right or wrong? discuss....

sheepsteeth wrote:

MountainMonster wrote:

sheepsteeth wrote:

Pudseyp wrote:

Personally yes the fat fuckpig was out of order in the way he did it, he should have gently ask him to leave then removed him. The force was over the top by the "big man" but then the student should not have been arrogant and used abusive language to the coffin dodger conductor. No one should be threatened in their line of work....simple.

big man should have minded his business. untill he stuck his beak in, the issue was purely verbal between a drunk man and an utterly useless old ticket collector.

i would see things differently had the student puke become physical. had that happned, i think the big man would have been right to step in. it didnt turn physical so the monstercunt should have mnded his business.

i agree that in general you shouldnt be threatened in your line of work but working with the general public should bring with it the caveat that many of those could well end up being abusive. as far as i can tell from the reports of what happened, it was an argument (these things happen) and it could have been resolved by reporting the student to the police who would have done what they are paid to do.

i hpoe the monsercunt gets jailed for being a nosey **** who should learn to mind his business.

All is good and well about minding his own business, but you seem to have failed to realise the conductor had told the youngster to get off many times and he refused. That's alot like going into a shop, yelling abuse at the clerks, refusing to leave after they have asked, then being surprised someone has thrown you out.

no, i realise plenty well what was happening.

my point remains, all of the other people should have minded their own business, the conductor should have reported the puke to the trnsport police and the train would have got moving plenty quick enough.

be under no illusion of the following: putting your hands on another person in the way that bloke did and for the reason that bloke did is assault.

if someone went into a shop yelled abuse and got thrown out by a customer, that customer would also have committed assault. a physical response to a verbal "attack" is not an appropriate response. in your example the same advice would be correct, call the police and let them deal with it.

if johnny sheepscunt is allowed to start cutting about, ignoring basic law in an attempt to dish out the law, we will find ourselves in a sorry old state.

just to highlight for the impending up in the air bleeding heart have a go billy cheesewands (who would actually sit in complete ******* silence in a situation like any suggested here i wouldnt doubt) who are going to give it the old "yeah but if it happened round my manor id just sort 'em out" sketch:

using physical force to stop a verbal argument is not a proper or apprpriate response. being larry large spuds doesnt earn you internet points or the respect of your peers, it makes you look like a ******* sheepscunt who should (until he can separate his emotions from his opinions) be locked up for the safety of the general public.

sheepsteeth wrote:

Pudseyp wrote:

People should have the powers (albeit) limited

first problem is as you say, these powers should be limited, who limits them and who decides what is reasonable and what isnt? people who cant disconnect their feelings from their opinions shouldnt be allowed to do anything that affects anyone else. i might also add that people do have the right to defend themselves and to defend others when thy cant do it themselves but this defence has to be appropriate. people cant separate their opinions from their emotions and for this reason will over react and do more harm than good.

Pudseyp wrote:

and not fear any percicution for defending other members of the public be it violent/physical/verbal attacks.

defending those unable to defend themselves is what separates us from the animals but as demonstrated by this incident, people are fuckingmongs and cant be trusted to behave in a manner comensurate with the supposed threat. no matter how you dice it, putting your hands on someone because of a heated conversation is not acceptable. if the person had started making death threats, i would imagine that physical intervention may have been deemed appropriate. if the student had got out of his seat in a threatening manner, then physical intervention may have been appropriate. if the student gobs off in a drunken manner, physical intervention is definitely not appropriate.

Pudseyp wrote:

Members of the public on that train could have been threatend by the kilted cockhead and the situation could have got worse...I don't condone the bigman cuntsmouths action of the force he used but we shouldn't worry and live in fear we should stand up for what we belive in...right vs wrong.

could have, would have, should have, and so on and so forth, no one was threatened and as such, bigmassivescotsman should have kept his nose out of the business.

this is all the fault of the conductor, if he wasnt such a useless **** none fo this would have escalated.