that is an extremely stupid notion. So going outside means letting everyone take pictures of you? Lets say you have a daughter, maybe like 3 years old and then a pedophile goes right up to your daughter and takes a picture. You'd be cool with that wouldn't you? Of course you would.
"So going outside means letting everyone take pictures of you?"
Yes.
"Lets say you have a daughter, maybe like 3 years old and then a pedophile goes right up to your daughter and takes a picture."
Like, what, he announces he's a pedophile before he takes the picture? That's a stupid scenario. Regardless, just because you don't like it doesn't mean people shouldn't be able to do it.
"Like, what, he announces he's a pedophile before he takes the picture?"
Judging by that reaction, you're fine if a man goes up to your daughter then takes a picture without even asking you what his agenda is?? Regardless if hes a pedophile or a normal person, its still an intrusion of privacy. By your logic, Even if you were forced to go naked on a street, you wouldn't be bothered if people take pictures or post it on the internet?
"you're fine if a man goes up to your daughter then takes a picture without even asking you what his agenda is?"
Again, just because I'm not fine with it doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to do it.
"Regardless if hes a pedophile or a normal person, its still an intrusion of privacy."
You don't have privacy in public.
"if you were forced to go naked on a street, you wouldn't be bothered if people take pictures"
If I was forced to it would be whoever forced me to do it who's in the wrong, not other people with cameras.
"Again, just because I'm not fine with it doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to do it."
So you're admitting you wouldn't mind getting pictures of yourself being photographed in public and put up somewhere on the internet or some weird website? There is a certain extent to being photographed, Accidental photographs are acceptable since it only focuses on the person/thing they are trying to photograph while can catch random bystanders. Photographing someone without their as the main focus point is intrusion of privacy (example is the picture above) regardless of where you are. Also you do have privacy in the public. Public restrooms for example are places where a high amount of privacy is involved. "If I was forced to it would be whoever forced me to do it who's in the wrong, not other people with cameras." That is not what i am trying to ask. I am asking, wouldn't you hate it if you were photographed doing something embarrassing or indecent in public?
"So you're admitting you wouldn't mind getting pictures of yourself being photographed in public and put up somewhere on the internet or some weird website?"
No, I'm saying it shouldn't be illegal.
"Public restrooms for example are places where a high amount of privacy is involved."
Yes, that's an exception where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. You're also not allowed to place surveillance cameras in public bathrooms.
"wouldn't you hate it if you were photographed doing something embarrassing or indecent in public?"
Yes, but again, that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
As i said before, Accidental photographs are acceptable since it only focuses on the person/thing they are trying to photograph while can catch random bystanders. Photographing someone without their consent as the main focus point is intrusion of privacy (example is the picture above). So yeah it should be legal to accidentally take someone's picture but it should be illegal to take someone's pic with them being the center of attention without their consent.
"Photographing someone without their consent as the main focus point is intrusion of privacy"
No it isn't. Not unless they're in a situation that warrants a reasonable expectation of privacy, like in a bathroom or punching in their PIN at an ATM.
"it should be illegal to take someone's pic with them being the center of attention without their consent."
Nope, you should be able to photograph anyone you want if you're in a public space unless it fits in with what I said above.
Look were not going to get anywhere with this. You want photographing someone to be legal in public, i want photographing to be illegal in public (assuming they are the center of attention without consent). This argument isn't gonna go anywhere so lets just stop.
You can stop posting whenever you want. The fact is you have no grounds on which to prevent someone from taking picture of whatever they want in public. If you're allowed to look at it in public, you should be allowed to photograph it.
No, If i stop and you post something which is the opposite of my argument, people will see it as if you've won the argument. Of course you can't just leave it peacefully like a normal person because you're stubborn as hell. The fact is you like to photograph people without their permission and are trying to justify you're actions. People are not "it", they have emotions and just because they are in public doesnt mean you can photograph them.
"If i stop and you post something which is the opposite of my argument, people will see it as if you've won the argument."
I don't think that's how it works.
"you're stubborn as hell."
That's over selling it a bit.
"The fact is you like to photograph people without their permission"
I have literally never done that.
"People are not "it""
In the context that I used, "it" includes everything, including people.
"they have emotions"
Obviously.
"just because they are in public doesnt mean you can photograph them."
Yes it does, or depending on where you live, it doesn't but it should.
I agree with Garlog here. It is more of a moral thing over a law thing. Lawfully, you can film/photograph most things in public, including the people. If someone takes a picture of a protest for a magazine or something, they don't need to ask every person for their permission. It may be lawfully ok to photograph someone, but it might not be morally right. Use your judgement
@garlog "I don't think that's how it works. " I was trying to end this argument but you kept trying to win it over because you're so petty over not wanting to call a truce. "In the context that I used, "it" includes everything, including people." I didnt say you can't photograph things which aren't alive. And by me saying "they have emotions" is that most people don't want to be photographed by others without permission which is why Australia made it against the law to photograph someone without their permission. @kibbles, People want to be photographed in in protests as it spreads the awareness for whatever they are trying to protest but i get your point, kibbles.
Yes.
"Lets say you have a daughter, maybe like 3 years old and then a pedophile goes right up to your daughter and takes a picture."
Like, what, he announces he's a pedophile before he takes the picture? That's a stupid scenario. Regardless, just because you don't like it doesn't mean people shouldn't be able to do it.
Judging by that reaction, you're fine if a man goes up to your daughter then takes a picture without even asking you what his agenda is?? Regardless if hes a pedophile or a normal person, its still an intrusion of privacy. By your logic, Even if you were forced to go naked on a street, you wouldn't be bothered if people take pictures or post it on the internet?
Again, just because I'm not fine with it doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to do it.
"Regardless if hes a pedophile or a normal person, its still an intrusion of privacy."
You don't have privacy in public.
"if you were forced to go naked on a street, you wouldn't be bothered if people take pictures"
If I was forced to it would be whoever forced me to do it who's in the wrong, not other people with cameras.
So you're admitting you wouldn't mind getting pictures of yourself being photographed in public and put up somewhere on the internet or some weird website? There is a certain extent to being photographed, Accidental photographs are acceptable since it only focuses on the person/thing they are trying to photograph while can catch random bystanders. Photographing someone without their as the main focus point is intrusion of privacy (example is the picture above) regardless of where you are. Also you do have privacy in the public. Public restrooms for example are places where a high amount of privacy is involved. "If I was forced to it would be whoever forced me to do it who's in the wrong, not other people with cameras." That is not what i am trying to ask. I am asking, wouldn't you hate it if you were photographed doing something embarrassing or indecent in public?
No, I'm saying it shouldn't be illegal.
"Public restrooms for example are places where a high amount of privacy is involved."
Yes, that's an exception where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. You're also not allowed to place surveillance cameras in public bathrooms.
"wouldn't you hate it if you were photographed doing something embarrassing or indecent in public?"
Yes, but again, that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
No it isn't. Not unless they're in a situation that warrants a reasonable expectation of privacy, like in a bathroom or punching in their PIN at an ATM.
"it should be illegal to take someone's pic with them being the center of attention without their consent."
Nope, you should be able to photograph anyone you want if you're in a public space unless it fits in with what I said above.
I don't think that's how it works.
"you're stubborn as hell."
That's over selling it a bit.
"The fact is you like to photograph people without their permission"
I have literally never done that.
"People are not "it""
In the context that I used, "it" includes everything, including people.
"they have emotions"
Obviously.
"just because they are in public doesnt mean you can photograph them."
Yes it does, or depending on where you live, it doesn't but it should.