Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Now you just have to make the distinction between flagrant violators with no respect for the law and people just standing around.

How can you be so sympathetic of troublemakers that get tazered, when the situation was entirely preventable on their part?

Because many innocent people can be put in this situation. For example, you get on the Skytrain and your fare expires while on the train...they could taser you and say you got on closer than you did. Or if you lose your farecard accidentally on the train or while getting on, you can get tasered.

Either way, if people are doing it consistently, then jail them or something...I guess the police forgot their basic training which says if someone is resisting arrest and not posing a danger to the police/public, then they are not allowed to use lethal means of catching them. However, since there is no public accountability for the police, they can kill people for even the smallest of reasons and not even get a slap on the hand. For once they could get off their fat lazy asses like they had to during training and run after the person. I am all for fining these people, but without blatent disregard for the law and peoples basic human rights.

[Nutterbug]

dp

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

For once they could get off their fat lazy asses like they had to during training and run after the person.

If you're a 50-year-old cop, how are you going to outrun a 20-year-old punk?

How are you going to subdue them if they're twice your size?

[G-Slice]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

If you're a 50-year-old cop, how are you going to outrun a 20-year-old punk?

How are you going to subdue them if they're twice your size?

You DON'T outrun them and you DON'T subdue them and they get away with evading a fare. I think it's worth it to avoid escalating the conflict and putting people's lives at risk.

[zivan56]

^^ Exactly. This is a more fundamental question and the police are probing how far they go before a backlash occurs. I say if they do things like that, they are just asking to be hurt by thousands of people hurling stones at them and demanding oversight.

So you are saying all 20 year olds are punks? If you are 50, they should just give you a desk job. Why pay someone more when they only do half the job?
The funny thing is, most people I have seen caught evading fares are 30-40+.

[jlousa]

As a guilty fare evader I would co-operate when I am caught and gladly pay my ticket, if I was uncooperative with them I would expect them to take me in for questioning/proper identification, if I continuing to resist and start fighting back to escape I certainly expect to get tasered. They are doing a job, their unwritten motto is do what's necessary to ensure they go home at the end of their shift. I don't believe someone who has lost their farecard is in danger of being tasered unless they become combative.
If someone gets tasered w/o cause, then take it to court that's what the system is for. If it was up to me we'd bring back the nightsticks, I remember hearing they exchanged them in favour of the tasers due to the union complaining the police can operate them at a greater distance thus being safer, not sure how much truth is in that.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by G-Slice

You DON'T outrun them and you DON'T subdue them and they get away with evading a fare.

Then why don't I do it too?

[G-Slice]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Then why don't I do it too?

Go for it.

Let's not forget that Translink's own studies said they lose somewhere around 5% of potential revenue from fare evasion. Of those 5%, I'm sure most of them would just pay the fine, with or without the threat of a tasing.

You seem to have this outlook (and not just about fare evasions, but also about public drinking, vagrancy, etc) that the only thing keeping society from a complete descent into anarchy and chaos is the threat of some punishment, be it a fine or a tasing, for breaking the rules. The way I see it, 99% of people are reasonable and it's not worth forcing them to live in an environment governed by zero-tolerance and an ever-present threats of physical harm just to catch the last 1% that completely lack responsibility.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that, ultimately, it's $2.50. Or $7 million annually. Big f-ing deal.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

So you are saying all 20 year olds are punks? If you are 50, they should just give you a desk job. Why pay someone more when they only do half the job?
The funny thing is, most people I have seen caught evading fares are 30-40+.

I doubt they show much attitude or put up much of a fight when they get busted.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by G-Slice

Go for it.

Let's not forget that Translink's own studies said they lose somewhere around 5% of potential revenue from fare evasion. Of those 5%, I'm sure most of them would just pay the fine, with or without the threat of a tasing.

You seem to have this outlook (and not just about fare evasions, but also about public drinking, vagrancy, etc) that the only thing keeping society from a complete descent into anarchy and chaos is the threat of some punishment, be it a fine or a tasing, for breaking the rules. The way I see it, 99% of people are reasonable and it's not worth forcing them to live in an environment governed by zero-tolerance and an ever-present threats of physical harm just to catch the last 1% that completely lack responsibility.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that, ultimately, it's $2.50. Or $7 million annually. Big f-ing deal.

Let that 1% have a heyday then. Then maybe another 1% will see what kind of — they're getting away with and follow suit. And so on...

I'd rather not take the assumed goodness of humans for granted.

[zivan56]

^^
I think your agenda is beginning to show

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

I doubt they show much attitude or put up much of a fight when they get busted.

Some of them do put on a nice show and start yelling and whatnot. However, one time 3 construction workers and a granny (all without fares) were sitting in one train. When the person came in to inspect the tickets, he was very rude to both these guys and the granny, to which the guys told him to watch his manners. He then threatened them with physical assult and started swearing like a hick, which I though was the perfect example of how police abuse their powers and do whatever they want. I don't know what happened later, but they co-operated with him. If it was me, I personally wouldn't say a word to him if he treated me in such a rude way, and would have got my camera out and recorded the whole thing.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

Some of them do put on a nice show and start yelling and whatnot. However, one time 3 construction workers and a granny (all without fares) were sitting in one train. When the person came in to inspect the tickets, he was very rude to both these guys and the granny, to which the guys told him to watch his manners. He then threatened them with physical assult and started swearing like a hick, which I though was the perfect example of how police abuse their powers and do whatever they want. I don't know what happened later, but they co-operated with him. If it was me, I personally wouldn't say a word to him if he treated me in such a rude way, and would have got my camera out and recorded the whole thing.

I agree cops too have to be held accountable for their actions, as much as the delinquents that they're assigned to deal with.

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

I agree cops too have to be held accountable for their actions, as much as the delinquents that they're assigned to deal with.

I agree with that. However, what you are arguing is that we should have a police state, where everybody is guilty before innocent and a high school dropout who took a 2 year course can decide on the spot who is guilty/innocent and how to dole out punishment. You are also saying that there is no distinction between criminal and civil offenses, and that each should be treated the same.
Essentially this is coming back to the phone bill question. It is exactly the same type of crime if you don't pay your phone bill and if you don't pay for a fare for the skytrain. So what gives the police the rights to hurt someone in one case and not the other?

[G-Slice]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Let that 1% have a heyday then. Then maybe another 1% will see what kind of — they're getting away with and follow suit. And so on...

I'd rather not take the assumed goodness of humans for granted.

Well, we used to have (or you could argue, we still have) an essentially lawless system in which anybody could evade fare and rationally expect to not get caught or, even if they did get caught, to avoid paying a fine. And how far did it go? $7 million. Not bad eh?

In the long run, assuming human goodness will cost you a lot less than assuming human badness.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

I agree with that. However, what you are arguing is that we should have a police state, where everybody is guilty before innocent and a high school dropout who took a 2 year course can decide on the spot who is guilty/innocent and how to dole out punishment. You are also saying that there is no distinction between criminal and civil offenses, and that each should be treated the same.

No, I don't favour a police state. They need a thorough screening process in recruiting cops, and keep a good system of checks and balances on them, without putting faith into them. If those in charge of upholding the law are corrupt and caught doing wrong, they should be locked away with all the other criminals, where their hypocrisy can be met with much fanfare among the inmates.

Trespassing is a criminal offense, right? Isn't entering a fare paid zone without a valid pass effectively trespassing?

And even civil laws without teeth are effectively useless.

Originally Posted by zivan56

Essentially this is coming back to the phone bill question. It is exactly the same type of crime if you don't pay your phone bill and if you don't pay for a fare for the skytrain. So what gives the police the rights to hurt someone in one case and not the other?

With the phone bill, it's easy to cut off service to their homes. With transit, physically barring them from entering transit property is a bit more difficult.

Originally Posted by G-Slice

In the long run, assuming human goodness will cost you a lot less than assuming human badness.

Don't you have locks on your door for it?

[SpongeG]

thats getting kinda scarey

where do we (society) stop? people who ignore keep of the grass signs?

[G-Slice]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Don't you have locks on your door for it?

Unlike tasers, my locks never hurt anybody.

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

No, I don't favour a police state. They need a thorough screening process in recruiting cops, and keep a good system of checks and balances on them, without putting faith into them. If those in charge of upholding the law are corrupt and caught doing wrong, they should be locked away with all the other criminals, where their hypocrisy can be met with much fanfare among the inmates.

Yes, but laws without teeth a useless, right? There have been cases like the airport incident where nobody even lost their job. In any sane system, the police officers should have faced 2nd degree murder charges. There are plenty of other cases, like where they left a drunk guy to die on the street...and got off saying "I'm sorry."

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Trespassing is a criminal offense, right? Isn't entering a fare paid zone without a valid pass effectively trespassing?

And even civil laws without teeth are effectively useless.

Trespassing is a civil offense (in Canada and most countries in the world). Damage to private property would be criminal

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

With the phone bill, it's easy to cut off service to their homes. With transit, physically barring them from entering transit property is a bit more difficult.

Sure they can. They can just get a court order to bar you from taking it.

[SpongeG]

what i don't get is - bus drivers are not allowed to refuse anyone service whether they have the full fare or not but skytrain gives out fines or tasers

[mezzanine]

I do agree that tasers seem extreme for fare evasion, but i can see how some situations can change quite quickly. There will always be a subset of transit users that will be guaranteed to escalate a situation. And i think people still give translink police the short shrift and forget they are dealing with people who are law enforcement officers and able to use force.

In the end I still support translink police to use tasers/— with regular oversight. Once faregates are installed, then we should quickly see less problems like this.