11-25-2019, 03:23 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-25-2019, 03:30 PM by danbrotherston.)
I really don't think enforcement is the reason people would pay for transit. I personally wouldn't steal, even if I knew I could get away with it, I don't know about others here.
As for "complete failure", when I, a person who fully intends to pay for transit every time I ride, am in fear of accidentally failing to pay, I'd call that a complete failure...worse, I am not comfortable relying on the generosity and judgement of a security guard. Even worse than that, I would probably be fine for no other reason than I am a relatively respectable looking white male, which is just not the reason I don't want to be charged with fare evasion. I have the same issue with Presto...I twice failed to pay for my train ride to Union despite my good faith efforts to do so, if I had been inspected by a fare inspector then I would have been thrown off the train and received a large fine...that is unacceptable to me, and especially offensive in the face of the dozens of drivers I encounter daily who knowingly and intentionally endangering my life and others (a vastly more serious crime) who have little fear of any consequences.
And I can personally tell you that I feel less comfortable when I see security board the train, it negatively impacts my riding experience, even if you want to argue whether it qualifies as "aggressive" police presence.
I have previously been sympathetic to the upset of "chumps pay"...but I eventually got over it, I'm far more concerned with having a good service than ensuring everyone pays...I'm much angrier at wealthier people who avoid paying their fair share and wield excessive amounts of power as a result of wealth...at the end of the day, there is little I can do about assholes poor assholes and they've probably suffered enough anyway...I'm quite privileged.
Possibly some fare inspection is beneficial, but there is no need to have fare inspectors be uniformed security guards working in teams (the few bylaw officers we have don't act in teams), on every fourth train I take, it should be commensurate to the crime. I find the current situation entirely inappropriate.
@Rainrider22 As for how one interprets a security presence, yes, some may be comforted, but I am absolutely cognizent of the fact that others do not, and we are absolutely not at a position where a lack of security presence would be threatening to some in the way that a police presence is threatening to others. They are there for fare evasion, not to make you feel safe.
As for "complete failure", when I, a person who fully intends to pay for transit every time I ride, am in fear of accidentally failing to pay, I'd call that a complete failure...worse, I am not comfortable relying on the generosity and judgement of a security guard. Even worse than that, I would probably be fine for no other reason than I am a relatively respectable looking white male, which is just not the reason I don't want to be charged with fare evasion. I have the same issue with Presto...I twice failed to pay for my train ride to Union despite my good faith efforts to do so, if I had been inspected by a fare inspector then I would have been thrown off the train and received a large fine...that is unacceptable to me, and especially offensive in the face of the dozens of drivers I encounter daily who knowingly and intentionally endangering my life and others (a vastly more serious crime) who have little fear of any consequences.
And I can personally tell you that I feel less comfortable when I see security board the train, it negatively impacts my riding experience, even if you want to argue whether it qualifies as "aggressive" police presence.
I have previously been sympathetic to the upset of "chumps pay"...but I eventually got over it, I'm far more concerned with having a good service than ensuring everyone pays...I'm much angrier at wealthier people who avoid paying their fair share and wield excessive amounts of power as a result of wealth...at the end of the day, there is little I can do about assholes poor assholes and they've probably suffered enough anyway...I'm quite privileged.
Possibly some fare inspection is beneficial, but there is no need to have fare inspectors be uniformed security guards working in teams (the few bylaw officers we have don't act in teams), on every fourth train I take, it should be commensurate to the crime. I find the current situation entirely inappropriate.
@Rainrider22 As for how one interprets a security presence, yes, some may be comforted, but I am absolutely cognizent of the fact that others do not, and we are absolutely not at a position where a lack of security presence would be threatening to some in the way that a police presence is threatening to others. They are there for fare evasion, not to make you feel safe.