Is Hamilton banning security cameras on people’s property?

Not exactly “banning them outright for everyone,” but the city is enforcing an existing bylaw that restricts how they can be used. It’s not a new law passed this week — it’s an older municipal rule being applied in a specific case. Justice Centre

📍 What’s happening now?

A Hamilton homeowner was ordered to remove 10 outdoor security cameras from his home because the city says they violate the Fortification Bylaw (Bylaw 10‑122). That bylaw prohibits surveillance devices that can view or listen beyond the boundaries of the owner’s property. Global News+1

• The homeowner says the cameras have been up for years and helped police with serious investigations. Global News

• The city says under the bylaw, cameras must not capture neighbouring private property — they can be repositioned so they only record on the owner’s land. Global News

So it’s not a blanket ban on all home security cameras, just an enforcement of a rule about how they’re pointed and what they record.

📜 Why does this bylaw exist?

Hamilton and some other Ontario cities adopted “fortification” rules years ago (many in early 2000s) to regulate excessive protective elements like high walls, gates, or cameras. The original idea wasn’t about stopping people from defending their property — it was more about public safety and access (e.g., firefighters, emergency personnel) and privacy concerns about watching your neighbours. City of Toronto

📌 Is the claim that everyone has to remove cameras true?

No — that’s misleading:

• It’s about enforcing an existing bylaw in one case where cameras allegedly capture beyond the homeowner’s property line. Global News

• There’s no city statement saying all residents have to take down all cameras everywhere.

• Even the city’s response to media clarifies that cameras like doorbell cams that only capture public space or the owner’s property aren’t automatically banned if they don’t capture others’ private land. Global News

🤔 Is the bylaw controversial?

Yes — it’s sparking debate:

• Some groups (like constitutional law advocates) argue the bylaw is too broad and conflicts with Charter rights like freedom of expression, because it would technically capture many common cameras (e.g., Ring doorbells). They’ve sent warning letters saying it should be repealed or changed. Justice Centre

• Privacy advocates say people should not be filming others’ private property — particularly neighbours — without consent. CHCH

🧾 Bottom line

• There isn’t a new city-wide ban on security cameras on private property.

• Hamilton is enforcing an older bylaw that limits how cameras can record beyond a homeowner’s land.

• The case that sparked headlines involves one resident whose cameras allegedly captured beyond his yard, and the city is applying the bylaw.

• That enforcement has triggered debate about privacy, safety, and constitutional rights in Ontario. Justice Centre