Scotrail No Ticket, **** on a Train

prinz

Latchy wrote: »

...if it was anybody job to throw him off it was scotrail guard or simply wait till the police arrived to take over matters... .

As a matter of interest on this, my old man travels by rail regularly to get chemotherapy sessions and sometimes blood transfusions by appointment.

Do you think he should be left sitting on a stopped train because some chancer doesn't buy a ticket or starts causing trouble?

Latchy

Ellis Dee wrote: »

The growing number of people with recording devices in public transport is a welcome trend. An increased likelihood that their actions and stupidities will be recorded and either posted on social media or made available to the authorities is likely to have a deterrent effect - to some degree at least - on racists and other scumbags, and perhaps reduce the amount of crap decent members of the travelling public have to put up with. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Like that guy who did a runner from the taxi out in Monkestown yesterday .The guards are looking for him to and as you mention recording devices ,the taxi driver had his camera on the dash and there is a you tube video doing the rounds of the incident .

Latchy

prinz wrote: »

As a matter of interest on this, my old man travels by rail regularly to get chemotherapy sessions and sometimes blood transfusions by appointment.

Do you think he should be left sitting on a stopped train because some chancer doesn't buy a ticket or starts causing trouble?

My point is I have seen a bus driver stopping a bus because of anti-social behaviour and asking everybody to get off until police arrive ....not easy on a train I know . Of course in your fathers case , that would be brought to the attention of the bus driver/ guard and overide everything else so in which case, the guy would have to be ejected who as mentioned by other poster , may/may not be a chancer but have a genuine protest .Not always is everything black and white

Biggins

Drunk or sober, if I spoke to an elderly man like that as well as just being a smart-arse, I would expect to be removed from the train – never mind about additional ticket problems.
Staff and workers ANYWHERE deserve to be able to go their days work without the possibility of being abused like that scruff did to that elderly gentleman.

If he was my son, I would be ashamed of him and would be apologetic unreservedly to the ticket collector to say the least for my sons behaviour.

He’s a disgusting little thug that for once was caught out! I’ve NO sympathy for him whatsoever.
You reap what you sow!

HellFireClub

Your man who intervened looks like your average bouncer pr*ck on a powertrip. Hope he gets charged and convicted, whatever about in a private venue that he might be paid to do security work for, what happens on a tube or in any public place or public transport facility is absolutely none of his f*cking business, especially where there is only a discussion going on about a fare, he had no business whatsoever getting involved, arsehóle pr*ck.

Biggins

HellFireClub wrote: »

Your man who intervened looks like your average bouncer pr*ck on a powertrip. Hope he gets charged and convicted, whatever about in a private venue that he might be paid to do security work for...

The ‘train vigilante’ has been named as Alan Pollock, a financial manager at one of the world’s biggest asset firms.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/8955571/Train-vigilante-is-investment-manager.html

Talk about rushing to judge a book by its cover!
See how you can be far wrong!

prinz

Latchy wrote: »

My point is I have seen a bus driver stopping a bus because of anti-social behaviour and asking everybody to get off until police arrive . Of course in your fathers case , that would be brought to the attention of the bus driver/ guard and overide everything else so in which the guy would have to be ejected who as mentioned by other poster , may/may not be a chancer but have a genuine protest .Not always is everything black and white

I've been on a bus where the same occurred. We were just lucky a squad car happened to be passing by the the driver flagged it down.

I just don't get the logic behind 20, or 50 other people being delayed and inconvenienced (God knows how badly) because they are all expected to sit there mutely looking at their toes while someone holds up the train for whatever reason. Although having said that after my other experience I've long been in favour of a transport police type unit of the gardaí to use the trains/buses/luas on a regular basis.

HellFireClub

Biggins wrote: »

Drunk or sober, if I spoke to an elderly man like that as well as just being a smart-arse, I would expect to be removed from the train – never mind about additional ticket problems.
Staff and workers ANYWHERE deserve to be able to go their days work without the possibility of being abused like that scruff did to that elderly gentleman.

If he was my son, I would be ashamed of him and would be apologetic unreservedly to the ticket collector to say the least for my sons behaviour.

He’s a disgusting little thug that for once was caught out! I’ve NO sympathy for him whatsoever.
You reap what you sow!

There is this little thing called "due process", if the inspector wanted to deal with an instance of non payment of a fare, there is a procedure there for dealing with that, that as far as I'm aware, is based on taking a name and address and escalating the matter. If someone is not co-operating, there is also a process to be followed to deal with that, in Ireland, we have a security presence that deals with this, and there is CCTV, etc, which can be used to pursue someone who isn't cooperating.

But are we going to say now it's fine for some ignorant looking pr*ck now who fancies himself as a bit of a hardman, to be judge, jury and executioner, in relation to any issue that might arise on public transport???

prinz

HellFireClub wrote: »

... that as far as I'm aware, is based on taking a name and address

What's your name? Mickey Mouse. Where do you live? Number 10 Downing Street............. In a country with no national I.D. cards it's absolutely meaningless for a ticket inspector to get a name and address tbh.

Biggins

HellFireClub wrote: »

There is this little thing called "due process", if the inspector wanted to deal with an instance of non payment of a fare, there is a procedure there for dealing with that, that as far as I'm aware, is based on taking a name and address and escalating the matter. If someone is not co-operating, there is also a process to be followed to deal with that, in Ireland, we have a security presence that deals with this, and there is CCTV, etc, which can be used to pursue someone who isn't cooperating.

But are we going to say now it's fine for some ignorant looking pr*ck now who fancies himself as a bit of a hardman, to be judge, jury and executioner, in relation to any issue that might arise on public transport???

As stated by others already, the "Big man" like the rest, just wanted to get home.
The process you are on about would have involved the calling of the police (and we know sometimes how long they can take to get somewhere) and sitting around for a long time for them to arrive.
Would you have sat in your train seat for hours if you had to be home to do something, meet someone, get to an interview or mind kids, etc?

You would in your arse. Why do you expect others to just take the young gurriers crap!
Your in the minority in this topic. The many support the stance of the elderly train worker and the actions of the "Big Man" - they all had homes/places to go to too!

Latchy

prinz wrote: »

I've been on a bus where the same occurred. We were just lucky a squad car happened to be passing by the the driver flagged it down.

I just don't get the logic behind 20, or 50 other people being delayed and inconvenienced (God knows how badly) because they are all expected to sit there mutely looking at their toes while someone holds up the train for whatever reason. Although having said that after my other experience I've long been in favour of a transport police type unit of the gardaí to use the trains/buses/luas on a regular basis.

I think everybody agrees that fare dodgers should get their come uppence as long as the methods used are in line with what's in the best interest of everybody concerned who after a tiring day at work out shopping or socialising , just want to get home . It's just some people have been beaten up and seriously injured from intervening and doing the same as that guy who threw him off the train .

HellFireClub

Biggins wrote: »

The ‘train vigilante’ has been named as Alan Pollock, a financial manager at one of the world’s biggest asset firms.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/8955571/Train-vigilante-is-investment-manager.html

Talk about rushing to judge a book by its cover!
See how you can be far wrong!

You don't just get up off a seat and start wrestling a passenger off a train without some exposure to this kind of rediculous behaviour. He may be working as a financial manager now, but he obviously fancies himself as a hardman who thinks he is fit to act as a judge and jury in relation to a dispute between two people that has absolutely nothing to do with him and he didn't lick it off a stone I imagine in relation to his past.

This guy is a thug who thinks he can get involved in situations that have absolutely nothing to do with him, and needs to be dealt with by the law. Notice how he only got involved when it was some scrawny student he was up against, I wonder would he be so quick to get involved if the opponent was not such a low risk of putting it back up to him.

BBDBB

HellFireClub wrote: »

There is this little thing called "due process", if the inspector wanted to deal with an instance of non payment of a fare, there is a procedure there for dealing with that, that as far as I'm aware, is based on taking a name and address and escalating the matter. If someone is not co-operating, there is also a process to be followed to deal with that, in Ireland, we have a security presence that deals with this, and there is CCTV, etc, which can be used to pursue someone who isn't cooperating.

But are we going to say now it's fine for some ignorant looking pr*ck now who fancies himself as a bit of a hardman, to be judge, jury and executioner, in relation to any issue that might arise on public transport???

not at all, the judge of whether the ticket was valid for the journey had made his decision as he was entitled and employed to do

the decision to eject him from the train was already made. The big fella simply decided that he didnt fancy waiting for the transport police to arrive to enforce the decision taken and thus halt the delay and inconvenience to all the legitimate fare paying passengers

prinz

HellFireClub wrote: »

...in relation to a dispute between two people that has absolutely nothing to do with him........

It had something to do with him. He was being held up on his journey like everybody else.

I'm interested the woman who was taped being a racist twat the other day? Do you think the others who shouted at her to shut up should have gotten involved in a dispute that had nothing to do with them? If you were on a bus and the person beside you was being racially abused would you look the other way and say nothing?

HellFireClub wrote: »

and he didn't lick it off a stone I imagine in relation to his past..

HellFireClub

HellFireClub wrote: »

Your man who intervened looks like your average bouncer pr*ck on a powertrip. Hope he gets charged and convicted, whatever about in a private venue that he might be paid to do security work for, what happens on a tube or in any public place or public transport facility is absolutely none of his f*cking business, especially where there is only a discussion going on about a fare, he had no business whatsoever getting involved, arsehóle pr*ck.

Someone has been thrown out of many a place by the sounds of it! lol.
None of his business? What if he had a connecting train, what if he was going to the airport, an important meeting, to see a sick relative.
Why should 100 people on a train lose 30 mins of their lives to one idiot? The guy would only have been turfed off and given a warning. The banker did not cause him any harm until the scumbag ran back at the train trying to get in. If he is that stupid to think he could get back on and they would go 'fair enough, lets continue the journey' that dive off the train might have knocked some sense into him.
Lived for 2 years in scotland, getting 4 trains each working day and never had an issue with an inspector. Buy your ticket, get a seat, its not rocket science. The kid deserved everything he got. If everyone paid their fares, you would get a better and cheaper journey.

prinz

Latchy wrote: »

It's just some people have been beaten up and seriously injured from intervening and doing the same as that guy who threw him off the train .

Absolutely I agree, but is that a good enough reason not to intervene in situations in future? Is that the route we are going down now? What about the young Clare lad beaten and brain damaged in front of God knows how many men like yer man from the train and none of them seem to have intervened early enough. Should they have said to themselves..'oh better not got involved, people have been seriously injured from intervening... better wait for the gardaí'.......... it seems like that's exactly what they did and a young lad is left permanently brain damaged.

Biggins

HellFireClub wrote: »

You don't just get up off a seat and start wrestling a passenger off a train without some exposure to this kind of rediculous behaviour. He may be working as a financial manager now, but he obviously fancies himself as a hardman who thinks he is fit to act as a judge and jury in relation to a dispute between two people that has absolutely nothing to do with him and he didn't lick it off a stone I imagine in relation to his past.

This guy is a thug who thinks he can get involved in situations that have absolutely nothing to do with him, and needs to be dealt with by the law. Notice how he only got involved when it was some scrawny student he was up against, I wonder would he be so quick to get involved if the opponent was not such a low risk of putting it back up to him.

1. He just didn't become a financial manager overnight, if your trying to infer something else.

2. Its your opinion that you think he thinks he's a "hard man" - others seem him as a fellow pissed off waiting traveller.

3. As a pissed off sitting (or standing) around PAYING customer who only wants to get home but is kept waiting by one pup, he's every right to stand up, be involved and aid others/himself to getting home

Fuhrer

Biggins wrote: »

As stated by others already, the "Big man" like the rest, just wanted to get home.

Ah, so he just wanted to get home quicker.


Will that excuse hold up if I drive straight through a bunch of red lights I wonder...

Ray Palmer

Maximiliano Low Hawk wrote: »

I must be seeing a different video to everyone else. I see a conductor with an attitude and a bully who should have minded his own business. Sure, the teenager was rude, but throwing him off the train was totally uncalled for. He didn't deserve to be physically assaulted.

Apparently forcably removing somebody is not considered assult. It's why bouncers can lift you and throw you out of places. They can't punch you as that would be assult but restraining you and moving you isn't assualt. The big guy didn't hit him

omega666

HellFireClub wrote: »

You don't just get up off a seat and start wrestling a passenger off a train without some exposure to this kind of rediculous behaviour. He may be working as a financial manager now, but he obviously fancies himself as a hardman who thinks he is fit to act as a judge and jury in relation to a dispute between two people that has absolutely nothing to do with him and he didn't lick it off a stone I imagine in relation to his past.

This guy is a thug who thinks he can get involved in situations that have absolutely nothing to do with him, and needs to be dealt with by the law. Notice how he only got involved when it was some scrawny student he was up against, I wonder would he be so quick to get involved if the opponent was not such a low risk of putting it back up to him.

what are you on about. of course it had something to do with him.
He along with every other passanger on the train were being delayed for good knows already never mind waiting for the police to arrive to deal with it/
So it involves him in a big way.

While it looks a bit rought what he did, the fare dodger was a p**k for not getting off on his own accord and then forced everyone else on the train
to get involved by refusing to move.

So in a way he got what he deserved.

Biggins

Fuhrer wrote: »

Ah, so he just wanted to get home quicker.

Will that excuse hold up if I drive straight through a bunch of red lights I wonder...

Well if you survive a possible car crash and others with you, expect a few people to be also pissed off!

cruiserweight

Don't mess with the big man

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc6gvyWRkvQ

MagicSean

Fuhrer wrote: »

Ah, so he just wanted to get home quicker.


Will that excuse hold up if I drive straight through a bunch of red lights I wonder...

No

HellFireClub

Deleted User wrote: »

Someone has been thrown out of many a place by the sounds of it! lol.
None of his business? What if he had a connecting train, what if he was going to the airport, an important meeting, to see a sick relative.
Why should 100 people on a train lose 30 mins of their lives to one idiot? The guy would only have been turfed off and given a warning. The banker did not cause him any harm until the scumbag ran back at the train trying to get in. If he is that stupid to think he could get back on and they would go 'fair enough, lets continue the journey' that dive off the train might have knocked some sense into him.
Lived for 2 years in scotland, getting 4 trains each working day and never had an issue with an inspector. Buy your ticket, get a seat, its not rocket science. The kid deserved everything he got. If everyone paid their fares, you would get a better and cheaper journey.

No I was never thrown out of anywhere in my life as it happens. What you are advocating here is that every time a disagreement emerges between someone in authority and a member of the public, that another member of the public should get involved and sort out the issue in an arbitary way. That's not the kind of society I want to live in, if it has nothing to do with you, then stay the f*ck out of it and mind your own business.

If I'm stuck in a traffic jam for 30 minutes because someone ahead of me has crashed into someone else, are you saying that it's acceptable for me to move myself up to the top of the traffic jam and start wrestling people off the road and demanding that the two parties move their cars out of the way to clear the traffic jam, because I'm being delayed by their incident?!?

k.p.h

I don't care what your man works as TBH, he just slapped the young lads head off the platform. I don't think he meant it or anything and I believe he went forward with the best intentions of sorting the situation out. e.g throw the young lad off the train so everyone could continue on their journey.

But in doing that, he assaulted the young guy and potentially risked something a lot more dangerous happening.

Actually i don't see how anyone could take a side here, young lad was in the wrong for not having a ticket and talking crap to the conductor, big man was in the wrong for what could be possibly described as assault, and the conductor was also completely in the wrong for not dealing with the situation and following proper procedure, the line "im staying here until you get off" is definitely not proper procedure and effectively flamed the situation.

How anyone would take a side here is beyond me, no one was right hence the **** on a train.

As it stands it looks like two pretty normal people got involved in an unfortunate situation/sequence of events. And a train conductor who did not follow proper procedure (which is understandable in a way) flamed the situation and one gets assaulted and another unwillingly commits assault.

****ed up **** :cool:

Fuhrer

Fuhrer wrote: »

Ah, so he just wanted to get home quicker.


Will that excuse hold up if I drive straight through a bunch of red lights I wonder...

No, you will get banned, lose your license and then be on here next week moaning about fare dodgers no doubt. See you then.

Latchy

prinz wrote: »

Absolutely I agree, but is that a good enough reason not to intervene in situations in future?Is that the route we are going down now?

Where human live is in danger ? no ...not all all .In situations with dispute over fare it depends on the circumstances on the day .The guard on the train incident didn't ask for assistance but he got it anyway and fair enough but had it been a larger more agressive individual ,not everybody will risk the confrontation .

What about the young Clare lad beaten and brain damaged in front of God knows how many men like yer man from the train and none of them seem to have intervened early enough. Should they have said to themselves..'oh better not got involved, people have been seriously injured from intervening... better wait for the gardaí'.......... it seems like that's exactly what they did and a young lad is left permanently brain damaged.

You could add thousends of such like cases to above to because many will only intervene when it's to late , or as you say ...not at all.

Edit- yer man from the train who intervened didn't get assulted by anybody .

MyKeyG

prinz wrote: »

Absolutely I agree, but is that a good enough reason not to intervene in situations in future? Is that the route we are going down now? What about the young Clare lad beaten and brain damaged in front of God knows how many men like yer man from the train and none of them seem to have intervened early enough. Should they have said to themselves..'oh better not got involved, people have been seriously injured from intervening... better wait for the gardaí'.......... it seems like that's exactly what they did and a young lad is left permanently brain damaged.

What a ridiculous comparison!!! In this situation the guy didn't pay his fare it's a long shout from brutally beating an innocent man. Yes there are times when intervention is necessary but I don't think it's an all or nothing situation. Quite frankly I'd struggle to feel much sympathy for someone who got a beating because he came to the aid of an over zealous train conductor who failed to follow due process.

All we got in this situation was an assault, a bunch of people being held up and a fare dodger who probably jumped on the next train.

HellFireClub

omega666 wrote: »

what are you on about. of course it had something to do with him.
He along with every other passanger on the train were being delayed for good knows already never mind waiting for the police to arrive to deal with it/
So it involves him in a big way.

While it looks a bit rought what he did, the fare dodger was a p**k for not getting off on his own accord and then forced everyone else on the train
to get involved by refusing to move.

So in a way he got what he deserved.

Rubbish, it's not open to you or me to make a that call, there is a process there for having these things dealt with and investigated. Allowing some fat c*nt to jump out of his chair and intervene and throw someone off public transport is aspiring to live in a banana republic.

k.p.h

Latchy wrote: »

You could add thousends of such like cases to above to because many will only intervene when it's to late , or as you say ...not at all.

How about this, lets say the big man throws him off the train and he falls and hits his head and dies.

Could argue that people need to intervene more often but in reality the right thing to do is follow proper procedure and call the proper authorities. All the time that's the right thing to do.

MyKeyG

Tell you what let's sack all the Gardai and introduce a vigilante system. Let it befall each member of society to judge what actions are necessary and let them act accordingly. That's what people supporting 'the big man' are advocating!

Latchy

k.p.h wrote: »

How about this, lets say the big man throws him off the train and he falls and hits his head and dies.

Exactly ...which was my point and it has happened before and big man ends up on a manslaughter charge .

Could argue that people need to intervene more often but in reality the right thing to do is follow proper procedure and call the proper authorities. All the time that's the right thing to do

That would be my opinion to.

We are not talking about a knife weilding maniac who by all accounts ,most people would attempt to subdue and that's when we want to see big guy or 'anybody who can' take action .

HellFireClub

Biggins wrote: »

1. He just didn't become a financial manager overnight, if your trying to infer something else.

2. Its your opinion that you think he thinks he's a "hard man" - others seem him as a fellow pissed off waiting traveller.

3. As a pissed off sitting (or standing) around PAYING customer who only wants to get home but is kept waiting by one pup, he's every right to stand up, be involved and aid others/himself to getting home

As I said, delay's happen, traffic jams happen, ticket disagreements happen, the problem is that nobody has any patience these days and the world is full of people like this c*nt who start throwing the head when there is the slightest delay to their precious daily itinary.

There would have been no delay at all if the inspector did his f*cking job and discreetly radioed up to the driver to proceed to the next station and to have have a cop or a station security person to hand when he next stopped the train to remove the person involved, arrest them in the case of a police officer being available, deal with the matter at hand without causing a delay to any person.

MyKeyG

I have to be honest, I would have been pissed off with the conductor. He's being petty and over zealous. We're all getting held up because he wants to play the big shot instead of following the correct procedure.

Dotrel

I just like to add that "bawbag" is now one of my favourite insults.

hardCopy

Fair play to the big man. He'd be welcome on the LUAS.

MyKeyG

hardCopy wrote: »

Fair play to the big man. He'd be welcome on the LUAS.

No because the security lads on the LUAS aren't idiots up their own arses. They give you a fine and allow you to continue your journey.

Biggins

MyKeyG wrote: »

I have to be honest, I would have been pissed off with the conductor. He's being petty and over zealous. We're all getting held up because he wants to play the big shot instead of following the correct procedure.

If you watch the video carefully, he was following steps.
He repeatedly asked for the proper ticket from the chap.
WHEN the person started to get abusive, thats when he was asked to vacate the train.
Workers are allowed to do this when they feel they and/or others are in trouble and a possible breach of the peace/violence might occur.

This is what the elderly worker did then. He for the sake of his own worry about himself and possibly other passengers, asked the young man to leave.
The young man didn't.

As for this crap of the "Big Man" pushing his weight around...
Take a good look at the man would ye! If that man wanted to push his full weight around, he clearly would have done some more serious damage if he wanted to.
He didn't - he used proportional force to see that the elderly worker was no longer abused and that the thug was ejected from the train without having to break bones, etc.

If the lad had done was was asked of him in the first place, had he actually produced a paid for ticket for the journey he was on, had he been polite, even apologetic - guess what - he would have arrived safely at his eventual destination on time with the rest.
...But he decided to speak and behave like a prick. He reaped what he sowed - and serve him right!

hardCopy

MyKeyG wrote: »

No because the security lads on the LUAS aren't idiots up their own arses. They give you a fine and allow you to continue your journey.

If they threw the junkies out on their ear we'd have a much more pleasant service.

Latchy

Another thing to remember is that like the videos on the london trains racist thread , we only know of this incident because somebody had their mobile camera on filming otherwise it would only have made an inch long colum on the scotttish post and the wider world would be none the wiser or care less because ' it's not happening ' on my bus or train . People shouting racist insults shock horror ? ...pfft ...it's been going on for decades and not alway in view of camera's ,,public or private ( which of course doesn't make it right)

So seen as all public places bars , nighclubs ,streets and public transport have cctc , would this or thousends of other such behaviour as we all know to well have been brought to our attentions by the people who operate them ? Well except for the 'cctv videos you have to see' sites and blogs ' or where there is serious crimes like rape or murder and are shown on crimwatch ... most likely not .

Edit - While I'm at it ... I wonder what the fare dodgers stats are for all major public transport services across europe ? .I did read somewhere recently that a lot of offenders were people not exactly from the scanger class ...quite the opposite in many cases and they all weren't running late for work either .

take everything

If I'm stuck in a traffic jam for 30 minutes because someone ahead of me has crashed into someone else, are you saying that it's acceptable for me to move myself up to the top of the traffic jam and start wrestling people off the road and demanding that the two parties move their cars out of the way to clear the traffic jam, because I'm being delayed by their incident?!?

You're analogy is inapt.
You're comparing this guys fare-dodging to an accident. An apt analogy would compare this guys fare-dodging to guys doing donuts in the middle of the road blocking traffic.
In other words, in both cases, an illegal act is causing a lot of people to be held up in each case (Even if the nature of an accident was illegal, it needs to be investigated and cars shouldn't be moved for that purpose. Again this does not apply in the case with this fare-dodger).

Auldloon

The guy who made that recording was on the radio news earlier(scotland). He said the row had being going on for a few mins before he started recording. Initially he had the thought to pay the kids fare for him but with the foul language, attitude and abuse coming from the kid he thought no way and started recorded it instead.

MyKeyG

Biggins wrote: »

If you watch the video carefully, he was following steps.
He repeatedly asked for the proper ticket from the chap.
WHEN the person started to get abusive, thats when he was asked to vacate the train.
Workers are allowed to do this when they feel they and/or others are in trouble and a possible breach of the peace/violence might occur.

This is what the elderly worker did then. He for the sake of his own worry about himself and possibly other passengers, asked the young man to leave.
The young man didn't.

As for this crap of the "Big Man" pushing his weight around...
Take a good look at the man would ye! If that man wanted to push his full weight around, he clearly would have done some more serious damage if he wanted to.
He didn't - he used proportional force to see that the elderly worker was no longer abused and that the thug was ejected from the train without having to break bones, etc.

If the lad had done was was asked of him in the first place, had he actually produced a paid for ticket for the journey he was on, had he been polite, even apologetic - guess what - he would have arrived safely at his eventual destination on time with the rest.
...But he decided to speak and behave like a prick. He reaped what he sowed - and serve him right!

Well you're watching a different video to me because he appears to order him off the train from the start. The 'big man' throws him off the train like a rag doll. Big tough man throwing a smaller person around. How do you know he didn't break any bones? You don't, but supposition seems to be your way.

Here's a question for you if the guilty party had been 'the big man' do you think the conductor and others on the train would have been so brave? No!

That's what I like about the process on the LUAS, no messing around, no ego's or abuse of position. You get your fine in your hand and sent on your way. Some people just thrive on violent confrontation and can't help but provoke it unnecessarily.

I think it's a true sign of the degradation of society when so many people so vehemently advocate brutal violence. Personally I'm disgusted at the attitudes on this thread!

G.muny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCqprbH7mrg

Have to hand it to the Scottish, they don't mess about

Anyone remember this when some looper crashed a burning car into glasgow airport

HellFireClub

HellFireClub wrote: »

No I was never thrown out of anywhere in my life as it happens. What you are advocating here is that every time a disagreement emerges between someone in authority and a member of the public, that another member of the public should get involved and sort out the issue in an arbitary way. That's not the kind of society I want to live in, if it has nothing to do with you, then stay the f*ck out of it and mind your own business.

If I'm stuck in a traffic jam for 30 minutes because someone ahead of me has crashed into someone else, are you saying that it's acceptable for me to move myself up to the top of the traffic jam and start wrestling people off the road and demanding that the two parties move their cars out of the way to clear the traffic jam, because I'm being delayed by their incident?!?

Where do you draw the line? A man has a heart attack. Nothing to do with you. Do you assist? We do not have any Good Samaritan law. Do you just call authorities and move on?
A man is beating his girlfriend, she is unconscious and he is about to kill her, do you help? Neither affect you directly. Most situations need some common sense and courage but also a general decency.

I hope this guy on the train is the one around when i need help. If my life depends on some of the people commenting here, God help me.

HellFireClub

take everything wrote: »

You're analogy is inapt.
You're comparing this guys fare-dodging to an accident. An apt analogy would compare this guys fare-dodging to guys doing donuts in the middle of the road blocking traffic.
In other words, in both cases, an illegal act is causing a lot of people to be held up in each case (Even if the nature of an accident was illegal, it needs to be investigated and cars shouldn't be moved for that purpose. Again this does not apply in the case with this fare-dodger).

Ok, to return this scenario to one that is based within your rules...

Someone breaks the law by breaking a red traffic light. A crash is the outcome, and a traffic jam is caused. It still isn't open to people held in the traffic jam to interfere, we have a process that involves the gardai being called, the matter being investigated and an outcome delivered.

It isn't open to people to start getting involved because God forbid, they get delayed for a few minutes, THAT'S LIFE, DELAY'S HAPPEN!!!

Unfortunately these days, people will walk over other people to get to where they are going, all part of the sheer selfishness that is an overhang of our Celtic Tiger years.

Only a few years back there was a priest who had a heart attack on a train in Bray I think it was, and because he wasn't wearing his clerical garb, people thought he was homeless or drunk or something and literally walked over him and around him as he was breathing his last breath.

Biggins

MyKeyG wrote: »

...Personally I'm disgusted at the attitudes on this thread!

...And personally I'm disgusted that some youths (Not ALL - some here clearly are wiser beyond their years) here are standing up for the young abusive thug!

Instead of standing up for a young teenage abusive thug that CLEARLY has no respect for the elderly, never mind a younger worker – how about you equally stand up for fellow passengers that have to live daily with abusive pups that often make their ugly presence known on similar journeys via train or bus etc!

No - that would be too much to ask for, from some here clearly!

MyKeyG

Deleted User wrote: »

Where do you draw the line? A man has a heart attack. Nothing to do with you. Do you assist? We do not have any Good Samaritan law. Do you just call authorities and move on?
A man is beating his girlfriend, she is unconscious and he is about to kill her, do you help? Neither affect you directly. Most situations need some common sense and courage but also a general decency.

I hope this guy on the train is the one around when i need help. If my life depends on some of the people commenting here, God help me.

It doesn't have to be all or nothing. The point has already been made that there is a time to act and a time for discretion. A man not paying for a train ticket and a man beating his girlfriend to death are hardly comparable. The difference is in perspective. A bit of cop on here in fairness.

MyKeyG

Biggins wrote: »

...And personally I'm disgusted that some youths (Not ALL - some here clearly are wiser beyond their years) here are standing up for the young abusive thug!

Instead of standing up for a young teenage abusive thug that CLEARLY has no respect for the elderly, never mind a younger worker – how about you equally stand up for fellow passengers that have to live daily with abusive pups that often make their ugly presence known on similar journeys via train or bus etc!

No - that would be too much to ask for, from some here clearly!

Yep you're right let's go around physically assaulting everyone who as much as swears at another person. You think the correct punishment for not paying your fair is a beating??? That's what you call 'wisdom beyond years??? Mate, you're for the birds. If you watch the video the conductor actually has to grab the mans arm because he intends to confront the youth on the platform. THUGGERY pure and simple and you're advocating it.

I think there's a kid in your local shop stealing sweets if you're quick you can give him a good kicking, hurry now!!!

summerskin

HellFireClub wrote: »

take everything wrote: »

You're analogy is inapt.
You're comparing this guys fare-dodging to an accident. An apt analogy would compare this guys fare-dodging to guys doing donuts in the middle of the road blocking traffic.
In other words, in both cases, an illegal act is causing a lot of people to be held up in each case (Even if the nature of an accident was illegal, it needs to be investigated and cars shouldn't be moved for that purpose. Again this does not apply in the case with this fare-dodger).

Ok, to return this scenario to one that is based within your rules...

Someone breaks the law by breaking a red traffic light. A crash is the outcome, and a traffic jam is caused. It still isn't open to people held in the traffic jam to interfere, we have a process that involves the gardai being called, the matter being investigated and an outcome delivered.

It isn't open to people to start getting involved because God forbid, they get delayed for a few minutes, THAT'S LIFE, DELAY'S HAPPEN!!!

Unfortunately these days, people will walk over other people to get to where they are going, all part of the sheer selfishness that is an overhang of our Celtic Tiger years.

Only a few years back there was a priest who had a heart attack on a train in Bray I think it was, and because he wasn't wearing his clerical garb, people thought he was homeless or drunk or something and literally walked over him and around him as he was breathing his last breath.

So in your view he should be treated better as he was a priest?