Taking the law into your own hands

[Digby]

egor110 said:

Not really.

Your allowed to use reasonable force to defend yourself however the old guy wasn't defending himself he was the attacker.

A provoked one who has obviously had enough of disrespectful, gobby and misbehaving children.

More like him, please.

[otolith]

This is probably a better solution.

http://www.brighthub.com/mobile/iphone/articles/12...

[anonymous-user]

What I'm really loving about this thread is the idea that somehow kids being gobby and putting their feet on the seats of trains is a new thing.

There have always been feral little sts and there always will be. Scum begets scum.

[Digby]

charltjr said:

What I'm really loving about this thread is the idea that somehow kids being gobby and putting their feet on the seats of trains is a new thing.

Indeed. Isn't it lovely when someone says "enough is enough" ? (or not, obviously)

[jaf01uk]

La Liga said:

Love the employment link due to enforcing the law against adults assaulting kids.

remkingston said:

vonhosen said:

It's OK for you to act within the law in dealing with matters yourself, it's not OK for you to act however you like outside it.

Evidently not obvious enough for someone people whom support what the chap did.

Yet (same) people yesterday were saying that a bloke should have intervened and prevented a guy pushing his other half because it was the responsible thing to do, so where do you draw the line? These little scrotes owners obviously think they are old enough to run riot on a train on their own but not ok for them to be chastised for it!? I echo the fact that society is broken!!

[Retroman]

Digby said:

A provoked one who has obviously had enough of disrespectful, gobby and misbehaving children.

More like him, please.

I agree. More vigilantes that enforce rule breaking of others, by breaking the law them self via physically assaulting children will surely lead to a better society.

[vonhosen]

jaf01uk said:

La Liga said:

Love the employment link due to enforcing the law against adults assaulting kids.

remkingston said:

vonhosen said:

It's OK for you to act within the law in dealing with matters yourself, it's not OK for you to act however you like outside it.

Evidently not obvious enough for someone people whom support what the chap did.

Yet (same) people yesterday were saying that a bloke should have intervened and prevented a guy pushing his other half because it was the responsible thing to do, so where do you draw the line? These little scrotes owners obviously think they are old enough to run riot on a train on their own but not ok for them to be chastised for it!? I echo the fact that society is broken!!

You don't have to draw the line, it's drawn for you & it's legality.
If you are going to act you have to act within the law.

[Digby]

Retroman said:

I agree. More vigilantes that enforce rule breaking of others, by breaking the law them self via physically assaulting children will surely lead to a better society.

Maybe, but certainly a better train ride for every other passenger.

[Retroman]

Digby said:

Maybe, but certainly a better train ride for every other passenger.

Why stop with punching them and getting them in puny holds. Just headbutt them and when they keel over do a 2 footed stomp onto their skulls. The more violence you incite, the better the lesson they learn, right?

[Digby]

Retroman said:

Why stop with punching them and getting them in puny holds. Just headbutt them and when they keel over do a 2 footed stomp onto their skulls. The more violence you incite, the better the lesson they learn, right?

So in this situation, had the guy in question been your Father and you were on said train with such unruly children, you would have reported him?

[Digby]

vonhosen said:

If you are going to act you have to act within the law.

Which, in the example I gave earlier, means standing for the entire journey, sucking up any verbal abuse and reporting anyone who dared to put an end to it.

[cmaguire]

La Liga said:

"Punch" doesn't suit so I'll doubt the credibility with 'it makes a better story'...

Punch obviously suits the rest of you, I'm less inclined to believe a newspaper report that quotes an eyewitness. Eyewitnesses are frequently unreliable and prejudiced.
It was probably a poke in the ribs. A punch implies significant force.

[Hackney]

TooMany2cvs said:

Digby said:

So in the example I gave above, you would go hunting for a guard or simply stand for the entire journey?

Yeh, that's an absolutely cram-full train. Not a single empty seat on it.

That's quite a talent you have. Can you tell whether any train is full from a blurred photo of an old man?

[TooMany2cvs]

Hackney said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Digby said:

So in the example I gave above, you would go hunting for a guard or simply stand for the entire journey?

Yeh, that's an absolutely cram-full train. Not a single empty seat on it.

That's quite a talent you have. Can you tell whether any train is full from a blurred photo of an old man?

If there are quite a few empty seats also visible in the photo, then I can take a fairly good guess that the train isn't chock-full, yes.

[egor110]

Digby said:

A provoked one who has obviously had enough of disrespectful, gobby and misbehaving children.

More like him, please.

Quite obviously your not in any sort of uniformed service if you think some gobby toe rag is your green card to get punchy.

[WinstonWolf]

vonhosen said:

jaf01uk said:

La Liga said:

Love the employment link due to enforcing the law against adults assaulting kids.

remkingston said:

vonhosen said:

It's OK for you to act within the law in dealing with matters yourself, it's not OK for you to act however you like outside it.

Evidently not obvious enough for someone people whom support what the chap did.

Yet (same) people yesterday were saying that a bloke should have intervened and prevented a guy pushing his other half because it was the responsible thing to do, so where do you draw the line? These little scrotes owners obviously think they are old enough to run riot on a train on their own but not ok for them to be chastised for it!? I echo the fact that society is broken!!

You don't have to draw the line, it's drawn for you & it's legality.
If you are going to act you have to act within the law.

The law is powerless against children and many know it. What are you to do? A clip round the ear always calmed me down a bit...

[Digby]

egor110 said:

Quite obviously your not in any sort of uniformed service if you think some gobby toe rag is your green card to get punchy.

Would you have reported this guy if he had been your Father?

[vonhosen]

WinstonWolf said:

vonhosen said:

jaf01uk said:

La Liga said:

Love the employment link due to enforcing the law against adults assaulting kids.

remkingston said:

vonhosen said:

It's OK for you to act within the law in dealing with matters yourself, it's not OK for you to act however you like outside it.

Evidently not obvious enough for someone people whom support what the chap did.

Yet (same) people yesterday were saying that a bloke should have intervened and prevented a guy pushing his other half because it was the responsible thing to do, so where do you draw the line? These little scrotes owners obviously think they are old enough to run riot on a train on their own but not ok for them to be chastised for it!? I echo the fact that society is broken!!

You don't have to draw the line, it's drawn for you & it's legality.
If you are going to act you have to act within the law.

The law is powerless against children and many know it. What are you to do? A clip round the ear always calmed me down a bit...

The law is powerless against anyone who is doing nothing illegal, child or not (& whether you find them objectionable or not).
You are to do what I said, act within the law.

[Digby]

vonhosen said:

You are to do what I said, act within the law.

It's not black and white though, is it?

[roofer]

vonhosen said:

The law is powerless against anyone who is doing nothing illegal, child or not (& whether you find them objectionable or not).
You are to do what I said, act within the law.

Which proves, on some occasions, " The law is an ass"