Thread: Father’s photo of daughter in shopping centre sparks security dispute

Originally Posted by Agent_Smith

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

you jobsworth c**t!"

I like this jobsworth word, wish we had a similar word in America. Best I can think of is petty tyrant or we can say someone is power tripping. Generally we just call folks like this douchebags, though.

duplicate

Originally Posted by Sailing into trouble

It looks like the cops and security went over the top, but if this had been a case of a pedophile coming on to the fathers kid, I wonder what would have happened if the guards and the cops did nothing?

What if someone had stopped and questioned you about taking that photo of your dog in your signature? After all, what would have happened if it turned out not to be your dog, and you were in fact a zoophile taking pictures of some other persons K9?

To Tax Exile....

I've had one run in with a little Hitler at Reading Station (en route from the airport), who refused to let me board a train that was stationary.....and sort of preparing itself to depart.

The guy had a peaked cap and was dressed in a Ruritanian Duke's outfit.


Am reminded too of a passenger commenting when shoe removal was incorporated into airport procedures.....and he had the temerity to ask 'why do I have to do this'......and the guard (inhaling so much as to double himself in size), yelled at 200 decibels.

"BECAUSE I SAY SO"

So I do agree, the 'because I say so' mentality is inane.

I quite like the Spectator's recommendation myself:

Are You a Terrorist or Just a Paedophile?


Alex Massie
Tuesday, 11th October 2011



Hark at this terrorist threat! The photograph above was taken by Chris White at Braehead shopping centre near Glasgow last Friday. It may look an innocent family snap to you because, well, that's what it is and that's his daughter in the picture. But that reckons without the blessed vigilance of the staff at this retail-hellhole who, wisely, considered Mr White a threat and duly called in Strathclyde police. The police duly hassled Mr White, reminding him that they were empowered to do so thanks to the provisions of anti-terrorism legislation. Cue much outrage on Facebook and amongst sensible people everywhere. This was not, alas, an uncommon type of incident.
Today the shopping centre has apologised and abandoned its ban on family photography. But not before making an ass of itself. Indeed, the statement they first issued deserves to be quoted in full as a ghastly example of the gawd-help-us dreadfulness of the times and the culture we must endure:

Following various postings on social media websites and stories in the traditional media, Braehead would like to set the record straight on an incident involving a man taking photographs of a child in the centre, on Friday October 7.
Retail staff at an ice cream stall in Braehead became suspicious after they saw a male shopper taking photographs of a child sitting at their counter. The staff thought the man had also been taking photographs of them and they alerted one of the centre’s security staff.
The member of security staff approached the man and politely asked if he had been taking photographs. At no time in the initial conversation was the member of our security staff informed by the man that the child in question was his daughter.
Because of the nature of the incident, police became involved and also spoke to the man.
Our priority is always to maintain a safe and enjoyable environment for all our shoppers and retailers. The member of our security staff acted in good faith.
Like most shopping centres, we have a ‘no photography’ policy in the mall for two reasons. First, to protect the privacy of staff and shoppers. as we are sure shoppers would not want strangers taking photographs of them or their children while they were in the mall.
Secondly and sadly, we live in a world of potential threats from terrorists and everyone is being urged by the police to be vigilant at all times. It is not uncommon for those intending to make some kind of attack to take photographs of their intended target as part of their planning before the event.
However, it is not our intention to - and we do not - stop innocent family members taking pictures. Discretion is used at all times.
Although Friday’s incident had nothing to do with a potential terrorist attack, the two retail assistants and the member of our security staff were faced with a situation they genuinely thought was suspicious. They witnessed a man taking photographs of a child, unaware that the man and the child were related.
I’m sure people will agree it is better safe than sorry [sic].

Dreadful but not, alas, surprising and a wearisome commentary on the madness of the age. I'd encourage fathers of small children to invade your nearest shopping centre and take as many photographs as it necessary to make your point that up with this kind of thing you will not put.

Originally Posted by taxexile

Yes, but why can't people just do as they're told? On this occasion its not some huge infringement of human rights.

probably a while since you were there moog.

the streets, parks, shopping centres and public spaces of that once free land are now crawling with government and local council paid employees with important sounding titles containing the words community and environment and safety, sporting para military police type uniforms, (you know... torches, badges, rubber gloves, walkie talkies, notebooks, big keys on frightening looking chains, boots etc.) all on the lookout for little old ladies who break any of the raft of rules regarding health and safety, anti terrorism, racial awareness parking, litter, cycling, smoking, dog walking, pram pushing, security, noise infringement etc.etc,etc. that strangle outdoor life in the uk.

massive fines await transgressors who fall foul of these fat spotty pale faced grinning misfit nazi enforcers patrolling the streets.


the world has gone mad, upside down. whats right is wrong, and whats wrong is right.

you can be challenged at any time by some youth in uniform, telling you in that official, politically correct and ultra polite monologue that you shouldnt be doing whatever it is that you are innocently doing, and then given a ticket for doing it.

in this case it was taking a photograph of a daughter, yesterday, according to a local newspaper i read, it was health and safety inspectors telling a man who had lived in his home for 60 years that he would need to display a "mind your head" notice on a low inside doorway before council carers would be allowed to visit him.

the day before, council employees visited a wooded area in a park in richmond commando style and pulled down kids temporary dens, made from branches and leaves, telling the crying kids that insects were being harmed by the dens.

and also yesterday, it was decreed that children now cannot blow up balloons in case they swallow them and choke to death, warnings and sales restrictions now apply to ballons and those blow out paper things that unfold when you blow, you find them in xmas crackers.

so i'm not surprised that this father is livid.

Is that the same all over the world, or is it restricted to backward places like Europe and the US?

Originally Posted by SiLeakHunt

everybody knows that terrorists only attack targets where there is a human or economic value.

Yet, factor in the psychological element towards terrorism, which a number of countries/cultures have integrated into their already OTT paranoid state, which of course has led to bizzare laws and mandates in-place.....

Originally Posted by taxexile

council paid employees with important sounding titles , sporting para military police type uniforms, (you know... torches, badges, rubber gloves, walkie talkies, notebooks, big keys on frightening looking chains, boots etc.)

here is what they look like- they get 2 weeks training
and a big fat belt to wear


take my advice stand well clear
you never know, when they are going to blow
an extra map or something is all it could take

Is the taking photos ban concerned with Terror plans being developed from information in the photos? I used to know "people" who would do on hiking trips to take pictures of points of interest. Always had their girl friend or a horse (both in some cases) as part of the photo.

Common MO for planning attacks since Fred of Arabia Days.

The rules have been set by someone trying to cover all the basses so he and his company won't get sued if some thing does happen.

that someone is a politician who is only interested in votes. "somebody threw a watermelon off a balcony, and broke somebody's neck"

"if elected, i pledge to ban watermelons in any building higher than 2 stories"

And another fucking jobsworth strikes....

Man fined for brushing his dog's fur in Nottingham public park


It may sound like a shaggy dog story... but a pet owner was handed a £75 litter fine for brushing his dog in a park.





Roy was slapped with a £75 fine (Picture: BBC)
Roy Wyre was given the penalty as he sat on a blanket brushing his German Shepherd dog Spencer’s coat.

The 66-year-old ex-security guard was initially asked by a council community protection officer to remove the high-visibility jacket he was wearing, because it looked as though he was impersonating a policeman.

‘He asked me for my details and I said I had done nothing wrong and I was not giving him my name and address,’ said Mr Wyre, from Nottingham.

Police were then called – forcing Mr Wyre to take off his jacket... and then came the real surprise.

‘When the police went, the community protection officer had a fine slip with a fine of £75 for litter,' he continued.

'He put on the slip, “litter, large amounts” but there was nowhere near large amounts.'

Mr Wyre has since received an apology from the council and had the fine rescinded.



Read more: Roy Wyre fined for brushing his dog's fur in Nottingham public park | Metro.co.uk

^
I heard he was going to buy his dog an
hi viz vest
to stop it getting hit by cars in the dark
but decided not to,
in case Spencer gets into trouble for impersonating a Police dog....

Seriously, if the Tory cuts mean these useless fucking arseholes get fired, GOOD.