Originally Posted by AgX
I can't sell you a hot dog without taking a course on food safety and undergoing health inspections. I have to have licenses and pay fees for all of this.
Originally Posted by Bob Carnie
But, who trained the employees of that business in pornography detection?
How were these employees informed that they were responsible for detecting and reporting pornography? Did some government official send them a letter? Did they get a visit from the police? Did they just read about it in the newspaper? Who told them to interpret photographs in order to report them?
Who taught them the legal standards for judging photographs as pornography? Don't give me the, "I know it when I see it," argument. This is different. A man's liberty and property are at stake. It's not just a case of freedom of speech.
Which employees took a seminar in pornography detection? Are they lawyers? Are they criminal psychologists? Where are their degrees? Where are their certificates? Who paid the fees and secured the licenses? How can untrained, unlicensed and uneducated store employees be expected to know the law and act correctly? We're talking about the possibility of sending a man to jail, here!
If a store owner hired a security guard to look out for shoplifters, that person would have to be trained in civil liability, the legal standards for shoplifting as well as the proper methods of confronting potential shoplifters. I know. I have taken those courses.
If a store security guard confronted a customer who is not actually a shoplifter, he could very well be held liable for damages. He could be charged with false arrest and, himself, be thrown in jail. (If it is an egregious offense.) He and the shop owner who hired him could be held liable for (money) damages. It could easily be enough to ruin the business.
If I owned a store, I would instruct my employees to NOT confront shoplifters. I would simply tell them to follow the guy to the property line, get his description and write down the license number to his car if they can then call the police. My security cameras would have recorded the crime and would be evidence of guilt.
I don't care if this happened in Adelaide or Albuquerque. If I owned a photo lab, I would instruct my employees to NOT report any photographs to the police unless it was absolutely, crystal clear that something illegal was taking place in the pictures.
I don't think the business owner was right, in any sense of the word, to do what he did.
I make it a point to shop at my local camera shop whenever I can. Maybe I don't spend $1,000 every week but I am a regular customer. If I just need batteries for my TV remote control, I'll stop there if it's convenient. I'm pretty sure I spend $1,000 over the course of a year. I don't know any store owner who wouldn't be, at least, disappointed to know that he has just lost $1,000 per year for the foreseeable future.
If ten other people who read this and who might have gone to that shop also stop going there, that figure could easily rise to $10,000.
I don't know about you but I would be pretty pissed off to know that I had lost that much money.
Randy, we must live in the world as it is, not as we might like it to be ...
... but it is no more right or wrong than if one were to call the police to report screams coming from the home next door. As a citizen (or even as a human being) we are compelled to attempt to keep sanity in our society. Sometimes that involves reporting suspicions to those who are educated and chartered to discern the real danger of a situation. It is the role of the police to investigate, and the courts to arbitrate; assuming that one needs to be qualified in those roles just to have a reasonable suspicion of potential harm (or comply with an established reporting law, as may have been the case in this discussion) seems a bit of a stretch.
Originally Posted by Worker 11811
This is the world we live in and, not to seem harsh to the OP or anyone else... there has been enough of this stutation in the news over the years that one would have to be living under a rock to have not expected such a issue to be a realistic possibility. Sad... very sad... but this is our world, and has been for quite some time.
p.s. The destruction of the personally-owned materials is a different matter. Since no crime was involved those never should have been destroyed. That should be pursued in a civil complaint against the police agency since it could have been retaliatory behavior rather than a situation of accidental damage.
the same lab that called the police on the people that i knew
was known to have processed and print some of the most graphic porn
as well (from what i understand from a friend who used to work there) ..
no one was ever arrested, no one was ever reported to the police &c BUT the difference is
the graphic porn was created by consenting adults, and had nothing to do with children.
labs and society in general have had eyes wide open ( thankfully ) when it comes to kids, kiddieporn
child abuse and labs are required to report whenever anything that involves nudity and children arrives
at their doorstep. sometimes they get it wrong, and it is a parent goofing around
photographing their version of "the coppertone advertisement" or something na´ve but sometimes they get it right
and nail a sick individual/s.
while i feel bad for the OP i am glad the lab owners were doing their job.
A photographer friend of mine has been doing a long term project of photographing a local park over many years (twenty so far). About ten years ago you suddenly notice that ther are no kids in the shots any more.
I asked him and he told me of a woman in the distance that shouted 'look at that pedofile over there taking kiddy pictures'
The people in question hardly registered on the photo.
After that he made sure there were no one in the shots.
Sick people need to be caught but when does it become to excess?
It's like the searches getting on a plane. If you want to be that sure then strip search everyone! Not going to happen!!!
I must vigorously disagree. To do so reduces all of us to mindless sheep. We are reasoning beings with the power to change what we do not like.
Originally Posted by Sirius Glass
Too many iron-fisted activists are created by too much watching of Law and Order SUV and other TV shows. They're just TV shows.
I did not say that one must accept the status quo. One can work to change the status quo, but until it changes one must live with it.
Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch
Whereas the problem of child abuse and paedophilia is all too real.
Originally Posted by Tom1956