The Difference between security and bouncers

Forums › Off topic › The Difference between security and bouncers

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

3872 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1007339 17-Mar-2014 14:38

If you had politely asked the door staff to collect your stuff at the time, without being a dick, _most_ places would either send someone to get it or possibly depending on circumstances escort you back to get it.

Turnin: What bar was that at in Hamilton?

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

kenkeniff

565 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 1007340 17-Mar-2014 14:41

2 people support this post

KiwiNZ:
Lyderies: When removing people from there premises what is acceptable for being 'physical'? are there any legal guidelines?

Bouncers like anyone are allowed to use reasonable force for self defence, if there is no need for self defence e.g you are just standing there not threatening verbally or physically then they are not allowed to touch you.The can verbally
ask you to leave in a non threatening manner, a threatening manner would constitute assault.

I really don't understand why people bother going to the effort of spouting off a bunch of BS when they really have no idea what they're talking about.

[Insert "your perceived knowledge of the law" vs "your actual knowledge of the law" meme here]

I agree with most of what Lias has said; in addition.

Lyderies:
Lias:... if you refuse to leave we have right to use reasonable force to compel you to leave under the Crimes Act. ...

The bolded, can this be expanded? What is reasonable force?

Use of force usually overlaps into a number of enactments.

i.e. Trespass Act specifically excludes "striking" however if you feared for your safety and striking was "reasonable" then it would be allowed under Crimes Act s48 (self defense).

The flip side of "what is reasonable force" is "what is excess" which is covered by the following:

Crimes Act, Section 62 Excess of force

Every one authorised by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess, according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.

This is obviously subjective which is why we have courts, lawyers, jury's etc to decide what's reasonable in the circumstances.

However this essentially means use the minimum force required to effect your purpose and reduce / stop using force when it is no longer necessary.

- source; actually studied law.

Lyderies

266 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 1007348 17-Mar-2014 14:52

Lias: If you had politely asked the door staff to collect your stuff at the time, without being a dick, _most_ places would either send someone to get it or possibly depending on circumstances escort you back to get it.

Turnin: What bar was that at in Hamilton?

I was actually sober as i was our ride in/out of town (not only that prices for drinks are stupidly overpriced so i dont drink in town), i had not been asked to leave until i was outside the place, all i did was follow them down to make sure my mate didn't do anything stupid, when i got down and was not allowed back in i asked for the manager where the bouncer went "manager, manager, oh sorry no manager". I then tried to explain i had stuff up there and if i could collect it, he then said to me i am blocking his que and asked me to leave, i asked again and he ignored me so i left

Thought a little more depth would do, just to note i was calm and collected the whole time, i only got pissey when he did the whole oh no manager thing to me

I'm going to noob myself past judgement

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

# 1007349 17-Mar-2014 14:53

Lias: If you had politely asked the door staff to collect your stuff at the time, without being a dick, _most_ places would either send someone to get it or possibly depending on circumstances escort you back to get it.

Turnin: What bar was that at in Hamilton?

The loft, upstairs next to beefeaters, few years back now :)

MikeB4

14224 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1007355 17-Mar-2014 14:57

kenkeniff:
KiwiNZ:
Lyderies: When removing people from there premises what is acceptable for being 'physical'? are there any legal guidelines?

Bouncers like anyone are allowed to use reasonable force for self defence, if there is no need for self defence e.g you are just standing there not threatening verbally or physically then they are not allowed to touch you.The can verbally
ask you to leave in a non threatening manner, a threatening manner would constitute assault.

I really don't understand why people bother going to the effort of spouting off a bunch of BS when they really have no idea what they're talking about.

[Insert "your perceived knowledge of the law" vs "your actual knowledge of the law" meme here]

I agree with most of what Lias has said; in addition.

Lyderies:
Lias:... if you refuse to leave we have right to use reasonable force to compel you to leave under the Crimes Act. ...

The bolded, can this be expanded? What is reasonable force?

Use of force usually overlaps into a number of enactments.

i.e. Trespass Act specifically excludes "striking" however if you feared for your safety and striking was "reasonable" then it would be allowed under Crimes Act s48 (self defense).

The flip side of "what is reasonable force" is "what is excess" which is covered by the following:

Crimes Act, Section 62 Excess of force

Every one authorised by law to use force is criminally responsible for any excess, according to the nature and quality of the act that constitutes the excess.

This is obviously subjective which is why we have courts, lawyers, jury's etc to decide what's reasonable in the circumstances.

- source; actually studied law.

despite your rudeness, common manners are actually applicable online

What I said is correct,
Self defence reasonable force or use of reasonable force to remove allowed under law
If a patron is not using force then "like" force is not justified.
Using threatening language when requesting someone to leave where that language can make the patron feel there safety is at risk constitutes assault.

Section 42, 48 , 56 of the Crimes act

And despite your rudeness

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

There is no planet B

kenkeniff

565 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 1007362 17-Mar-2014 15:07

2 people support this post

KiwiNZ:

despite your rudeness, common manners are actually applicable online

What I said is correct,
Self defence reasonable force or use of reasonable force to remove allowed under law
If a patron is not using force then "like" force is not justified.
Using threatening language when requesting someone to leave where that language can make the patron feel there safety is at risk constitutes assault.

Section 42, 48 , 56 of the Crimes act

And despite your rudeness

Except you actually said "e.g you are just standing there not threatening verbally or physically then they are not allowed to touch you" which is wrong (as they can still drag you out under Trespass Act) and you've been shown the relevant legislation to prove it, end of story.

You're wrong so stop pretending to be a lawyer on this thread and others.

Quoting irrelevant pseudo-facts doesn't make all of your arguments correct.

MikeB4

14224 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

# 1007370 17-Mar-2014 15:23

kenkeniff:
KiwiNZ:

despite your rudeness, common manners are actually applicable online

What I said is correct,
Self defence reasonable force or use of reasonable force to remove allowed under law
If a patron is not using force then "like" force is not justified.
Using threatening language when requesting someone to leave where that language can make the patron feel there safety is at risk constitutes assault.

Section 42, 48 , 56 of the Crimes act

And despite your rudeness

Except you actually said "e.g you are just standing there not threatening verbally or physically then they are not allowed to touch you" which is wrong (as they can still drag you out under Trespass Act) and you've been shown the relevant legislation to prove it, end of story.

You're wrong so stop pretending to be a lawyer on this thread and others.

Quoting irrelevant pseudo-facts doesn't make all of your arguments correct.

where am I wrong.

Are you saying that bouncers and guards are not required to comply with the Act sections I stated?
Are you saying they are free to act as they so chose without recourse?
Are you saying that patrons can act as they chose without recourse?
Are you saying the justification of reasonable force is not required?
Are you saying that using threatening language etc is not assault?

And lastly please provide links to threads and posts that I have made claiming to be a lawyer

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

There is no planet B

Geektastic

13315 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1007467 17-Mar-2014 17:39

KiwiNZ: The best approach and saves any hassles is to leave and spend ones hard earned elsewhere

I generally avoid setting foot in anywhere whose clientele is so lowbrow that security staff are required to be honest!

sdav

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 1007539 17-Mar-2014 18:56

Lyderies:
Lias: If you had politely asked the door staff to collect your stuff at the time, without being a dick, _most_ places would either send someone to get it or possibly depending on circumstances escort you back to get it.

Turnin: What bar was that at in Hamilton?

I was actually sober as i was our ride in/out of town (not only that prices for drinks are stupidly overpriced so i dont drink in town), i had not been asked to leave until i was outside the place, all i did was follow them down to make sure my mate didn't do anything stupid, when i got down and was not allowed back in i asked for the manager where the bouncer went "manager, manager, oh sorry no manager". I then tried to explain i had stuff up there and if i could collect it, he then said to me i am blocking his que and asked me to leave, i asked again and he ignored me so i left

Thought a little more depth would do, just to note i was calm and collected the whole time, i only got pissey when he did the whole oh no manager thing to me

Breach of the Sale of liquor act to not have a manager so yeah...

Handsomedan

2225 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

# 1007866 18-Mar-2014 09:06

2 people support this post

The thing that really bothers me in all of this is the fact that the OP couldn't go back in (escorted) and collect his stuff.

I'd like to think that my property is still my property, whether in someone's premisies or not...

Surely it's reasonable (assuming that the ejected person is not a complete tool) to be escorted back to collect your possessions?

Handsome Dan Has Spoken.

Lias

3872 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1007871 18-Mar-2014 09:11

Geektastic:
KiwiNZ: The best approach and saves any hassles is to leave and spend ones hard earned elsewhere

I generally avoid setting foot in anywhere whose clientele is so lowbrow that security staff are required to be honest!

Your more likely to encounter security staff in a high class bar in town that wants to ensure things runs smoothly, than you are in say an urban sports bar.. We just wear suits rather than t-shirts that say "Security" on the back :-P

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

Lias

3872 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1007881 18-Mar-2014 09:23

Handsomedan: The thing that really bothers me in all of this is the fact that the OP couldn't go back in (escorted) and collect his stuff.

I'd like to think that my property is still my property, whether in someone's premisies or not...

Surely it's reasonable (assuming that the ejected person is not a complete tool) to be escorted back to collect your possessions?

If OP was indeed sober and being polite and reasonable, then yes it's fairly unreasonable of the staff to have not allowed him to collect his possessions. At the very least someone should have been tasked with going and getting them. That being said I can think of plenty of times I've been working a door where it's so busy it might not be practical for this to be done for 20-30 minutes, and it sounds as if OP gave up and left in a fairly short time.

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.