted, pictures of clothed children don't satisfy their prurient interests.
Basically, by not giving people the benefit of the doubt, you stigmatize the act of street and candid photography while doing little or nothing to improve the security of your own children. A real child pornographer will act without you ever noticing, because the last thing he wants is a confrontation with an angry parent. Either that, or he will notice how attentive you are and move on...
I've shot pictures of children in the third world that I could never shoot in the US because people here can be so uptight. Even though incidents of child molestation are just as common in the third world, people are far more willing to accept that a guy with such an expensive camera probably isn't interested in anything but interesting images...
I just want to note don't blame the cops for having to come out and bug you. They don't want to do it, but they have to investigate complaints. If you ever have a conversation with a cop, you soon learn they have to do all sorts of junk because of stupid people (a dispatcher once told me how he wasted a good bit of his time explaining to some old lady that you don't call 911 if you need help opening a jar of mayo).
As far as the photographing people thing, I don't know, I mean, I do it, but not of kids (for one I never thought those photos were worth a hoot). I agree it's an irrational fear people have, and I myself don't care since I'm a big promoter of individual rights, but since I know people who do care about having their photo taken in public I would have to say that the people who don't want their photo taken in publc take the issue very seriously. For the people I know who feel this way, it has nothing to do with terrorism or fear of pedophiles or anything like that, they just don't want their picture taken.
I do take photos of everything and everywhere, and the only time I ever got hassled was when a cop wouldn't let me take a photo of him hassling some cabby (it really would have been a good shot, two cops standing, staring intently at a clipboard and a cabby just with this "get this over with" look on his face. Not sure what the cops grounds were for that, but I didn't take the photo anyways.
Canonfan,
Yes, I understand the police are only doing what they have to do, but if there is no law being broken, why don't they tell that to the complaintant? Moreover, why did they need my ID if no infractions were occurring?
A good many of these people who don't want their picture taken, will during a parade or festivity in public, ham it up, shove their kids at you and do anything to get in the limelight.
As an addendum, as I walked into the grocery last night, I noticed a number of poster for the school sports teams and cheerleading squads. All of the girls in the cheering squads are striking "poses" and trying to look seductive abd their parents probably think that is OK. More weirdos will see those pictures than will ever see mine.
lordarka wrote:
But that just isn't rational. If you see someone with thousands of dollars in visible equipment shooting kids playing in a park, it makes absolutely no sense to jump to the conclusion that they have some evil designs in mind. Real sex offenders and terrorists know that this sort of voyeurism or reconaissance would be highly suspect, and would hence operate very discretely. That means they would not acquire multiple L lenses and EOS bodies that anyone can see from a mile away; they would probably work with something much smaller and easier to conceal. Further, taking pictures of kids at play would have little appeal to a child pornographer because, as someone has already noted, pictures of clothed children don't satisfy their prurient interests.
Basically, by not giving people the benefit of the doubt, you stigmatize the act of street and candid photography while doing little or nothing to improve the security of your own children. A real child pornographer will act without you ever noticing, because the last thing he wants is a confrontation with an angry parent. Either that, or he will notice how attentive you are and move on...
I've shot pictures of children in the third world that I could never shoot in the US because people here can be so uptight. Even though incidents of child molestation are just as common in the third world, people are far more willing to accept that a guy with such an expensive camera probably isn't interested in anything but interesting images...
rickmorealnd wrote:
Canonfan,
Yes, I understand the police are only doing what they have to do, but if there is no law being broken, why don't they tell that to the complaintant? Moreover, why did they need my ID if no infractions were occurring?
More than likely the dispatcher doesn't know that there is nothing illegal about what you were doing, so the complaint was filed, and once that happens he has to investigate if he finds the person who the complaint was about he has to take their info down.
Now, if there was no complaint and he were just coming to question you, as long as you're not in the driver's seat of a car, you don't have to present an ID in states that don't require it (IIRC only a handful of states require it), all you would have to give is your name.
Richard (btw good choice of name, in both my elementary school and high school I was the only Richard, and even in my college I'm 1 of 3)
Canonfan, you are right that I did not HAVE to show my ID. The consequences of not soing so may not be pleasant. Having friends on the force was one reason I complied, the other is that if you do not comply, chance are that they will follow you until they can find a valid excuse - like getting into a car.
.