TRMR Stolen.

[Cannonfodder]

IIRC a few of them.were SO19

Didn't know about that but from what I remember one was MoD police

 

[hunter511]

Yeah the guys who occasionally showed up in blue kit and owned the site using actual CQB tactics etc were firearms officers.

 

[Gryph]

Never truly off duty, there’s a legal obligation under Police Regs. PACE s1 can be applied anytime as long as there’s a suspicion somebody may have/be about to commit an offence - see all the media outrage over use of S&S by the Met Police…!

You're absolutely right, bobbies are never off duty. When it comes to the practical side though it's a bit trickier - most people won't use their powers off duty unless it's to save life or limb because it generally causes more harm than good, especially with what's been going on in the news recently!

 

[Rogerborg]

Riddle me this: what happens when a site declares that it's going into lockdown and nobody is leaving until the thief hands over the stolen TRMR.

... when the "stolen" TRMR just rolled into a dark spot somewhere on site?

Don't get me wrong, things do get stolen and I'd be happy to see thieves' hands removed.  But before you go depriving people of liberty, you need to be sure of the situation, and consider the endgame.

You're shopping at Tesco, and the tannoy blares "Mrs Miggins says she can't find her purse that was definitely in her bag when she came in, maybe, so we're locking the doors and nobody is leaving until you've all been searched."

Reasonable? ?‍

 

[pedro]

i used to work in casinos and occasionally disputes would escalate beyond just a shouting match. when this happened there was a standing policy to bar all exits and wait until the police arrived.

i often wondered if this was illegal detention of everyone else who wasn't directly involved, or did the casino have a clause in theirs T&C's which allowed for this? 

cant remember, was a very long time ago, but in the 15 months i worked at one specific casino we had to lock everyone in on 3 separate occasions and no one complained

 

[Dan Robinson]

what happens when a site declares that it's going into lockdown and nobody is leaving until the thief hands over the stolen TRMR.

Well the site could be in some big doo doo's.  Even the police have limitations on what they can do in terms of detention, and I doubt that extends to holding 80+ people in an area on the say so of some rando.

i often wondered if this was illegal detention

It's all under section 24A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and I doubt very much the casino would be covered if anyone expressed a desire to leave.

 

[pedro]

when a riot kicks off in a crowded casino at 2 am lots of people want to leave, they simply were not allowed to.

in order to leave they would have had to resort to direct action/violence on the staff members guarding the exits

 

[Rogerborg]

Presumably you've got CCTV of the handbagging?  And you're securing the scene immediately.

I'm contrasting that with a case of missing-presumed-stolen, some time in the past.

I'll re-iterate that I'm in favour of catching thieves. I'm just pressing X to doubt that attempting to lock down an airsoft site, well after the event, and then searching the people still there, is likely to result in recovery.  If it does result in someone shouting "found it", great, but does that happen?

 

[pedro]

i play at the site where the op lost his grenade although i wasn't there that particular evening

according to the marshals that i have asked about this specific situation, and the op can correct me if im wrong, the grenade was deployed in a place where there aren't any dark holes or nooks and crannys for it to disappear into.

so seemingly a clear case of stealing rather than misplacing

 

[Dan Robinson]

in order to leave they would have had to resort to direct action/violence on the staff members guarding the exits

One would guess that people would be within their rights to use "reasonable force" to end their false imprisonment, but how far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?

No organisation/person has the right to detain anyone without good cause (see section 24A again), and I doubt any of the examples above would constitute a good cause.  Your casino would probably have justified their actions solely because of the police being en-route, but ultimately they got away without trouble from the people because of the nature of crowds (very interesting video on that recent on YouTube - link a the bottom).  Also the security people there would have been licensed and therefore trained in what they can get away with, but they have no more powers than you or I and can only detain someone for a "reasonable" amount of time using minimal force, and specifically relating to a crime.

No airsoft site would get away with it unless they caught the thief red handed.

 

[Cannonfodder]

I'd assume that any site instigating a lockdown would only do so after a search of the area it was deployed had been carried out rather than instatly assuming it's been nicked. The few times I've used a bfg and had to search for it a marshal has helped 

 

[Rogerborg]

I'd assume that any site instigating a lockdown would only do so after a search of the area it was deployed had been carried out rather than instatly assuming it's been nicked. The few times I've used a bfg and had to search for it a marshal has helped 

By which time it's likely long since left the site, been sequestered in a car, or in a bush by the gate.

I mean, thieves don't tend to be the smartest, but I'm struggling to see the scenario where someone is going to be daft enough to put it in their bag or their pocket and then stay on site, on the assumption that its owner is just going to shrug it off.

Which I guess is an argument for not shrugging it off and making some effort to recover it.  But I'd expect the search for it to be a case of finding a black cat in a dark room, when the cat isn't there.  Especially if you tell the cat that you're about to come looking for it.

I'm seeking a practical solution here, by the way. The first step I'd prefer a site owner to take is to not loudly announce a lockdown or search, but to walk around the safe zone with the owner and just start looking in bags. Actions over words, every time. But I've banged that drum until it's just a hoop with a ragged hole in it.

 

[Cannonfodder]

By which time it's likely long since left the site, been sequestered in a car, or in a bush by the gate.

Possibly

I mean, thieves don't tend to be the smartest, but I'm struggling to see the scenario where someone is going to be daft enough to put it in their bag or their pocket and then stay on site, on the assumption that its owner is just going to shrug it off.

You'd be surprised, I've seen theiving little shits do some really dumb shit and try to talk their way out of it only to dig themselves into a deeper hole.

not loudly announce a lockdown or search, but to walk around the safe zone with the owner and just start looking in bags.

That does sound like a good idea but if I saw someone nosing around at my gear without knowing what they're up to I'd be asking questions.

Unfortunately there's no perfect answer to this senario but as long as the site is seen to be doing something that's the important thing. As you (I think it was you) posted in another thread, if nothing is done the only lesson learned is that there's no consequences 

 

[gavinkempsell]

The simple answer is for sites to ban their use, might not be 'customer' friendly but reduces the risk of theft of that kind of item, people will either ignore it, hand it to a marshal or some opportunist might think...cool, finder keepers.

Personally I'm in favour of a ban, whether that is enforced before any accusation or after is for site owners to decide.

 

[Rogerborg]

The simple answer is for sites to ban their use

The Depot was very close to it, I wouldn't have blamed them if they'd gone ahead. It's all downside, including lower sales of disposable pyro.

 

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

All crime is committed by the living.  The solution is obvious.

View attachment 114330

 

[Colin Allen]

The simple answer is for sites to ban their use, might not be 'customer' friendly but reduces the risk of theft of that kind of item, people will either ignore it, hand it to a marshal or some opportunist might think...cool, finder keepers.

Personally I'm in favour of a ban, whether that is enforced before any accusation or after is for site owners to decide.

So sites should ban them because thieving cunts sometimes steal them?  The "logic" behind that is somewhat worrying.

 

[Cannonfodder]

A lot of indoor site specifically don't allow disposable pyros though. As I understand it this is due to ventilation problems with the smoke created

 

[Rogerborg]

All crime is committed by the living.

As someone currently handling inheritance tax for an estate, I can assure you that HMRC have different views.

So sites should ban them because thieving cunts sometimes steal them?

... and then sites get dragged into the process of dealing with it.  It's not right, but it's pragmatic.  After all, the substance of why we're there is to shoot and get shot: bangs are flavouring.

 

[Lozart]

As someone currently handling inheritance tax for an estate, I can assure you that HMRC have different views.

Same here. They're terrible cunts, aren't they?