ralphchadkirk
Established Member
It's private property, they're entitled to ban people from taking photographs.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Man stopped by security for taking pictures in shopping centre
- Thread starter nedchester
- Start date
- Status
It's private property, they're entitled to ban people from taking photographs.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
But they should make it very clear, and even then they can simply ask the person to leave and ban them if they so wish.
They also have to consider WHY they would want to implement such a ban, given everyone takes photos these days. Your mates on a day out (whether that's on the street, a bus or in a shop), taking a photo of a product to show someone later on (is this the one you wanted?', 'what do you think of this?') or something funny.. Goodness, there are a million reasons that aren't for any commercial gain.
They can't call the police or ask to see/delete the photos. If they wanted to do that, they could take a civil action against the 'offender'.
Whatever the man was trying to take a photo of, it doesn't change that fact. No shopping centre is going to be able to get someone arrested for breaching a rule they've set up that isn't law.
The next time security pick on a teenager taking a picture of their mate with their BlackBerry, I wonder how the media would react then a security guard started getting all heavy, and no doubt succeeding in getting the person to delete the photos or hand over the phone.
Like with Dale Farm, you make the rules and you must enforce them for everyone or nobody.
They also have to consider WHY they would want to implement such a ban, given everyone takes photos these days. Your mates on a day out (whether that's on the street, a bus or in a shop), taking a photo of a product to show someone later on (is this the one you wanted?', 'what do you think of this?') or something funny.. Goodness, there are a million reasons that aren't for any commercial gain.
They can't call the police or ask to see/delete the photos. If they wanted to do that, they could take a civil action against the 'offender'.
Whatever the man was trying to take a photo of, it doesn't change that fact. No shopping centre is going to be able to get someone arrested for breaching a rule they've set up that isn't law.
The next time security pick on a teenager taking a picture of their mate with their BlackBerry, I wonder how the media would react then a security guard started getting all heavy, and no doubt succeeding in getting the person to delete the photos or hand over the phone.
Like with Dale Farm, you make the rules and you must enforce them for everyone or nobody.
SS4
Established Member
This sums up my disgust well. It is only because there is a young, female child in the picture that anyone cares. If it were teenagers then I could well predict this would not have made the papers or, if it did, along the lines of "Young louts harass security guard for doing his job"
If the teenager was a young male, it would be the lout up to no good and harassing the guard. If the teenager was a young female, it would no doubt be a heavy handed security guard.
I am sure the papers would also base their judgement on things like what they were wearing, skin colour, how good looking they were and other factors to ensure they put the blame on the right party, by fitting into their own stereotyped views. So, young black male in tracksuit against young girl with blonde hair and a cute top (perhaps a football shirt?).
The fact is; was it a company policy to ban cameras (and if they think it's a real risk, they should either take the cameraphone off every visitor, or apply a tamper-proof sticker that covers the lens and is handed back when leaving) or not? And does the rule apply to everyone, or simply people they don't like the look of.
I am sure the papers would also base their judgement on things like what they were wearing, skin colour, how good looking they were and other factors to ensure they put the blame on the right party, by fitting into their own stereotyped views. So, young black male in tracksuit against young girl with blonde hair and a cute top (perhaps a football shirt?).
The fact is; was it a company policy to ban cameras (and if they think it's a real risk, they should either take the cameraphone off every visitor, or apply a tamper-proof sticker that covers the lens and is handed back when leaving) or not? And does the rule apply to everyone, or simply people they don't like the look of.
- Status