Public transport has always been awful; and over the past couple of years 
I've noticed that more and more often I'm squashed inside a bus or train, 
with hardly enough room to breathe, because the company decided to cancel 
earlier buses or trains without notice, and without making any alternative 
arrangements.

Because I believe that this gross-overcrowding is a serious risk to public 
health and safety, I've created a petition at 
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/sardines/ asking for action to be taken to stop 
this gross-overcrowding.

Therefore, if anyone else here shares my concerns, please co-sign the 
petition, and if possible, please pass the message along to a few friends.

Jonathan

Oh, so you want a law that mandates the number of people allowed on a
bus/train? If capacity is reduced in this way, what happens to the
passengers who can't get on and are forced to stay behind? Do you
expect them to get to work late every day? Or to travel at 5am? What
about passengers on commuter lines in London, where trains are already
full by the time they get to stations nearer the centre? According to
your law, passengers who live in more central suburbs would not be
allowed on ANY centre-bound train during rush hour.

Who is going to pay for the security staff/ barriers needed at every
train station/bus stop to hold back angry commuters? Who is going to
pay for the lost revenue due to fewer passengers?

How does this law encourage transport companies to increase capacity?

I don't like this petition because it's reactionary and a regulation
like this one would do nothing to solve the capacityshortage that is
causing overcrowding in the first place.

A petition to increase investment in public transport would be a
better idea. I would sign that.

"Doug"  wrote in message 
news:747b9789-e1a6-4913-9048-d9c182c64faf@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> Oh, so you want a law that mandates the number of people allowed on a
> bus/train? If capacity is reduced in this way, what happens to the
> passengers who can't get on and are forced to stay behind? Do you
> expect them to get to work late every day? Or to travel at 5am? What
> about passengers on commuter lines in London, where trains are already
> full by the time they get to stations nearer the centre? According to
> your law, passengers who live in more central suburbs would not be
> allowed on ANY centre-bound train during rush hour.
>
> Who is going to pay for the security staff/ barriers needed at every
> train station/bus stop to hold back angry commuters? Who is going to
> pay for the lost revenue due to fewer passengers?
>
> How does this law encourage transport companies to increase capacity?
>
> I don't like this petition because it's reactionary and a regulation
> like this one would do nothing to solve the capacityshortage that is
> causing overcrowding in the first place.
>
> A petition to increase investment in public transport would be a
> better idea. I would sign that.
>
How about a petition to rid the world of ignorant hypocritical sanctimonious 
old bastards? Would you sign that too?
>

On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:05:15 -0700 (PDT), Doug
 wrote:

>Oh, so you want a law that mandates the number of people allowed on a
>bus/train? If capacity is reduced in this way, what happens to the
>passengers who can't get on and are forced to stay behind? Do you
>expect them to get to work late every day? Or to travel at 5am?

That is precisely what our headmaster said Ca. 1962 in assembly when
kids started turning up late at school saying their bus was full.

> What
>about passengers on commuter lines in London, where trains are already
>full by the time they get to stations nearer the centre? According to
>your law, passengers who live in more central suburbs would not be
>allowed on ANY centre-bound train during rush hour.

Yes you're right, PT sucks donkey dick.

>
>Who is going to pay for the security staff/ barriers needed at every
>train station/bus stop to hold back angry commuters? Who is going to
>pay for the lost revenue due to fewer passengers?

Motorists usually.

>
>How does this law encourage transport companies to increase capacity?
>
>I don't like this petition because it's reactionary and a regulation
>like this one would do nothing to solve the capacityshortage that is
>causing overcrowding in the first place.

Nonsense, providing more capacity simply encourages more users to
travel. There's an an addled piss stained old wazzock on uk.t says so.

>
>A petition to increase investment in public transport would be a
>better idea. I would sign that.

Don't fuck about with petitioning to spend other peoples money ...

Put your money where your mouth is.

Derek

"Derek Geldard"  wrote in message 
news:9ou3849eigspfhtjsrkudpm9icsbmh2hlp@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 07:05:15 -0700 (PDT), Doug
>  wrote:
>
>>Oh, so you want a law that mandates the number of people allowed on a
>>bus/train? If capacity is reduced in this way, what happens to the
>>passengers who can't get on and are forced to stay behind? Do you
>>expect them to get to work late every day? Or to travel at 5am?
>
> That is precisely what our headmaster said Ca. 1962 in assembly when
> kids started turning up late at school saying their bus was full.
>
>> What
>>about passengers on commuter lines in London, where trains are already
>>full by the time they get to stations nearer the centre? According to
>>your law, passengers who live in more central suburbs would not be
>>allowed on ANY centre-bound train during rush hour.
>
> Yes you're right, PT sucks donkey dick.
>
>>
>>Who is going to pay for the security staff/ barriers needed at every
>>train station/bus stop to hold back angry commuters? Who is going to
>>pay for the lost revenue due to fewer passengers?
>
> Motorists usually.
>
>>
>>How does this law encourage transport companies to increase capacity?
>>
>>I don't like this petition because it's reactionary and a regulation
>>like this one would do nothing to solve the capacityshortage that is
>>causing overcrowding in the first place.
>
> Nonsense, providing more capacity simply encourages more users to
> travel. There's an an addled piss stained old wazzock on uk.t says so.
>
>>
>>A petition to increase investment in public transport would be a
>>better idea. I would sign that.
>
> Don't fuck about with petitioning to spend other peoples money ...
>
> Put your money where your mouth is.
>
He *can't*. All his money is *our* money anyway - remember despite all his 
sodding whining that dear old Duhgtard is a welfare-dependant scrounging bum 
:o)

In article <747b9789-e1a6-4913-9048-
d9c182c64faf@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Doug says...
> Oh, so you want a law that mandates the number of people allowed on a
> bus/train? If capacity is reduced in this way, what happens to the
> passengers who can't get on and are forced to stay behind? Do you
> expect them to get to work late every day? Or to travel at 5am? What
> about passengers on commuter lines in London, where trains are already
> full by the time they get to stations nearer the centre? According to
> your law, passengers who live in more central suburbs would not be
> allowed on ANY centre-bound train during rush hour.
> 
So Doug is in afavour of allowing public transport to operate 
dangerously overloaded?


-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

Conor wrote:
> In article <747b9789-e1a6-4913-9048-
> d9c182c64faf@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Doug says...
>> Oh, so you want a law that mandates the number of people allowed on a
>> bus/train? If capacity is reduced in this way, what happens to the
>> passengers who can't get on and are forced to stay behind? Do you
>> expect them to get to work late every day? Or to travel at 5am? What
>> about passengers on commuter lines in London, where trains are already
>> full by the time they get to stations nearer the centre? According to
>> your law, passengers who live in more central suburbs would not be
>> allowed on ANY centre-bound train during rush hour.
>>
> So Doug is in afavour of allowing public transport to operate 
> dangerously overloaded?

Of course he is. Having recently ridden on a "Southern" train into 
Victoria (arriving at just before 9am) I know exactly what the 
petitioner means. As one can imagine it was as full as can be - you 
couldn't get any more people on it if you'd tried, unless you had 
Japanese style pushers there to force people onto it. I think only the 
driver had a comfortable ride...

There is no law to mandate the number of people on this or any other 
train, but you might only have been able to put less than 1% more people 
on it, so the effect was the same.

Passengers who live in more central suburbs would not be able to get on 
this train (or probably many others at around this time into any London 
terminus) anyway. Its been a perennial problem since ghod knows when.

My wife at one stage got a season ticket from Wendover to Harrow, but 
when forced to stand *every day* crushed into many other people on a two 
coach train (which was all that Chiltern Trains thought necessary at the 
time, even though all the platforms on that line will take 12 coach 
trains, courtesy of BR), she gave up the idea and went by car instead. 
This is rationing by capacity.

-- 
John Wright

"What would happen if you eliminated the autism genes from the gene pool?

You would have a bunch of people standing around in a cave, chatting and
socialising and not getting anything done!" - Professor Temple Grandin