We used to have one here in the town centre, obviously a lot less people than at Wembley and all he got was a few funny looks. It just seemed to encourage him more though.
Never seen him for a couple of years now, I wonder of Ainsworth has seen him.
Railway byelaws if nothing else?I imagine it's probably difficult to show any crime has been committed despite the obvious risk to life and limb he has created by causing a panic.
Why not wait until the platform, which was less than a minute away. Still as I said all this is doing is playing straight into the hands of terrorists and extremists who will undoubtedly be rubbing their hands with glee with the amount of paranoia that they've instilled into the public.
If we're getting this paranoid, perhaps we should have body scanners and luggage searches for everyone before they're allowed to enter a station.
Don't remember him myself (and I hardly ever go into the centre anyway to be honest) but my mum does. She told me one time she walked up to him whilst he was spewing his bile and asked him about what God said about loving one another (or something like that) and she reports that seemed to stump him for a few minutes!
Well over 4500 mins worth of delays are attributed to this so far.
Railway byelaws if nothing else?
Is there a specific bylaw offence that would capture this situation?
I'd have thought assault would be the most likely criminal offence, due to the perceived threat of physical violence, but even that might be impossible difficult to establish in the absence of something more specifically threatening being said.
6. Unacceptable behaviour
(8) No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway.
Byelaw 6 would seem to do it:
I was on the first carriage of this train. This is not an accurate report of what happened in our carriage at least. A man came into our carriage and spoke with calm authority saying we needed to open the doors and evacuate. The was no stampede and no preacher in our carriage, we did however follow instructions and evacuate.
We also did not get back on the train - we were escorted to nearly Wimbledon station by staff.
I have problem with that.
1. They know that it's not uncommon to come to a brief stand outside WM at anytime of day.
2. Do you think that any extremist/terrorist is going to have a go at the same area so soon after the previous event, they know full well that security is going to be increased, they're going to be looking elsewhere to do it where the tensions and locals aren't quite so tetchy.
It turns out this guy was (presumably) a harmless nutter but anyone behaving like this is putting themselves at a substantial risk of being shot by armed police in the current climate.
Anyone seen a picture of this loon?
I find the use of the term nutter here offensive as implying the person has a mental health issue which isn't substantiated.
I think it's fair to question whether the circumstances justified a suspicion that the guy was going to detonate a bomb on board the train. But once that suspicion has taken hold, I don't think it's reasonable to expect passengers to calmly assess the routine stopping patterns of their trains (I commute through Wimbledon and I've no idea how often we stop outside).
As for security, well, if you think you've got someone with a bomb in your carriage, the horse has already left the stable.
And this is even more offensive
It is rather surprising that the phrase "death is not the end" should provoke such an extreme hysteria. To the Christian mind this is very much a message of hope.
Then again, the level of religious literacy of most people of my acquaintance leaves much to be desired, so perhaps not so surprising after all.
Rightly or wrongly we now live in a secular society where most people are not of the "Christian mind" and will not have an in-depth (or any) knowledge of religious texts.
From that perspective I'm sure you can see how the phrase "death is not the end" certainly won't inspire much hope on a packed London commuter train, in the presence of a potential suicide bomber, in light of recent events.
Absolutely, it would seem (to put it mildly) a rather strange thing to say on a rush hour train.
Stranger than using the words "hope" and "London commuter train" in the same sentence?!
There used to be a guy in the 1970s and 1980s who stood in Oxford Street (always on the south side, I noticed, but varied from near Bond Street to nearer Charing Cross Road) and his beef (pun intendedThose of us in or around London/most large cities will no doubt be familiar with these types. Often using a loud hailer, handing out pamphlets etc. Oxford Street seems a particular hotbed. God knows what they think they are achieving (pun intended).
) was that protein was the cause of all life's ills, of which lust seemed the most repugnant to his eyes. Meat and nuts were listed among several others on a huge board he used to carry. He looked, come to think of it, like an older Jacob Rees-Mogg, so I wonder if the latter is a relative. I would say he was present on every weekday on the street for twenty years, possibly more. I don't recollect ever seeing anyone engaging him in conversation: he had leaflets with him, but, again, I never saw him giving them out or anyone requesting one.What is offesive about the national bird of Canada?
There used to be a guy in the 1970s and 1980s who stood in Oxford Street (always on the south side, I noticed, but varied from near Bond Street to nearer Charing Cross Road) and his beef (pun intended) was that protein was the cause of all life's ills, of which lust seemed the most repugnant to his eyes. Meat and nuts were listed among several others on a huge board he used to carry. He looked, come to think of it, like an older Jacob Rees-Mogg, so I wonder if the latter is a relative. I would say he was present on every weekday on the street for twenty years, possibly more. I don't recollect ever seeing anyone engaging him in conversation: he had leaflets with him, but, again, I never saw him giving them out or anyone requesting one.
Nothing but it wasn't the bird that was being referred to though but a derogatory term for a person with a mental health issue and that is offensive
I remember him, a gentleman by the name of Stanley Green:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Green
Nothing but it wasn't the bird that was being referred to though but a derogatory term for a person with a mental health issue and that is offensive