I refer to the letter headlined, 'Photograph ban rules stupid' (South China Morning Post, December 2).
Having lived here for 3.5 years and seeing these guards at 'work' (and I use the word 'work' quite liberally), it is no surprise to me that they did not permit the photographer to take his/her pictures at those locations mentioned. Simply put, those security guards have nothing better to do than to prevent an apparently harmless (yet productive) activity from taking place.
On the other hand, if you were to see a person spit in the street, throw litter on the pavement, or smoke in an indoor shopping mall (which occurs all too frequently in this fair city), those same security guards would do nothing.
Even if there were rules prohibiting 'commercial' photography (which I don't think exists), any normal person exercising one ounce of judgment could see that this photographer carrying one camera and a tripod was in no way disturbing the peace or presenting a public danger.
Of course, if you're talking about the director James Cameron, his talentless crew, plus a cast of thousands, that would be, as the writer correctly points out, a different story. But asking these security guards to see this distinction would be impossible. That would be assuming they had this little-known, but rarely used, skill called 'discretion'.
During these trying economic times, these lazy security guards should be the first group of people to be made redundant.
