![\"\"](\"http:\/\/nw0.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/HLIC\/21176f624a8e8377c498f9ed44821eaf.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
‘Put that camera away. Yes, you, put it away right now. This is a public place, you can\u2019t take pictures here. What right have you got to take photographs? People might not like it. Did they say you could take photographs? Did they? No. Are you some sort of paedo? A terrorist? Gimme that camera. Delete those images. Delete your rights, delete trust, delete innocence before guilt. You\u2019re nicked.<\/p>\n
Perhaps I exaggerate a little: nevertheless, the days when you could photograph freely in public spaces are disappearing fast. In the eyes of many, the camera has become an offensive weapon, as Peter Dunwell discovered when he travelled from Grimsby to London in January. Coming down by train with a work colleague, Dunwell planned to make a photo-journal of their trip. At King\u2019s Cross he took out his Sony Handycam and started to photograph the arrivals board and station.<\/p>\n
Two police community-support officers approached and told him to stop. Sure, PCSOs are agents of the state whose job it is to stand by while others drown (as happened in the case of a 10-year-old boy) but intervene in anything none too dangerous. And yes, King\u2019s Cross is sensitive to the threat of terrorism<\/a> because the London bombers arrived there before going their separate ways on the Tube to murder 52 people in 2005. But Dunwell, a middle-aged man of middle build with middling-brown hair, doesn\u2019t look much of a terrorist. He looks more like the manager of a Jessops camera shop, which is what he is. Though his colleague has dyed blonde hair and pierced ears, there\u2019s no law against that, yet.’<\/p>\n Read more: Photography Under Threat: The Shooting Party\u2019s Over<\/a><\/p>\n