What about his human rights ?

[joe-90]

The yob was wrestling the lad in a crowded train and could have killed a child. Just like firing a gun in public - only good fortune saved an incident. Therefore what he did was wrong. Geddit yet?

You cite one scenario and yet see to lack the imagination to consider a whole load more possible outcomes, many of which could have been far more catastrophic to human life. Geddit yet?

No. The yob illegally attacked a young train traveller for no good reason. His actions could have killed a child. If a child had been injured would you still be saying 'well done'?

 

[cantaloup63]

How do you know that he had "no good reason"?

 

[Whitespirit66]

The yob was wrestling the lad in a crowded train and could have killed a child. Just like firing a gun in public - only good fortune saved an incident. Therefore what he did was wrong. Geddit yet?

You cite one scenario and yet see to lack the imagination to consider a whole load more possible outcomes, many of which could have been far more catastrophic to human life. Geddit yet?

No. The yob illegally attacked a young train traveller for no good reason. His actions could have killed a child. If a child had been injured would you still be saying 'well done'?

Oh, downgraded to 'injured' now.

What if a child suffered a broken finger nail?

I'm off to the pub. At least I can get a sensible debate there.

 

[joe-90]

How do you know that he had "no good reason"?

What was it then?

 

[cantaloup63]

How do you know that he had "no good reason"?

What was it then?

You're saying that he had no good reason. I'd like you to explain how you know! Well, go on then. I'M ASKING YOU!!!

 

[joe-90]

The yob was wrestling the lad in a crowded train and could have killed a child. Just like firing a gun in public - only good fortune saved an incident. Therefore what he did was wrong. Geddit yet?

You cite one scenario and yet see to lack the imagination to consider a whole load more possible outcomes, many of which could have been far more catastrophic to human life. Geddit yet?

No. The yob illegally attacked a young train traveller for no good reason. His actions could have killed a child. If a child had been injured would you still be saying 'well done'?

Oh, downgraded to 'injured' now.

What if a child suffered a broken finger nail?

I'm off to the pub. At least I can get a sensible debate there.

Broken fingernail? Paralysis? Death? You go down to the pub. They are too drunk to listen to your drivel down there.

 

[joe-90]

How do you know that he had "no good reason"?

What was it then?

You're saying that he had no good reason. I'd like you to explain how you know! Well, go on then. I'M ASKING YOU!!!

Because there was no reason in law. (unless you know otherwise).

The kid was sitting with his back to him having no intercourse whatsoever.

 

[cantaloup63]

Because there was no reason in law. (unless you know otherwise).

moving goalposts now

The kid was sitting with his back to him having no intercourse whatsoever.

So what? The kid was stealing the bloke's time on the planet through his refusal to remove himself from the train.

 

[gasbanni]

Attacked is it he was just manhandled off of the train period,

A child wasnt killed maimed or injured your argument is ridiculous
The biggest Killer in this country is the motor car presumably you dont drive one because of the possibilty you might kill a child.

 

[joe-90]

But if I drove recklessly like that lout acted - I'd expect to be arrested. Just like he will be.

 

[Norcon]

If police officers had attempted to remove the kid from the train would he have just gone meekly or put up a struggle?

Would the train carriage have to be evacuated in case someone gets hurt?

 

[joe-90]

Dunno but at least they would have the legal powers to do whatever needed to be done. It was fook all to do with that thug.

 

[Alarm]

Most people will find anything you say difficult to make sense of.

Well from getting back and seeing the attempts your making I am glad I left this one alone.

And you still do not grasp the situation do you.

 

[cantaloup63]

Dunno but at least they would have the legal powers to do whatever needed to be done..

So if the police had attempted to manhandle the lad off the train but in so doing a scuffle broke out and they all fell on and subsequently killed a child, then that would have been alright then?

 

[Alarm]

No, but they would have at least you would like to think done a on the spot risk assessment and been insured.

As I mentioned at the beginning the best thing was to let the train resume the journey and arrest the scrote at the station. As I have seen many times.
A vigilante passenger and a man who obviously does not understand his powers are not the way to go.