Pay your fare or get thrown off!

[snailracer]

...

Your last paragraph makes no sense at all. The most likely punishment would be a penalty fare.

A penalty fare is offered at the discretion of the ticket inspector - if not offered, or refused by the fare evader which is likely what actually happened, it then it goes to criminal court. And that is just for fare evasion, never mind the trespass.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/tickets/fare-evasion-prosecution.pdf

 

[Globalti]

Swearing at the inspector is no longer an offence, or not in England at any rate where you can use the F word as many times as you like when addressing a Police officer.

 

[User482]

A penalty fare is offered at the discretion of the ticket inspector - if not offered, or refused by the fare evader which is likely what actually happened, it then it goes to criminal court. And that is just for fare evasion, never mind the trespass.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/tickets/fare-evasion-prosecution.pdf

Yes, I know. That an inspector reports it for prosecution in no way implies that the matter will actually go to court.

 

[snailracer]

Swearing at the inspector is no longer an offence, or not in England at any rate where you can use the F word as many times as you like when addressing a Police officer.

We're talking about a ticket inspector, here, not a policeman. The ticket inspector can tell you to get off a train for swearing or any other reason, even if you've paid, and if you refuse, you've committed an offence.

 

[snailracer]

Yes, I know. That an inspector reports it for prosecution in no way implies that the matter will actually go to court.

Equally, you couldn't say it wouldn't go to court.

 

[User482]

Equally, you couldn't say it wouldn't go to court.

Which is why I didn't say that.

 

[snailracer]

OK - thanks. I can see how this might apply, assuming Main didn’t have the correct ticket, but I’m not entirely sure how the big bloke could have known whether or not that were the case at the time.

Doesn't matter if the kid had a correct ticket or not, refusing to get off the train when ordered was an offence by itself.

 

[User482]

Doesn't matter if the kid had a correct ticket or not, refusing to get off the train when ordered was an offence by itself.

I once refused to get off a when the conducter accused me of trying to get on the already-full bus (I hadn't - I was already on it). Do you think I should have meekly complied, even though I had done nothing wrong?

 

[User169]

Doesn't matter if the kid had a correct ticket or not, refusing to get off the train when ordered was an offence by itself.

I’ll have to bow to your greater knowledge. It does, however, seem odd to me that you have to accede to any request made by an employee of the railways irrespective of its merit.

 

[snailracer]

I’ll have to bow to your greater knowledge. It does, however, seem odd to me that you have to accede to any request made by an employee of the railways irrespective of its merit.

I agree it seems odd because, in a modern society, only the police should be able to use force.

The thing is, English law is very old, and many laws were drawn up long before any organised, taxpayer-funded police forces existed. Thus the laws reflect the fact that ordinary citizens, such as ticket inspectors, employees or even well-meaning passers-by, were often called upon to enforce the law.

 

[snailracer]

I once refused to get off a when the conducter accused me of trying to get on the already-full bus (I hadn't - I was already on it). Do you think I should have meekly complied, even though I had done nothing wrong?

So the conductor gave you the opportunity to persuade him that he was wrong, and took it no further - it was within his discretion to do so. He would equally have been within his rights to have you thrown off. If the captain of a ship or aeroplane told you to get off, would you have done so?

 

[Mad at urage]

I agree it seems odd because, in a modern society, only the police should be able to use force.

The thing is, English law is very old, and many laws were drawn up long before any organised, taxpayer-funded police forces existed. Thus the laws reflect the fact that ordinary citizens, such as ticket inspectors, employees or even well-meaning passers-by, were often called upon to enforce the law.

This is simply not true. Reasonable force is available, legally for any person to defend themselves and to perform a number of other actions; for example to prevent a potential or ongoing criminal offence (certain types of offences only). Merely because the legality dates back a long way is not (IMO) a reason that it should not be used in a modern society. Giving the representatives of the state, the only legitimate resort to force is not a good thing for individual freedom.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

If the captain of a ship or aeroplane told you to get off, would you have done so?

That would also depend where it was, middle of the Atlantic or at 24000 feet I'd probably rather stay put.

 

[snailracer]

That would also depend where it was, middle of the Atlantic or at 24000 feet I'd probably rather stay put.

 

[snailracer]

This is simply not true. Reasonable force is available, legally for any person to defend themselves and to perform a number of other actions; for example to prevent a potential or ongoing criminal offence (certain types of offences only). Merely because the legality dates back a long way is not (IMO) a reason that it should not be used in a modern society. Giving the representatives of the state, the only legitimate resort to force is not a good thing for individual freedom.

Excellent points, although the situations where an ordinary person may legally use reasonable force have been reduced throughout the course of history, so "modernity" implies a further reduction, probably only to self-defence or the immediate defence of others.

At one time, reasonable force could be used against practitioners of witchcraft, people who weren't in church on Sunday, Catholics, peasants who did not show the proper deference to landowners, etc. but these have lapsed as there was no use for them.