Today Daddy was told "you cannot take photographs in ASDA".
So obviously this photograph was not taken in ASDA, and it certainly does not contain evidence that WalMart are breeding an ARMY OF GIANT PENGUINS to take over the world!
Actually quite apart from the pedantic grammatical point ("may not take photos", not "cannot take photos") I wonder if it is true that ASDA can actually enforce that. Obviously their shop is private property, but it seems to me that ASDA's security cameras are taking photos of me all the time as I browse the aisles looking for sticky buns!
You might ask what possible reason can they have for suddenly springing this rule upon us? But then Lord Blairimort is always saying "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear", and HE is a power-crazed monomaniac who ought to be working for the Cybermen. So we won't go there.
Maybe they are worried that I am a MYSTERY CUSTOMER from WatchDog or WatchElephant as it ought to be called if I was presenting it, and do not want an UNDERCOVER EXPOSE by a consumer programme. Obviously I am well versed in the secrets of infiltration from all of the JAMES BOND that I have watched.
The best way to get into WalMart headquarters is inside a SUBMARINE disguised as a CROCODILE!
My understanding - as I happened to be reading up this subject today - is that they are entitled to set restrictions (such as banning photography) on access to their private property (even an apparently public shop) and breach of those can constitute trespass.
It amuses me that you picked up on the incorrect use of "cannot" instead of "may not", but still came up with "if I was presenting it" instead of "if I were presenting it". Long live the subjunctive!
Post a Comment