That's a different problem, and it requires a solution by itself.

> You let people evade fares and then those people go onto stab people like Zarutska.

That has nothing to do with it. The guy that committed that murder wasn't going to be deterred by a ticket fee. But it is interesting that you should right away jump from the one to the other, effectively using the poor dead girl for your agenda. Crime and homelessness are complex problems some parts of which are easy to solve and some of which are much harder.

You can't simply jump from 'someone got murdered on public transport' to 'public transport can't be free'.

▲

bretthoerner an hour ago | parent [-]

https://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2026/news20260908

	▲	alsetmusic an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I ride BART. I'm two blocks from a busy transfer station. It's great for going to a show and getting home without driving (drunk). Arguing that modern fare gates lowered crime is a pretty terrible response to the comment to which you responded. It shows a real lack of articulation ("crime bad, crime down here, therefore I don't need to refute what you said"). The original poster said: > The guy that committed that murder wasn't going to be deterred by a ticket fee. I don't see how lower crime on BART due to fewer people hopping the turnstiles refutes that at all. (Huh, I just learned turnstiles is spelled with an I and not a Y. At least your comment led to me learning something.) It just seems defeatist, which is what the people looting this country want.
	▲	jacquesm an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You can cut crime all the way down to zero by shutting down all transport. You could decrease it to a very low minimum by setting a $100 / trip fare. But then it wouldn't be public transport anymore.