You've got to watch those "photographers"

"A park official who stopped an 82-year-old woman taking pictures of an empty paddling pool, in case she was a

paedophile, acted 'overzealously', admit council bosses...."

 

<p>

 

<a

href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Council_admits_pool_photography_ban_mistake_82yearold_stopp

ed_over_paedophile_fears_news_264091.html"> LINK </a>

I wonder what would have happened had it been an 82-year-old man...

I read that in the Metro on the train home yesterday. Sadly, councils often seem to attract the non-thinking jobsworth

types.

I used to fear that the world would be taken over by aliens, but now I discover it's actually been taken over by very stupid people.

We are the Golgafrinchans.

Yes give some people a title and a cap and the power will go to their heads without any thought at all.Mainly because they are unable to...

The loss of 'common sense", "logic" and "wisdom" are the sure sign of a society in decay. Especially when those entrusted with our...err...'safety' are the ones who lack all of the above.

 

Of course, if you start talking about airport security the list would be 100 miles long. They would have families with small children stop and search each and every bag, diapers, bottles, etc... Apparently, because someone has told them to search those who may appear LEAST suspicious! So, with that philosophy in mind, they would stop those who appear least suspicious because...that would mean that they are actually suspicious and trying to appear less so...and those who might look suspicious (by whatever warped standard they have come up) would actually be let by because if they look suspicious it must mean they are NOT suspicious. Does your brain hurt yet?

 

With morons at the top what can you expect?

Dear Lord, how can people be so stupid.

I'm ready to tell you my secret now... I see dumb people.

Another matter of interest from the link is this so-called "National Guidlines" issued by the IRSM regarding "unauthorized" photography involving children.

Einstein said something to the effect that: "Only two things are infinite; the universe and stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe".

TSA cannot just search the people they find suspicious. If they did that they would be profiling (isn't that the point to

a degree?) and the ACLU would have a field day.

 

I mean, isn't part of the point of security paying more attention to the people you think appear or are acting

suspicious? Only so many security people, shouldn't they spend their time focuses on the individuals who would

APPEAR at least to be more likely suspect of doing something wrong?

 

I guess I am just crazy.

 

Kinda like how police need to even things up. Instead of just giving tickets to people who speed, they need to start

giving them to people who aren't speeding. Even things out and keep them on their toes. Kinda like that ticket I got

for doing 50 in a 40 zone. Funny thing is the ticket says 78 in a 40 on it and I think that is what came out of the cops

mouth. I must be wrong though as myself and the other 6 cars on the road (single lane road with me wedged in the

middle) were all doing 50mph and hell I had my cruise control set at 50mph, but I mean radar never lies (it lies) and

of course the cop can single me out of 5 or 6 other cars from 200 yards away (cause of course radar is that

accurate, it picks up the largest signal and can easily show false readings). At least I have never gotten a ticket or a

warning in 9 years of driving and a co-workers friend is a traffic lawyer who has offered to represent me for half their

usualy rate. Grrr.

 

Sorry, so far off topic it isn't funny. Just needed a little venting is all.

 

Back on topic, I mean every 82 year old grandmotherly type instantly makes me suspicious. You never know when

they might be spiking their cookies or really offering GBH candies to the little kids.

We're living in the time where law and security enforcement will quickly error on the side of enforcement and apologize

later than let things go. It's easier in their mind to stop, arrest or detain any non-parent photographer, in this case or one

they perceived to be, than let matters go and find out later the one in a million error was yours. It's the act first mentality.

Their sense of normal is skewed to the enforcement end forgetting 99% of people aren't criminals.

 

And after all if that elderly woman had posted her photos, no telling where they would end up. She might be charged with

promoting pedophilia to others. By God, arrest that woman, she's potentially, or her photos are, criminal. We're living in

the time we arrest potential criminals than the real ones. And the law? We'll just ignore basic civil rights and liberties for

an instant, or rather one continuous instant after another.

Just this morning I was walking down an out of the way rural road when an approx.eighty year old women drove by slowly, stopped and rolled down her window. She asked if I needed a ride as she had seen my car on the side of the road farther back and was concerned that my car may have broken down. I told her I was just out taking photos and thanked her for her concern. Fortunately I had not read this thread yet or else I would have run off into the woods and hidden until she was gone.

Hmmmm ... a female, octogenarian pedophile. Common sense has become a thing of the past.

 

Gordon ... most likely, she was a molester and would have buried your lifeless body deep in the woods once she was done

violating you. ;-)

Bear with me here before sides are taken automatically.

 

There's a thread near this one about paparazzi, got in a fight with security at Brangelina's place, etc.

 

Watched Nancy Grace last night (not my idea, it was on the TV at the bar I ate at) and she was orgasming over some missing little girl and the terrible dad, etc. and "were pictures taken inappropriately?"

 

Not so long ago, there was an article I skimmed about some dork who put a camera in a women's dressing room, and another about cellphone camera "upskirtlng".

 

And there's a fair amount of shots of unattractive people, or people in unattractive poses, with some sort of sarcastic comment made, and no business or property owner can tell when his place will show up in the local newspaper with the caption "Is this a pollution/health/safety problem?" (with the answer, no, buried on page 18 three weeks later, if at all)

 

My point is: the general public has little or no knowledge of "real" photographers (us of course). Their main experience with using a camera is to point it at the Grand Canyon/Eiffel Tower/Aunt Susie and hit the shutter. Their own experience with printed photographs might not be very pleasant

 

Throw in the constant sensationalism over national security and child molesters/kidnappers, and basically what the hell do you expect?

 

That said, an 82 year old woman,pedophilia, an EMPTY wading pool? There's a new winner of the Box of Rocks award there in merry old England

Leaving aside the hysteria and the stupidity, according to the story this 'incident' took place on Southhampton Common - which is common land. The Council mainain it but they don't own it and as I see it, they have no jurisdiction to control what people do or do not do on common land.

<i>I used to fear that the world would be taken over by aliens, but now I discover it's actually been taken over by very stupid people.</i>

<p>

There's still <a href="http://www.wpbf.com/technology/16990637/detail.html">hope</a>. I for one welcome our new insect overlords.

GOOD LORD! And I thought that Barney Fife went by the wayside when the Andy Griffith show ended. Sounds like

he is alive and well.

Did someone say the pool was EMPTY? I mean that's a mistake isn't it? Isn't it?

Well,it seems the British Government is now of the opinion that only terrorists and pedophiles take photographs in public.Considering that half of all the CCD cameras in the entire world are in London,what does that tell you about the British Government?

 

Me thinketh he doth protest too much!