"Andy" wrote in
:

Im glad there are enough of us here to be honest enough to say what
99% are actually thinking, in that this guy got exactly what he
deserved.

Translation: "I have no compassion at all within me, but it's OK because
neither have lots of others."

Our thoughts should be with the train driver and the network
rail bods who have to pick bits of this guy up spread over a large
area.

Translation: "Naturally, some faux concern for innocent parties always
goes down well, so I'll stick a bit in at this point."

Im sure the 1% of you sandal wearing, pullover knitting,
yoghart eating lefties will be outraged at this

Translation: "I'd like to take this opportunity to gratuitously abuse
anyone who doesn't share my opinions."

but sorry, youre
obviously confusing me with someone who actually cares what you think.

Glad to hear it, otherwise I would have been reluctant to say that I
think you still have some distance to go before reaching the level of
human being.

Rick. (Occasional yoghurt-eater)

Rick Hughes wrote:
"Andy" wrote in
:

Im glad there are enough of us here to be honest enough to say what
99% are actually thinking, in that this guy got exactly what he
deserved.

Translation: "I have no compassion at all within me, but it's OK
because neither have lots of others."

Why have compassion for someone who deliberately puts himself in harm's way
whilst damaging your property?

Why have compassion for someone who deliberately puts himself in harm's way
whilst damaging your property?
Maybe having a 17-year old child yourself is the clearest way of
answering this question

Simon wrote:
Why have compassion for someone who deliberately puts himself in
harm's way whilst damaging your property?
Maybe having a 17-year old child yourself is the clearest way of
answering this question

I'm sure his parent's will be distraught, quite understandably, and will
tell the rest of the world that he was a good boy, equally understandably.

However, the fact remains that a 17 year old has sufficient knowledge to
know that if a human body puts itself in the path of a train travelling at
100mph there is only one outcome. Why have compassion for someone so
reckless with his own well being? Try answering the question, if only for
those who don't have 17 year old children.

"Brimstone" wrote in
:

However, the fact remains that a 17 year old has sufficient knowledge
to know that if a human body puts itself in the path of a train
travelling at 100mph there is only one outcome. Why have compassion
for someone so reckless with his own well being? Try answering the
question, if only for those who don't have 17 year old children.

I doubt that there's anyone reading this who's never done anything
dangerous at some time or other. Most of us take minor risks every day of
our lives, including you, if you care to think about it. If you fall off
the ladder whilst trying to put the fairy on top of the Christmas tree,
too bad, you should have had sufficient knowledge to avoid putting
yourself in such obvious danger?

It may be foolish to trespass on a railway line, but doing so doesn't
mean certain death, however much some people here imagine it does. This
youth died because he was on a railway line, and presumably misjudged his
situation and the danger. Literally thousands of other trespassers on
that day, as every day, walked across or along railway lines, then
continued about their business unharmed and unconcerned. Millions of
other people crossed roads without injury, but a small proportion of them
also misjudged, and didn't make it safely. Did these also get what they
deserved?

Rick.

Rick Hughes wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in
:

However, the fact remains that a 17 year old has sufficient knowledge
to know that if a human body puts itself in the path of a train
travelling at 100mph there is only one outcome. Why have compassion
for someone so reckless with his own well being? Try answering the
question, if only for those who don't have 17 year old children.

I doubt that there's anyone reading this who's never done anything
dangerous at some time or other. Most of us take minor risks every
day of our lives, including you, if you care to think about it. If
you fall off the ladder whilst trying to put the fairy on top of the
Christmas tree, too bad, you should have had sufficient knowledge to
avoid putting yourself in such obvious danger?

It may be foolish to trespass on a railway line, but doing so doesn't
mean certain death, however much some people here imagine it does.
This youth died because he was on a railway line, and presumably
misjudged his situation and the danger. Literally thousands of other
trespassers on that day, as every day, walked across or along railway
lines, then continued about their business unharmed and unconcerned.
Millions of other people crossed roads without injury, but a small
proportion of them also misjudged, and didn't make it safely. Did
these also get what they deserved?

Who said he deserved to die? Who said that simply being on or about a
railway line meant certain death? He didn't die because he was on a railway
line. He died because he was stupid enough to get hit by a fast moving
train.

Trains Don't Take Prisoners!

"Brimstone" wrote in
:


Who said he deserved to die?

Several posters.

Who said that simply being on or about a
railway line meant certain death?

It seems to be implicit in a number of posts, in this thread and many
others, in uk.railway, at least.

He didn't die because he was on a
railway line. He died because he was stupid enough to get hit by a
fast moving train.

You say stupidity, I say misjudgement. Your version would imply that any
accidental death is because of the stupidity of the victim.

Trains Don't Take Prisoners!

Pity. Could be a growing source of traffic.

Rick.

Simon wrote:
Why have compassion for someone who deliberately puts himself in
harm's way whilst damaging your property?
Maybe having a 17-year old child yourself is the clearest way of
answering this question

Still does not change the facts.


--
JFG

"Brimstone" wrote in
:


Why have compassion for someone who deliberately puts himself in
harm's way whilst damaging your property?

Whether or not you feel any compassion is probably innate; if you don't
have any, I don't suppose it's something you can learn or develop. But
whilst I can't say that I have particular sympathy with this victim (any
more than any of the roundly 2000 other people who died in Britain that day
- I didn't know any of them), I can recognise that his demise is a tragedy
to his friends and family. Can't you?

Rick.

Rick Hughes wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in
:


Why have compassion for someone who deliberately puts himself in
harm's way whilst damaging your property?

Whether or not you feel any compassion is probably innate; if you
don't have any, I don't suppose it's something you can learn or
develop. But whilst I can't say that I have particular sympathy with
this victim (any more than any of the roundly 2000 other people who
died in Britain that day - I didn't know any of them), I can
recognise that his demise is a tragedy to his friends and family.
Can't you?

Undoubtedly it's a tragedy for his friends and family and every other poster
has said something similar. It's the individual's stupidity that has been
commented on, but you seem to be having a struggle seperating the two.