Earlier this week Bruce Schneier wrote: "This video is priceless. A Washington DC news crew goes down to Union Station to interview someone from Amtrak about people who have been stopped from taking pictures even though there's no policy against it. As the Amtrak spokesperson is explaining that there is no policy against photography, a guard comes up and tries to stop them from filming, saying it is against the rules."
Today he wrote a wonderful essay on The War on Photography. He cites a number of examples where in the name of security, "photographers have been harrassed, questioned, detained, arrested or worse, and declared to be unwelcome." and then declares it nonsense because in none of recent terrorist plots did terrorists ever photograph their targets. It's inefficient to fight terrorism by fighting photography.
Then what really made me happy is that he goes even further by saying that even if they did, they would be such a tiny fraction of photographs taken that it's still an inefficient way to combat terrorism. Terrorists use shoes, should we ban shoes? (Oh wait, we kinda do at airports).
"Fear aside, there aren't many legal restrictions on what you can photograph from a public place that's already in public view. If you're harassed, it's almost certainly a law enforcement official, public or private, acting way beyond his authority. There's nothing in any post-9/11 law that restricts your right to photograph. This is worth fighting. Search "photographer rights" on Google and download one of the several wallet documents that can help you if you get harassed; I found one for the UK, US, and Australia. Don't cede your right to photograph in public. Don't propagate the terrorist photographer story. Remind them that prohibiting photography was something we used to ridicule about the USSR. Eventually sanity will be restored, but it may take a while."
No comments:
Post a Comment