Change to Police Reform Act 2002
Discussion
Section 38 Designation of officers.
Aiui anyone daft enough to, for example, park a vehicle to obstruct the operation of a speed camera van, now commits an offence of obstructing a Police Support Officer (Camera van operators), penalty a fine and / or up to 51 weeks in clink.
Nobody here would do that one presumes.
And go... 3, 2, 1...
Aiui anyone daft enough to, for example, park a vehicle to obstruct the operation of a speed camera van, now commits an offence of obstructing a Police Support Officer (Camera van operators), penalty a fine and / or up to 51 weeks in clink.
Nobody here would do that one presumes.
And go... 3, 2, 1...
So far as I can see.... a chief police officer *may* designate powers to non officers. But I can't see it saying anything about obstructing duly appointed civilian officers.
And if I park and it obstructs a camera van, but I am parked legally.... then I was just exercising my legal right to park and did not realise they were operating their scamera. I really can't see them going for prosecuting people legally parking their cars. They are unpopular enough as it is, they don't need more bad PR.
I'd have no issue with the camera vans if they actually targeted the roads where speeding really is dangerous. They won't though, because hardly anyone speeds there, so they'd make little revenue. They always sit on the wide open stretches with an artificially low limit that many people naturally break as it clearly feels too low to any sensible driver selecting an appropriate speed for the hazards and conditions.
And if I park and it obstructs a camera van, but I am parked legally.... then I was just exercising my legal right to park and did not realise they were operating their scamera. I really can't see them going for prosecuting people legally parking their cars. They are unpopular enough as it is, they don't need more bad PR.
I'd have no issue with the camera vans if they actually targeted the roads where speeding really is dangerous. They won't though, because hardly anyone speeds there, so they'd make little revenue. They always sit on the wide open stretches with an artificially low limit that many people naturally break as it clearly feels too low to any sensible driver selecting an appropriate speed for the hazards and conditions.
spookly said:
So far as I can see.... a chief police officer *may* designate powers to non officers. But I can't see it saying anything about obstructing duly appointed civilian officers.
And if I park and it obstructs a camera van, but I am parked legally.... then I was just exercising my legal right to park and did not realise they were operating their scamera. I really can't see them going for prosecuting people legally parking their cars. They are unpopular enough as it is, they don't need more bad PR.
Volunteer to be the first o give it a go.And if I park and it obstructs a camera van, but I am parked legally.... then I was just exercising my legal right to park and did not realise they were operating their scamera. I really can't see them going for prosecuting people legally parking their cars. They are unpopular enough as it is, they don't need more bad PR.
spookly said:
I'd have no issue with the camera vans if they actually targeted the roads where speeding really is dangerous. They won't though, because hardly anyone speeds there, so they'd make little revenue. They always sit on the wide open stretches with an artificially low limit that many people naturally break as it clearly feels too low to any sensible driver selecting an appropriate speed for the hazards and conditions.
Fair enough...but if the limit is exceeded it is unlawful. The conditions you mention don't have a tractor-beam pulling the vehicle up past the limit or a heavy force field pushing your foot down. All that is needed is "...any sensible driver selecting an appropriate speed for the hazards and conditions that is up to the well-known or signalled maximum."
https://www.gainsboroughstandard.co.uk/news/crown-...
Yet cases that have real, actual victims aren't getting to court as there are not enough police officers to prepare the cases to a sufficient standard.
Speed cameras aren't about revenue generation at all.
Yet cases that have real, actual victims aren't getting to court as there are not enough police officers to prepare the cases to a sufficient standard.
Speed cameras aren't about revenue generation at all.
FiF said:
agtlaw said:
Presumably you mean section 38 of the Policing and Crime Act 2017?
Which amends Police Reform Act 2002.https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/secti...
As amended in 2011...
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/secti...
2017 amendments (not yet shown on main act)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/3/section...
Maybe I'm just dim, but you're going to have to explain to me what the big problem is that's being added here that hasn't been in place since 2002 or 2011. Unless you've just got a cob-on against hobbybobbies.
carinaman said:
https://www.gainsboroughstandard.co.uk/news/crown-...
Yet cases that have real, actual victims aren't getting to court as there are not enough police officers to prepare the cases to a sufficient standard.
Speed cameras aren't about revenue generation at all.
They sure as sYet cases that have real, actual victims aren't getting to court as there are not enough police officers to prepare the cases to a sufficient standard.
Speed cameras aren't about revenue generation at all.
t aren't about safety...certainly not as their primary concern.TooMany2cvs said:
Original from 2002...
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/secti...
As amended in 2011...
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/secti...
2017 amendments (not yet shown on main act)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/3/section...
Maybe I'm just dim, but you're going to have to explain to me what the big problem is that's being added here that hasn't been in place since 2002 or 2011. Unless you've just got a cob-on against hobbybobbies.
I thought a hobby bobby was a special which is completely different from police support officers?https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/secti...
As amended in 2011...
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/secti...
2017 amendments (not yet shown on main act)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/3/section...
Maybe I'm just dim, but you're going to have to explain to me what the big problem is that's being added here that hasn't been in place since 2002 or 2011. Unless you've just got a cob-on against hobbybobbies.
pavarotti1980 said:
I thought a hobby bobby was a special which is completely different from police support officers?
Adding in "volunteers" is the main addition to s38 of PRA02 (original and as amended in 2011).PRA17 said:
38 Powers of police civilian staff and police volunteers
(1)Chapter 1 of Part 4 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (exercise of police powers etc by civilians) is amended as follows.
(2)In section 38 (police powers for civilian staff), for subsections (1) and (2) substitute—
“(1)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a relevant employee as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support officer;
(b)a policing support officer.
(1A)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a police volunteer as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support volunteer;
(b)a policing support volunteer.”
(etc)(1)Chapter 1 of Part 4 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (exercise of police powers etc by civilians) is amended as follows.
(2)In section 38 (police powers for civilian staff), for subsections (1) and (2) substitute—
“(1)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a relevant employee as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support officer;
(b)a policing support officer.
(1A)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a police volunteer as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support volunteer;
(b)a policing support volunteer.”
Oh, and making it clear they can't be firearms officers (but CS gas is OK).
TooMany2cvs said:
pavarotti1980 said:
I thought a hobby bobby was a special which is completely different from police support officers?
Adding in "volunteers" is the main addition to s38 of PRA02 (original and as amended in 2011).PRA17 said:
38 Powers of police civilian staff and police volunteers
(1)Chapter 1 of Part 4 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (exercise of police powers etc by civilians) is amended as follows.
(2)In section 38 (police powers for civilian staff), for subsections (1) and (2) substitute—
“(1)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a relevant employee as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support officer;
(b)a policing support officer.
(1A)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a police volunteer as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support volunteer;
(b)a policing support volunteer.”
(etc)(1)Chapter 1 of Part 4 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (exercise of police powers etc by civilians) is amended as follows.
(2)In section 38 (police powers for civilian staff), for subsections (1) and (2) substitute—
“(1)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a relevant employee as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support officer;
(b)a policing support officer.
(1A)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a police volunteer as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support volunteer;
(b)a policing support volunteer.”
Oh, and making it clear they can't be firearms officers (but CS gas is OK).
(8)In that section, at the end insert—
“(12)In this section, “police volunteer” means a person who is under the direction and control of the chief officer making a designation under subsection (1A) otherwise than because the person is a constable, a special constable or a relevant employee.
Your welcome
pavarotti1980 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
pavarotti1980 said:
I thought a hobby bobby was a special which is completely different from police support officers?
Adding in "volunteers" is the main addition to s38 of PRA02 (original and as amended in 2011).PRA17 said:
38 Powers of police civilian staff and police volunteers
(1)Chapter 1 of Part 4 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (exercise of police powers etc by civilians) is amended as follows.
(2)In section 38 (police powers for civilian staff), for subsections (1) and (2) substitute—
“(1)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a relevant employee as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support officer;
(b)a policing support officer.
(1A)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a police volunteer as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support volunteer;
(b)a policing support volunteer.”
(etc)(1)Chapter 1 of Part 4 of the Police Reform Act 2002 (exercise of police powers etc by civilians) is amended as follows.
(2)In section 38 (police powers for civilian staff), for subsections (1) and (2) substitute—
“(1)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a relevant employee as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support officer;
(b)a policing support officer.
(1A)The chief officer of police of any police force may designate a police volunteer as either or both of the following—
(a)a community support volunteer;
(b)a policing support volunteer.”
Oh, and making it clear they can't be firearms officers (but CS gas is OK).
(8)In that section, at the end insert—
“(12)In this section, “police volunteer” means a person who is under the direction and control of the chief officer making a designation under subsection (1A) otherwise than because the person is a constable, a special constable or a relevant employee.
Your welcome
I was reminded of this change the other day when encountered a parked Transit van trying to obstruct the operation of a camera van. In reality all he was doing was provide a serious distraction to oncoming traffic, preventing them getting a clear view of the van itself, but didn't actually get in the way of the operator's line of sight to ping vehicles at a distance as they first came round the corner.
FiF said:
I was reminded of this change the other day when encountered a parked Transit van trying to obstruct the operation of a camera van. In reality all he was doing was provide a serious distraction to oncoming traffic, preventing them getting a clear view of the van itself, but didn't actually get in the way of the operator's line of sight to ping vehicles at a distance as they first came round the corner.
That's stty parking - but what's it got to do with this change?TooMany2cvs said:
FiF said:
I was reminded of this change the other day when encountered a parked Transit van trying to obstruct the operation of a camera van. In reality all he was doing was provide a serious distraction to oncoming traffic, preventing them getting a clear view of the van itself, but didn't actually get in the way of the operator's line of sight to ping vehicles at a distance as they first came round the corner.
That's stty parking - but what's it got to do with this change?
Does anyone want to explain this legislation in simple terms ? (I CBA trawling the relevant Acts and amendments).
Chief officers can grant PCSO powers to anyone ?
Chief officers can grant police support staff powers to anyone (no idea what they would be, but hey ho) ?
Chief officers can grant full police powers to PCSOs and police support staff ?
There's no specific offence of obstructing a camera van bod and I don't see how the changes in the legislation have changed that.
Red 4 said:
Does anyone want to explain this legislation in simple terms ? (I CBA trawling the relevant Acts and amendments).
Chief officers can grant PCSO powers to anyone ?
Chief officers can grant police support staff powers to anyone (no idea what they would be, but hey ho) ?
Chief officers can grant full police powers to PCSOs and police support staff ?
There's no specific offence of obstructing a camera van bod and I don't see how the changes in the legislation have changed that.
The argument that's been presented to me is that it's now being instructed that it would carry the same as Obstructing a Police Officer in the Execution of their Duty. Where I agree with agtlaw is afaik that's not up to 51 weeks chokey, a month maybe, not sure? But the relevant officer was insistent on the potential sentence tariff but didn't explain clearly how he got to it.
FiF said:
Red 4 said:
Does anyone want to explain this legislation in simple terms ? (I CBA trawling the relevant Acts and amendments).
Chief officers can grant PCSO powers to anyone ?
Chief officers can grant police support staff powers to anyone (no idea what they would be, but hey ho) ?
Chief officers can grant full police powers to PCSOs and police support staff ?
There's no specific offence of obstructing a camera van bod and I don't see how the changes in the legislation have changed that.
The argument that's been presented to me is that it's now being instructed that it would carry the same as Obstructing a Police Officer in the Execution of their Duty. Where I agree with agtlaw is afaik that's not up to 51 weeks chokey, a month maybe, not sure? But the relevant officer was insistent on the potential sentence tariff but didn't explain clearly how he got to it.
Any person who resists or wilfully obstructs a constable in the execution of his duty, or a person assisting a constable in the execution of his duty, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month or to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale, or to both.
FiF said:
Red 4 said:
Does anyone want to explain this legislation in simple terms ? (I CBA trawling the relevant Acts and amendments).
Chief officers can grant PCSO powers to anyone ?
Chief officers can grant police support staff powers to anyone (no idea what they would be, but hey ho) ?
Chief officers can grant full police powers to PCSOs and police support staff ?
There's no specific offence of obstructing a camera van bod and I don't see how the changes in the legislation have changed that.
The argument that's been presented to me is that it's now being instructed that it would carry the same as Obstructing a Police Officer in the Execution of their Duty. Where I agree with agtlaw is afaik that's not up to 51 weeks chokey, a month maybe, not sure? But the relevant officer was insistent on the potential sentence tariff but didn't explain clearly how he got to it.
I think whoever you spoke to may have got their wires crossed somewhere.
Plus, camera van operators, like you said, are police staff and not constables.
I can't see any situation where, in normal operations, they would be regarded Constables or be granted police powers.
Maybe there is legislation in the pipeline specific to speed detection and civilians ?
I haven't trawled the legislation you've linked to but the provisions sound like they are there to be used in a time of national emergency (or something like that).
A bit like the provisions that exist to allow CNC officers to be sworn in as full Constables if there is a need to (and happened during the terror attacks) ?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff