• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does this intervene the privacy ?!

Coin

Coin

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
949
Reaction score
371
Location
Albania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A store in my city placed some pictures of thief womens while they were in action.
Many people complained that this was an intervene in privacy.

What do you think about this??
Do you find this a better way for the owner to defend from thiefs rather than just reporting to the police ??

HAJDUTE = THIEFS

484051_10151540661193344_1840579864_n.jpg
 
I have no problem with it. In the US there is no expectation of privacy in a situation like that. The people could sue for defamation, but truth is a defense to defamation.
 
There is no presumption of privacy in a public place, except as specifically outlined by law (such as bathrooms, changing rooms, etc). The picture is of neither, thus, there's no privacy to be had. Plaster their pictures all over town.
 
Coin said:
A store in my city placed some pictures of thief womens while they were in action.
Many people complained that this was an intervene in privacy.

What do you think about this??
Do you find this a better way for the owner to defend from thiefs rather than just reporting to the police ??

HAJDUTE = THIEFS

View attachment 67152035
Click to expand...

If it was on their shop and/or another shop with consent then that is fine, the women were in the store and the store has the right to look onto its property.
 
Name and shame, a millennias old and very successful technique.
 
clownboy said:
Name and shame, a millennias old and very successful technique.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, we live in a society today that is largely devoid of shame and making someone feel bad, even for something they ought to feel bad about, is a prosecutable offense.
 
Coin said:
A store in my city placed some pictures of thief womens while they were in action.
Many people complained that this was an intervene in privacy.

What do you think about this??
Do you find this a better way for the owner to defend from thiefs rather than just reporting to the police ??

HAJDUTE = THIEFS

View attachment 67152035
Click to expand...

I believe the proper English term you're looking for is "invasion" of privacy, not intervention. Being from Albania, I would presume that English isn't your first language, although you have been clear in your posting - I like to help people with the language, just as I'd love to be helped by others when I'm learning a new language, so please don't take offense.

As for the posting of the picture, it's not so much an invasion of privacy, but if the women in the picture have not been arrested and convicted of the crime of shoplifting - theft - it could possibly be a defamation of character in that the poster identifies them as thieves. We had a case here recently where a restaurant owner threw hot sauce on a person he thought was a thief and it turns out it was another person who committed the crime. If these women were arrested and convicted, then I see no problem with a shop owner letting the public know that he has surveillance cameras and they helped him get these women arrested.
 
It depends on the laws of your country, but in the USA thieves do not have the expectation of privacy in public, and cannot sue for defamation of character because their criminal acts have been photographed and displayed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom