That's an interesting chain of logic. The mere responsibility of a job gives you powers of arrest? Why are there police in the US at all, if private citizens may so easily be empowered?
No, actually in this specific case the law specifically gives ticket inspectors the power of arrest as I said in a comment either up there ^^^ or down there VVVV.
But actually in most common-law jurisdictions, citizens do have arrest powers, which is why we have the term "Citizen's arrest":
Which (if you look up the bit about Victoria) would probably apply in this case even if the ticket inspector were not specifically empowered to make arrests.
"... the law specifically gives ticket inspectors the power of arrest ..."
With very limited non sworn powers.
"... To deprive a person of their liberty is a serious matter. Authorised officers should only consider arrest as a last resort and when contemplating doing so, consistent with arrest powers under the Transport Act. The following guidelines must be followed. Persons will only be arrested under Section 219 of the Transport Act 1983 as a last resort. Specifically an authorised officer must believe on reasonable grounds that a person has committed an offence against the Transport Act 1983 or any regulation made under that Act and arrest is necessary for one or more of the following reasons: ..."
but the act also warns
"... If an arrest is made outside the strict requirements of this section of the Act, an officer carrying out the arrest may be liable to civil and/or criminal action ..."
However, transport is usually under some form of contract, so people who break those contracts are more usually guilty of breaking civil law, not criminal law. The penalties for such very rarely involve loss of liberty. I'm fairly sure citizen's arrest is targeted at getting the public to aid in apprehending criminals instead.
The penalties for such very rarely involve loss of liberty.
Right, but the penalties for resisting arrest (or fining) do.
If a policeman stops you and gives you a ticket for jaywalking, that's not an offence for which you can wind up in prison. But if you try to run away instead of being given the ticket, the policeman can do whatever it takes to catch you and restrain you.
Otherwise, the whole ticketing system wouldn't work at all.
"... But if you try to run away instead of being given the ticket, the policeman can do whatever it takes to catch you and restrain you. ..."
Bad example.
Did you know it's SOP for AO's to only apprehend in certain circumstances at risk of legal complications. For example if a person has evaded capture:
"... In the event that the offender is able to decamp officers are not to give chase and pursue the offender. ..."
if the person has evaded capture and/or hidden:
"... loose sight of the offender then the pursuit must be abandoned and the officers should resume normal duties. Under no circumstance are officers to conduct a search of the area ..."
if the person is on private property:
"... If it is deemed necessary to pursue a person for a serious offence and that particular person enters private property, the pursuit is to cease immediately; entry to private property may be illegal and deemed as trespass. ..."
These examples are straight from the "Code of Conduct". It highlights how limited the real powers AO's have been supplied, mostly the Transport Act 1983.
But actually in most common-law jurisdictions, citizens do have arrest powers, which is why we have the term "Citizen's arrest":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest
Which (if you look up the bit about Victoria) would probably apply in this case even if the ticket inspector were not specifically empowered to make arrests.