Canada’s war on photography

Canada has started its war on photography (and also on sketching and taking notes).

The Gatineau/Ottawa transit system, along with the federal government, is asking people to call police if they see: “[a]n individual taking photos or pictures in a location that has no particular interest, drawing maps or sketches, taking notes or wandering in the same location for an unusually long time”.

What’s the difference between taking photos and taking pictures? How would you like to be arrested for being armed with a sketch pad and a charcoal pencil? Watch out, I’ve got pen and paper and I’m not afraid to take notes!

Haven’t they learned anything from the ongoing problems in the USA and UK with their silly anti-photography laws and bans? Far too many links to list but here are a few: Link 1. Link 2. Link 3. Link 4. Link 5. Link 6. Link 7. Link 8.

Haven’t they learned that taking pictures has nothing to with terrorism? Haven’t they learned that photography increases security?

Are they stupid?

Who decides what’s an interesting location for pictures? How can a passerby possibly know what a photographer is thinking or is looking at through their viewfinder? A location that has no particular interest to whom, photographers or passersby? By definition, terrorists work only in areas of high interest, otherwise they couldn’t cause terror.

If a photographer really is taking pictures in a location that has no particular interest, don’t call police, call the local photography school and have them rush over an instructor.

What is “an unusually long time”? Photographers will stand (okay, maybe they’ll sit) for hours waiting for the right light or right situation. I’ve stood in one public location for two hours waiting for the right moment to happen. I’ve wandered (and even wondered) for hours in a location looking and waiting for pictures.

No previous terrorist attack has involved photography. None. USA, London, Madrid, Bali, Moscow, Mumbai – no photography whatsoever. (The claim that an accomplice might have used a video camera prior to the Mumbai attack has not been proven.)

But what has been involved in *every* terrorist attack? Backpacks. Every time.

Report people with backpacks to the police!

Are they stupid?

As what happened (and still is happening) in the USA and UK, this will start a witch-hunt on anyone with a “big” camera. The government and transit system have just said that anyone with a camera should be considered suspicious until proven otherwise.

The UK Metropolitan Police seem to (finally) understand. It stopped its people-with-a-camera-are-suspicious campaign in favour of its just-launched people-who-buy-bomb-making-materials-are-suspicious campaign.

Photographers in the Ottawa-area, (and let’s see how fast this spreads across the country), will be harassed and punished for no reason, just like in the USA and UK. But anyone with a cell phone camera will be left alone. Terrorists would never think to use small, discreet cell phone cameras.

Note that in the UK, they’re trying to ban cell phones with cameras from all nurseries and daycares. Why? To prevent child abuse.

What about Google and Microsoft driving along every street and photographing every building? What about Microsoft’s low-flying aircraft photographing every building from all directions? Terrorists would never think to use these photos.

Reporting suspicious packages? Okay. But reporting anyone taking uninteresting pictures?

Are they stupid?

From the Gatineau/Ottawa transit system’s current “spot-the-terrorist” campaign (ah yes, paranoia at its finest):

Can you spot the photographer terrorist?

Correct, it’s the guy with the backpack about to board the bus.

Harassing photographers will never prevent terrorism or increase security. Photography is not a crime.

Are they stupid?

–––––

For more stupidity, the Ontario city of Kitchener requires anyone who takes pictures in public, (“…a person who uses a photographic camera or similar device in or upon any highway or public place”), to have a $297 permit (link to PDF).