Boris Johnson’s plan to ban drinking alcohol on the tube is ‘unworkable’ the RMT has warned. In what’s likely to be the first of many wars of words Union leader Bob Crow said:
“We are being told that it is our members who will have to approach people drinking and ask them to stop – but the mayor hasn’t asked us what we think.
“Violence against our members is already a major problem, particularly from people who have been drinking.”
Given that even ticket inspectors are rarely allowed out without half the Met backing them up it seems likely that this new legislation will be entirely ignored.
Meanwhile it’s emerged that these new rules will not apply to the yuppie stuffed commuter trains where first class travellers can legally order a Pimms anytime they want.
One rule for them and another for us?
Yup, that’s about the size of it.
Crime on the Tube – Some Perspective
There are around 18,000 recorded crimes on the Tube Network each year with the vast majority being low level criminal damage such as graffiti.
Crimes which actually affect an individual run at around 13,000 a year with the bulk of these being pick-pocketing. Around 1 billion journeys are made on the tube every year.
Someone who makes 400 tube journeys a year would stand a 1 in 200 chance of being a victim of crime. To put that in perspective you would have to make 400 journeys a year for 200 years to statistically be likely to experience crime.
And that crime would be unlikely to be anymore serious than having your mobile pinched when you aren’t looking. Carrying out the same number of annual journeys you could expect to wait 6,250 years before you were robbed.
Aside from the 7/7 bombings, serious crimes such as murder, rape or serious violent assault are virtually unheard of on the tube.
In fact, statistically a tube carriage is probably safer than your own front room, but don’t worry it’ll only be a matter of time before they stop you having a drink there too.
For your own good you understand.
2 responses so far ↓
ARN // May 8, 2008 at 8:20 pm |
“it’s emerged that these new rules will not apply to the yuppie stuffed commuter trains where first class travellers can legally order a Pimms anytime they want. One rule for them and another for us?”
Nope. Just a legal fact that BJ has no authority over national services: anything operating outside the London area (read, commuter services) cannot be affected by TfL by-laws. He cannot change national conditions of carriage.
This plan will not stop drunk people using public transport, but it might make them rather less offensive to everyone else, and anything that stops them imbibing even more alcohol will be good for them, too. Saying that it is largely unenforceable misses the point; the message about what is socially acceptable will sink in slowly with minimal active enforcement. Compare the universal smoking ban.
Saying that crime on the transport network is already low also misses the point. Its not about the actual safety, but the public’s perception of safety. That is why, after crimes that excite a media frenzy, there are extra police patrols put on. Not because they will help make anyone safer, but because they will FEEL safer.
Perhaps it would be better to invoke the braincell, rather than ‘the void’, when writing articles?
ajit8 // May 9, 2008 at 8:02 am |
This should be here. Thanx Mr. Void
http://education.guardian.co.uk/oxbridge/article/0,,2279011,00.html