[Osem]

Originally Posted by BBKing

OK, let's recap, so you want:

a) fewer people to be prosecuted for fare evasion
b) tough enforcement action against people who break the rules

Can you really not spot the contradiction in this position? TfL really can't win here, throughout the Mayoral election campaign (and since) people have been hammering home the message that goes roughly 'oh, Ken's useless, look at all the fraud on bendy buses, I've never seen anyone touch in on those, they should bring back conductors and put policemen on them to enforce the law', then when they do*, they get attacked for persecuting Joe Public. Are certain people immune from the rules? Why is deterring people from freeloading on public transport (which is associated with anti-social behaviour, by the way) not a worthy cause? Are you coming down on the side of the criminal, Osem? Feeling a bit hypocritical yet?
* it's not enough to have the money on your bloody Oyster, you have to touch in *to actually pay for the journey*. It's not rocket science, the signs are plastered all over the buses and it's part of the deal known as 'using money'. Otherwise you'd put a quid on it and ride free all day, if you knew you'd get off when challenged. Likewise, I wouldn't expect to be able to stick sixty grand in my skyrocket, stroll down to the BMW garage and drive off in a nice new M5, then when the police pulled me over say 'it's OK, I could have paid for it, look, I just didn't know how to pay'.

Did I state 'my' position on this, or are you just making another of your tedious and verbose assumptions? Just to clarify, I'd prefer the weight of the law to be brought to bear on 'real' criminals, not people supposedly evading fares who are then subsequently cleared by the courts. Perhaps that's too simple for you to grasp or is the concept of prosecuting someone who's innocent your answer to all our problems? I reckon you should stop reading all those tabloids...