Why the Arab systems feel a sort of sensitivity towards using the camera in public places? Why cameras and flashes upset people every where? This disturbance is common either in the developed countries that call for the absolute freedom, or in the countries that full of traditions and sanctify privacy and consider it as divine as the dignity of man.

What is the difference between privacy and publicity in public places that are full of people, whatever these public places are agencies or tourist places? Who has the right exclusively to prevent shooting in public places? Can the sign “no shooting” be useful in the age when Goggle Earth is able to shoot you reluctantly in street, trade centers, house roofs, or even in your bedroom?

Can we prevent shooting in this age, the age of modern cell phones with cameras? This phone has the capacity to take photos without even noticing it. Pretending to have a call, the phone can take shoots any where without noticing any body, Also the “Bluetooth” the greatest data transporter that can transport information and photos to any where in the blink of the eye.

Few years ago, the Saudi Ministry of trade forbade the selling of the modern Camera-phones. Using this kind of cell phones was considered as a crime. But this strict forbiddance has gradually reduced after the huge popularity of this kind of cell phones and using it by the travelers of the neighboring countries, besides some people considered this kind of cell phones is necessary. Finally people realized that these phones are exactly like any thing depends on the way you use it. We can say that it is a double edged weapon, like the knife for example; may be used in the kitchen and be useful, and also may be used to kill some one.

Camera-phones were always a source of suspensions in places where women work, like the girls’ school. And using this kind of phones in the schools and universities of girls is still a violation in the student-draft law.

Shooting in public places is forbidden, especially in places that are specialized for families, least bad people might use such shoots to interfere the privacy of some families. So, any one may find himself involved in a serious problem if he tried to take some photos of his family and kids in a public place, especially if another family, with girls wearing veils, accidentally appeared in his photo. He might find himself accused of the worst charge ever in traditional communities that is interfering the privacy of families. Moreover, the religious base that some people depend on that considers shooting is forbidden originally by religion.

This is nothing comparing with the huge number of surveillance cameras that are wide spread every where in many countries and the citizens have no idea about them. It was mentioned in a research made by the European commissarial that the number of the surveillance cameras has increased four times during the last few years in England, it became four million cameras. Also there are the immoral secret cameras that act as spying tools that are sold by some websites and any one can buy them any where in the world.

It is remarkable that preventing or allowing shooting depends on different criteria that differ from a counter to another. So it is considered as one of the social awareness criteria. In some countries, there is no problem at all concerning shooting in public places, even some passing by in such countries happily share you your photos. Whereas, in other countries there might be a great sensitivity against shooting for several social, political and religion reasons, and who dares to shoot in public places will be involved in serious problems.

Some times in the huge trade centers and companies, shooting is not allowed. A worker suddenly appears to tell toy that shooting is not allowed here while he himself doesn’t know if it is really allowed or not. The last scene is very common because such people were firmly brought upon prevention and repression culture, so the worker, as an example for such people, thought that every thing is not allowed including shooting. And when you ask the permission of the person in charge, he will welcome and will never mind taking some photos.

In Arab countries, the phenomenon of “babaratzy photographer” does not appear thanks God. Babaratzy shooting is very common in the western countries. “Babaratzy photographers” are those photographers who are hired by newspapers and information agencies. They are hired to spy on public figures and famous actors and actresses and take private shoots of them and to sell these photos to yellow press and gain so much money. Often those photographers follow some immoral ways to penetrate the privacy of the public figures; such as watching their houses and spying on their personal life, And how many times those photographers caused embarrassment to public figures when they were shot cheating, having affairs, or stealing. Also there are some modern cameras that are as tiny as a pin that could show the wrinkles of some actresses and also the hidden wounds of plastic surgery which caused embarrassment to them.

Every photo is automatically and so quickly published in the yellow press. There are so many scandals beginning with Michael Jackson having sex with his wife till shooting Britney Spears nude.

Some people do not like shooting, may be because they are afraid of his real personality appear in the photo and his negative sides will be clear for all. Do we remember the American ex-president of the World Bank and the engineer of the invasion of Iraq; Paul Votiz, during his visit to Turkey, the journalists took some photos for him when he was taking off his shoes to enter the mosque and his torn socks appeared in the photos. It was a scandal.

In the age of technology and the information revolution, the whole world became a small village and there is no place for secrets any more, nothing can be hidden. The public places became more public than they were before. And whatever happened in Cairo, Paris, or in Morocco is known just few seconds after it took place through the news agencies and the broadcasting services that televise the event on air. So, claiming that one can keep his privacy in public places is a big lie. Privacy came into its end in the open space age both in Arab countries and all over the world.

If any one protests against shooting in public places claiming that he defends the privacy of the individual, we can tell him that; as soon as you go out to street and consider the social rules in public places, then you became a part of the publicity of the place. People see you in public places, so what is the problem if they saw you in a picture of that place? Whatever is visible to all people can be kept in a photo. As long as you do not do any thing wrong then there is no reason to avoid cameras any more.

Some may protest against shooting in some specific military places for security reasons, to which I say that who wants to spy will never take photos so simply before all these people. Every thing is visible is public and there are some more complicated means for spying that no body knows about. In such cases, the institutions in charge have the right to decide places where shooting is not allowed for security reasons and to write signs every where in different languages demonstrating that shooting is not allowed and why.

Shooting is a social critical eye that records every thing in life. Shooting is the right of every one, not only journalists. It is considered as a sort of knowledge. Exactly like reading, tourism and social relationships. Shooting is a human right.