NationStates Jolt Archive

Was reading my favorite news site this morning, and came across this...

Click Me (http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,17979111%255E421,00.html?from=rss)

I think its very sad that society has got to the stage now where parents can't take photo's of their own children having a swim or playing sport without asking someone else's permission.

While I fully understand and support the need to protect children, I do feel this is going too far. A better solution in my opinion would be better security around public venues or junior sports grounds and stopping the perverts. They are the problem, not the parents. Photographs are a parents permanent visual record of their child's childhood and restricting that is censorship gone mad.

One request to anyone who wants to comment on this. Please don't turn this thread into a tirade about what should happen to pedophiles. I think we all have our opinions set on that ;).

I'm pretty sure they are making it as hassle-free as possible. It is a filter for pedos, not parents.

If it's a growing problem in that particular area, especially, then yes extra caution should be taken.

All I can think to say is OMFG. Let's hear it for social progress.

I am actually surprised at the quick response from Queensland as they are normally slow witted.

I wouldn't know about Queenslanders being slow witted, I'm from Adelaide. Am just trapped here for the foreseeable future.

Whether its handled in a hassle free manner or not, I still think its disgusting that a parent has to ask a stranger for permission to snap a pic of his/her own child.

Get more security guards/police patrolling these places. That would be enough to scare any undisirables away and protect the children, without impacting on the families.

Pshhh we just don't concern ourselves with the outside world.

I guess it would never come across anyone's mind to simply locked the baby rapers up till the end of their days instead of the goverment taking ownership their kids would it?

What about setting the vermin up with a pocket knife and a weeks rations and dropping them off on an outer island and say....can't live in our society....make your own.

I wouldn't know about Queenslanders being slow witted, I'm from Adelaide. Am just trapped here for the foreseeable future.

Whether its handled in a hassle free manner or not, I still think its disgusting that a parent has to ask a stranger for permission to snap a pic of his/her own child.

Get more security guards/police patrolling these places. That would be enough to scare any undisirables away and protect the children, without impacting on the families.
Are you sure you are Australian?:p
Pshhh we just don't concern ourselves with the outside world.
Have i got the place for you.:p

:p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p

i saw this coming when there was all that hooplah about diane arbus....

Whether its handled in a hassle free manner or not, I still think its disgusting that a parent has to ask a stranger for permission to snap a pic of his/her own child.

Get more security guards/police patrolling these places. That would be enough to scare any undisirables away and protect the children, without impacting on the families.

I actually fail to see the problem. Pedophiles aren't going to be scared off by security guards and police wandering around; if all parents are allowed to take pictures without any sort of approval, how are the guys in uniforms supposed to know that the guy in the middle of row 5 isn't someone's parent? 'Tis a rule any skilled criminal knows: If you don't want to get caught, don't act like anything unusual is going on.

The parents go to the officials in question and ask to take pictures, they get approval, they take pictures. Whoopty doo. I don't think anybody's rights are being violated here.

I actually fail to see the problem. Pedophiles aren't going to be scared off by security guards and police wandering around; if all parents are allowed to take pictures without any sort of approval, how are the guys in uniforms supposed to know that the guy in the middle of row 5 isn't someone's parent? 'Tis a rule any skilled criminal knows: If you don't want to get caught, don't act like anything unusual is going on.

The parents go to the officials in question and ask to take pictures, they get approval, they take pictures. Whoopty doo. I don't think anybody's rights are being violated here.

Just about exactly what I would expect to hear from the land where child porn is a misdemeanor.
Come to think of it, I'd probably think the very same thing if I were a Pedophile. It sure beats hunting down the criminal if you are one.

Just about exactly what I would expect to hear from the land where child porn is a misdemeanor.
Come to think of it, I'd probably think the very same thing if I were a Pedophile. It sure beats hunting down the criminal if you are one.

I... You... But... What the bloody hell? Ye gods, please tell me you're being sarcastic. There's no way this makes sense otherwise.

Mathew Hayden

Why care who is taking a photo of your child at a sporting event?

Just about exactly what I would expect to hear from the land where child porn is a misdemeanor.
Come to think of it, I'd probably think the very same thing if I were a Pedophile. It sure beats hunting down the criminal if you are one.

So... you agree with 'hunting down' paedophiles... but you oppose this measure, which would make it easier to hunt down paedophiles (because if you're randomly taking photos of kids that aren't yours, there's a possibility there's something not quite right there...)?

Confusing.

I would love to be photographed at a sporting event.. I'm so good, I should be in everyone's living room.

Why care who is taking a photo of your child at a sporting event?

Because a good number of those random-people-taken-photos end up on child porn sites or in child porn rings.

Understandably, not many parents really approve of that.

I actually fail to see the problem. Pedophiles aren't going to be scared off by security guards and police wandering around; if all parents are allowed to take pictures without any sort of approval, how are the guys in uniforms supposed to know that the guy in the middle of row 5 isn't someone's parent? 'Tis a rule any skilled criminal knows: If you don't want to get caught, don't act like anything unusual is going on.

The parents go to the officials in question and ask to take pictures, they get approval, they take pictures. Whoopty doo. I don't think anybody's rights are being violated here.

Years ago, I was a nanny/housekeeper and looked after twin 7 year old boys. I took many photos of the boys, in many different places like the house, beach, park, zoo ect, and always had doubles developed so the father could have a set. One photo, which I still have, was of the boys in the bath. They didn't know it was coming, I just snuck my head around the door and snapped the pic. There was absolutly nothing sexual about it, and the father loved that paticular photo when he got hold of his set.

That was in 1985. If I did that today, I'd probably end up in jail. Thats a sign of the times and it seems these days instead of treating the disease, by arresting the perverts and locking them up for a bloody long time, we are punishing society, and especially families, instead by treating the symptoms. No parent should have to ask permission to photograph their own child.

Police and security do scare those planning wrong doings. If you were planning to stalk children, would you do it in a place where a guard is constantly walking around and watching? Trained guards and police can pick those acting even slightly furtively by watching body language and other signs. The fact there isn't enough security in these places is because the organisations concerned either can't afford it, or just plain don't want to pay for it.

There is also the fact most junior sports teams officials do know most of the parents of their young members and can easily pick if someone is out of place. Some of these known parents are the ones who turn up every week and scream abuse at the umpires :p.

No parent should have to ask permission to photograph their own child.

Why? Ignoring the fact that it's nice to have the kid's permission beforehand, what philisophic code lists "the right to take a picture of my kids without checking with the people legally responsible for them at the moment first" as an inalienable right?

Police and security do scare those planning wrong doings. If you were planning to stalk children, would you do it in a place where a guard is constantly walking around and watching? Trained guards and police can pick those acting even slightly furtively by watching body language and other signs. The fact there isn't enough security in these places is because the organisations concerned either can't afford it, or just plain don't want to pay for it.

I think you give too much credit to security guards, and too little to skilled criminals. Again, some random guy who comes into the gymnasium in the middle of the crowd, sits right in the open in the middle of the bleachers (one of dozens, maybe one or two hundred or more, depending on the size of the event and the gym), and who is taking pictures just like half the other people in the stands is not going to attract undue attention, particularly from a middle-aged security guard who just wants to sit on his duff and get paid, maybe so that he can go home and see his own kids.

There is also the fact most junior sports teams officials do know most of the parents of their young members and can easily pick if someone is out of place. Some of these known parents are the ones who turn up every week and scream abuse at the umpires :p.

Yes, and these are the people the parents are getting their permission from. Basically, the rule described here says that, unless the person is recognized as a parent by one of these people, they're not allowed to take pictures.

I simply fail to see the issue here.

I had asked why anyone would care as to who was taking pictures of their child at a sporting event.

Because a good number of those random-people-taken-photos end up on child porn sites or in child porn rings.

Understandably, not many parents really approve of that.

We are kidding right. How is child porn created at a sporting event? Exactly what kind of sport are you thinking about here?

Also if the picture of your child isn't pornographic why care who sees it?

Was reading my favorite news site this morning, and came across this...

Click Me (http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,17979111%255E421,00.html?from=rss)

I think its very sad that society has got to the stage now where parents can't take photo's of their own children having a swim or playing sport without asking someone else's permission.

While I fully understand and support the need to protect children, I do feel this is going too far. A better solution in my opinion would be better security around public venues or junior sports grounds and stopping the perverts. They are the problem, not the parents. Photographs are a parents permanent visual record of their child's childhood and restricting that is censorship gone mad.

One request to anyone who wants to comment on this. Please don't turn this thread into a tirade about what should happen to pedophiles. I think we all have our opinions set on that ;).

Did you ever consider that a parent could be a pedophile?

In some cases maybe, but those parents won't be stopped by this ban, they can just ask and recieve permission and snap away.

In some cases maybe, but those parents won't be stopped by this ban, they can just ask and recieve permission and snap away.

On the one hand, you complain that parents will be stopped from taking pictures of their kids.

On the other hand, you say it will be easy for pedophiles to get permission.

Which is it?

Why would any pedophile take pictures of a kid playing sports?
Its not like most people play sports without clothes.
Yes, im sure theres a sicko out there for every particular sexual malady, but
this may just be too far into the realms of paranoia.

I can understand that parents might be a bit.... aghast to find out their kids' pics are on a porn website. I also agree that tighter security and coaches taking more of an interest in who is snaping photos and who shouldn't be is only a good thing. However, I think we are allowing something filthy to pervert something not. These are innocent children swimming and engaging in sports. Clothed sports, I believe(I think I would've heard something if Australia reverted to greek-style naked athletics). These photos are of innocent children engaging in sports. That's a healthy thing.It's a positive thing. Just because a few wacko-nutjobs get their rocks off seeing pictures of kids in shorts doesn't change the fact that these are nothng more than photographs of a perfectly innocent activity.

Just keep the cameras out of the locker rooms. *nod*

Did you ever consider that a parent could be a pedophile?

It's happened before. It'll happen again. :(

Let's put it this way. If I am a parent that is concerned about pedophiles and doesn't want my child's picture taken, I'm shit out of luck without a policy like this.

"Sadly in this day and age we have had to be more vigilant," a Surf Life Saving Queensland spokeswoman said.

Sadly in this day and age we still have people thinking the world used to be a safer place. There have always been paedophiles, and probably always will be. However, it is much easier to prevent, discover, rehabilitate and convict them today than it was then. Plus, the subject is no longer taboo. Camera bans will ultimately lead to witch hunts.

Some people just won't stop reading the tabloids and start thinking for themselves. Pathetic.

On the one hand, you complain that parents will be stopped from taking pictures of their kids.

On the other hand, you say it will be easy for pedophiles to get permission.

Which is it?

Oh for petes sake, you are trying to twist things.

Parents are banned from taking photos of their children unless they ask permission from strangers. I feel that is wrong and approching the problem the wrong way because as someone said in a post not far above this one, it will turn innocent activities into something seedy, and punish the wrong people.

I never said that it will be easy for pedophiles to get permission, I said if little Tammy's father molests her at night, then comes to her netball game and asks the coaches permission to take photos, he will get it because he is the parent, unless of course the coach is psychic and knows he's molesting her. So in the case of molester parents, this ban is useless and won't protect the child.

Another strike against it in my opinion.

Well from a legal stance I don't see how this rule could be enforced... seeing as it is the sole right of child's legal guardians to grant permission to photograph a child. What are they going to do if someone breaks that rule, chuck them out of the building? Who's going to look after the child? Are you going to chuck the child out with the photographer as well? So what's the point in the rule then? Or are you going to keep the child until you can determine the child's parents? Does that sound like unlawful imprisonment, can anyone here the lawyers running down the road to get to this easy lawsuit first?

Just a ridiculous rule.

And anyway, you could just have a paeophile ring asking each other for permission to take photographs.

Did anyone actually think this rule through before trying to implement it?

Let's put it this way. If I am a parent that is concerned about pedophiles and doesn't want my child's picture taken, I'm shit out of luck without a policy like this.

This ban prevents people taking photos of their own kids, I'm not against stopping them taking photos of other peoples without permission. Thats just politness if nothing else.

Well from a legal stance I don't see how this rule could be enforced... seeing as it is the sole right of child's legal guardians to grant permission to photograph a child. What are they going to do if someone breaks that rule, chuck them out of the building? Who's going to look after the child? Are you going to chuck the child out with the photographer as well? So what's the point in the rule then? Or are you going to keep the child until you can determine the child's parents? Does that sound like unlawful imprisonment, can anyone here the lawyers running down the road to get to this easy lawsuit first?

Just a ridiculous rule.

And anyway, you could just have a paeophile ring asking each other for permission to take photographs.

Did anyone actually think this rule through before trying to implement it?

Did you think this post through before you made it. The rule you object to is one that you say is a "right."

This ban prevents people taking photos of their own kids, I'm not against stopping them taking photos of other peoples without permission. Thats just politness if nothing else.

How do I keep you from taking photos of other kids once you are allowed to take photos?

See the point of the policy.

I don't understand your objection to my objection. :P

edit: I'm off to lectures. I'll catch up with the thread later.

How do I keep you from taking photos of other kids once you are allowed to take photos?

See the point of the policy.

Good question, and something else that makes this ban stupid.

This policy won't stop that because parents who ask will get permission to snap away with the camera, and I doubt there will be anyone standing next to them ensuring only their own child is in the viewfinder at the time. I'd ask permission from the other parents, I don't know if others would.

Most, in fact the vast majority of parents who want to take photos are doing it for totally innocent reasons. Not because they want to put the pictures up on a pervert website. I can't imagine having to walk up to a coach, manager, lifesaver or whoever and ask nicely if I can take a few snaps of my kid scoring a try, standing on a podium or throwing a goal.

A much better solution is increased security in the problem venues, and stronger penalties for pedophiles. Most of them are barely tapped on the wrist in this country and unlucky if they get more than 3 years jail time (yes, that is sarcasm, I believe the crime deserves 10 years minimum).

Remind me never to go live there when I have kids.....

Dumbasses :rolleyes:

I live West of Queensland, thank God.

I am actually surprised at the quick response from Queensland as they are normally slow witted.

lol what is your problem with queensland?