Robbie Loving Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 So why are parents (in a lot of schools) banned from taking pictures of their kiddies doing sport on school sports day? I feel it is safe to assume, anyone who has access to the CCTV, has been thoroughly checked to confirm they're not paedaphiles or anything of such a nature..... The same cannot be said of every person who attends a sports day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerbyTup Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 So why are parents (in a lot of schools) banned from taking pictures of their kiddies doing sport on school sports day? because we've become a nation who are paranoid about paedophiles maybe? You're right Pete - they do ask parents not to take photos at school sports day. I do find it hard to understand because it wasn't how things were when I was a kid and no harm seem to come from it then. But I suspect that it's maybe to do with the internet and the ease with which folks can take digital images - and alter them - and publish them. I guess the school could be held liable for any images of pupils that are misused in this way. A CCTV in the toilet communal area would presumably be accessed only by authorised officers of the school and wouldn't be circulated anywhere else. I coach a junior football team and there are similar restrictions on photography. A sad state of affairs really but I guess it's necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 We've had the "banning of taking photos on sports day" discussion on here in the past, with explanations as to why. If you have an issue with that I suggest you dig up that thread and let this one continue about CCTV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted September 12, 2012 Author Share Posted September 12, 2012 I feel it is safe to assume, anyone who has access to the CCTV, has been thoroughly checked to confirm they're not paedaphiles or anything of such a nature..... The same cannot be said of every person who attends a sports day. Two words.... Ian Huntley....Wasn't he a caretaker in a school? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joanl Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I find it unacceptable that there is a need for this kind of protection to be honest. I don't mind being watched over by a camera at all. Using a cash machine early in the morning and late at night, going into a public loo when it's in a remote area. I would have had no objection when my own kids were younger at all. Why can people never see the good points of something only the dirty darker ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted September 12, 2012 Author Share Posted September 12, 2012 We've had the "banning of taking photos on sports day" discussion on here in the past, with explanations as to why. If you have an issue with that I suggest you dig up that thread and let this one continue about CCTV. I only mentioned it in response to another posting, merely to illustrate a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stomp Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 Fixed cameras? Don't all CCTV cameras need to be adjustable? Otherwise they would be almost impossible to mount and get right first time! I think you are just nit-picking in an attempt to get a rise out of me. Go and Google the different types of CCTV camera and you will see what I mean with regard to "fixed" rather than "movable". A bit like "Fixed" speed camera's, as opposed to "Mobile" speed cameras. Ceiling mounting is obvious, as it's a bit silly putting them on the floor. What about wall mounted? Most modern schools don't have hugely high ceiling these days, so reaching the camera wouldn't pose too much of a problem for whoever. Really? So you think that the establishment in question hasnt realised this particular possibility and made the neccessary adjustments? I don't have any real objection to them being mounted outside the toilets to monitor who goes in and who comes out, but over the threshold is in my view a step too far! Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stomp Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 I think maybe you're just trying to be funny but with little success. I think maybe you're just inveting "facts" to inflame the subject with little success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted September 12, 2012 Author Share Posted September 12, 2012 I think you are just nit-picking in an attempt to get a rise out of me. Go and Google the different types of CCTV camera and you will see what I mean with regard to "fixed" rather than "movable". A bit like "Fixed" speed camera's, as opposed to "Mobile" speed cameras. What about wall mounted? Really? So you think that the establishment in question hasnt realised this particular possibility and made the neccessary adjustments? I don't have any real objection to them being mounted outside the toilets to monitor who goes in and who comes out, but over the threshold is in my view a step too far! I'm really not nitpicking honestly, just stating facts. It's a fact that all cameras need to be able to be directionally adjustable, whether that is fixing a line or view or whatever. Which means they can be retrospectively 'adjusted' in relation to their field of view. Wall mounting would mean being 'lower' than the ceiling making them even more accessible. Am I just weird because my opinion is different to yours? I don't 'have to agree with you, as you don't with me. But it's a debate, and without differing opinions it would all be pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stomp Posted September 12, 2012 Share Posted September 12, 2012 It's a fact that all cameras need to be able to be directionally adjustable, whether that is fixing a line or view or whatever. Which means they can be retrospectively 'adjusted' in relation to their field of view. Not necessarily. There are plenty of camera's out there which are vandal proof*, which I would imagine would also include some kind of protection from being adjusted after it's been installed. Also, you are correct in that even then it may have to be adjusted again - but I would send you back to my original point that there are cameras which can accomodate such. Wall mounting would mean being 'lower' than the ceiling making them even more accessible. I see what you're getting at here, but again not necessarily. I've seen plenty of cameras mounted on walls which are out of reach. Am I just weird because my opinion is different to yours? I don't 'have to agree with you, as you don't with me. But it's a debate, and without differing opinions it would all be pointless. I don't know you, so I can't really comment on your level of weirdness. You are perfectly entitled to have a differing view to me, but it would be nice if you could argue sensibly, presenting facts to support your position, rather than just saying the opposite. *Like this one: Amazon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.