New Met police video

[Chief Bakes 6,479]

Can a PCSO use the power to search for alcohol without having been designated a separate power to detain?

[Sceptre + 2,710]

The answers to this question don't seem to answer the question itself. The power of search does not carry any power of detention, so a PCSO not designated with the separate power to detain for thirty minutes could not detain someone for the offence of obstructing them as it is summary only, however that would not prevent them exercising the actual power of search itself regardless of the lack of any specific power to detain for the purpose. Indeed if a constable were present they could not detain the person either as they do not possess a power to search for alcohol or tobacco - such is the legislative mess PCSO powers have become.

[AA101 626]

5 hours ago, Chief Bakes said:

Can a PCSO use the power to search for alcohol without having been designated a separate power to detain?

I see no reason in principle because the power of detention is very limited and specific in the circumstances it can be used. A power of search carries with it an implicit power of detention (just how most acts don't give an express power to use force in searches and warrants).

[IrateShrike + 1,850]

I agree with Sceptre, the four multiple choice answers don't really match the question.

However the answer is "yes".

PCSOs can excercise their power to search for alcohol or tobacco without being designated the discretionary power of detention.

If the subject refuses to consent to be searched, then the issue of detaining the subject (by force if necessary) almost becomes irrelevant since PCSOs cannot use force to search for alcohol or tobacco if the subject refuses to consent.  The subject merely commits an offence of refusing to consent.

A PCSO in my team said that if the subject refused to be searched they would detain them and search them under their equivalent of S32 PACE.  I told them I didn't think this would be lawful as the alcohol/tobacco would unlikely be 'dangerous items'.

[Jinxer 43]

Why would you need to search for alcohol or tobacco in the first place, there both legal to have I thought so no reason to plug them up your backside is there.

[Pete 1,492]

13 minutes ago, Jinxer said:

Why would you need to search for alcohol or tobacco in the first place, there both legal to have I thought so no reason to plug them up your backside is there.

underage...

[Jinxer 43]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

underage...

Of course silly me. Are PCSO's taking over the responsibility of parenting now then.

[AA101 626]

1 hour ago, Jinxer said:

Of course silly me. Are PCSO's taking over the responsibility of parenting now then.

...or upholding the law. Call it what you like your contribution is far from helpful and nothing to do with the question posed.

[Jinxer 43]

3 minutes ago, AA101 said:

...or upholding the law. Call it what you like your contribution is far from helpful and nothing to do with the question posed.

I think it may have a lot to do with the question asked, If the only reason a PCSO can search someone for tobacco and alcohol is because there a kid, I for one would of been a very upset mop if PCSO's had searched any of my kids without me being present, they should have no more right to do that than anyone else.

[Indiana Jones + 1,103]

And if we swap cigarettes for crystal meth, then would you still have an issue with your child being searched?

Is it PCSOs that you object to? Or just the general concept of your child being searched?

[Jinxer 43]

I wouldn't have no issue with a Warranted Police Officer searching my kids if they had a good reason to do so, but would have a great issue with anyone else doing it no matter what they were looking for. Even with a proper Police Officer I would expect to be informed if it was possible at the time. 

[northernape 55]

So the issue is with PCSOs? Just because they don't operate on a warrant doesn't mean they don't have lawful authority. They are properly officers of the police, even though they are not "police officers". We work alongside them and their contribution to the overall effort of policing is invaluable. The grounds for searching a person for alcohol or tobacco must be met and the responsibility of these powers is not something handed down willy nilly. Like any uniformed officer they undergo the necessary training and on the job probation, and are accountable for their actions, which must be lawful and according to their force's policy. If your child hasn't been searched by a PCSO for alcohol or tobacco, then you've probably done a great job as a parent, but if they have been searched, it doesn't mean you've failed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jinxer 43]

1 hour ago, northernape said:

So the issue is with PCSOs? Just because they don't operate on a warrant doesn't mean they don't have lawful authority. They are properly officers of the police, even though they are not "police officers". We work alongside them and their contribution to the overall effort of policing is invaluable. The grounds for searching a person for alcohol or tobacco must be met and the responsibility of these powers is not something handed down willy nilly. Like any uniformed officer they undergo the necessary training and on the job probation, and are accountable for their actions, which must be lawful and according to their force's policy. If your child hasn't been searched by a PCSO for alcohol or tobacco, then you've probably done a great job as a parent, but if they have been searched, it doesn't mean you've failed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My issue isn't with PCSO's it would be with anyone who touched my child when I wasn't there. A Police Officer has a warrant card for a reason and if you receive the same training then what's wrong with being a proper Constable, it's bad enough that they got the right to do it without a parent there. When will giving powers to others stop, there's so many different types of enforcement agents and whatever about these days the public don't know whether there coming or going. What will come next, the local neighbourhood watch coordinator knocking your door to check your up to date with your tv licence.

[ScotLass + 638]

14 hours ago, Jinxer said:

I think it may have a lot to do with the question asked, If the only reason a PCSO can search someone for tobacco and alcohol is because there a kid, I for one would of been a very upset mop if PCSO's had searched any of my kids without me being present, they should have no more right to do that than anyone else.

....so you'd be more upset that your kid was searched without you being present, than the fact your underage kid is out in public drinking and/or smoking?

[Jinxer 43]

14 hours ago, Mazza said:

....so you'd be more upset that your kid was searched without you being present, than the fact your underage kid is out in public drinking and/or smoking?

If my underage kid was out in public drinking and smoking I guarantee you it wouldn't of been long before I would of found out myself and dealt with it accordingly. I wouldn't of needed no PCSO nor Police Officer to have searched them to find out what they had been up to. I think PCSO's appeared around 2002 and we managed ok without them up to then.

[jimmyriddle 87]

1 hour ago, Jinxer said:

If my underage kid was out in public drinking and smoking I guarantee you it wouldn't of been long before I would of found out myself and dealt with it accordingly. I wouldn't of needed no PCSO nor Police Officer to have searched them to find out what they had been up to. I think PCSO's appeared around 2002 and we managed ok without them up to then.

Wow, that's some civil servant hating right there. Here's the reason why comments like this appear - they and their kids got away with it because we have no local community bobby anymore. They're all in different roles now so nobody does the grassroots stuff or takes the time to deal with people on a courteous and human level. In come the PCSOs, so this in people's minds gives them the attitude that the PCSOs are causing the problem where infact they didn't place the alcohol in the kid's jacket, they merely found it. You don't need me to tell you the damage kids can do to themselves, others or a bus stop with alcohol in them.

Maybe rather than blaming the PCSOs for finding your 14 year old getting jiggy with all the boys in the park when sozzled on a bottle of Lambrini, ask yourself, is the problem closer to home?

Think of the alternative and the counter-arguments we'd now have... "As if they need a fully warranted bobby to search my kids getting drunk in the park... haven't they got more serious crimes to solve?". You just can't win with the GBP (Great British Public).

On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 12:51, Jinxer said:

Of course silly me. Are PCSO's taking over the responsibility of parenting now then.

Because in this country we really have such a great handle on it don't we. And you may find it unfortunate, but actions need to be taken without the so-called parent being there. It's probably all for the best as we all know it's nothing to do with accountability but for the Jeremy Kyle wannabe parent to come down and cause a massive scene. Here's an example, my last few weeks on the job were subject to a PSD complaint over incivility. This was never elaborated on precisely, but stemmed from me seeing a local horror in the making from a bad family in the town centre on a school day. I started to ask him about not being in school and his mum came over being very rude saying it was none of my business etc. Parents hate being called out on their poor parenting, but as long as she's still getting the social for him hey? We had just been given the PND power to issue fines for not securing attendance of the child in school, maybe this is something PCSOs should use more? Look at what happened with two truant kids in Bootle in 1993? (Thomson / Venebles).

Also, there is another reason to search for alcohol and this includes over 18s - designated no-drinking zones in town centres. PCSOs can search for this if they suspect there is an open container in this zone which many town centres have (need to look up the exact legislation). Ever been to a nice seaside town with the family to find the local drunks fighting, having a dump in the bushes by the high street, nicking alcohol from the local shop all because that's their main aim in life? (I'm talking from experience here, witnessing not participating obviously). Nah, it's totally unreasonable to deal with this issue, we don't have the resources to deal with this stuff from a patrol PoV so why not give PCSOs more responsibility?\

It's so strange the anger someone being 'not a proper' anything in someone else's eyes? Do we also say to a trainee nurse "you're not a proper phlebotomist/surgeon/registrar" etc. Coming over here, taking my blood like she's a doctor or sumthinornuffin.

Edited April 26, 2016 by jimmyriddle
Vicky Pollard