Dr_Intoxicated
Member
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 457
Is that the one where they tracked a repeat offender in real time and caught them out?
It’s become a culture of sorts; you’re not “cool” if you don’t do it regularly.
Quite. And it’s true, police won’t even attend to a house burglary anymore for instance. All thanks to the tories, and I have a bad feeling that Labour won’t be any different.I get the feeling at the moment the culture is “I can and will do whatever I want, and who is going to stop me”. An attitude which the Covid response seems to have heavily aggravated.
Just saw a blatent tailgater at Marylebone. Pointed him out to staff who thanked me but did nothing.
Excellent, well done.Someone tried to tailgate me through the barrier onto the platform at Aylesbury two weeks ago. Luckily I saw him hanging around the barriers and sussed his game. As soon as I passed through the barrier I stopped dead, so he had no space to get through and had to stay the other side. I asked him if he had a ticket and got a blank stare in response so I politely suggested he f*cked off.
Surely it was a public place so it is allowed? You weren't harassing them. Perhaps I'm wrong on this.I was followed through a wide luggage gate by two males aged about 15 recently on the Elizabeth Line. I pointed them out to station staff who couldn’t have cared less. I shared an image of them online with TfL and the BTP in the hope they would investigate and was promptly told I was the problem for sharing their image without consent. What’s the point!
They do, yes.Does Paris still have full height turnstiles? I went through one but it shut before my large rucksack did, which was rather embarrassing!
Couldn't the time in which the normal gates stay open be reduced by about 1/3rd?
New York is not exactly getting any better with its crime problem, petty or otherwise, though. I can’t seem to find any evidence of said “zero tolerance policing” you mentioned.I know Labour isn't likely to change much, but we do need something akin to the zero tolerance policing that New York introduced to change mindsets.
New York is not exactly getting any better with its crime problem, petty or otherwise, though. I can’t seem to find any evidence of said “zero tolerance policing” you mentioned.
There is no consensus that the broken window approach prevents crime other than vandalism.This was in the 90s and was based on the broken windows theory where small crimes were tackled as allowing them allowed more serious crime to escalate.
It was very successful at the time and crime is still significantly lower than it was at its height in the early 90s , look it up.
"Fare Dodgers: At War with the Law". 2019 mini series (4 episodes).There was a Channel 5 series a few years back about the TfL revenue protection officers which might still on My5 but not 100%
I don’t think there are allowable physical solutions.I'm surprised we've not seen barriers upgraded to perhaps be higher to prevent people bumping.
Higher barriers won't prevent tailgating.I'm surprised we've not seen barriers upgraded to perhaps be higher to prevent people bumping.
Fare evasion will be way down the list of priorities for the BTP.Seems to be a big problem everywhere now, but endemic at the London stations I pass through. I'd love to see more btp recruited and funded from railway budgets, with the catch that they have to spend at least half of their time rostered helping rpi's . About time the serial evaders and 'bumpers' got their comeuppance.
*Obviously wouldn't want to see police getting involved over wrong time advances etc or checking tickets themselves, but chasing down gate jumpers and taking details from those who refuse to give details to revenue teams would be very useful indeed.
Personally, I really do think the levels of antisocial behaviour would drop massively and noticeably aswell if ticketless travel was tackled.
They may have reported that person before and made a note to add this time to their list of reports. But yes realistically that's the most they can do.Just saw a blatent tailgater at Marylebone. Pointed him out to staff who thanked me but did nothing.
There is no consensus that the broken window approach prevents crime other than vandalism.
Ironic given how strongly Chiltern pursue penalty fare cases in court (see any of the threads over in that section of the forum) that they don't care about catching one in the act!Just saw a blatent tailgater at Marylebone. Pointed him out to staff who thanked me but did nothing.
Unless Revenue Protection staff and/or British Transport Police are around, there's very little that most station staff can do in such cases.Ironic given how strongly Chiltern pursue penalty fare cases in court (see any of the threads over in that section of the forum) that they don't care about catching one in the act!
Hence my suggestion for additional officers, fully funded from rail budgetsFare evasion will be way down the list of priorities for the BTP.
Couldn't agree more !There is some evidence that fare evasion has a habit of being linked with other crimes.
The problem is that the railway tends to focus on the low-hanging fruit, eg your stereotypical student who has short fared, or whatever. Whilst not in any way condoning that type of fare evasion, it means the “I ain’t paying wha you gonna do bruv” types tend to be left to get on with it, unless there’s a big joint BTP/revenue sting operation. On balance I’d prefer more effort to be targeted on the second group, as they are the ones more likely to assault staff and in many cases be associated with other crimes both on and off the railway.
Hence my suggestion for additional officers, fully funded from rail budgets
My view is the police should respond to crime based on its risk, seriousness, urgency etc not on the basis of who funds them.Hence my suggestion for additional officers, fully funded from rail budgets
Good idea !They could start by using contract security guards for what they are actually useful for - additional staff at gatelines to protect the railway staff so they can challenge such people. Rather than have them attempt to do (badly) the job of railway staff without the requisite fares knowledge.
A perfectly reasonable moral view.My view is the police should respond to crime based on its risk, seriousness, urgency etc not on the basis of who funds them.
They could start by using contract security guards for what they are actually useful for - additional staff at gatelines to protect the railway staff so they can challenge such people. Rather than have them attempt to do (badly) the job of railway staff without the requisite fares knowledge.