Photography in Public Areas (Term Paper Sample)

Name
Course
Instructor
Date
Photography in Public Areas
Discussing whether photography in public places constitutes an inherent suspicious activity
Even before the happenings of 9/11 in the US, photography had always been under siege. This situation got even worse after the 9/11 happenings in that anyone posing with a camera particularly larger than cellphone size in public areas is considered some threat. Currently, there are incredible volumes of misinformation about the rights of photographers in the US. There have been questions about what pictures one can take in public areas. For instance, some people claim that a photographer should not take pictures of a police officer, or shoot parents and children without their consent. Such sentiments can only be approved or disapproved through the deep application of law provisions.[Siljander, Raymond P., and Lance W. Juusola. Clandestine Photography Basic to Advanced Daytime and Nighttime Manual Surveillance Photography Techniques. Springfield: Charles C Thomas, 2012. Print.]
In the past, there have been cases of harassment, arrests, threats, and in worst cases murders of photographers for capturing moments on film or camera. Images have also been lost through forced deletion and confiscation in cases where innocent photographers had to deal with cops, ordinary folks, and guards. I believe that photography in public places is not essentially an An inherent suspicious act that should be investigated when observed. Misplaced fears of terror, unclear privacy claims, and misplaced child protection are cited to be the major factors preventing amateur photographers to enjoy photography. Currently taking photos in public is increasingly becoming difficult due to terrorism-related fears.
However, there are instances where photographing in public becomes an inherently suspicious activity necessitating investigation by a police officer. For instance, where photography trespasses privacy such in taking ‘up-skirts’. It is important to note that there could be some rational expectation of privacy, although to a limited extent than photographing in private places. A study of the statute and common law indicates that only in few limited circumstances will there exist a legal barrier against photography in public areas. However, if it is clear that a photographer is trespassing privacy, an officer can launch an investigation in such a case.[Greenberg, Ed, and Jack Reznicki. The Copyright Zone: A Legal Guide for Photographers and Artists in the Digital Age. Second ed. 2015. Print.]
A photographer can legally take a photograph of anything visible to the public provided such photography does not require special equipment such as telephoto lenses. This implies that one can legally take photos of athletes, children, buildings, people on the street, beach bathers, policemen, government officials, airports, and trains in public areas amongst others though there are exceptions in law where such photography could raise suspicion and inspire the need for an investigation. For instance, though defense buildings are public, photographing such buildings could rise suspicion and police officers may investigate a photographer.[Miller, Larry S. Police Photography. 6th ed. Burlington: Elsevier Science, 2010. Print.]
It is also illegal to photograph public areas that the law has prohibited photography. Such include certain governmental property such as military camps. Another area is where there are banners prohibiting photography such as in bridges in New York City area. Photographing of things or items not visible to the public in public areas such as th...