Tesco Security

wmpdd3

Tesco Security guards are not issued with a phone. Just an ear-piece etc. I cant say for agency staff.

discus

I know the shopping centre in Artane well. It has had some huge problems in the past with lads hanging around acting the dick - hassling oul wans, intimidating locals and other small things. There has been worse, like muggings, lads kicking mirrors off cars and guys on their own getting a thumping. When security keep those small fry guys away, it tends to keep the bigger problems at bay too.

jugger

suzyq132 wrote: »

Hi, does anyone know if this is illegal.
it appears not to be

Today a group of teenagers from a local secondary school were hanging out around the shopping centre in Artane during their lunch time. A few of them were a bit loud but nothing untoward.
from what you witnessed, could they have been doing something untoward before you happened upon them ???

The security guard who is employed by Tesco took out a camera and started following them and taking photos of them.
i do not think he was doing this just for fun. it probably was not his best move ever, however there are a number of less sinister reasons for him to do this

He took photos of all of them even if they were just standing around.
from what you witnessed

Is this legal,
it appears to be

I can't imagine it to be.

Anyone know.

Tks cause I want to say something to him but I'd like to know first.
why??? there not your kids, you were not involved, and unless you have more information that you did share in your op you really dont know the full story at all

p.s sorry if i sound harsh but its late and im tired but i had to respond

suzyq132

suzyq132 wrote: »

These kids we're all under 14. I'm not saying its anything sinister, I just think its completely unappropriate. It infringes on the their rights. Would you like the security guard to take a photo of your son or daughter or even yourself as you we're walking around Tesco doing your shopping. I agree with security cameras but this was intrusive. Odd behaviour. Can't campare it to a party photographer. Just think its intrusive, especially taking pics of school kids. Why couldn't he just ask them to leave if they were'nt buying anything. The world has gone mad!!

You have clearly never worked in a shop as asking someone to leave does not automatically make it happen and 99% of the time they don't go quietly. The guard was definitely taking pictures to forward on to the school as he rightly should, particularly if they are in uniform.
CCTV pictures often arent clear, nor cover all areas and they may not have a printer or dvd burner. Much easier to whip out a camera and send the file to the school. If one of those kids abused or assaulted you, you would be the first to complain that there weren't decent pictures.
I would recommend you apply for some shop jobs. You sound just like every union rep 'human rights' 'infringement' blah blah blah. lol

shawnee

suzyq132 wrote: »

These kids we're all under 14. I'm not saying its anything sinister, I just think its completely unappropriate. It infringes on the their rights. Would you like the security guard to take a photo of your son or daughter or even yourself as you we're walking around Tesco doing your shopping. I agree with security cameras but this was intrusive. Odd behaviour. Can't campare it to a party photographer. Just think its intrusive, especially taking pics of school kids. Why couldn't he just ask them to leave if they were'nt buying anything. The world has gone mad!!

When you are in Tesco or any of the main shopping areas you are on camera most of the bloody time anyway , so those photos are there if they want them. Next suggestion is that most of those guys watching security cameras are paedos. Get used to it, we are living in an era where crime is on the increase and if you were a victim of it , you would be quite pleased to see the perpetrators caught on camera. If you're doing nothing wrong then the pictures are insignificant.:p

shannon_tek

Photos could be used as evidence for future. Just a back up of who they may suspect. May turn out to be nothing but always better to be safe then sorry so if somethin should ever happen and they don't catch the faces on camera. They can use the photos to show the guards. This is the person to look for.

I just wish a lot of other places would do this too. Would possibly serve as a deterrent to a lot of scumbag behaviour.

keithclancy

Cabaal wrote: »

Supermarkets and shopping centers are not public places, they are private property

If they were in a public place they would be nothing illegal about this, in this instance I'd say the chap is doing his job as he is security and maybe there was past issues with these teenagers

Get into your car hammered drunk in a Tesco Car Park and try telling the Gardai that

Cabaal

Unrealistic wrote: »

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Private property can be a public place. Shopping centre, car park, a road in an estate owned by the management company etc. The definition is not whether the land is owned by the state or a private individual but whether the public have unhindered access.

Nope, thats not the case i'm afraid.

If I take my dslr and walk down the main street of any town i am free to take photos until the end of the world.

If however I walk into a shopping centre I am not, the supermarket are perfectly in their right to stop me. It doesn't matter if the general public can access it its still private property

keithclancy

Cabaal wrote: »

Nope, thats not the case i'm afraid.

If I take my dslr and walk down the main street of any town i am free to take photos until the end of the world.

If however I walk into a shopping centre I am not, the supermarket are perfectly in their right to stop me. It doesn't matter if the general public can access it its still private property

No, that is not the case, a shopping centre by its very nature allows Public Access, they would have to explicitly state up front that photos are not allowed or indeed inform you in person.

http://www.digitalrights.ie/2006/05/09/photographers-rights/

On private property, you are also generally allowed to take photographs, provided you have permission to be on the property.

However, the owner may impose conditions on your entry to the property, which may include a complete ban on photography, a ban on photography of certain things, or a ban on certain types of photography (eg, flash photography, video photography etc).

If you enter private property which does not allow Public access then you cannot take Pictures because you are Trespassing and are not supposed to be there in the first place.

Del2005

suzyq132 wrote: »

Hi, does anyone know if this is illegal.

Today a group of teenagers from a local secondary school were hanging out around the shopping centre in Artane during their lunch time. A few of them were a bit loud but nothing untoward. The security guard who is employed by Tesco took out a camera and started following them and taking photos of them.

He took photos of all of them even if they were just standing around. Is this legal, I can't imagine it to be.

Anyone know.

Tks cause I want to say something to him but I'd like to know first.

Question? Did he actually take pictures or just point his phone at them? He may have been trying to scare them into moving on by pretending to take pictures to send to the school? It's as far fetched as some of the other ideas.

Have you ever seen the "professional crusties"? They record every encounter with authority, so why can't authority do the same?

Unrealistic

Cabaal wrote: »

Unrealistic wrote: »

Cabaal wrote: »

Supermarkets and shopping centers are not public places, they are private property

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Private property can be a public place. Shopping centre, car park, a road in an estate owned by the management company etc. The definition is not whether the land is owned by the state or a private individual but whether the public have unhindered access.

Nope, thats not the case i'm afraid.

If I take my dslr and walk down the main street of any town i am free to take photos until the end of the world.

If however I walk into a shopping centre I am not, the supermarket are perfectly in their right to stop me. It doesn't matter if the general public can access it its still private property

I made no claims about the rights or wrongs of taking photographs. I merely disputed your claim that the fact was property was privately owned meant it could not be a public place. And your statement is still incorrect. The fact that somewhere is private property does not mean it cannot be a public place.

castie

Max Power1 wrote: »

It is a public place. The public has access without a barrier.

But yes, the security guard (or anyone) can take pictures, as its a public place.

Could it not be argued that the doors are barriers? and hence doesnt not satisfy a public place?

Just to add Im not sure wither way myself. Also doesnt the definition of a public place change in relation to the issue?

MyKeyG

Would the right to photograph not be precluded by whatever law/legislation states they have to say they have CCTV in operation?

slimjimmc

castie wrote: »

Could it not be argued that the doors are barriers? and hence doesnt not satisfy a public place?

Just to add Im not sure wither way myself. Also doesnt the definition of a public place change in relation to the issue?

Perhaps when those barriers are locked to prevent public access.
The presence barriers (doors, gates, etc) in itself is not sufficient to declare a place private; if the barriers admit the public then it is a public place.

Max Power1

castie wrote: »

Could it not be argued that the doors are barriers? and hence doesnt not satisfy a public place?

Just to add Im not sure wither way myself. Also doesnt the definition of a public place change in relation to the issue?

Think of what would happened if you walked around naked or drove while intoxicated, in a tesco (theoretically) and that will answer if it is a public pplace or not.

(It is a public place as the public has unhindered access)