Passengers forcing their way off stranded trains

[Captain Chaos]

But an instant solution isn't always going to be possible and it is foolish to expect so. When an engineer is required to fix a problem he will be required to locate the fault, diagnose it, obtain any parts that may be required, shut off any power supply if needed, fit the parts, test it to ensure that the fault is fixed and a whole host of other things. This is not an instant process. Sure there may be a fair few faults that are quite obvious and easy to fix but there will always be circumstances where this is not possible. People these days seem to think that you can just press a re-set button and everything will be fine. They seem to forget that the railways are not a mobile phone or a computer. It is a complex network of infrastructure.

With regards to the bus scenario it is not as simple as you make out. If the bus has broken down in the middle lane of the motorway and is unable to move then traffic is going to be an issue. How are you going to evacuate these people with traffic going past you at 70 MPH without stopping traffic in the first place? Even if it is stuck on the hard shoulder it is still not as simple when compared to a train. Evacuating a bus onto the grass verge will take no more than a few minutes. A train takes significantly longer due to it's height from the ground, number of passengers and service length. You cannot just step off a train when it is stuck in the middle of nowehere. Even when you have sorted the problem out and trains can move again, if you have evacuated then you have to try and get these people back on. Simple for a bus but nowhere near as easy when on a train. The only way you can get people back onto a 12-car train from the embankment is by using ladders. If you have 1,000 people using three of four ladders getting back onto a train then that takes a significant amount of time and just makes the delay even longer. The total delay could double simply by getting these people back onto the service.

Also, I believe it is stupid to make assumptions about all rail staff based on one or two individuals. Why should I have someone be rude and insulting towards me because they have made an assumption about me based upon what someone they don't know has written on the internet? And although unfortunate that you do seem to have some poor service when you have travelled by train I wouldn't let it put me off. If we all let one bad experience put us all off then no-one would travel at all. The huge majority of the travelling public are treated with respect and are offered the best service possible by most staff. Just because there are one or two bad eggs doesn't mean the rest of us are. With regards to toilets, I tend to agree that train toilets are an issue particularly with the stock I work on. However the company have taken steps to address this and things are improving. I know and you know it is not good enough but things are getting better. It's just unfortunate that when one problem is sorted on the railways people just find something else to moan about.

 

[codenamecuebal]

Okay, okay so getting out and wandering in close proximity to 660v isn't the smartest of ideas, but what if it was a 25kV overhead? Would it be safer to disembark and walk alongside (on the side that doesn't have another section of track next to it) the train there if you were only <500m from a station or at the very least, freedom?

 

[island]

It would at best slow matters down because trains would have to run at caution until they were certain everything was clear.

 

[Nonsense]

But an instant solution isn't always going to be possible and it is foolish to expect so. When an engineer is required to fix a problem he will be required to locate the fault, diagnose it, obtain any parts that may be required, shut off any power supply if needed, fit the parts, test it to ensure that the fault is fixed and a whole host of other things. This is not an instant process. Sure there may be a fair few faults that are quite obvious and easy to fix but there will always be circumstances where this is not possible. People these days seem to think that you can just press a re-set button and everything will be fine. They seem to forget that the railways are not a mobile phone or a computer. It is a complex network of infrastructure.

I agree, an instant fix is pushing it, but two hours? One hour even? The customer doesn't understand why the fix can't be made at the depot long after the train has been rescued and they have reached their destination, and I challenge anyone to explain it without drawing attention to the managerial incompetence of the last 20 odd years.

With regards to the bus scenario it is not as simple as you make out. If the bus has broken down in the middle lane of the motorway and is unable to move then traffic is going to be an issue. How are you going to evacuate these people with traffic going past you at 70 MPH without stopping traffic in the first place? Even if it is stuck on the hard shoulder it is still not as simple when compared to a train. Evacuating a bus onto the grass verge will take no more than a few minutes. A train takes significantly longer due to it's height from the ground, number of passengers and service length. You cannot just step off a train when it is stuck in the middle of nowehere. Even when you have sorted the problem out and trains can move again, if you have evacuated then you have to try and get these people back on. Simple for a bus but nowhere near as easy when on a train. The only way you can get people back onto a 12-car train from the embankment is by using ladders. If you have 1,000 people using three of four ladders getting back onto a train then that takes a significant amount of time and just makes the delay even longer. The total delay could double simply by getting these people back onto the service.

Any vehicle fouling any lane will rapidly bring everything to a standstill anyway so thats not an issue.

I don't think anyone is arguing that its not a massive inconvenience to get everyone back on the train. The issue is keeping people on the train, and even suggesting that they be punished for leaving it.

Its a good thing that the law of this land isn't as absolute as some here would like, otherwise we'd have people prosecuted for leaving a train on fire, unless of course you made that an exception, but then you'd have to legislate for everything, and that way madness lies.

Also, I believe it is stupid to make assumptions about all rail staff based on one or two individuals. Why should I have someone be rude and insulting towards me because they have made an assumption about me based upon what someone they don't know has written on the internet? And although unfortunate that you do seem to have some poor service when you have travelled by train I wouldn't let it put me off. If we all let one bad experience put us all off then no-one would travel at all. The huge majority of the travelling public are treated with respect and are offered the best service possible by most staff. Just because there are one or two bad eggs doesn't mean the rest of us are. With regards to toilets, I tend to agree that train toilets are an issue particularly with the stock I work on. However the company have taken steps to address this and things are improving. I know and you know it is not good enough but things are getting better. It's just unfortunate that when one problem is sorted on the railways people just find something else to moan about.

No one would ever suggest that someone ever be rude to you because of something they read on the internet.

Millions of rail journey's are made every year without incident or remark, but there are also millions (maybe less ) of people who never travel by rail, but when they do, and if they have a bad experience of it, will carry that experience forever.

 

[EM2]

Millions of rail journey's are made every year without incident or remark, but there are also millions (maybe less ) of people who never travel by rail, but when they do, and if they have a bad experience of it, will carry that experience forever.

Substitute 'rail' for 'Tesco' or 'WHSmith' or 'Vodafone' or basically any other service industry. Unfortunately, whatever steps are taken to make everyone's life as perfect as possible, something may go wrong. That is life.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

... otherwise we'd have people prosecuted for leaving a train on fire...

If a train was on fire, passengers would evacuate safely under the direction of staff. A completely different scenario, where there is a danger of loss of life, not just very uncomfortable.

 

[O L Leigh]

There are rail workers on this board that seem happy to overlook the fact that the railway is there to serve the paying customer. Multiply that by the thousands of employees that don't post here, is it any wonder the public has such low regard or patience when things go wrong. From my own experiences on the railway, the vast majority of customer facing staff would seem to prefer it it if the passengers used some other means to reach their destination.

Are you still stirring the pot? Haven't I already addressed all your questions and concerns? Or do you have some axe to grind with regard to the railways in general and this is just the most convenient way of doing so?

I'm not going to sink to having to explain it to you once again, as it is all a matter of record. Why not go back ten pages on this thread, read it all again and then let me know what I might have missed.

O L Leigh

 

[Minstral25]

Choice of detraining would depend on where I am stuck.

Two hours standing in cramped conditions without light, food or information and I'm off - doubt I'd even last that long! And information is probably not that useful unless it says we have rescue locomotive on the way and it will be coupled in 15 minutes.

Two hours with comfortable seat and plenty of updated positive information then we are happy.

In the recent snow when Southern were trying to get thousands of commuters home we were stuck for long periods but the driver came on and told us what was happening and how they were trying to get us home - we were all happy campers

I think the key issue is that when a train is stuck for more than 30 minutes the train companies need to switch from rescue a dead train to managing the issue and getting passengers safely off the trains or at least move the train to the next station through red signals when it is signalling problem.

The real issue is that no-one should be left in the middle of nowhere for 2 hours in the first place.

 

[Flamingo]

Are you still stirring the pot? Haven't I already addressed all your questions and concerns? Or do you have some axe to grind with regard to the railways in general and this is just the most convenient way of doing so?

I'm not going to sink to having to explain it to you once again, as it is all a matter of record. Why not go back ten pages on this thread, read it all again and then let me know what I might have missed.

O L Leigh

I think the real problem is he can't handle the fact that someone else might have the authority to tell him what to do, and hasn't the brains to realise that they are telling him this for his own safety, as they know more about the situation than he does.

Knows all of his rights, none of his responsibilities :roll:

 

[Nonsense]

I think the real problem is he can't handle the fact that someone else might have the authority to tell him what to do, and hasn't the brains to realise that they are telling him this for his own safety, as they know more about the situation than he does.

Knows all of his rights, none of his responsibilities :roll:

Hmmm insults. How big of you.

 

[Old Timer]

Nonesense
A couple of points that you should be aware of, IF you are referring to the original discussion.

1 - The failure was not due to the fault of the Railway in any way. It was caused by thieves stealing cable from a remote location - which then had to be traced.

I suggest you write a tirade to your local MP about the leniency the Law shows to such individuals when they are Prosecuted.

2 - Rules implemented and enforced by the ORR do not permit trains to be moved without an operational signalling system. These were the result of media soundbite-engineering, and no doubt the comments of people like yourself who have much to say and little knowledge to back it up.

I suggest a little navel gazing amongst the general public who do travel might not go amiss.

You may also want to write again to your local MP to have much of this LEGISLATION rescinded rather than suggest managerial incompetence.

3 - Passengers were kept informed at all times about what was happening - a lack of communication from train crew was NOT the cause of the detrainment.

This selfish detrainment the required the traction current to be cut off causing a loss of vital on-board services after a period, and a considerable extension to the time taken to start train services again.

The Railway cannot be held liable for the selfish acts of some people.

4 - The Railway as an organisation is required to by Health & Safety requirements to minimise risks to passengers. These requirements run to NOT allowing passengers to detrain except in an extreme emergency (defined as a risk to life). The Railway is legally obliged to comply with the terms of its operational Licences which require this.

Again you may wish to write to your local MP and have such onerous requirements relaxed.


Finally a variety of Railway staff have given very good explanations as to why detrainment is NOT a good idea. I doubt you would care very much for Railway staff to tell YOU how you should undertake your work, although I think one or two would be delighted to shadow you and report on the various inconsistencies and inefficiencies within your Industry, which in some cases may well serve US as consumers, and which we pay for. Now who did you say you worked for ?

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Nonesense
A couple of points that you should be aware of, IF you are referring to the original discussion.

1 - The failure was not due to the fault of the Railway in any way. It was caused by thieves stealing cable from a remote location - which then had to be traced.

I suggest you write a tirade to your local MP about the leniency the Law shows to such individuals when they are Prosecuted.

2 - Rules implemented and enforced by the ORR do not permit trains to be moved without an operational signalling system. These were the result of media soundbite-engineering, and no doubt the comments of people like yourself who have much to say and little knowledge to back it up.

I suggest a little navel gazing amongst the general public who do travel might not go amiss.

You may also want to write again to your local MP to have much of this LEGISLATION rescinded rather than suggest managerial incompetence.

3 - Passengers were kept informed at all times about what was happening - a lack of communication from train crew was NOT the cause of the detrainment.

This selfish detrainment the required the traction current to be cut off causing a loss of vital on-board services after a period, and a considerable extension to the time taken to start train services again.

The Railway cannot be held liable for the selfish acts of some people.

4 - The Railway as an organisation is required to by Health & Safety requirements to minimise risks to passengers. These requirements run to NOT allowing passengers to detrain except in an extreme emergency (defined as a risk to life). The Railway is legally obliged to comply with the terms of its operational Licences which require this.

Again you may wish to write to your local MP and have such onerous requirements relaxed.


Finally a variety of Railway staff have given very good explanations as to why detrainment is NOT a good idea. I doubt you would care very much for Railway staff to tell YOU how you should undertake your work, although I think one or two would be delighted to shadow you and report on the various inconsistencies and inefficiencies within your Industry, which in some cases may well serve US as consumers, and which we pay for. Now who did you say you worked for ?

Well said

 

[Flamingo]

Hmmm insults. How big of you.

Not insults. Personality analysis. No charge.

So, as old-timer said, who do you work for? Just so we can follow you around telling you how to sweep up.

 

[Nonsense]

Thank you Older Timer for taking time to summarise the events in question. I will however reiterate my stance as I'm not telling anyone how to do their job, stir pots or grind axes, or even articulating my point of view very well.

The cause of the failure isn't really the issue as the effect is the same regardless. My 'beef' in this whole discussion is that some would believe that the problem is the failed train, its not. The problem is the people stranded on the failed train, It is they that should be the absolute priority of the railway, and repairing the fault might not be the most effective means resolving the problem of the stranded passengers.

Anyway, the main response here that jars with me most though is the view that instead of an apology for being forced off the train into a potentially hazardous environment, the passenger should feel the full weight of the law for an entirely human reaction to the situation. The law exists to protect people, and the inside of the train is not automatically safer than the outside.

I'm not even arguing that individuals should ignore the advice of the rail staff, but if what if they have no confidence in that staff? It can take a while to erode that confidence, but it does happen.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not insults. Personality analysis. No charge.

So, as old-timer said, who do you work for? Just so we can follow you around telling you how to sweep up.

Is it beyond your wit to challenge my point of view without denigrating my character? If you think I'm wrong, tell me why, or ignore me, but don't lower the tone.

But if you're looking for an insult, only an imbecile couldn't determine my particular specialism from the nature of my posts.

 

[Old Timer]

Nonesense
The discussion has never entered the arena of people being forced off trains at all.

The issue is that passengers, despite being told not, elected to get off themselves thus exposing themselves to greater risk.

Whether or not people like it, the railway is an enclosed transport system and as a result on rare occasions substantial delays may occur.

The very nature of the failure - a power failure where all signalling controls and indications were lost - is in itself a very infrequent event given that it occurred through a theft rather than through a normal failure mode.

The Railway as an Industry has to take the best interests of passenger seriously. In the majority of cases this WILL require that it is in their best interests to remain on board a stranded train.

There have been many unrealistic and impractical comments made here on the ability of people to (1) actually disembark safely, and (2) to safely reach a place where they may be taken from the track. It is hardly sensible to wealk a very large group of people to a bridge access which is on a Motorway or an A class road, indeed this will almost always create a much more hazardous situation than remaining on the train. This assumes by the way that on-train staff have access keys - which they do not. It also assumes the ability to bring suitable numbers of vehicles to convey them away, again something that may not be possible.

The Railway has nothing to gain from standing trains and every effort is made to move trains out from within the affected area as quickly as possible. Sometimes the extent and the nature of the failure will mean that this will inevitably take time as trains have to be moved one by one. The alternative if some sort of "train free for all" which I am sure you will agree would be much more dangerous.

The rules by which the Railway now operates are much more onerous than in BR days and in part have much to do with the uninformed and emotional debate that entered into the Industry post-Clapham. Even taking into account recent accidents, statistically you are far more likely to die in your own living room through an accident than through a railway accident.

The bigger issue is the involvement of groups and individuals, who were working to completely disparate and separate agendas, and whose voice unfortunately has been allowed to dictate the manner in which the Railway now operates. Rather than operate on the basis of reasonable risks we have an environment where the Railway is meant to be completely free from hazard. THis CAN be achieved but at the sort of price that led to this debate.

We thus now have an industry which is hidebound by rules and procedures which bring nothing of value but add tremendous avoidable costs and prevent an early return to normal working when things do go wrong.

The public now have the Railway they deserve. Now they do not like it, but have only themselves to blame.

 

[O L Leigh]

The problem is the people stranded on the failed train, It is they that should be the absolute priority of the railway, and repairing the fault might not be the most effective means resolving the problem of the stranded passengers.

OT has given a very good, informed precis of the situation in which we find ourselves. The hand-wringing to which he refers is just the sort of thing that you yourself are guilty of.

You would have the railways do "something" merely to show that we have not lost control of a situation regardless of the sense of taking such action, the impact on those passengers directly affected and on the service as a whole and those who rely upon it. Getting people off trains is a matter of absolute last resort and is not entered into lightly, as I have already been at pains to explain.

Whether the railways talk about passenger welfare or service recovery the result is the same; the desire to get trains moving again as soon as possible. As a passenger I would hope that you can see that this benefits you as well, because trains kept at a stand for whatever reason is a bad thing for everyone concerned. All TOCs will have a "cut and run" policy which ensures that train failures are dealt with as quickly as possible so that time is not wasted on endless fault-finding where declaring a train failed gives a faster outcome. Where train services are affected by infrastructure problems there are options for degraded working, but these necessarily take longer to implement because safety must be ensured at all times. However, the railways gain nothing from having trains held at a stand for hour after hour. As I've said before, I have yet to be involved in any incident where I've been held for longer than 1.5 hours, and that includes being caught up with fatalities, bridge strikes and major signalling failures.

Anyway, the main response here that jars with me most though is the view that instead of an apology for being forced off the train into a potentially hazardous environment, the passenger should feel the full weight of the law for an entirely human reaction to the situation. The law exists to protect people, and the inside of the train is not automatically safer than the outside.

No-one is being "forced off the train into a potentially hazardous environment". Once again, I have said previously that we would rather you stay put, even if you are in a potentially uncomfortable environment, so that we can sort out whatever the problem is and get you to a location where it is safe for you to disembark.

As for the law, well I'm afraid you're just talking out the top of your head. The law is not there to ensure safety as well you know. You'd be perfectly safe standing in the middle of my back garden but that won't stop me calling the Police.

But to bring this back on-topic, anyone bailing out of a train is indeed committing an offence of trespass on the railway. This is a criminal act no matter what the reason motivating it, therefore anyone taking this course of action is leaving themselves open to prosecution. Whether you like it or not, this is not a matter of life and death but of convenience. It's a human reaction to exceed the speed limits if you're late for an appointment but a traffic cop/gatso won't be impressed. You committed a criminal act, end of story. So why should trespass on the railway as a result of bailing out of a stranded train be any different?

I'm not even arguing that individuals should ignore the advice of the rail staff, but if what if they have no confidence in that staff? It can take a while to erode that confidence, but it does happen.

No...? Your posts certainly don't read that way. You seem to be making every excuse for them, so if you're not arguing that the advice of railstaff should be ignored what are you saying? Your argument seems to be lost in a fog of indecision and you are just selectively replying to posts as you see fit. I've tried engaging with you over and over but you simply refuse to address what I say.

In any case, who are you to tell me I don't know what I'm doing? That's effectively what you're saying by insinuating that you might lose confidence in me or my colleagues. Do you have that sort of devil-may-care attitude to other industries and areas of life or is it just the railways? Would you have this sort of argument with your GP or a Police Officer on the basis that what they tell you to do might be a little bit inconvenient or unpalatable?

You may not like this very much, but no matter how well (or otherwise) you respond to personal insults, I find your posts incredibly insulting. Not only that but, with your selective quoting and unwillingness to engage, you appear to be exhibiting all the behaviour of an internet troll. If you show a preparedness to listen and understand the railways perspective then I will be willing to reconsider my opinion of you, but you have failed to do that so far. Consequently I am coming to the end of my patience with you. You may consider that I am doing precisely the same, but you need to read my posts again and understand that I am motivated by the same concerns as you; passenger welfare and speedy incident resolution, both of which go hand in hand.

O L Leigh

 

[Holly]

... But to bring this back on-topic, anyone bailing out of a train is indeed committing an offence of trespass on the railway. This is a criminal act no matter what the reason motivating it, therefore ...

That is prima facie inexact.
Trespass to land is a tort, not a crime. Moreover there is no penalty for trespass to land if the trespasser leaves promptly and diligently on request and does not harm the land or anything on it.

Having said that offenses are (probably) being committed in these circumstances, but these offense are not trespass (for which only civil relief is available to the railway).

The actual crimes arise under the Transport Act (2000) which empowers the creation of byelaws.

In particular, byelaw 10(3) provides that "No person shall open a train door, or enter or leave any train, while it is in motion or between stations."

Also, only if there are signs, byelaw 13(1) provides that "(1) No person shall enter or remain on any part of the railway where there is a notice:
(i) prohibiting access; ... (etc) "

The penalties are (1) Financial and/or (2) Removal from the railway (by force if necessary). The financial penalty cannot exceed Standard Scale 3 (i) in relation to England and Wales the meaning given by section 37 of
the Criminal Justice Act 1982, or
(ii) in relation to Scotland the meaning given by section 225(1) of the
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995,

All of which means you cannot be hauled off to gaol for bailing out of a stranded train, but you can be fined and forcibly excluded from the railway.

 

[EM2]

Nobody was suggesting that trespassers could be imprisoned, however trespass on the railway certainly is a criminal offence.
From http://www.teachingzone.org/btp/conseq.htm:

TRESPASS
Most people believe trespass to be a minor misdemeanor. In fact, outside of the railway environment, trespass is largely a civil rather than a criminal offence. Within the railway environment Parliament has decided, with very good reason, that trespassing on or near railway lines is a criminal offence.
The penalty for an act of criminal trespass on the railways is a maximum fine of £1,000
To the public, trespass might not sound very serious. However, the railway environment can be a dangerous place and railway trespassers expose themselves, rail staff and passengers to serious danger with, all too often, tragic consequences.
The vast majority of people who trespass on the railway are adults - taking a short cut or walking their dogs for example. They are either oblivious to the extremely dangerous position in which they place themselves, and others, or they choose to ignore it. They set a potentially life threatening example to young children who may see them taking a short cut.
Trespass very often leads to acts of vandalism. In many cases it is the precursor to it and it is difficult to commit acts of vandalism without first trespassing on or near railway lines.

There is also:

Section 23 Regulation of the Railways Act 1868: this prohibits passage upon or across any railway line except for the purpose of crossing the line at an authorised point. A person commits an offence by so doing after having once received warning by the railway company, their servants or agents, to desist.

Section 34 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and Section 17 Railway Regulation Act 1842 deal with any unlawful act or wilful neglect endangering public safety. Section 34 covers all potential defendants; Section 17 is aimed specifically at railway employees

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Incorrect I'm afraid Holly, trespass is usually a civil offence, unless you trespass on the Railway, Airport, MoD etc land.

 

[Old Timer]

Holly
Right from almost the inception of Railways, Parliament determined that there are a variety of actions that within the Railway environment needed to be subject to Criminal prohibition, even though they would not ordinarily give rise to this in different circumstances.

The only requirement to display trespass notices is at a railway station.

Trespass notices erected or diplayed elsewhere such as level crossings are additional to the Statutory requirement and simply add additional support to a Prosecution.

Case law has already determined that Trespass for example is considered to occur when a person places their arm over the platform edge.

Now that may seem to be rather a nitpicking point of pedantry however in complex legal argument this was the decision reached. A similar situation applies to a railway carriage, where placing any part of the body outside of the doors or windows is technically trespass.

The forcing of a train door may very well cause damage to the door mechanism, which constitutes Criminal Damage.

 

[jon0844]

Or, in the case of the new Victoria Line stock - breathing on the doors will cause damage to the mechanism!

 

[Flamingo]

Well Nonsense, as you have chosen an appropriate username for your posts, and are responding in a manner to all those who are trying to explain the issues to you in a manner that can only be described as obtuse, the only logical assumption that one can make is that you are a few cans short of a six-pack, and respond accordingly.

As I said, it was not an insult, it was a personality analysis. I don't hold with this modern PC practice of saying that people are "special" and "inclusiveness" needs to be provided. Sometimes one needs to call a spade a bloody shovel.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

I thought I would make a brief return and thank all of you who voted in my poll. Clearly, forcing an escape from a ' dead train' has a bright future !

I'll avoid any further polemic as I don't know how many points I have remaining or should I say, can afford to lose !

 

[Flamingo]

I thought I would make a brief return and thank all of you who voted in my poll. Clearly, forcing an escape from a ' dead train' has a bright future !

Just to repeat, try to do it on my train, I WILL do my best to prevent you, physically restraining you if necessary, and I will do my best to see you are arrested and prosecuted.

I do not see why others should be put at risk for your selfishness.

Remember to factor that into your thinking.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

Just to repeat, try to do it on my train, I WILL do my best to prevent you, physically restraining you if necessary, and I will do my best to see you are arrested and prosecuted.

I do not see why others should be put at risk for your selfishness.

Remember to factor that into your thinking.

It would probably be more fun staying on the train and laughing at you as five hundred other passengers evacuated in complete impunity.

 

[90019]

It would probably be more fun staying on the train and laughing at you as five hundred other passengers evacuated in complete impunity.

Are you like this in real life?

If so, I hope I never have to encounter you.

 

[Pyreneenguy]

Are you like this in real life?

If so, I hope I never have to encounter you.

Not at all , but even a subject as serious as this one needs a little bit of humour injected now and again.

Clearly passengers are not going to accept being stranded in a broken down train for hours within sight of a station. What do you propose ?

 

[Flamingo]

It would probably be more fun staying on the train and laughing at you as five hundred other passengers evacuated in complete impunity.

Most people follow the first one. If the first one is taken down decisively, the battle is over.

Hopefully we won't have to find out, and I suspect that in that situation you would be all talk anyway.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

It would probably be more fun staying on the train and laughing at you as five hundred other passengers evacuated in complete impunity.

That says quite a lot about you and your arguments...

 

[Pyreneenguy]

Most people follow the first one. If the first one is taken down decisively, the battle is over.

Hopefully we won't have to find out, and I suspect that in that situation you would be all talk anyway.

There's no point engaging in a slanging-match !

Who knows how people will react ? It is impossible to secure a twelve carriage train, the buzz would soon get about and the situation would be uncontrollable.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

So you advocate causing uncontrollable dangerous situations? Are you happy with putting yourselves and others in danger? That says a HUGE amount about you.