to be annoyed that a stranger lined my children up and took their picture in the park without asking permission?

[IlanaK]

In Regent's park today with a friend. Three boys all way ahea dof us on the path scootering. A group of tourist men lined them up with the stream and trees as backdrop and took their phot before we could get to them.

They got a right telling of from me though.

Was I being unreasonable?

Some people got arrested for taking pictures of their own children in Trafalgar square!
I don't understand the logic of this anyway, a very very small percentage of people taking pictures of children in public places may be deviant, but would banning the practice prevent paedophilia? I don't think so.
It reminds me of a mob trashing a paediatrician office after some horrific news story. It's meant well but completely misguided.

isnt it even illegal to take pictures of your own children whilst they are in the bath/naked?

No, it's not illegal. I have taken naked pictures of the children from time to time and it's certainly not illegal. If you get them developed somewhere else some idiot of a Boots developer as happened to that poor newsreader might complain but it is not illegal.

Actually wisteria I was NOT implying that THIS situation was neccesarily one with evil intent but just a bit bemused at everyones reaction that of course it isn't!!

Of course we don't want our kids to see bogeymen at every corner (& I would never fighten a child with these thoughts) but there is a difference between being realistic & being unaware.(not having a dig at you general statement) Evil pictures can & do lead to physical abuse, the internet whilst being so wonderful on many levels has also allowed many a borderline pervert move from merely fantasising over a mag or film to accessing a plethora of increasingly awful images which can tip them over the edge into real actions.

Teenagers posting photos on a web-page is not a worry. My kids know why I don't want their images on a public website that I don't have control over & they agree. Peadophiles in the whole use photos of very little ones not teenagers, wwho are starting ot look grown -up so if they do it later when older I have no problem with that.

I agree the OP is NBU from a pure courtesy pont of view they should have asked but hey-ho some don't. I love talking to strangers about my kids & others kids & would never be rude to one but a little caution is all I'm saying & DON'T presume just because it's unlikely that it doesn't happen.

"If we were all a little more interested in other people's children, and a little bit less scared about intervening, there probably would be less abuse going on."

That's another thread topic possibly Uber & I quite agree!!

Xenia: "If you get them developed somewhere else some idiot of a Boots developer as happened to that poor newsreader might complain but it is not illegal."

That case was particularly ironic, since at the time Boots promoted their photo-processing, instore and on the pavement) with a life-size stand-up photograph of a small child (4 y.o.?) seen from behind. Stark naked.

IlanaK: "I just think it was rude and unwise to take photos of someone else's children without asking permission."

That's a fair point - but I also think that's a time when even quite small children can be trusted to give or withhold permission themselves.

In fact at home now I always ask before I take photos if any of the 5 object and also get it clarified if the image can be sent to relatives or not. The children have very strong views so it pays to get consent!

As Xenia says, it's not illegal to take pictures of people in public places. In a private place it's different. If you were to attack someone for taking a picture as some posters have suggested, you'd be liable for assault.

Lots of celebs would love to make it an offence to take photos of people in public too, but thank God that's not the case yet.

The reason we are not allowed to video Nativity plays any more is nothing really to do with paedophiles - it is a response to the sort of paranoia present on this thread. And it's not a huge leap from that to the stoning of a paediatrician's house. Yes, horrible things do happen - but almost always behind the closed doors of respectable houses. If hideous paedophile (is it just me who hates "paedo"?) misused an image of my child it would do no harm at all to my child. Teaching her that people are all potentially dangerous, and the most innocent and kindly act should be treated with suspicion will do her infinite harm and give her a seriously skewed world view.

seeker
sorry but you're bonkers

these people transpose pictures of kids they see onto all sorts of things

taking pictures of strange children is not an innocent and kindly act -- and i've lived in countries where taking pictures of blonde children was seriously innocent and i had to discourage even that

what about a stranger offering your child sweets? that could be, to a child, "innocent and kindly"

I do not talk to strange children, if they come and talk to me I redirect them to their parents, I am not particularly nice or not nice just "go and find your mum". I do not want to encourage any children to talk to strangers.

Seeker: "Teaching her that people are all potentially dangerous, and the most innocent and kindly act should be treated with suspicion will do her infinite harm and give her a seriously skewed world view."

Spot on.

and you're bonkers too ubergeek!

'these people transpose pictures of kids they see onto all sorts of things'

This thread is starting to sound a bit Chris Morris.

But if they did awful things with the pictures how exactly would that harm my child?

And I have always told my children that there are ways they can behave when they are with me that are completely different from how they should behave on their own. For example, when they are with me, I am fine with them talking to strangers, they have had some brilliant interractions with people on buses and trains. They have also been given - and accepted -sweets from grannies in supermarkets. I thing the risk of them being given a poisoned mqrs bar is rougly on a par of them being hit by a meteorite - and I don't insist on the wearing hard hats in case that happens either

well they do
it's a lovely airy fairy place some people live in

i know the facts
most abuse happens inside the home or someone you know

so instead of telling them not to talk to strangers, let's tell them not to talk to the most likely offenders, not to accept lifts from teachers, people they see around school, other people's fathers, youth group leaders... because they're more realistic offenders in terms of my child

which i do, by the way

my children don't have a seriously skewed view of the world, they haven't suffered "infinite harm" (purlease) they know that if I say they can walk somewhere alone, it's safe, because I've said so and I wouldn't let them if I thought they wouldn't follow "the rules"

and I won't let them take pictures because why make it easy for them?

these wankers need to be stopped at every possible opportunity ..inconvenienced, told off, reprimanded, publicly embarrassed

(it's obvious if they're tourists.. you can just tell them nicely -- anyone else would get a bit more from me)

and I won't let them take pictures because why make it easy for them?

these wankers need to be stopped at every possible opportunity ..inconvenienced, told off, reprimanded, publicly embarrassed

(it's obvious if they're tourists.. you can just tell them nicely -- anyone else would get a bit more from me)

Sorry, don't understand your last post.

So now you are saying that everyone who isn't a tourist is a 'wanker' - presumably you mean a paedophile?

Wow. That's really reasonable. Maybe we should make people get a licence to buy a camera?

I don't think it's necessary to tell children not to talk to anyone. I think it's important to tell them that if anyone asks them to do something they don't like they have a right to say "no". That goes for anyone - stranger or Uncle Fred.

Teach them how to look after themselves - not that the world is a horrible dangerous place....IT ISN"T!

you are wondering why people object when strangers take pictures of their children .. or have I misunderstood?

in my case it's because I don't want paedophiles being in possession of pictures of my children

and if strangers who may be paedophiles take pictures of my children when I am not with them I will object

but if they are obviously tourists I will explain to them why I am unhappy with it

is that clearer..

so hard on mn but realise the tone is "talking down" but it's not meant to be

I hate the bastards who do this kind of thing and there are a bastard lot of them around

by wanker I meant the bad guys

but really in this day and age most people should know it's not good form to take pictures of other people's children

Actually stuffitall, I think children are more likely to be abused by family members. So I would start policing that first before teachers etc. At least people who work with children have to crb checked but parents and uncles dont.
Haven't read rest of thread so sorry if my post is out of context.

I'm interested to know how you can tell the difference between a tourist and a 'wanker'. Is it a mac?

I think it's necessary to tell children not to talk to people.
Stop and talk and you are vulnerable.