Photos of Terror
Today, British police published new guidelines regarding photography in the UK. The Met says:
We have no intention of Section 44 or Section 58a being used to criminalise ordinary people taking photos or legitimate journalistic activity.
We have issued guidance to all police forces advising them that these offences should not be used to capture an innocent member of the public, tourist or responsible journalist taking a photograph of a police officer.
These offences are intended to help protect those in the front line of our counter terrorism operations from terrorist attack. For the offence to be committed, the information would have to raise a reasonable suspicion that it was intended to be used to provide practical assistance to terrorists.
Section 58a, mentioned above, includes a ten year prison sentence for attempting to obtain information about an officer — including photographs of that officer — that is likely to be useful to a terrorist.
All this makes me wonder — when has a photograph ever been used to provide practical assistance to terrorists? Is there an instance of this of which we are unaware?
Earlier this year, we here at the Big Bad Blog discovered that guidelines being provided to public servants to identify terrorists asked them to look for cameras with zoom lenses and maps, and warned that these people might visit hotels and rail stations.
It’s not just in the UK — people with tripods seem to get hassled quite often in the United States, too.
What seems peculiar is the emphasis on professional (or serious amateur) photo equipment. Surely a low quality image that shows where things are is good enough, right? Why would a terrorist engaging in reconaissance make themselves obvious. In particular, what’s so evil about tripods? It makes less than no sense.
Still, people get arrested for taking apparently innocuous photographs here, which always makes me feel a bit nervous when I’m out running around with a camera. As ridiculous as the whole thing is, the police still have the ability to arrest me on suspicion of photography-with-intent-to-terrorize. That a rational person could not possibly have the “reasonable suspicion” required is hardly satisfactory — there has been nothing rational about these laws or their enforcement thus far.
In related news, I’m going out photographing tomorrow. Wish me luck.
Related links:
I’m a Photographer, not a terrorist.
The Home Office circular on Photography and Counter-Terrorism.
Related articles: