• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Taking Pictures in your Army Career?

Not open for further replies.

Access to a military base or installation is controlled by a set of rules called DCAARS (Defense Control Area Access Regulations)

Effectively when you enter a military controlled area your rights dissapear.

They can stop you for no reason, search your car for no reason, detain you for no reason And yes, even if you're still a civvie! There is a sign at the entrance to each base in Canada stating this.

Included in these rules are very specific rules about picture taking. They are not normally enforced but easily could be (including seizing your camera without cause)

Now these rules are not usually enforced without good reason but they can be at the drop of a hat. As a militia MP I have, in the past, dragged a pair of civvie journalist from their vehicle kicking and screaming about their rights...And taken their cameras. It was explained to them in detail... after they were flex-cuffed and sitting in the dirt.

So Torlyn, the next time a serving member or former member of the CF tells you and your Ninjaclub something , sit back, be quiet and listen.

Slim said:
So Torlyn, the next time a serving member or former member of the CF tells you and your Ninjaclub something , sit back, be quiet and listen.


Blah blah blah...  Hey, that's great, except the question wasn't "what rights do I have on base" or "who can search me on base" it was "Who owns the image taken on a military base".  IF DCAARS has something on that, please forward me in the right direction.

I was stunned by your response that basically says if I (for example) were to be on base, you, for whatever reason, could completely suspend my charter rights for absolutely no reason, thereby committing a criminal act yourself...  Very interesting, Slim.  Do I doubt DCAARS?  No, not at all.  And being a reserve MP, you obviously have more experience in that area than I.  I was unable to find DCAARS anywhere (DND, justice website et al) so if you could point out it's location to me, I'd love to find the part of it that specifically deals with image rights.  And, the part that says an MP can suspend all of my rights for NO reason.

For the record, when any of the standing/retired members have pointed out my misinformation whatever the source, they've done it with proof or at least relevancy, and in those cases, I take it as gospel.  Those members (yourself included) know way more about it than I do, and I've never debated that.

So Slim, next time a person asks a question, read it, deliver whatever RELEVANT information you have, otherwise sit back, be quiet, and listen. 

Actually, Torlyn, the person who initially brought up the fact that the CF would own the rights, is a serving JAG Officer.  Somehow I think he would know.
Eowyn said:
Actually, Torlyn, the person who initially brought up the fact that the CF would own the rights, is a serving JAG Officer.  Somehow I think he would know.

That's all I needed to hear. 

Slim - All you needed to do was show me or state:

21. Except with the prior consent of a designated authority, no person shall bring into or have on any controlled access area any photographic equipment or any recording or transmitting device, whether such device records or transmits images, sounds, data or other information of any type whatsoever.

Good.  So we've determined that without permission I can't bring in photographic equipment.  DCAARS says nothing about ownership of images, but as Eowyn pointed out, a serving JAG member would know, ergo I bow to the JAG member's knowledge.

And in regards to the journalists, were they trespassing?  I'm just wondering how you were able to search for NO reason...  DCAARS has fairly specific limits to searches, by the looks of it...  It says you can be searched upon entering and exiting, right?  Other than that, you must have had "[security guard may search if there are "reasonable grounds to believe that the personal property is or may contain anything that is likely to endanger the safety of any person within the controlled access area."  Perhaps our JAG could enlighten me...

I arrested them because they were photographing something they were told not to...


A military base is a different world. YOu give up your normal rights when you enter one...Oh sure they have to justify what they do but, believe me, the rules to seize and search are VERY DIFFERENT from out on the street. The MP's do no need your consent to search, nor do they have to see you doing something wrong...All they need to stop you is a reasonable beliefe that you are doing, or have done, something that is against the rules.

Are you a journalist by chance...?

  No, I'm not a journalist (I figured that they probably tried something like that) nor do I have any love for them.  I used to work security at some of the hospitals in Calgary, and have had more than my fair share of run-ins with them, so that I couldn't be one.  I'm a bit of an art photographer, and I've been curious about this because I do take a lot of pictures, and I do have stuff up at an art gallery in town.  I was curious as to whether I would be able to do that (show my photos), should I get in to the CF and take any on base.  I PM'd brneil, (he's the JAG officer Eowyn mentioned) so I'm sure he'll be able to respond to that specific.

In regards to the "different world" on base, I understand that now (I read DCAARS) and wholeheartedly agree with the policy.  Thanks for pointing it out.

  As for the journalists, they should have known better.  We had to launch a few from the children's when we had a Jehova's Witness girl in who was refusing blood transfusions.  (Her father was fighting it, so there was a bit of a media scrum)  It blew my mind that they believed they had the right to invade the privacy of all of the sick kids on the cancer ward just to get a photo op...  Sigh.

Here is my attempt to try and put this one to rest.

There are many photos out there taken by service members while they were deployed/onduty.  The large number of these photos were not sold or otherwise used for profit but rather posted in scrapbooks or websites.  No problem.

The difficulty comes in two situations:

1) Member takes photos while on duty - According to the Copyright Act the photos are deemed to be work product  of the employer UNLESS there is an agreement in place that says otherwise.  This follows the basic premise that while you are on duty you are working for the employer and all work product therefore belongs to them.  This is not to say that you would not be able to get permission later to use the photos for any number of reasons.  Permission not really needed for personal enjoyment or keeping a scrapbook type record.

2) The second situation is in regards to classified materials/objects.  Obviously there are particular provisions in order to maintain the classified status.  These regulations are of a National Security nature and thus apply to civilians as well as CF members.

My original comment was simply to provide a warning to some that the use of photos taken while on duty for a profit reason without receiving permission from the chain of command COULD land you in hot water.  No one in the CF is trying to stop people from sharing their stories and experiences.

Hope this can put the topic to rest.
I think its time to make sure of that.
Thank you, brneil.
Not open for further replies.