Does in you country is specific ban on photographing military installation?

[Pawelk198604]

In Poland you can not take pictures of military installations, the ban was introduced in the time of communism and is still in force.

You are not allowed to make a picture yourself on the background of these objects. (I wonder why they are such bans after these objects were built with public tax money that pays every Pole)

I wonder whether such prohibitions apply also in other countries, or is it a communist relic?

I wonder why such a silly bans, since the pictures of these military bases are publicly available. on the Internet.

I once read that some joker had a photo, himself from a military base on the background of the information board "ban onphotographing" then put this photo on his facebook

Unfortunately, it was not him then to laugh, because he got a ticket for misdemeanor.

[Duke23]

I don't think anyone cares in the US unless it's one of their "secret" bases that they claim doesn't exist even though you can see it from space (or experimental aircraft). Even then I think it's more a case of them catching you doing it, than tracking you down after the fact, but I could be wrong about that.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Duke23

[Flymetothemun]

Apparently here in the U.S. the president can prohibit photography of certain bases if he thinks they're vital to national defense. However, if you go through a process of getting permission from all concerned parties and then send the photos to a commanding officer for censorship if they deem it necessary, you can take photos of such declared bases. As far as non-declared bases, I'd say it's just a risk of getting hassled if you get too close or look suspicious.

Sources:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/795

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/USCODE-2011-title18/USCODE-2011-title18-partI-chap37-sec795

Edited July 16, 2014 by Flymetothemun

[BadRocketsCo.]

In Estonia there is the same thing, for all I know, you can't take pictures of vehicles and buildings.

[Camacha]

Apparently here in the U.S. the president can prohibit photography of certain bases if he thinks they're vital to national defense. However, if you go through a process of getting permission from all concerned parties and then send the photos to a commanding officer for censorship if they deem it necessary, you can take photos of such declared bases. As far as non-declared bases, I'd say it's just a risk of getting hassled if you get too close or look suspicious.

People are getting hassled for photographing pretty mundane objects now.

[Godot]

German military installations AFAIK can be freely photographed.

Things are different, however, for the military US bases on german soil.

Guess they are afraid that people might photograph the US bases while they are performing some secret and illegal NSA espionage activity.

[rpayne88]

I was up in the tower at Andrews AFB, once. That is where they store Air Force One. They said we were not allowed to photograph in a particular arc (looking towards Air Force One,) but everything else was fair game.

[pxi]

In Ireland, we go one further - you can't even draw pictures!

See here, via Google Streetview

The entrance to that which is not to be photographed

Also:

Guess they are afraid that people might photograph the US bases while they are performing some secret and illegal NSA espionage activity.

That, or someone might start offering hot-air balloon rides over the installation.

Edited July 16, 2014 by pxi

[szputnyik]

In Hungary you can't photograph military bases and installations, although you can photograph military training camps, air-raid shelters and bunkers, but only from the outside.

Photographing border crossings to Schengen countries is theoretically legal, though you musn't photo the crossings at the Ukrainian and Serbian borders and the small iron curtain-like installations (mostly fences and infrared cameras) at the Ukrainian and Serbian border.

I've heard that the strictest laws against photographing military and border installations in Europe are in Greece. Some British guy got into trouble because he tried to cross the border by car from Greece to Bulgaria, and the Greek border soldier noticed a small adhesive camera on his windshield with which he recorded his trip.

[lajoswinkler]

I don't know about the actual laws at this very moment, but I think you aren't allowed to photograph certain such objects in Croatia. At least there are warning signs against taking photos. They might be obsolete, though.

It would be fun to go there and do this.

Trolling stupid laws FTW.

[Seret]

Some countries are super paranoid about it. I remember being on exercise with the Malaysians and we were warned not to take any photos of their MiG-29s, as if they were some kind of secret wonder weapon.

[KaBob]

Theoretically even the most mundane information could be used for something someday, thus the paranoia.

[The Fleet Master]

What I know is in America you can't photograph "Off the record" Bases. Area-51 Makes sense because it's where we test our most secret aircraft.

[Camacha]

Theoretically even the most mundane information could be used for something someday, thus the paranoia.

And at the same time it is exactly the counter argument why it is a futile exercise. Also, when people photograph some civil installation that can be seen from a distance with ease, they should not be visited by secret services. The fact that a free citizen who does something normal gets scrutinized by secret services is a warning sign that we are on a wrong path. Those people should be protected, not harassed.

In Ireland, we go one further - you can't even draw pictures!

I guess that making a carving is legal.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Camacha

[Godot]

What I know is in America you can't photograph "Off the record" Bases. Area-51 Makes sense because it's where we test our most secret aircraft.

And keep your Aliens, as well as Stargates

[ZedNova]

And keep your Aliens, as well as Stargates

We actually keep most of those in Cheyenne mountain.

[cpast]

We actually keep most of those in Cheyenne mountain.

That's why normal NORAD operations are no longer in the mountain - other uses were taking up too much space.

[piggysanTH]

In Thailand.We even can take selfie with leader of Thai Army,Solider and even army base(In Thailand we don't have a lot of secret about military:blush:) But we can't photo Royal Palace(When they stay there) But if Royal family isn't in there.It's OK to take photo:cool:

[Woopert]

I did a Cape Canaveral Air Force Station historical tour in Florida and they have a strict no picture policy on their grounds. If you're not inside of the base you can take pictures of it, though.

Cape Canaveral is actually *separate* from Kennedy Space Center. A lot of people use the two interchangeably, but this is false. KSC belongs to NASA, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station is USAF and is technically a military base, even though they launch rockets there. At KSC they allow pictures, though..

[Seret]

Theoretically even the most mundane information could be used for something someday, thus the paranoia.

Preventing photography of an aircraft you can walk up to and touch (and photograph) at an airshow is just silly though. They'd bought them off the shelf, it was the bog-standard export version of the Fulcrum. The only reason they were preventing photography was that they were super excited about flying a modern type, and wanted to create a bit of mystique to stroke their own egos. They were selling t-shirts with "MiG-29, pride of the nation" on them! Eejits.

[pxi]

I guess that making a carving is legal.

The way I'd read the sign in the first link I provided, I'd figure so.

But we can't photo Royal Palace(When they stay there) But if Royal family isn't in there.It's OK to take photo:cool:

I presume this is anticipating some sort of "gun in camera" scenario, but that seems like a bit of a weird distinction to me.

---

If you haven't read "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" it's worth a read. Somewhere within, you'll hear about his exploits with safes during the Manhattan Project. The gist of it was that he noticed that the safes they were supplied with, were rather insecure for a number of reasons, not least of which was that most had been left at the default combination.

In the end, his attempts to highlight the issue, led to memos instructing that Feynman was a safecracker who was not to be let near a safe under any circumstances.

[lajoswinkler]

I didn't want to open a new thread, so here's somewhat related post.

Have you seen the changes on Flightradar?

http://www.flightradar24.com

Check out Europe, you'll understand immediately.

[Godot]

That flights now try to avoid the regions around Donetsk?

Well, that was to expect after all what happened yesterday ... I also wouldn´t want to the planes I am on to fly through regions where we can get shot down

[Seret]

I also wouldn´t want to the planes I am on to fly through regions where we can get shot down

It happens more than you might think. If they had to route around every trouble spot on the globe they'd be flying in circles. I've flown over Afghanistan recently, for example. The thing is that civilian aircraft can 100% positively identify themselves to military radar. Since there's no sane reason to bring down an airliner it's not normally a problem. You'll be tracked by military radar entering most countries, but because they know you're not a threat there's no trouble.

[SelectHalfling0]

Area 51. There are definitely aliens at area 51 cuz we cannot photograph the area.