Taxi Driver Online

Astounded by the professionalism of the two police officers who called tonight. They had clearly been well-schooled in all matters Trolling. And the 5 page document detailing the crime reported.

They brought me up to speed. Seems since the Stephen Lawrence (R.I.P.) case, the whole dynamic of police response to hate crimes has been changed forever. The authorities are now taking such matters extremely seriously. I was impressed by the procedures explained to me.

How fortunate then to have Lothian and Borders police officers dealing with the case who not only understand the new dynamic, but have personal experience of dealing with such crimes.

Both officers are now fully up to speed with the background to the case. How I've been subjected to malicious phone calls at all times of the day and night, how my family has been threatened and how I've been ostracised by the taxi trade for having the temerity to want the same conditions for taxi licensing in Edinburgh which exist in the overwhelming majority of local authorities in the UK.

The detail of the torn casualty moniker, and its anagram meaning, was particularly of interest. I'm just chuffed there is no anonymity on the internet.

Of course the finger is pointed at Travis Bickle. But then the route to him is through Alan Gladstone. I'm now charged to produce a list of other miscreants.

I'm grateful that the officers have reassured me that this matter is going to be fully investigated. In the public interest of course.

Looks like the coconut tree is being shaken.

BTW I love coconut.

And I hope you are all having as good a day as I've had.


.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

So you take offence at fasties calling you names

I doubt you'll show the police the thread you created calling/implying Alex Salmond is a ****!

You just don't get it, do you?

I've put my name to everything I've written. I stand by what I say. There's no shame. I'm not hiding.

Travis on the other hand is a coward. He doesn't. And all the other taxi scum who hide behind pseudonyms.

Now Alex salmond takes issue with my opinion of him, I'd welcome it. I'd be delighted rto stand up in court and explain why he is what I say he is.

But it'll never happen. because courts sometimes allow the truth to slip out, and they aint gonna be the forum to allow it to happen, in the full glare of publicity.

Nope, this is about Trolling and besmirching my name by others. And they need to be held to account for it.

if anyone else takes umbrage at what I've said. then bring it on boys. You know where I am. And if you want to understand how to use a lawyer to do so. Just ask the boys from central. They know all about taking us to court.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

The point being Lonshanks, if I know your real name, and I start calling you a pedophile, and it's not true, from hiding behind a pseudonym. I am besmirching your reputation while denying you the right of redress. And that's exactly what Travis has done. The law must come back with Travis's real name to grant Jim his right of redress. Travis's only out is to prove what he claimed is true or face the full weight of the law, and in this case, at the very least he is likely to lose his taxi licence.

I have been called many a name from many am Internet forum message boards. Some by people I know and some I don't. And you know what, I couldn't give a toss what anyone behind a keyboard says about me. Even people saying things to my face trying to provoke me when we both know it's only trying to rile me, so what, let the little person win his battle by calling me names

At the end of a day, anyone involved in an online argument end up looking like losers. That's why I don't start flying insult or calling people things like idiot, feckwit, [edited by admin], dickhead as it makes me look just as pathetic!

Thats one missed by admin.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

There is a massive difference between calling someone thick or a tit of the highest order, to accusing someone of being a pervert or sexual predator. Surely you can see that.

I well (sadly) remember the things aimed at Mr Ali T during his family difficulties, are you saying poster's family issues are fair game, and/or if similar stuff was aimed towards you wouldn't get the right hump?

In short there is a line in the sand somewhere, and that's when we all need to reflect on things a bit more.

_________________
IDFIMH

Longshanks, if I call you a dick head, it's my opinion, but alleging someone has committed a criminal offence of a sexual nature, makes it a hate crime. Which could have far-reaching consequences to not only the individual being defamed but also to his family.

Look at it this way Longshanks, I think you are a harmless idiot who's frightened to be judged for what you write by your peers. Anonymity over the Internet allows you a platform to have a voice and under normal circumstances, your rights are protected, but if you commit a hate crime, you forfeit your right to anonymity, and rightly so.

Travis, outed himself when he crossed the line. Now he faces an investigation for committing a hate crime and at the very least. He can expect to lose his taxi licence – not a fit and proper person.

have to disagree. Sometimes name-calling can serve gthe purpose of displaying utter contempt for an adversary.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

Perhaps I should explain the above.

Let's take the case of Colin Keir for example. Here was a man elected to represent the people, but found himself in a position of some power and used it to protect the status quo, rather than question it in the public interest.

It's a simple premise of how can a restriction of taxis possibly be in the public interest. Is it possible that someone struggling to hail a cab could possibly not want more cabs to be available? The females assaulted after failing to hail a cab? Someone who accepts a dodgy lift knowing getting a cab is difficult? Or someone who leaves a night out earlier than they otherwise would, or doesn't go out at all, because getting a cab is difficult.

How can any politician possibly believe a restriction is in the public interest?

And after the recorded assault cases, why did Keir not even ask the question whether the restriction policy was still tenable? It hasn't been considered by the council since 2007. When Inch place over 100 pages of documents arguing for retention of the policy, with no dissenting argument. Councillors were faced with over 50 items on the agenda which considered the policy, was there any prospect of them properly scrutinising and understanding the argument? Or wasn't what happened more likely, that Councillors took the easy option and voted as they were told to do?

So, how can you respect any adversary who conducts himself in this way. Keir was culpable of abusing the democratic process to protect the status quo. How can that possibly be acceptable in our alleged democracy.

So, isn't it justified to denigrate such an individual as a fascist and a scumbag, because these terms accurately reflect his conduct. He did exert overbearing control of the process, that's pecisely what fascist is and does. did abuse the political process, and his actions were despicable and contemptible.

The terms used against Keir are inherently accurate. If he took offence, and I hope he did, I make no apology whatsoever. The system delivered up Keir, who sought to protect the system for delivering him. Which proves how our political system has fallen into disrepute.

Keir was specifically asked why the restriction policy existed. He wouldn't answer the question. He was asked what he would think if it was his daughter raped because she couldn't hail a cab and the council artificially restricted them. Again he wouldn't answer.

Policy before public safety proves The accuracy of how Keir was described.

And the situation prevails today.

SNAFU.

Until the next time.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

Jim when you sat in the chamber under the cabforce banner and you presented to councilors the restriction argument which you defended where you too despicable and a ****??

yes was there not a newspaper article with jim in it supporting restriction and saying we didnt need more taxis what about poor wee lassies back then

I was wrong then. And you guys are wrong now.

At least I had the wit to realise how fundamentally immoral restriction is. It's just plain wrong.

And without the corruption of the council, it won't exist.

You guys have to realise you don't matter. The council decides to bin restriction they will do so in a heartbeat.

The only question is when they're gonna do it.

I suspect sooner than you think or want.

My only concern is whether another vulnerable female is harmed before they do.

And if that does happen, I'm gonna have a field day.

Bet on it.

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"

Your only concern ??

Jim, woman do not get raped/harmed because there is a lack of taxis they get raped/harmed because there are guys who rape them.

Under your theory we should have a taxi for every member of the public as soon as they demand one could i not use the same theory and say there should have been a policeman there and then to make sure that girl was safe or bus there as soon as she wanted one

Jim, woman are not getting harmed due to the lack of taxis, policemen or buses

If your ONLY concern is really about womans safety i suggest you focus you time to stop these offenders rather than lay the blame onto the taxi restriction policy

I would suggest to you that your flogging a dead horse every time you bang on about this as you know you have taken what was said out of context and anyone with half a brain can see it, the only person you have convinced that that the girl was raped due to lack of taxis is you.

I'm not flogging a dead horse, else you wouldn't be responding. You know full well that limiting taxis contributes to the vulnerability of women. More taxis would take more women home safely.

No council can claim to be protecting public safety unless and until they've done everything possible to protect public safety. deliberately making it more difficult for vulnerable groups to get the safe lift home falls well below this simple test.

And that was precisely the point Lady Smith was making.

What disgusts me is that women's safety is less imprtant to you than a plate value. Than being able to squeeze serfs into a smaller fleet so you can hike their rentals. That is just despicable.

No other market sector suffers such an arbitrary restriction. No other sector is cossetted by reducing supply so that increased demand can inflate prices.

In fact over 75% of local authorities already disagree with you Sunset. That places you in the minority. I'd say that already makes you wrong and me right.

If we had politicians with any moral fibre they would already be howling from the rooftops how wrong restriction is. The Tories, to be fair, have been beating their minority drum since we first argued the point.

Deliberately making it harder to hail a cab to protect your interests is quite outrageous. You should be ashamed to have posted what you just have.

What a disgusting and tawdry trade we have. Selfish people treating customers with contempt, as little more than cash cows. Hardly surprising our streetcred is so poor isn't it?

BTW

And yes, rapists are to blame for rapes. I agree with you on that. But on your logic, we would just blame them and then sit back and do nothing to deter them. But we do try to deter them. We increase police presence. Install cameras. Taxi marshals. More buses. I would say that removing the artificial limit on taxis is just another measure that should be taken to help deter the scumbags.

And what would we say if the police demanded fewer officers on the streets so that those remaining could have more work to do? Or fewer nurses in hospitals. Or doctors? Or paramedics?

We'd say they were daft. So why should cabbies get away with it?

_________________
Skull, "You are a police inspector, aren't you?"
Cab Inspector Smith, "Yes."
Skull, "So, are you going to tell Mr Taylor what his rights are?"
Smith, "And ... What rights?"