Photographing children

[Gumby]

How about the photo below? Is that creepy?

Yes, it is creepy. But mostly because that child has three arms! 😱

EDIT: Sorry to post the same thought, Andrew. I'd delete but I need the post count! 😉

 

[Gumby]

Blake, in my area the average sex offender (based on examination of the Megan's law database) has a hispanic surname and is less than 40 years old. The "profile" seems ot depend very much on where one is located.

Oh, and they are most often living in apartments.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

we haven't all agreed on anything.

i think we as photographers should take a step back and ask ourselves if being a menace to someone's child is worth defending our right to take their picture against their will.

i said it before, no picture any of us will ever take will ever make any real impression on the world. none of us will ever shoot the cover of national geographic or even the new york times, so why be so g*dd*mned self important about a right that MAY hurt other people?

bob

Hey Bob, taking a photo of a child is not a menace to anyone, except perhaps in your mind.

Also, I think you severly understimate the talent of some of the photographers on this site. There is certainly no reason to impose your own shortcomings on everyone else.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

Ours is a mixture -- it's largely black males in our community, and 85% of the people committing crimes in our community are black males... they are committing a vastly different sort of crimes than stalking children with cameras -- that's largely, mostly anywhere, a white middle aged male thing... If it was a black male hovering too close, given our community and having seen a lot of crap that happens here... I'd pack emma up, call the cops and secure the situation...

Granted, you guys from boston need to stop sending your sex offenders here as we arrested one last night who was a repeat offender

Anthony Simmons was on Massachusetts top 10 list of "Most Wanted Sex Offenders."

He served more than 2 years in a state prison for fondling a child on three separate occasions.

In 2006, he was charged with violating his probation and failing to register as a sex offender. Monday the Mid-South Fugive Task Force caught up with him near Summer and North Parkway.

According to the U.S. Marshals Service, he'd been living here homeless, begging for money, for more than a year.

"He could be a repeat offender at any time, I would consider that guy very dangerous," said Marty Magnon of the U.S. Marshals Service.

Magnon received a tip Simmons was known to panhandle in the neighborhood near Summer and North Parkway, a neighborhood filled with children.

--- homeless panhandler type - -but that's a whole different issue for our community -- yes, the homeless guy hovering nearby or the panhandler is going to see the inside of jail rather quickly....

I've no problem with profiling in this city --- it kinda gets to a point where your rights matter a lot less than you'd think.

Why do you feel this is necessary?

 

[bob338]

Hey Bob, taking a photo of a child is not a menace to anyone, except perhaps in your mind.

Also, I think you severly understimate the talent of some of the photographers on this site. There is certainly no reason to impose your own shortcomings on everyone else.

ahhh, the refuge of the coward at their keyboard; 'it's you who is the pervert, not us!' why is it that stating my dislike for strangers taking pictures of my son makes me a pervert? nice deflect! i don't think i've even crossed that line and called anyone a pervert or even brought it up. i just think it's low-rent to bother people for no good reason when they would rather not be bothered by you and your camera.

and i said in an earlier post that i was wrong to heap my own insecurities on anyone else's work on the site. i apologize for saying that.

but i will not apologize for saying that i think it's creepy and a bit menacing to take pictures of kids without a parents consent. mind your own business and take pictures that don't make anyone feel worse than they already do.

bob

 

[bob338]

here's a good rule of life... don't f*ck around when it comes to other people's kids

for the life of me, i cannot understand why so many people have such a hard time understanding this simple logic. if you mess with kids, don't be surprised when people respond violently.

bob

 

[bmattock]

To all the ones screaming loudly about their rights... What would you do if I'm on the sidewalk in front of your house, repeatedly taking pictures of your car, your house and you as you walk around your premises...

Ignore you. It's part of that "Golden Rule" thing people who didn't actually understand it were trying to use as if it meant something else earlier in this thread.

It's for an art project I'm doing called "Photograph of a license plate" -- besides, I'm well within my legal rights to be standing here on public property taking pictures as I see fit...

Knock yourself out.

You'd get a bit edgy, pissed off, and probably either call the cops or worse...

Nothing wrong with calling the cops. I'm all for parents who are scare of photographers taking pictures of their kids doing likewise. If there is no law being broken, then the cop is going to tell me to forget about it and let you continue happy-snapping my house. PS - paparazzi do it all the time, perfectly legal.

here's a good rule of life... don't fück around when it comes to other people's kids

Here's a better rule. Mind your own business when it comes to people going about theirs.

 

[bmattock]

for the life of me, i cannot understand why so many people have such a hard time understanding this simple logic. if you mess with kids, don't be surprised when people respond violently.

bob

Don't be surprised when you find out you're not as tough as you talk.

 

[bob338]

Don't be surprised when you find out you're not as tough as you talk.

until you mentioned my name, you weren't even interesting or eloquent enough to illicit a response from me.

i don't care if you think i'm tough or not, that's childish. i've seen the wimpiest looking guy take the biggest biker in a bar fight easily. i'm under no illusion that i'm the toughest guy in the world. but you seem to be under some illusion that your rights will protect you from some headcase asserting their 2nd amendment rights. you cannot argue your rights with a gun nut, they'll out-crazy you every time. so go ahead and keep ruining peoples day so you can get another picture for your flickr page. but don't come crying to me when someone knocks your teeth out.

bob

edit--just for the sake of argument, what do you do when someone does beat you senseless? sue them? they might not have any money. prosecute them? they go away for a while and you're still left with broken bones, medical bills and a fear of leaving your house. is it worth it?

 

[Paul T.]

This isn't about kids, is it?

It's about who's toughest. Or most paranoid.

We've had three people, or more, promising violence, and beating their chests like gorillas proclaiming how tough they are. Don't you realise how pathetic that looks? Have you realised that, as a parent, your paranoia is far more dangerous than the stranger on the street?

THis is starting to remind me of the UK rentamob who vandalized the home of a pediatrician, thinking it was the same thing as a paedophile.

 

[rover]

OK, just sit in joyful anticipation, this same exact thread is scheduled to happen again in just another month or two as this is the 3006th time we have had this discussion. Until then, grab your chains and chair legs and take you scrap into an alley somewhere. Which of course brings up the speculation, what is the best lens to use in a riot?