Bus driver sacked OMG

[pete01]

No permission to use OMG

Oh

 

[Highway Man]

Admission of defeat above.

Yes I think I put the final nail in the coffin for him. He had nowhere to go thereafter.

 

[Highway Man]

Oh

Exactly

 

[noseall]

What's the chances of that?

Is that relevant? The risk however, certainly is.

 

[pete01]

What's the chances of that?

Have you not seen Speed?

 

[noseall]

Have you not seen Speed?

 

[Elsa TLC]

and still no source.

He has plenty dribbling out his mouth

 

[Highway Man]

Is that relevant? The risk however, certainly is.

irrelevant, a car could also hit into the bus but it didn't, what other risks are you looking at? This happened in the heat of the moment and so he wasn't thinking about company policies or health and safety issues, he was acting for the passengers not against them.

 

[morqthana]

when you have apprehended them, any further use of force cannot be justified.

What if they resist, or try to escape? If the apprehension was lawful, surely the further use of reasonable force to maintain it ought to be OK? Otherwise it all seems a bit pointless. You can, say, rugby-tackle someone to stop him, but then have to stand there while he gets to his feet and runs off again?

 

[noseall]

irrelevant, a car could also hit into the bus but it didn't, what other risks are you looking at? This happened in the heat of the moment and so he wasn't thinking about company policies or health and safety issues

Insurers will not look at it that way.

, he was acting for the passengers not against them.

For one passenger, whilst at the same time ignoring many others.

 

[Elsa TLC]

Then it won't be hard for you to show at least some words of mine, accompanied by an intelligent and rational analysis of them which shows how I'm taking the side of the criminal will it.

Just go backwards from this post.

Except of course, you can't do that, can you? You will fail to even try to prove it, despite how desperately you would like it to be true.

Back that way.

I'm sure you'll either ignore this, or repeat your baseless insults, or bluster on about how you can't be bothered, but the the truth is that your allegation is completely without merit.

Do you drive a moped?

You do at least understand the concept of truth, don't you? You have at least heard of it?

Is that when you dont talk boIIocks?

 

[Highway Man]

Insurers will not look at it that way.

For one passenger, whilst at the same time ignoring many others.

Seen plenty of bus drivers going for a pee and leaving the bus unattended also if someone wanted to joyride a bus it would be unlikely they would choose one full of passengers.

 

[MNW67]

In these scenarios, there is both a subjective element and an objective element when assessing whether force is reasonable.

The subjective element means we take the threat as it was perceived by the defendant, whether or not the defendant was mistaken in that perception.

The objective element means we consider what a reasonable person would think was an acceptable amount of force, in the situation as perceived by the defendant.

The third factor is that, in the heat of the moment, the defendant cannot be expected to weigh the amount of force needed precisely. So, there is significant leeway to use more force than determined in the second step above.

 

[noseall]

Just go backwards from this post.

Yep, go back to that head-slap moment when chicken biker read this...

It is funny watching you keep posting the same opinion without source.

What if I chase them as they run off?
This situation is different as you are no longer acting in self-defence and so the same degree of force may not be reasonable. However, you are still allowed to use reasonable force to recover your property and make a citizen's arrest. You should consider your own safety and, for example, whether the police have been called. A rugby tackle or a single blow would probably be reasonable. Acting out of malice and revenge with the intent of inflicting punishment through injury or death would not.

Chasing a fleeing suspect with a weapon and subsequently using it is highly likely to be considered malice, revenge, or retaliation rather than self-defence in legal terms, particularly if the initial threat has passed.
(Source - CPS)

Post #260

 

[pete01]

Seen plenty of bus drivers going for a pee and leaving the bus unattended also if someone wanted to joyride a bus it would be unlikely they would choose one full of passengers.