All Photographers are dangerous!

Spooky

Spooky

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,555
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
This morning I recieved a request from a colleague to borrow a couple of cameras (DSLRs with big lens) for an event she is organising, in collaboration with the police, to raise awareness of 'stranger danger' to young people.

The scenario she is planning involves a character taking photographs of the children. She then wants to use this as an illustration of a potentially dangerous person.

Maybe I am being a touch over sensitive but is this wrong? Certainly there are some unsavoury characters about and we need to keep children safe, but the implication here is that all people with big cameras is a potential pervert, especially when in the vacinity of children. I was immediately reminded of the FT reporter who was wrongly accused of photographing 'kiddie porn' and has had to live with the stigma for years.

Any thoughts?
 
Just lend her you iPhone/smartphone and show her that those are capable of superb images and video.

And then remind her that majority of the child abuse cases are from someone in their own 'family' structure.
 
I'd tell her to go..........find some real evidence that people with big cameras and large lenses are a danger to children then she can recreate a real crime.
 
Well firstly my answer to the request is a definite NO! and explain why.

If someone wanted to take photo's of children then surely they wouldn't advertise the fact with a great big DSLR and large lens.

So whats next anyone wearing a raincoat is a 'flasher'?.

I'm with you on this one Simon.
 
She clearly doesn't know much about the subject - why has she been given this job?
 
very good point - sounds like she needs to gain some Stranger Danger awareness before advising others.

The advice should be around what strangers are offering you, what they are suggesting etc,. rather than the 'danger' of having your photograph taken in public by a person with a huge and very obvious camera
 
Last edited:
This is exactly the sort of point we should be preventing. Just because someone carries a large camera doesn't make tham a pervert and shouldn't be played out as such.
I was videoing a school presentation, for one of the parents who couldn't attend, in a public place and was asked to stop filming which I did. I was made to look the bad guy and several other people taking photos and video (I assume they were parents) had nothing said to them. I ended up being persecuted for helping a friend which left me with a very sour taste.
This happened years ago, before I was aware of the laws regarding filming in a public place, but has still had an affect to this day. Explain to your colleague that you really shouldn't help to misinform people and that part of the event should be omitted.
 
Yeah think some of this is overkill. When I lived in another part of the country school rules were no photography at all but thankfully with my daughters nursery having their sports day soon they are not operating with any such restrictions. Personally I am not too worried about my daughter being photographed by strangers on days such as this but if someone was stalking the school area that would become more of a worry. Obviously if any parent asked me to leave their child out of the footage I would endeavour to please them. I don't fully subscribe to the big lens and SLR being too conspicuous for these types either. If the person is so inclined I don't think the camera type would be any sort of indicator.
 
Can I borrow your camera and big lens to show everyone what a pervert looks like?


NO!
 
she's clearly given this a lot of thought :shake:
presumably she asking others to bring the bags of sweeties and the cute puppies, so she covers all the accepted (ie non cliched) scenarios.
 
Why are we seen as pedophiles or terrorist by these narrow minded people.

I am seriously thinking of calling it a day.
 
Refuse to do it. Please. This really is pretty bad. All it will do is reinforce a stereotype. Ask her why she thinks this will help, and I'd want to have words with the police about their involvement in this. Do they really want people dialling 999 every time some self-panicker sees someone with a camera? Which police are they? I'd be quite happy to talk to them if you don't want to.
 
KIPAX said:
Can I borrow your camera and big lens to show everyone what a pervert looks like?


NO!
Click to expand...

More worryingly is that by knowing you have a big camera and lens they must therefore assume you are a pervert.
 
jon ryan said:
Refuse to do it. Please. This really is pretty bad. All it will do is reinforce a stereotype. Ask her why she thinks this will help, and I'd want to have words with the police about their involvement in this. Do they really want people dialling 999 every time some self-panicker sees someone with a camera? Which police are they? I'd be quite happy to talk to them if you don't want to.
Click to expand...


:agree:

Brilliant post!
 
JFHC.................:shake:
 
I wondered what that guy with a 100-400mm poking it over the top of my changing room cubicle was doing!! :)

The fact of the matter is anyone walking about could be dangerous not just thos with a camera, some people really dont think.
 
well first things first...

make sure that you lend her a Nikon.....as we all know that this is the perverts "weapon of choice" :razz::razz:

personally I think it's rather daft

why don't you ask her
do you want the pervert to be black? or asian? or white? maybe?. what's her preferred pervert phenotype?
also I think a turban or a cross should be in there. do a demographic study of most perverts....maybe a cassock or something might be relevent.

this is quite insulting, really. can you tell I'm annoyed?? :bonk:

p.s can anyone say FLASHMOB? everyone turn up with your enhanced CRB documents
 
DizMatt said:
p.s can anyone say FLASHMOB? everyone turn up with your enhanced CRB documents
Click to expand...

Just because you have one of those does not mean you are not a bad 'un...it possibly just means you haven't been caught!!!
 
don't forget to lend them your long flasher mac as well.. the camera on it's own only does half the job :thumbs:

Scandalous.
 
tiler65 said:
Just because you have one of those does not mean you are not a bad 'un...it possibly just means you haven't been caught!!!
Click to expand...

eeerm not really.. you can have been caught and have 50 convictions for sex offences or whatever.... you still get a enhanced CRB ...
 
Spooky said:
The scenario she is planning involves a character taking photographs of the children. She then wants to use this as an illustration of a potentially dangerous person.
Click to expand...

This is about context

Im a daddy taking pic's of my daughter in the park - and other kids are running about, and all the other mummys and daddys are supervising thier kids - there is nothing to worry about

Im a mummy taking pic's of my kid making sandcastles, on a beach with loads of other kids and a few topless women - no problem

Im a lone adult, with no kids, not known to anyone, only shooting pictures of strangers children, whilst trying to be covert - alarm bell is ringing. however this doesnt mean anything is wrong

If the same lone adult then starts communicating with the kids - big big alarm bells


The idea of educating people is good, but it has to convey that context is very important

Subnote...

-CCTV cameras record kids daily all over the place

- If I were a Paedophile (and I certainly am not), I would either use a camera phone (i.e. virtually invisible), or a 600MM lens and be half a mile away i.e. not on the radar

Subnote 2...

The real education is about supervision. If your kids are dressed decently, and are supervised, then it matters not a hoot if the guy with the phone, camera, or super zoom is a paedophile or not.

Even if he/she snaps your little darling, there is absolutely no danger to the kid.

If you leave a child unsupervised, and they happily talk to strangers, and they dress provocatively then you are (as a parent) allowing your child to be vulnerable.

The issue here isn't about the photographer or the paedophile, or the daddy snapping pic's of his own kid, it is about bringing your own kids up to be streetwise, be decent and supervising them when they are too young to make the right judgements
 
KIPAX said:
eeerm not really.. you can have been caught and have 50 convictions for sex offences or whatever.... you still get a enhanced CRB ...
Click to expand...

So what is the point in having an enhanced CRB Authority (?) then if it allows crinimals to get through, this system is a total cock up. I presumed the idea was to stop folk with convictions of crimes to hold a CRB certificate?
 
Wow!

Great range of responses; thanks to all who have contributed in such a short space of time.

I have politely declined supporting the event and gently questioned the ideas behind the scenario; I await a response (no doubt I might get summoned by a senior manager and told off for not being a team player)

In the meantime, I would still love to hear other thoughts.

Cheers

Spooks

PS - I am not going to bite about the throwaway Nikon comment :razz:

PPS - I don't own a mac; do you think I could get a Nikon branded one? :D
 
tiler65 the CRB check is wrong on so many levels, but perhaps the worst is the assumption that if you have been CRB checked you are a "good un" but if you haven't you are a pervert.

I can have convictions for many different offences and as the CRB check is not a pass or fail type check. I can still get employment including with kids & vulnerable adults. It is the person who request the CRB check that has to make the decision based on the information received.

This can work the other way especially when convictions that in Law are spent (in other words I do not have to declare them) appear on a CRB check.

There was a case where a guy used to take his kid to cubs and occasionally help out. CRB check was done and when he was a youngster he had nicked some sweets. The cub leaders banned him from picking up his kid from the premises as they deemed he had failed a CRB check. Other parents heard of this and immedietley equated this to him being a p***, to say his life was made hell was an understatement.
 
munch said:
tiler65 the CRB check is wrong on so many levels, but perhaps the worst is the assumption that if you have been CRB checked you are a "good un" but if you haven't you are a pervert.

I can have convictions for many different offences and as the CRB check is not a pass or fail type check. I can still get employment including with kids & vulnerable adults. It is the person who request the CRB check that has to make the decision based on the information received.

This can work the other way especially when convictions that in Law are spent (in other words I do not have to declare them) appear on a CRB check.

There was a case where a guy used to take his kid to cubs and occasionally help out. CRB check was done and when he was a youngster he had nicked some sweets. The cub leaders banned him from picking up his kid from the premises as they deemed he had failed a CRB check. Other parents heard of this and immedietley equated this to him being a p***, to say his life was made hell was an understatement.
Click to expand...

So my point is ....if you were convicted of a said child sex offence and you receive a CRB certificate then that is only down to the 'employer' allowing you to have one?

Slightly off topic but are the new regs regarding convictions with kids, something along the lines they are forbidden to work with kids (maybe for a set period of time) and in most cases put on the sex offenders register?
 
well the CRB think was a comment upon people's assumptions.
any system has its flaws.

Nikon, throwaway comment? I don't know what you mean :)

personally the camera thing is misnomer, the danger is stranger danger is about go ing away with strangers, getting in cars, etc
you might as well say that every person a walking a dog in the park is potentially doing it to attract young children to come and pet it and then steal them away...
horrendous I think.
 
CRB is a check not a certificate.
Say I have been found guilty of flashing, 10 years ago. this would appear on the CRB check that my "employer" gets. My employer would make a decision based on that information, the companies policies and maybe what I tell them.
Had I not been convicted then this would not appear on the CRB check

It is for this reason that you can't do CRB checks on yourself and why all "employers" require(and there is another can of worms) you to have one done specifically for them.

My main employer may deem a "one off when drunk flash" is OK but the scout group I help out with may not. Again there is a lot of public misconception and several organisations won't look at any body who as anything other than a blank CRB (see previous post)
 
I must add I have no convictions for flashing or anything else for that matter and the only time I have been to court is as a visitor.
 
tiler65 said:
So what is the point in having an enhanced CRB Authority (?) then if it allows crinimals to get through, this system is a total cock up. I presumed the idea was to stop folk with convictions of crimes to hold a CRB certificate?
Click to expand...

The CRB check 'report' isn't a certificate or any kind of authority, it's a report that says you have no criminal record or a criminal record as detailed below.....

It's like having a driving licence - you could have one with 10 points on it. The act of holding a driving licence shouldn't create the assumption that it's a clean one.

Anyone can have an enhanced CRB cert - it doesn't mean it's clear and you'd want them near your possessions - unless you'd read the details on it.:bonk:

When people tout the fact that they have an enhanced CRB you shouldn't necessarily assume it's a clean one.
 
entirely true, that's why I suggested people brought it with them.
however, the CRB business is detracting from the topic on hand.
 
DizMatt said:
entirely true, that's why I suggested people brought it with them.
however, the CRB business is detracting from the topic on hand.
Click to expand...

Brought what with them?......the certificate that you have had a check by the CRB?

I can't believe you can all be pedantic about a certificate/document/piece of paper when they all mean exactly the same thing!!!
 
No I don't think it is it is all about peoples perceptions. I am sure if the OP had said I have a CRB check then all would have been fine.

I am often asked I have a been CRB checked and I say yes (I do have one that was done about 5 years ago) I have never been asked to produce it though. In all but one occasion the request was not appropriate for what I was doing in any case, but it just shows peoples lack of understanding.
 
im my youth we had to avoid people with bags of sweets and Puppy Dogs...
 
You still should.
Would you like a sweety and can you help me find my lost puppy in those bushes over there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top