• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Yet another bunch of Jobsworths

#1
Couple banned from a shopping mall for life.

Their crime?

Taking photos!

A link was put up on the Multinational Thread to this site;

Global Incidents Map ( Tin foil hat optional)

It led me to this article.

Torygraph article

How very dare they take photos in a shopping mall.

Words fail me.

MODS feel free to move this to the NAAFI.

edited for lack of reading and copying ability.
 
#2
Calm down dear:

Pam Gillard, the manager of the centre, said that taking photos was a security risk, but not because of a terrorist threat, and that the Sparshotts were welcome back.

So, no life ban. And it's from the Torygraph, not The Times.

Far too much spluttering and harrumphing.

msr
 
#3
msr said:
Calm down dear:

Pam Gillard, the manager of the centre, said that taking photos was a security risk, but not because of a terrorist threat, and that the Sparshotts were welcome back.

So, no life ban. And it's from the Torygraph, not The Times.

Far too much spluttering and harrumphing.

msr
So how is taking photo's in a shopping centre a security risk?
Did they snap some lazy arrse of a security operative having a quick snooze? Accidentally capture photographic evidence of lower prices on women's underwear? Poke someone's eye out with a telephoto lens?
What gives?
 
#5
jimmys_best_mate said:
Chuffit said:
So how is taking photo's in a shopping centre a security risk?
They could be taking photos of security systems/SOPs before planning a raid on a local jeweller/bank?
Ummmm. Yeah. I'm trying to understand that, but if these security systems are visible to the general public, all it would take would be a working memory, no photo's needed, surely?
I wonder if they'd stop someone from drawing on paper in there?
It just seems to me like we've moved on from planet Earth to a new home called 'Exaggerate any little fear' while I was asleep one night
 
#6
msr said:
Calm down dear:

Pam Gillard, the manager of the centre, said that taking photos was a security risk, but not because of a terrorist threat, and that the Sparshotts were welcome back.

So, no life ban. And it's from the Torygraph, not The Times.

Far too much spluttering and harrumphing.

msr
<grin>
1.I have, but I was prepared to be outraged.
2.There was, initially, it seems.
Hampshire Local
3.I think if Rum Ration were to get HMS Collingwood personnel avec cameras up to take a few shots, that would do nicely.
 
#7
Chuffit said:
jimmys_best_mate said:
Chuffit said:
So how is taking photo's in a shopping centre a security risk?
They could be taking photos of security systems/SOPs before planning a raid on a local jeweller/bank?
Ummmm. Yeah. I'm trying to understand that, but if these security systems are visible to the general public, all it would take would be a working memory, no photo's needed, surely?
I wonder if they'd stop someone from drawing on paper in there?
It just seems to me like we've moved on from planet Earth to a new home called 'Exaggerate any little fear' while I was asleep one night
You mean, like the whole team does a walk through on the ground, before committing the crime :D
 
#8
Chuffit said:
jimmys_best_mate said:
Chuffit said:
So how is taking photo's in a shopping centre a security risk?
They could be taking photos of security systems/SOPs before planning a raid on a local jeweller/bank?
Ummmm. Yeah. I'm trying to understand that, but if these security systems are visible to the general public, all it would take would be a working memory, no photo's needed, surely?
I wonder if they'd stop someone from drawing on paper in there?
It just seems to me like we've moved on from planet Earth to a new home called 'Exaggerate any little fear' while I was asleep one night
I agree, but hardly surprising, it comes from the top - remember John reid (when Home Sec) statin that terrorism was the greatest potential threat to this country since WWII. Er, anyone remember the USSR, imminent nuclear holocaust etc, oh of course not John you were a marxist back then. This from the same people who always used to vote against the PTA. Terrorism is a real threat but hysteria just doesn't help.
 
#9
Sven said:
Chuffit said:
jimmys_best_mate said:
Chuffit said:
So how is taking photo's in a shopping centre a security risk?
They could be taking photos of security systems/SOPs before planning a raid on a local jeweller/bank?
Ummmm. Yeah. I'm trying to understand that, but if these security systems are visible to the general public, all it would take would be a working memory, no photo's needed, surely?
I wonder if they'd stop someone from drawing on paper in there?
It just seems to me like we've moved on from planet Earth to a new home called 'Exaggerate any little fear' while I was asleep one night
You mean, like the whole team does a walk through on the ground, before committing the crime :D
Exactly! Walkthrough talkthrough, ex-pats from the Costa del crime I suspect! What better cover than OAPs? I suspect that there's more to this then meets the eye.

I would be asking them where they were in the weeks preceding the Brinks-Mat caper! :wink:
 
#10
Rather than terrorism, isn't it very much the fear of terrorism, and the atmosphere of pacifist appeasement and positive discrimination that goes with it, that is the greater threat to this country?
 
#11
Unfortunately *security* and *elf n safety* are now regarded as unarguable excuses for doing anything. That is why our boys need to get stripped off on the tarnmac at Birmingham Airport.
 
#12
Chuffit said:
jimmys_best_mate said:
Chuffit said:
So how is taking photo's in a shopping centre a security risk?
They could be taking photos of security systems/SOPs before planning a raid on a local jeweller/bank?
Ummmm. Yeah. I'm trying to understand that, but if these security systems are visible to the general public, all it would take would be a working memory, no photo's needed, surely?
I wonder if they'd stop someone from drawing on paper in there?
It just seems to me like we've moved on from planet Earth to a new home called 'Exaggerate any little fear' while I was asleep one night
Have you ever tried making a model from memory? :p
 
#13
Why yes, it was an Airfix Hurricane IIB as I recall...although my memory isn't what it used to be.
 
#15
during gulf war one some dozy saudi cop(aged 18-gun belt bigger than him),pulled us over to seize photos we took of a refinary(we didnt-he must have been at the sid).
anyway the muppet drew his revolver on me.
the lads all pointed several wepons of various calibre at him.
he put his gat away.
i cleaned up my undies.
we pushed the iraqis out of kuwait.
endex.
perhaps he is an asylum seeker now and working at the place above?
 
#16
chocolate_frog said:
Chuffit said:
jimmys_best_mate said:
Chuffit said:
So how is taking photo's in a shopping centre a security risk?
They could be taking photos of security systems/SOPs before planning a raid on a local jeweller/bank?
Ummmm. Yeah. I'm trying to understand that, but if these security systems are visible to the general public, all it would take would be a working memory, no photo's needed, surely?
I wonder if they'd stop someone from drawing on paper in there?
It just seems to me like we've moved on from planet Earth to a new home called 'Exaggerate any little fear' while I was asleep one night
Have you ever tried making a model from memory? :p
Oddly enough, yes. It flew too.
 
#19
BlotBangRub said:
The staff say don't take pics, don't take pics, simple really?

What's the problem?
Thats ok then.

If the staff say get into the back of this cattle truck for a quick shower, we'll also comply.

Minor supposed figures of 'authority' now have more 'power' due to H&S and the threat of terrorism than ever before. Is it right? No it f****** isn't. If its about anti terrorism then frankly, the terrorists have won. The ideal of terrorism is to disrupt and frighten regardless of actions they take. If its about anti crime security, again, its utter bollox to be honest.

If true, what it appears to be is some failed police dog exercising his power over a couple who I guess were using a normal camera and were an easy target. Do they inforce the same rule if a chav is using a mobile phone camera taking piccies of his or her inbred fuckwit mates whilst they are bunking off skool?

We have become a country populated by people who wear dayglo vests carrying clip boards for no apparent reason whatsoever.
 
#20
Before the second world war loads of young Germans were packed off on cycling holidays all around europe armed with new bikes and nice little Leica cameras. They took loads of snapshots of smiling blond Germans in outrageous shorts, often with the bikes (For scale only one frame size was issued), leaned up against bridge pillars.

I spoke to Hitler (my mother in law) only this morning and she confirmed that Fareham shopping centre would have been high on her list of targets if it had been built back then!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top