From time to time photographers share stories about being harassed by police and security officers for photographing public sites. Some cities have even gotten in on the act, taking very odd action such as outlawing or restricting the use of tripods in public places. In general, these actions completely baffle photographers.

From an article in the Guardian:

Given that real terrorists, and even wannabe terrorists, don’t seem to photograph anything, why is it such pervasive conventional wisdom that terrorists photograph their targets? Why are our fears so great that we have no choice but to be suspicious of any photographer?

Because it’s a movie-plot threat.

The article is an interesting read. The point is that an imaginary threat has been concocted in the public consciousness that it completely unrelated to any real danger. The article goes on:

The 9/11 terrorists didn’t photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid subway bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn’t photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber didn’t photograph anything; neither did shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs aren’t being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. The IRA wasn’t known for its photography. Even those manufactured terrorist plots that the US government likes to talk about — the Ft. Dix terrorists, the JFK airport bombers, the Miami 7, the Lackawanna 6 — no photography.

Photographers should know that virtually all public photography is quite legal in the USA. The public should understand that it is also almost always completely innocent.