'Paedophile Suspect' For Taking Son's Photo

<p>As a long-time photojournalist, I make it a point to look for police and let them know that I am there and what I'm doing. This works wonders and usually gets me by many police lines and makes me known to the local security forces. It's easy to forget that most of these people are first responders to any sort of trouble or danger. As one police officer said to me, "We have no idea of what we may be walking into, just the fact that you come to us and let us know what you are doing, puts us at ease and makes our job that much easier. Please tell your photographer friends that."<br>

I also wear my photography and media badges almost everywhere. If I don't have them with me I "offer" to show them my ID or drviers license. This usually and immediately defuses the situation and in most cases, I'm allowed to go on my way. Another thing is that it gives me a level of protection against anyone else harassing me, because, if something does happen with a security guard, the police already knows me and will usually stand up for me against an over-zealous security guard.<br>

Some would argue that this is sucking up, and you have to stand up for your rights. True, but as a wise old editor said, "You are there to report the news, not be the news."<br>

And as a tourist taking photos, tell the police or security guard that you are a tourist. In most cases they will not only let you proceed, but also tell you the rules or point out better advantage points for photos.<br>

It might just be me, but I just feel better if the authorities (with the guns) were on my side.</p>

<p>Craig: We are talking about basic freedoms here. This is not a good opportunity to attack someone for being an American male. You are not going to make me feel guilty because I am not starving or in jail for my political views. </p>

<p>You weren't attacked for being an American male or expected to feel guilty for not starving or being in jail. Craig makes a valid point about oppression. It's a shame that you're not longer comfortable doing street photography in NYC, but that doesn't mean that you are oppressed. I know of several people who regularly do street photography in NYC, who consider it their favorite place to do street photography, and they don't suffer from "oppression" while photographing there. Millions of tourists each year don't suffer from "oppression" while photographing in the streets of NYC.</p>

<p>While it sounds much more dramatic to say "it has become so oppressive here" than to say "I don't want to deal with the occasional hassles anymore," that doesn't actually mean you're are suffering genuine oppression.</p>

<p>I consider threats of arrest to be oppressive. Occasional hassles are one thing. That is part of street photography. But when the police stop you, inspect the camera and threaten to arrest you, that is oppression.</p>

<p>Now wait a minute, the security guard said that he couldn't prove it was his son.<br>

And his only concern is he his a possible paedophile? What about a kidnapper?</p>

<p>Matthew Newton ... normally I'd read the story before saying anything, but I thought "this sounds like sky news", sure enough, scrolling up, it bloody well is. So I didn't bother, your comment says it all. The people at sky news should be shot, they over-exaggerate everything, stir things up, to get viewers not to actually contribute to society as free press does. It's media companies like sky news that actually give photographers and press a bad name.</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=937861">John Henneberger</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Feb 27, 2010; 09:32 a.m.</p>

 

<p><em>I wonder how many people defending England are the same who make up wild assumptions about other countries based on a few reports of bad behavior? Not funny when its your country that is getting bad press is it? Maybe we should all be a little more realistic about judging others?</em><br>

Its ironic and profoundly hypocritical to make wild assumptions and be unrealistic about judging others as a condemnation of people making wild assumptions and being unrealistic about judging others.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p>There is no evidence whatsoever to even suggest that anyone defending England has engaged in that behavior. The assumptions in this thread are surpassing the assumptions made by the security person.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I wasn't going to chime in on this, but John just pressed my buttons and hit one of my biggest pet peeves.</p>

<p>It's not ironic. Stop saying that. Hypocritical ... maybe. But hypocrisy really requires the accusing party to be engaging in the same activity they are decrying. Hence, 'the pot calling the kettle black.' The phrase isn't, 'The copper pot calling the kettle non-silver.' A security guard assuming a man taking photos of a child is a pedophile, and a poster saying all security guards/English are idiots might both be statements painted with a broad brush, but they are two totally different situations.</p>

<p>It would only be ironic if something out-of-the-ordinary happened. Like if it turned out the photographer actually was a pedophile, and an 'incorrect' assumption led to the discovery of that fact.</p>

<p>If you don't know what irony is, don't use the word. It makes you sound like one of those wannabe intellectuals that overuses the word 'whom' because they don't actually know which one to use when. This guy was just being uninformed and generalizing about a country. There's nothing ironic there. Happens every day.</p>

<p> Marcus Wilson wrote: As one police officer said to me, "We have no idea of what we may be walking into, just the fact that you come to us and let us know what you are doing, puts us at ease and makes our job that much easier. Please tell your photographer friends that."</p>

<p>Marcus, we have NO RESPONSIBILITY WHATSOEVER to put police at ease or to make their jobs easier. They knew it was a tough job when they got into the business. It is THEY who have a responsibility to know the law and stay strictly within its limits.</p>

<p>It is really is getting bad in the UK. I would like to take more street life things, old people, young people, kids playing. Not a chance would you see me pull out a camera, say in a public park or maybe like Bresson did try and get shots of kids just playing. Not where I live.<br>

A member of my family teaches at primary school, it's close and lovely sometimes just to listen and hear there clear voices at break time crying free above the rooftops. As least they still have that and we can appreciate that freedom to some degree. <br>

I got called a pervert recently while in a field photographing a tree? nothing else about, just a tree in an empty field.<br>

The only place I take my camera out in public is in a tourist spot near me. I may go back to India to shoot people. </p>