Taking the law into your own hands

[ferrariF50lover]

Digby said:

How terrible. Many here would much rather have endured the train ride with these characters.

Sorry, Freudian slip. What I meant to say was, they all thought 'Thank goodness for that'

This could be an interesting conversation if the 'bring back the 1940s' half was being well represented. Unfortunately it seems that Mr Bean's less able-minded cousin has taken up the mantle.

[Digby]

ferrariF50lover said:

You'll recall a poor girl in India last year(?) was gang raped to death on a bus by a group of men who disagreed with her choice of bus-mate.

If only others on the bus had stepped in.

[Digby]

TooMany2cvs said:

Yes, I do see a punch to the ribs and an armlock as violence. There's a reason for that. Because it IS violence. It IS criminal assault.

Had the old man shook a fist at these misbehaving kids or at an argumentative adult hogging the last chair with their feet etc and the seat was made available as a result, you would also want the person who shook a fist for a second or two reported for common assault, then?

[Cat]

Digby said:

I'm not comparing them, I'm asking at what point people do something about a situation.

What would you do in such situations? Watch an animal be tortured whilst you call the police? Ask them to stop several hundred times? Do you spring in to "Oh, hang on, this is a criminal act, I shall get involved" mode? What do you do when they tell you to get lost? Let the animal die?

I have already said that I would intervene and challenge them. I would also use physical force if necessary if someone was doing something illegal. I would do so in a way that was proportionate and appropriate.

Digby said:

I already told you; if that old guy had me in an arm lock and my parents were on that train, they would make me appologise to him.

My question was about whether you would be happy not your parents.

I understand you feel it is acceptable to use physical force against someone doing something legal but "anti social" but who gets to decide where to draw the line?

There are people who would consider the following behaviours to be anti social and unacceptable on public transport so should they be allowed to use physical force to stop them?

• noisily chewing gum
• talking loudly on a mobile phone
• listening to loud music on headphones
• eating smelly food
• tapping their fingers on the table
• having a passionate kiss with someone
• drinking alcohol
• picking their nose
• tapping their foot on the back of someone's seat

Surely if physical force is acceptable in the case of feet on a seat it should be acceptable in them all?

Cat

[Digby]

I may shake my fist. You would report that, too, right?

[anonymous-user]

Digby said:

La Liga said:

Digby said:

Perhaps if we went back to the days of having blackboard rubbers thrown for insubordination and slippers / canes at school, they wouldn't have had their feet on the seat in the first place.

That's selective rose-tinting of the past.

No. It's wondering what we are doing wrong.

It's not, it's taking something specific from the past and isolating it and only looking at it in a positive light. Is there any actual evidence it was more effective? Why was it removed? Etc etc.

Digby said:

Digby said:

We can't have that now though, can we? We don't want children growing up thinking their will be consequences for their disobedience.

La Liga said:

Are you suggesting that's the only way children can learn there are consequences for "disobedience"?

You know what the answer will be, why bother asking? What an utterly ridiculous question.

When you bolt it on to the suggestion above it reads that way.

[mph1977]

Digby said:

mph1977 said:

perhaps someone should have kicked you repeatedly in the head as a child until your sociopathic views weren;t an issue any longer ???

Sociopathic views.

I love this place

I don't like what someone does so i'm going to batter them until they stop without regard for the law, societal norms or proportionality ... sounds pretty sociopathic by all clinical measures ...

[DoubleD]

Digby,

How would you feel if a teenager had an OAP in an armlock?

[cmaguire]

DoubleD said:

Digby,

How would you feel if a teenager had an OAP in an armlock?

I expect that would depend on why the teenager had an OAP in an armlock.
There are probably plenty of OAPs that would benefit from an armlock, but might not had they been kept in line when they were younger.
It is mostly the thickos that cause the problems, and they don't usually get any brighter with age. They just breed.

[Cat]

Digby said:

I may shake my fist. You would report that, too, right?

I wouldn't report low level idiotic behaviour, I'm not sure why you keep suggesting I would.

You've not answered the question - at what point does it becomes acceptable for you to use physical force to prevent someone from doing something perfectly legal that you feel is "anti social"?

Cat

[mph1977]

Cat said:

Digby said:

I may shake my fist. You would report that, too, right?

I wouldn't report low level idiotic behaviour, I'm not sure why you keep suggesting I would.

You've not answered the question - at what point does it becomes acceptable for you to use physical force to prevent someone from doing something perfectly legal that you feel is "anti social"?

Cat

you won't get an answer to that , it requires insight and self awareness ...

[Digby]

mph1977 said:

I don't like what someone does so i'm going to batter them until they stop without regard for the law, societal norms or proportionality ... sounds pretty sociopathic by all clinical measures ...

May aswell get the chainsaw and my Jason mask out and do a proper job? Right up my street.

Funny how several of those who condone this old mans actions are the ones in this thread showing a lack of forum etiquette and getting extremely passionate and angry.

Yet apparently I am a one man vigilante squad bully with sociopathic views, more stupid than Mr Bean, proud of being violent, like to get 'punchy' and should have been kicked in the head as a child.

Oh and now I am an idiot and lack insight and self awareness.

And all for wanting to help others.

I don't think I'm the one who needs to worry about my morals and state of mind going by some of the responses here.


Maybe people are trying to justify and live with the guilt of walking away from situations they could have, or should have, helped with...

Edited by Digby on Monday 1st August 23:29

[Digby]

DoubleD said:

Digby,

How would you feel if a teenager had an OAP in an armlock?

I would be asking why.

[egor110]

Digby said:

DoubleD said:

Digby,

How would you feel if a teenager had an OAP in an armlock?

I would be asking why.

' because last week he punched my little brother in the ribs on a train , now his slightly larger brother has caught up with the oap , mr oap isn't quite as assertive '

[Digby]

Cat said:

I wouldn't report low level idiotic behaviour, I'm not sure why you keep suggesting I would.

You've not answered the question - at what point does it becomes acceptable for you to use physical force to prevent someone from doing something perfectly legal that you feel is "anti social"?

Cat

You don't have to touch someone for it to be an assault. I'm asking if you feel the same way in those situations. Would you be anti-old man if he had just shaken his fist?

And what happens when you try your proportionate and appropriate physical response and it fails? Let them get on with it, or allow someone to turn things up just a notch to sort the issue?

It becomes acceptable for me to use force (and by force I mean possibly making some form of contact) if the situation dictated contact was required. In other words, if asking politely results in verbal abuse, refusal, or a situation where someone else has to suffer as a result of that anti-social behaviour, or someone were to start shoving me around etc, then I have no problem with it.

That doesn't mean I would be reaching for the Uzi 9mm at that stage; obviously I save that for people who park outside my house.

[Digby]

egor110 said:

' because last week he punched my little brother in the ribs on a train , now his slightly larger brother has caught up with the oap , mr oap isn't quite as assertive '

My slightly older Brother would have told me not to be a gobby little tt.

[mph1977]

Digby said:

Maybe people are trying to justify and live with the guilt of walking away from situations they could have, or should have, helped with...

That would be funny if it weren't so deeply insulting, but funnily enough those who actually understand the law related to the use of Force tend to know when to use it and when not to and what is deemed proprtionate in various circumstances ...

but as various PH armchair lawyers have accused me of lying when I have stated that I have considerable experience with such matters and the use of force and other restrictive practices, i doubt you will be much difference , thus further reinforcing your position of unconcious incompetence and proving Dunning and Kruger correct once again.

[Digby]

Deeply insulted by some text on a screen? Not just insulted, but deeply!

I think the majority of the problems in the world today are born out of such oversensitivity.

mph1977 said:

.. funnily enough those who actually understand the law related to the use of Force tend to know when to use it and when not to and what is deemed proprtionate in various circumstances ...

Right up to the point teenagers start hanging around outside your front gate night after night and then, after several weeks, get physically dragged away by your fed up neighbour and his friends..

Edited by Digby on Tuesday 2nd August 00:01

[Digby]

Cat said:

There are people who would consider the following behaviours to be anti social and unacceptable on public transport so should they be allowed to use physical force to stop them?

• noisily chewing gum
• talking loudly on a mobile phone
• listening to loud music on headphones
• eating smelly food
• tapping their fingers on the table
• having a passionate kiss with someone
• drinking alcohol
• picking their nose
• tapping their foot on the back of someone's seat

Surely if physical force is acceptable in the case of feet on a seat it should be acceptable in them all?

Cat

I would applaud someone able to demonstrate all of those activities at once!

Ok, seriously, if like the kids in this original tale they were also misbehaving and being gobby to passengers etc, then whatever else they were doing from your example list would be pretty immaterial. I wouldn't worry if someone stepped in and asked them to pack it in and due to this they subsequently had to stop picking their nose.

[Cat]

Digby said:

I would applaud someone able to demonstrate all of those activities at once!

Ok, seriously, if like the kids in this original tale they were also misbehaving and being gobby to passengers etc, then whatever else they were doing from your example list would be pretty immaterial. I wouldn't worry if someone stepped in and asked them to pack it in and due to this they subsequently had to stop picking their nose.

The question wasn't about whether you thought it was acceptable for people to ask someone to stop behaving in a particular way. It was about when you thought it was acceptable to use physical force to stop someone doing something legal which you deemed was inappropriate.

Cat