I've just caught up with the controversy over the YouTube footage of the young man who was violently assaulted by a fellow passenger on a ScotRail train. The Yahoo headline "Fare-dodger claims he was the victim" is seemingly dripping with irony, but in all honesty, what doubt can there be in anyone's mind that he was indeed a victim? It doesn't matter how obnoxious he was being - an act of violence clearly outweighs fare-dodging and swearing. There were three villains in this piece, and the third was the conductor himself, who not only acted disgracefully by clearly giving his blessing to the assault (both before and afterwards), but was also partly responsible for the restlessness of the other passengers by falsely giving them the impression that the train would be delayed for a long spell if the young man didn't either pay up or leave.
I can only hope that the vigilante is tracked down and charged, and that the conductor is disciplined for his role in the incident.
"It doesn't matter how obnoxious he was being - an act of violence clearly outweighs fare-dodging and swearing."
ReplyDeleteTotally disagree - a bit of physical encouragement is perfectly acceptable in a civilised society where citizens aren't simply helpless children incapable of placing a finger on each other or using initiative to sort out stupid situations and move on.
To believe that every little incident has to be escalated to a police intervention is utterly, utterly pathetic, and is the attitude that has led to anti-social behaviour being rife.
I think that folk like you have good intentions, but don't fully realise that when your attitudes are applied in reality the result is a complete mess.
At the same time, to adulate the guy who solved this problem as a hero is an over-reaction. It's perhaps understandable though, when there's such a sizable part of the population suffering from learned helplessness where everything has to be dealt with by the police.
Note that if the police had been involved the guy would have effectively been rewarded for not paying a ticket. He'd have reached his destination, been let off with it, and police time would have been wasted. Pathetic.
To me, a "bit of physical encouragement" is a shove. Throwing someone head-first onto a station platform, leaving him grazed, and then preventing him from collecting his belongings, goes somewhat beyond that.
ReplyDelete"Note that if the police had been involved the guy would have effectively been rewarded for not paying a ticket."
How? He'd almost certainly have been forced to pay a hefty fine - unless of course his story about having two single tickets is true, and we shouldn't completely exclude that possibility.
As a society, we shake our heads when we read about people being mugged, raped and murdered while passer bys looked the other way, refusing to intervene and get involved.
ReplyDeleteYet the minute someone does get involved, we scream for them to be "tracked down and charged". We get the society we deserve and if this guy is, indeed, tracked down and charged, you'll find that a ticket inspector's job just got harder.
I agree James,this vigilante type character just looked and behaved like some sort of bully boy thug who was playing to an audience!
ReplyDelete'As a society, we shake our heads when we read about people being mugged, raped and murdered'.
ReplyDeleteSorry did I miss something, its an unpaid train fare we're talking about. Physically throwing someone of a train is assault and the man should be charged for it. The train conductor never helped the situation by encouraging others to get involved when he should be defusing the situation. The guy without the ticket's also in the wrong but that doesn't mean he should be assaulted by someone twice his size. Do you think he would have tried it if the guy was the same size as he was?
"Sorry did I miss something, its an unpaid train fare we're talking about. "
ReplyDeleteThin edge of the wedge, mate, thin edge of the wedge. This scumbag thought everybody would take your attitude and he'd get away without paying. He was wrong and now he's crying foul and hoping all the liberal limp wrists that have caused the majority of our society's ills will back him up (and, to a man and true to form, they seem to be).
Remember, as the song goes, if you tolerate this, then your children will be next.
How much more should we be asked to tolerate?
Well said mate! String the fare-dodgers up, electrocute those wee bastards that play on weans swings and say bad words, waterboard folk that piss in the street, cut the goolies off paedophiles and give the people the power to be judge, jury and executioner ("whit de ye mean he's a pediatrician?").
ReplyDeleteOn-the-spot justice delivered by 'big boays'. That'll make society a much better place to live.
"liberal limp wrists". Yeh - you could have stopped there, we'd have got the idea.
"As a society, we shake our heads when we read about people being mugged, raped and murdered while passer bys looked the other way, refusing to intervene and get involved."
ReplyDeleteIn that case, shouldn't we be shaking our heads at the onlookers who in this instance didn't just fail to prevent the assault taking place, but actually applauded it?
Although there was one woman who, to her immense credit, sounded like she was protesting volubly at the level of violence used.
I said pretty much the same thing. If the guy was attacking the conductor, it would have been legitimate to restrain him to protect someone else, but this was just a bit of macho, vigilante, unnecessary violence. It's not on.
ReplyDeleteWho was right and who was wrong? They all were in my opinion from what was videoed as it is what preceded the filming that is the crucial missing evidence.
ReplyDelete