right. My younger sister was stalked by a crazy ex for years.
According to some of the people here that would mean she had no right to participate in a regular activity.
According to some of the people here that would mean she had no right to participate in a regular activity.
While directly providing said stalker with information seems like a harmful, and likely prosecutable behavior, the indirect providing of information is not a burden the general public should bear for another parties already illegal actions.
My kid's school strictly bans peanut products due to at least one kid having a severe and potentially deadly allergy. It seems like a reasonable and necessary precautions to avoid harm or injury.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/introducing-pe...
What you've done is bring back the equivalence to a public place so that an absurd argument can be made about banning peanuts wholesale.
As far as any non-public situation goes, it's a simple discussion of consent and it's easy: just ask for it instead of feeling entitled to it.
Preventing anyone ever possibly taking pictures where you could be in the background is not the answer.
> Preventing anyone ever possibly taking pictures where you could be in the background is not the answer.
and asking not to be recorded at a recurring event.