Photography and the terrorism law.

[yelvertoft]

This is another aspect of the continuing paranoia:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...n-at-fair.html

[walwyn]

Why had she allowed her kids to go on the slide naked in the first place?

[yelvertoft]

I don't know which story you've been reading walwyn............

[miketoll]

I understand what Walwyn means, you can not take an indecent shot if the subject is not indecent so if the shot could be deemed indecent then the women must have let her child on the slide naked so she is a guilty party too. I think....

[robski]

It is the classic case of extrapolating a basic concept into the realms of the ridiculous. The masses want those in power to be seen to be acting on a problem regardless as to how ineffectual that action maybe.

Any half wit could think of a million ways to bring about mass death and destruction. Little that those in power could do to predict or stop it.
They would have to ban everything to stand a chance. That would make living pointless if that were the case.

If you take 9/11, it was about attacking the symbols of power, the death toll would of been much higher if humans were the target.

Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the examples of true terror.

We see the security stepped up at airports every so often to keep people on their toes. The armed police are told to walk around the building a few times and every item double checked. The real cost to us is millions for the extra staff, equipment and delays. Why attach the front door when the back door is wide open ?

Road safety is another area for concern. Soon we will told we are walking too fast to save another life because the bean counters want to reduce the death toll by one over a ten year period. Crazy when you think that on average 2000 people in the UK die everyday for one reason or another. A fact of life. Work it out for yourself if you don't believe me ( average life span 70 yrs population 60 million). It is crazy when the news headline is that 3 people died today. What about the other 1997 or so that also died.

I am sure we have all got a local person with bee in their bonnet who wants to clamp down on something or the other.

Now to the case in question of photographing children in public. I don't question that it is a problem but how big a problem is it really ? By peoples reaction I guess there must be 10 perverts lurking on every street corner and vastly out number those who have a genuine reason to photography their own kids. I am sure the pervert community already has enough photos to keep them going so why would they risk taking more ?

When will the human race get a sense of proportion and act accordingly ?

Rant over

[walwyn]

Originally Posted by yelvertoft

I don't know which story you've been reading walwyn............

Well Miketoll got the point.

If photos of fully dressed kids are causing people to get off then we need to do something about people spanking the monkey whilst watching CBEEBIES, the Disney Channel, or the Littlewoods catalog.

On flickr from time to time one sees complaints from a parent about photos of their child getting unwanted attention. Those photos are not your normal kid in playground photo. Rather they are photos of the child naked in the bath, or dressed in highly sexualized clothing, or posing in a suggestive way. No doubt the parent thought it cute, but such images will attract the perverts.

Lets have a sense of proportion as to what is problematic and what is not. Though I suppose he could have been trying to get upskirt shots of lttle girls.

[carman]

Anybody read "1984" by George Orwell?

[robski]

Yes and Orwell was really complaining about the state of affairs in 1948 god knows what he would of made of the current situation.

[walwyn]

Originally Posted by robski

Yes and Orwell was really complaining about the state of affairs in 1948 god knows what he would of made of the current situation.

I added a entry to my political blog on that a couple of weeks ago:
http://spark-in-the-ashes.net/warr/?p=23