trek Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 they should clean the joint sections in the Mark II's more thoroughly... Some of them smell like piss.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 they should clean the joint sections in the Mark II's more thoroughly... Some of them smell like piss.... Actually, it seems like the ends of the Mark I trains smell like piss all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted August 13, 2009 Author Share Posted August 13, 2009 CCTV cameras are now being installed on all the trains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeGillis58 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 CCTV cameras are now being installed on all the trains. I was riding the number 9 trolley bus today and saw CCTV cameras installed. One camera near the front door and one camera near the rear door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 CCTV cameras are now being installed on all the trains. I've never seen anyone put smiley faces at the idea of increased surveillance. We should put cameras outside your home too, looking into your backyard and such, nothing to hide so no reason not to right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted August 13, 2009 Author Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) ^ if you ever get mugged or attacked while on a transit system without CCTV or any witnesses and can't remember how he/she looked like, don't complain if there aren't any CCTV cameras around to catch his face. I'd also propose to send you all of SkyTrain's (and bus) grafitti removal and vandalism repair bills. I am all for increased surveillance on transit. Boohoo for you. Edited August 13, 2009 by nitronuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 I've never seen anyone put smiley faces at the idea of increased surveillance. We should put cameras outside your home too, looking into your backyard and such, nothing to hide so no reason not to right? We should also take out all cameras in all shopping centers, grocery stores, convenience stores, and gas stations. Sure, someone's gonna get shot/ran over, but it's all for the sake of "personal freedom!" </sarcasm> Camera thread's this way, inane. I suggest you stick to that thread if you want to get into a bitchfest with nitro... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trek Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Camera thread's this way, inane. I suggest you stick to that thread if you want to get into [another] bitchfest with nitro... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 I've never seen anyone put smiley faces at the idea of increased surveillance. We should put cameras outside your home too, looking into your backyard and such, nothing to hide so no reason not to right? Don't jack off on the trains. It may save you some embarrassment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyDraft Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 ^ if you ever get mugged or attacked while on a transit system without CCTV or any witnesses and can't remember how he/she looked like, don't complain if there aren't any CCTV cameras around to catch his face. I'd also propose to send you all of SkyTrain's (and bus) grafitti removal and vandalism repair bills. I am all for increased surveillance on transit. Boohoo for you. Fear based logic! Now all the cliches are complete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Fear based logic! Now all the cliches are complete. Is there something to fear from having the cameras on the trains and buses? Do all the illegal crap (eg. drug dealings) in the privacy and comfort of your own home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyDraft Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Is there something to fear from having the cameras on the trains and buses? Do all the illegal crap (eg. drug dealings) in the privacy and comfort of your own home. That's not what I meant - anyways, cameras won't stop any of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) Shame you life your life in fear. Nitro you posted this: http://forum.canucks.com/index.php?showtop...t&p=7617932 yourself. 1.4 incidents per million. I mean, when does it stop? Edited August 13, 2009 by inane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted August 13, 2009 Author Share Posted August 13, 2009 You people are simply, and sadly, hopeless to be even against surveillance on transit - the simplest of security measures. So because there's only a few incidents a year, nothing shouldn't be done? We should just cross our arms, and say "we're awesome, nothing needs to be done". The article I posted mentioned that expensive measures would not be warranted. While CCTV has a capital cost, it has a very, very low operational cost. I'm going to leave it at that, I refuse to waste any more time arguing with you. Rabble Rabble Rabble! Freedoms! Rights! Screw logistics! Pictures of SkyTrain assault suspect released Updated: Tue Jul. 28 2009 16:37:06 Andrew Weichel, ctvbc.ca Transit Police have released images of a suspect in a controversial SkyTrain assault earlier this month. The July 15 attack, in which Ravinder Sidhu was beaten and bloodied at the Surrey Central SkyTrain station, sparked criticism about TransLink's security measures. Sidhu had his watch and some gifts he was carrying stolen. Images released Tuesday show a suspect described as a Hispanic male, 5'9", 160 lbs. in his early-to-mid 30s. Officers say he may have a bite mark on his calf from Sidhu. Transit Police Sgt. Tom Seaman says he is confident the images will lead to an arrest. "It's certainly going to be very beneficial," he said. "We've had numerous tips on pictures we've put in the media, some within hours of posting." Critics charged that Sidhu's assault was not discovered by TransLink security staff, even though it took place in view of a surveillance camera. Seaman says the Surrey station alone has about 30 cameras, which would make constant surveillance of all areas difficult -- and that officers were at least able to respond quickly once called. "The SkyTrain attendant was at the scene within two minutes," Seaman said. "The officers were there a couple minutes after that." "What we are thankful for is when an incident does occur more often than not we get good footage from the CCTV (closed circuit television) cameras." Still, Surrey-Newton MLA Harry Bains says he's trying to see new measures implemented. 'We're hoping to get a security person present at all times at every station," he said. "That is not happening right now." If anyone recognizes the suspect, they are asked to contact Transit Police at 604-515-8300. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyDraft Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) You people are simply, and sadly, hopeless to be even against surveillance on transit - the simplest of security measures. So because there's only a few incidents a year, nothing shouldn't be done? We should just cross our arms, and say "we're awesome, nothing needs to be done". The article I posted mentioned that expensive measures would not be warranted. While CCTV has a capital cost, it has a very, very low operational cost. I'm going to leave it at that, I refuse to waste any more time arguing with you. Rabble Rabble Rabble! Freedoms! Rights! Screw logistics! Did I say that? Or did I say you were subscribing to the lowest common denominator through the use of fear as a justification. Whatever man, I'm sick of reading the typical BS posted from you. Not a critical thought in your brain - unless we count the problem with small signage at transit. Edited August 13, 2009 by JonnyDraft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 yeah good job, you post a story of a criminal. would you like me to post the 1 million times someone uses the skytrain safely? And I'm pretty sure we never said nothing should be done. So please stop exaggerating and try, just try to have a civil conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Is there something to fear in having surveillance cameras watching you if you're just sitting and riding the train, like most other passengers do, and you're not a fugitive on the run? Read a book, look outside, listen to your iPod or something. Don't pick your nose, smoke, masturbate, scribble on the seats, harass other passengers... you get the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) yeah good job, you post a story of a criminal. would you like me to post the 1 million times someone uses the skytrain safely? And for every 9/11, we can also cite 1 million other flights that take place without incident. ABOLISH AIRPORT SECURITY! Edited August 13, 2009 by Buggernut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 And for every 9/11, we can also cite 1 million other flights that take place without incident. ABOLISH AIRPORT SECURITY! Holy god I don't know how to make my point more clear. I'm not saying we should abolish security or just be happy with the way it is. I've never said that so please, stop arguing against a point I've never made. I'm saying that basing policy on fear is a poor way to make policy. When does it stop? I'm assuming you love the Patriot Act then? If not, why not? Maybe there's just a level of risk that we need to accept. You accept it everytime you get in a car. The risk of you dying or getting injured is thousands of times greater in a car than it is on skytrain or a plane. Why is that risk ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Holy god I don't know how to make my point more clear. I'm not saying we should abolish security or just be happy with the way it is. I've never said that so please, stop arguing against a point I've never made. I'm saying that basing policy on fear is a poor way to make policy. When does it stop? I'm assuming you love the Patriot Act then? If not, why not? Maybe there's just a level of risk that we need to accept. You accept it everytime you get in a car. The risk of you dying or getting injured is thousands of times greater in a car than it is on skytrain or a plane. Why is that risk ok? Because we can't eliminate driving nor have some safe automated bot do it all for us. And the train is supposed to be a safe alternative to driving. Arguing it's a one in a million thing is going to be little comfort to the rare few who do fall victim, and it certainly doesn't help with the perception of safety on the train. One such incident is one too many! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now