Glasgow Folk (& Other Strangers) Caught on Camera.

[HollowHorn]

Little girl lost, she takes herself so seriously:

[Graham]

All I can say is

[Graham]

[tobester]

Wanna buy some columbian shit mister

[engineer]

mori, that is a fantastic photo

[Graham]

Wanna buy some columbian shit mister

I don't think any of it was Columbian, just yer regular run of the mill Briggait version

[Smartalex]

Blonde and Blue:-

Purple:-

And Green:-

All from the West-End Festival.

[tobester]

The blonde in the first pic had an impressive pair of *censored*


(they wouldve made scally's eyes pop)

[Graham]

The blonde in the first pic had an impressive pair of *censored*


(they wouldve made scally's eyes pop)

Sunglasses?

[triggerhappy]

Here's a few from the festival on Sunday (but not technically all that festival-y... just random people)

[Graham]

[quote="triggerhappy"]Here's a few from the festival on Sunday (but not technically all that festival-y... just random people)

PICTURES REMOVED ~ Graham


I'm always wary of taking pics of little kids - you'd have a hard time explaining it to pc plod with all the current hysteria surrounding that wee girl in Portugal

[triggerhappy]

Yeah, I was a little wary, but there were hunners of taking photos of folk of every one... the girl with the dog in particular and no-one seemed to mind.

Legally there's nothing to stop anyone taking photos in a public place, unless they were asked to stop. I see your point, but there's a big difference between taking a photo and abducting someone.

Photos removed just in case though

**edit** Any chance you could remove the quoted ones from your post?

[Graham]

Yeah, I was a little wary, but there were hunners of taking photos of folk of every one... the girl with the dog in particular and no-one seemed to mind.

Legally there's nothing to stop anyone taking photos in a public place, unless they were asked to stop. I see your point, but there's a big difference between taking a photo and abducting someone.

Photos removed just in case though

**edit** Any chance you could remove the quoted ones from your post?

You are quite correct about there being nothing illegal in taking pictures in a public place - but do you really want to have to explain that in court when you're up on a breach of the peace charge (at the very least) for taking pics of little kiddies?

Trust me, I've had enough indepth "discussions" with Strathclyde's finest over the last couple of weeks (not for taking pics of children I hasten to add) on this very subject to know that if they want to they can easily charge you with breach of the peace. The only reason they need is if they consider that you are "causing fear and alarm" by your actions and, given the current climate, snapping pics of other people's kids is likely to do just that.

[triggerhappy]

Indeed, I think being of the female persuasion causes fewer people to have fear and alarm of me, rightly or wrongly.

It would be a shame to see photography being restricted to the point that you couldn't take a photograph of anyone for fear of a child being in the background, or indeed any photo where a child is the subject - known or unknown - without being in fear of the law.

I expect that it would be incredibly difficult for PC Plod to charge you with breach of the peace despite the current climate given that no laws have been broken and that if asked the photographs could be deleted satisfactorily in both the PCs' and parents' presence?

An interesting article on the subject here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/11/nphotos111.xml. Perhaps an idea for a discussion thread in the photography forum on the ethics behind photography in a public place?

[Graham]

ahhh...being of the "female persuasion" probably does help, but then instead of thinking you're a kiddy fiddler they think you're going to snatch the child and keep it as your own

Seriously though, take a wee look at This for a legal perspective on taking photos in public