Loitering is the act of standing or waiting around idly without purpose in some public places. [1]
While the laws regarding loitering have been challenged and changed over time, loitering of suspect people can be illegal in some jurisdictions and some specific circumstances.
While not being a crime by itself, loitering has historically been treated as an inherent preceding offense to other forms of public crime and disorder, such as prostitution, begging, public drunkenness, dealing in stolen goods, drug dealing, scams, organized crime, robbery, harassment/mobbing, etc.
Loitering provides a lesser offence that can be used by police to confront and deter suspect individuals from lingering in a high-crime area, especially when criminal intent is suspected but not observed.
Local areas vary on the degree to which police are empowered to arrest or disperse loiterers; limitations on their power are sometimes made over concerns regarding racial profiling and unnecessary use of police force. The offence remains highly subjective and serious criminal activity must be observed before police can confront any suspect.
Police officers in South Australia may ask a person to stop loitering in a public place (in other words, to leave the place) where they believe on reasonable grounds: [2]
The Vagrancy Act 1824 [3] was designed to prevent suspects and infamous thieves from "lingering about" certain places. This was modified slightly by 34 & 35 Vict. c.112, the Prevention of Crimes Act 1871, and 54 & 55 Vict. c.69, the Penal Servitude Act 1891, which introduced the phrase "loitering with intent". [4] The Vagrancy Act 1898 was passed, then both were repealed by the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
The Vagrancy Act 1824 permits in section 6 "any person whatsoever" to apprehend offenders and to bring them directly before a Justice of the Peace. The same section creates a duty on "any Constable or other Peace Officer" to apprehend and bring them before a justice of the peace, or be charged with "Neglect of Duty", punishable in section 11 by a fine of five pounds or three months in jail. The same Act provides disbursements from the general funds of Council for expenses of Prosecutors and Witnesses. Classes of persons that the Act was designed to dissuade, on penalty of three months at hard labor, include:
The law was also used to criminalize men who were found in areas where men picked each other up for sex. [5]
Loitering in public is not illegal in New Zealand, but it is an offence to loiter with the intent to commit an imprisonable offence. [6]
A statute of the Kingdom of Ireland was enacted in 1635 "for the erecting of Houses of Correction and for the punishment of rogues, vagabonds, sturdy beggars and other lewd and idle persons". Many other laws in the 17th–19th centuries targeted vagrants. [7]
The Offences Against the Person Act 1861 stated, "Any constable or peace officer may take into custody, without a warrant, any person whom he shall find lying or loitering in any highway, yard, or other place during the night, and whom he shall have good cause to suspect of having committed or being about to commit any felony in this Act mentioned, and shall take such person as soon as reasonably may be before a justice of the peace, to be dealt with according to law." [8]
In the Republic of Ireland, the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act, 1994 allows the Garda Síochána to order to move on any person who "without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, is acting in a manner which consists of loitering in a public place in circumstances, which may include the company of other persons, that give rise to a reasonable apprehension for the safety of persons or the safety of property or for the maintenance of the public peace," and to arrest anyone who does not follow their orders; on conviction, the penalty is a fine of up to €1,000 or up to 6 months' imprisonment. [9] [10] [11] [12]
The Loitering and Ruffianry Law (in Spanish: "Ley de Vagos y Maleantes") of August 4, 1933, aimed to address issues related to vagrants, nomads, procurers, and other behaviors deemed antisocial. [13] Popularly known as "La Gandula", the law gained consensus approval from all political groups during the Second Republic, with the intention of controlling beggars, unskilled ruffians, and procurers.
Rather than imposing penalties, the law focused on preventative measures, including distancing, monitoring, and retaining individuals deemed potentially dangerous until their perceived threat had subsided. Unfortunately, its regulatory development distorted the law's original intent, establishing internment camps known as "Reformatories for Vagrants and Ruffians. [14] [15] This allowed for the arbitrary use of the law to persecute loitering and also to suppress individuals without means, both during the Second Republic and later during the Franco regime.
The Loitering and Ruffianry Law took a cruel turn under the Francoist dictatorship (1939–1975). During Franco's rule, this law was brutally applied, particularly to individuals who were often petty thieves or merely unemployed, falling under the category of habitual vagrants. [16] Paradoxically, those with higher purchasing power, such as "advantage players and ruffians", human traffickers, or procurers, rarely faced the harsh consequences of this law due to their legal defenses and financial means. News reports of the time often featured sentences handed down under the Vagrancy and Ruffianry Act, which routinely sentenced individuals to one to three years of internment in what were essentially "concentration camps," as dictated by the local courts. [17]
Furthermore, the Franco regime further amended the law on July 15, 1954, to include the repression of homosexuals. [18] In 1970, the law was replaced by another, the Law on Dangerousness and Social Rehabilitation, with similar terms but included sentences of up to five years of internment in prisons or asylums for homosexuals and other individuals deemed socially dangerous for the purpose of rehabilitation, maintaining loitering within its terms. [19] Despite the law not being applied during the democratic period, it remained in force until its complete repeal in 1995. [20]
There is no loitering law in Sweden since it expired in 1981, but the Public Order Act regulates what one can and cannot do in public. The municipality decides what rules apply. For example, it is prohibited to drink alcohol in some designated public places. Loitering can be prohibited under particular circumstances. [21]
In several jurisdictions, persons required to register as a sex offender are prohibited from loitering within a defined distance of schools, parks, or other places in which children may congregate. [22]
In 1992, the city of Chicago adopted an anti-loitering law [23] aimed at restricting gang related activity, especially violent crime and drug trafficking. [24] The law, which defined loitering as "remain[ing] in any one place with no apparent purpose", gave police officers a right to disperse such persons. In cases of disobedience, the law provided a punishment by fine, imprisonment, and/or community service. It was ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court of the United States ( Chicago v. Morales , 527 U.S. 41 (1999)) as unacceptably vague by not giving citizens clear guidelines on what acceptable conduct was. In 2000, the city adopted a revised version of the ordinance, [25] in an attempt to eliminate the unconstitutional elements. Loitering was then defined as "remaining in any one place under circumstances that would warrant a reasonable person to believe that the purpose or effect of that behavior is to enable a criminal street gang to establish control over identifiable areas, to intimidate others from entering those areas, or to conceal illegal activities."
Indecent exposure is the deliberate public exposure by a person of a portion of their body in a manner contrary to local standards of appropriate behavior. Laws and social attitudes regarding indecent exposure vary significantly in different countries. It ranges from outright prohibition of the exposure of any body parts other than the hands or face to prohibition of exposure of certain body parts, such as the genital area, buttocks or breasts.
A citizen's arrest is an arrest made by a private citizen – a person who is not acting as a sworn law-enforcement official. In common law jurisdictions, the practice dates back to medieval England and the English common law, in which sheriffs encouraged ordinary citizens to help apprehend law breakers.
Breach of the peace or disturbing the peace, is a legal term used in constitutional law in English-speaking countries and in a public order sense in the several jurisdictions of the United Kingdom. It is a form of disorderly conduct.
Disorderly conduct is a crime in most jurisdictions in the United States, the People's Republic of China, and Taiwan. Typically, "disorderly conduct" makes it a crime to be drunk in public, to "disturb the peace", or to loiter in certain areas. Many types of unruly conduct may fit the definition of disorderly conduct, as such statutes are often used as "catch-all" crimes. Police may use a disorderly conduct charge to keep the peace when people are behaving in a disruptive manner, but otherwise present no danger.
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) is an Act of Parliament which instituted a legislative framework for the powers of police officers in England and Wales to combat crime, and provided codes of practice for the exercise of those powers. Part VI of PACE required the Home Secretary to issue Codes of Practice governing police powers. The aim of PACE is to establish a balance between the powers of the police in England and Wales and the rights and freedoms of the public. Equivalent provision is made for Northern Ireland by the Police and Criminal Evidence Order 1989 (SI 1989/1341). The equivalent in Scots Law is the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.
The Offences against the Person Act 1861 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. It consolidated provisions related to offences against the person from a number of earlier statutes into a single Act. For the most part these provisions were, according to the draftsman of the Act, incorporated with little or no variation in their phraseology. It is one of a group of Acts sometimes referred to as the Criminal Law Consolidation Acts 1861. It was passed with the object of simplifying the law. It is essentially a revised version of an earlier consolidation act, the Offences Against the Person Act 1828, incorporating subsequent statutes.
"Stop and identify" statutes are laws in several U.S. states that authorize police to lawfully order people whom they reasonably suspect of committing a crime to state their name. If there is not reasonable suspicion that a person has committed a crime, is committing a crime, or is about to commit a crime, the person is not required to identify himself or herself, even in these states.
The Malicious Damage Act 1861 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. It consolidated provisions related to malicious damage from a number of earlier statutes into a single Act. For the most part these provisions were, according to the draftsman of the Act, incorporated with little or no variation in their phraseology. It is one of a group of Acts sometimes referred to as the Criminal Law Consolidation Acts 1861. It was passed with the object of simplifying the law. It is essentially a revised version of an earlier consolidation Act, the Malicious Injuries to Property Act 1827, incorporating subsequent statutes.
The house of correction was a type of establishment built after the passing of the Poor Relief Act 1601, places where those who were "unwilling to work", including vagrants and beggars, were set to work. The building of houses of correction came after the passing of an amendment to the Elizabethan Poor Law. However the houses of correction were not considered a part of the Elizabethan Poor Law system because the Act distinguished between settled poor and wandering poor.
The Criminal Law Act 1967 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that made some major changes to English criminal law, as part of wider liberal reforms by the Labour government elected in 1966. Most of it is still in force.
Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning the constitutionality of vague laws that allow police to demand that "loiterers" and "wanderers" provide "credible and reliable" identification.
Papachristou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case resulting in a Jacksonville vagrancy ordinance being declared unconstitutionally vague. The case was argued on December 8, 1971, and decided on February 24, 1972. The respondent was the city of Jacksonville, Florida.
Vagrancy is the condition of wandering homelessness without regular employment or income. Vagrants usually live in poverty and support themselves by travelling while engaging in begging, scavenging, petty theft. Historically, vagrancy in Western societies was associated with petty crime, begging and lawlessness, and punishable by law with forced labor, military service, imprisonment, or confinement to dedicated labor houses.
The Vagrancy Act 1824 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom that makes it an offence to sleep rough or beg in England and Wales. The legislation was passed in Georgian England to combat the increasing number of people forced to live on the streets due to the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars and the social effects of the Industrial Revolution. Critics of the law included politician and abolitionist, William Wilberforce, who condemned the Act for making it a catch-all offence for vagrancy with no consideration of the circumstances as to why an individual might be homeless.
The Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 is a mainly repealed Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. It consolidated statutory English criminal law related to accomplices, including many classes of encouragers (inciters). Mainly its offences were, according to the draftsman of the Act, replacement enactments with little or no variation in phraseology. It is one of a group of Acts sometimes referred to as the Criminal Law Consolidation Acts 1861. It was passed with the object of simplifying the law. It collected the relevant parts of Peel's Acts and others.
The Libel Act 1843, commonly known as Lord Campbell's Libel Act, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It enacted several important codifications of and modifications to the common law tort of libel.
This is a list of notable events in the history of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights that took place in Spain.
Irish law allows firearm possession on may-issue basis. With approximately seven civilian firearms per 100 people, Ireland is the 107th most armed country in the world.
The Vagrancy Act 1898 was a piece of legislation in England and Wales that criminalised men who lived off the earnings of prostitution (pimping) and who solicited in public places. The bill was generally viewed as successful in its impact, leading to the similar Immoral Traffic (Scotland) Act.
The 1970 Law on Social Danger and Rehabilitation was a Spanish penal code law approved by dictator Francisco Franco's regime on August 5, 1970. The Law of Danger and Social Rehabilitation specifically criminalized homosexuality and established a spectrum of punishments for citizens caught engaging in homosexual acts, including time in concentration camps or prison. The anti-homosexuality clause of the law was repealed following the end of Francisco Franco's regime, but homophobia continued long past the political transition.
Media related to Loitering prohibition signs at Wikimedia Commons| Authority control databases: National |
|---|
