I should really have posted this when I got the letter, but I have finally had a response from the SIA's Mike Wilson via my local MP Helen Goodman.
I posted the letter on the main APSO site here for all to see.
Wednesday, 30 April 2008
Thursday, 17 April 2008
Update, kinda...
Ok, so I haven't been updating the blog lately, but there really hasn't been anything to put here.
I still haven't received any reply from my MP. All I have had was a breif email from her secretary saying they were awaiting replies from the SIA etc and would get back to me once they had received them - I know the SIA can drag their heel with things for us, but come on, this is the deputy leader of the house of commons. You'd think they'd have gotten back to her in a matter of days, not months.
I dunno, just getting a bit sick of the entire situation. The SIA are basically a waste of time and space that needs a complete rethink, sooner rather than later.
I still haven't received any reply from my MP. All I have had was a breif email from her secretary saying they were awaiting replies from the SIA etc and would get back to me once they had received them - I know the SIA can drag their heel with things for us, but come on, this is the deputy leader of the house of commons. You'd think they'd have gotten back to her in a matter of days, not months.
I dunno, just getting a bit sick of the entire situation. The SIA are basically a waste of time and space that needs a complete rethink, sooner rather than later.
Friday, 4 April 2008
Self defence?
Ok, so I'm bored. I've just been re-reading the response from Downing Street regards the petition to allow security personnel the use of batons/sprays and handcuffs as standard, to which they basically gave a big no.
I came across a section on the use of reasonable force:
Under the law as it stands a person is entitled to use reasonable force in self-defence, to protect another person or property, to prevent crime or to assist in the lawful arrest of a criminal.
What constitutes `reasonable force' will depend upon the circumstances of each case and is a matter for the courts to decide. The courts have held that if a person does only what he honestly and instinctively thought necessary to defend himself or prevent a crime, then that would be potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken.
Now, the way I read that, if your first instinct when someone pulls a knife/whatever on you whilst not on duty is to punch them full-force in the face, breaking their nose/jaw/whatever else you come into contact with, that would be reasonable force. So in theory, this would be the same if we were on duty at the time this happened, wouldn't it?
As a private citizen, we could defend ourselves in that way and it would be called self defence, however, whilst on duty whether it be in a pub or club, or a retail site, or even in some remote building site, we are seen as having a position of authority, and if we did this to defend ourselves on duty, we would be considered as thugs who beat up people rather than attempt to disarm them without having to resort to violence.
It's a very grey area, but until it is clarified we are going to be constantly on a knife-edge (no pun intended) if someone tries to attack us in any way shape or form, wondering if we would be sued etc if we seemingly go too far.
Gordon, get your ass into gear and allow us all to defend ourselves properly. The criminals use weapons on us, so why can't we use 'defensive' weapons on them?
I came across a section on the use of reasonable force:
Under the law as it stands a person is entitled to use reasonable force in self-defence, to protect another person or property, to prevent crime or to assist in the lawful arrest of a criminal.
What constitutes `reasonable force' will depend upon the circumstances of each case and is a matter for the courts to decide. The courts have held that if a person does only what he honestly and instinctively thought necessary to defend himself or prevent a crime, then that would be potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken.
Now, the way I read that, if your first instinct when someone pulls a knife/whatever on you whilst not on duty is to punch them full-force in the face, breaking their nose/jaw/whatever else you come into contact with, that would be reasonable force. So in theory, this would be the same if we were on duty at the time this happened, wouldn't it?
As a private citizen, we could defend ourselves in that way and it would be called self defence, however, whilst on duty whether it be in a pub or club, or a retail site, or even in some remote building site, we are seen as having a position of authority, and if we did this to defend ourselves on duty, we would be considered as thugs who beat up people rather than attempt to disarm them without having to resort to violence.
It's a very grey area, but until it is clarified we are going to be constantly on a knife-edge (no pun intended) if someone tries to attack us in any way shape or form, wondering if we would be sued etc if we seemingly go too far.
Gordon, get your ass into gear and allow us all to defend ourselves properly. The criminals use weapons on us, so why can't we use 'defensive' weapons on them?
Friday, 21 March 2008
Sorry for the quietness....
I know I appear to have not been updating the blog, but there hasn't actually been anything to put on here lately.
Im still awaiting a further response from my MP, as I understand she is awaiting responses from those she wrote to last month. So once I have the responses, I will put them here, but until then, we just have to wait.
Something I will mention, is that I have started to gather increasing interest from both individual guards and security companies alike, however, as this is still only a fledgling idea, they are reluctant to show their support by being listed on the main APSO website - something that I can understand.
Anyways, like I say, once I have information to put here, I will do.
Im still awaiting a further response from my MP, as I understand she is awaiting responses from those she wrote to last month. So once I have the responses, I will put them here, but until then, we just have to wait.
Something I will mention, is that I have started to gather increasing interest from both individual guards and security companies alike, however, as this is still only a fledgling idea, they are reluctant to show their support by being listed on the main APSO website - something that I can understand.
Anyways, like I say, once I have information to put here, I will do.
Monday, 3 March 2008
Followup: Security officer killed on duty
Last night it came to my attention that the officer 'killed' on duty in Bristol on Saturday, had in fact died from natural causes.
Obviously I cant speculate as to the actual cause of his death until confirmation is released by the police, but it still does't change my comments regarding the issuing of batons and sprays to officers to be able to defend ourselves.
Obviously I cant speculate as to the actual cause of his death until confirmation is released by the police, but it still does't change my comments regarding the issuing of batons and sprays to officers to be able to defend ourselves.
Sunday, 2 March 2008
Security Officer killed on duty
In the early hours of yesterday, 1st March, a security officer was killed whilst on duty at a bowling alley in Bristol. The following story is taken from the this is bristol website:
SEVEN people have been arrested after a security guard was killed in an incident at the Bowlplex bowling hall and bar in Longwell Green in the early hours of this morning.
The 27-year-old security guard was in the foyer of the building, which is part of the Aspects Leisure Park, when the incident happened.
Police have sealed off the foyer and are expected to be at the scene most of the day carrying out inquiries to establish the full circumstances surrounding the man's death.
It was not clear how he was killed.
Detective Inspector Richard Budd said: "We know there were in excess of 100 people using facilities at Bowlplex during the early hours of this morning.
"It is important that we speak to those people to help us piece together the circumstances surrounding the man's death.
"Officers are this morning studying CCTV footage and speaking to people who were either working or visiting Bowlplex at around the time of the incident."
Police have arrested seven people in connection with the death. They were being held at a Bristol police station.
The dead man worked for Wotton-under-Edge-based Stuart Leisure Security which has a contract with Bowlplex to provide security guards.
Commercial director of Bowlplex Marena Hyatt-Willis said: "We are liaising with the police completely on this and trying to find out what happened.
"Our immediate concern is for the young man's family. He was only 27."
She said the company would issue a statement later today.
The Bowlplex has a late bar which is open until 1.30am on Fridays and Saturdays and also runs a disco, pool room and video room.
Now, correct me if Im wrong, but the last comment there, is that just a blatant advertisment or what? Someone died, and they are listing what facilities they have there.
I have just left a comment on that site, but not mentioning either this or the main APSO site, as it would probably not be shown.
Lets just see what happens in the next few days, as come tomorrow it will probably hit the main news rather than just the local papers, and hopefully someone from the government will sit up and take notice, as we have just had the response from them regarding the recent petition to allow security personnel to carry batons and sprays to be able to defend ourselves effectively, to which they gave a resounding NO.
SEVEN people have been arrested after a security guard was killed in an incident at the Bowlplex bowling hall and bar in Longwell Green in the early hours of this morning.
The 27-year-old security guard was in the foyer of the building, which is part of the Aspects Leisure Park, when the incident happened.
Police have sealed off the foyer and are expected to be at the scene most of the day carrying out inquiries to establish the full circumstances surrounding the man's death.
It was not clear how he was killed.
Detective Inspector Richard Budd said: "We know there were in excess of 100 people using facilities at Bowlplex during the early hours of this morning.
"It is important that we speak to those people to help us piece together the circumstances surrounding the man's death.
"Officers are this morning studying CCTV footage and speaking to people who were either working or visiting Bowlplex at around the time of the incident."
Police have arrested seven people in connection with the death. They were being held at a Bristol police station.
The dead man worked for Wotton-under-Edge-based Stuart Leisure Security which has a contract with Bowlplex to provide security guards.
Commercial director of Bowlplex Marena Hyatt-Willis said: "We are liaising with the police completely on this and trying to find out what happened.
"Our immediate concern is for the young man's family. He was only 27."
She said the company would issue a statement later today.
The Bowlplex has a late bar which is open until 1.30am on Fridays and Saturdays and also runs a disco, pool room and video room.
Now, correct me if Im wrong, but the last comment there, is that just a blatant advertisment or what? Someone died, and they are listing what facilities they have there.
I have just left a comment on that site, but not mentioning either this or the main APSO site, as it would probably not be shown.
Lets just see what happens in the next few days, as come tomorrow it will probably hit the main news rather than just the local papers, and hopefully someone from the government will sit up and take notice, as we have just had the response from them regarding the recent petition to allow security personnel to carry batons and sprays to be able to defend ourselves effectively, to which they gave a resounding NO.
Thursday, 28 February 2008
Ive had a response...
After emailing my local MP around 5 weeks ago, I have had a reply in the form of an official letter from her through the House of Commons, which states:
Dear Mr Watson,
Thank you for your recent emails concerning the problems you have been experiencing with the Security Industry Authority (SIA). I apologise for the delay in replying.
I appreciate the importance of this issue, and I understand your frustration at being unable to receive a satisfactory response from the SIA.
I have therefore written on your behalf to Mike Wilson, Chief Executive of the SIA, and Meg Hillier MP, Parlimentary Under Secretary of State for Identity at the Home Office, and I will write to you again when I receive a reply.
With regard to the problems you have experienced updating your address details, I have had success contacting the SIA on similar problems in the past, and would be happy to do so on your behalf. Please contact my constituency office if you would like me to make any such representations.
Yours sincerely
Helen Goodman
Step one - Make local MP aware: Complete
Step two - Make a difference: Pending
Dear Mr Watson,
Thank you for your recent emails concerning the problems you have been experiencing with the Security Industry Authority (SIA). I apologise for the delay in replying.
I appreciate the importance of this issue, and I understand your frustration at being unable to receive a satisfactory response from the SIA.
I have therefore written on your behalf to Mike Wilson, Chief Executive of the SIA, and Meg Hillier MP, Parlimentary Under Secretary of State for Identity at the Home Office, and I will write to you again when I receive a reply.
With regard to the problems you have experienced updating your address details, I have had success contacting the SIA on similar problems in the past, and would be happy to do so on your behalf. Please contact my constituency office if you would like me to make any such representations.
Yours sincerely
Helen Goodman
Step one - Make local MP aware: Complete
Step two - Make a difference: Pending
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)