'He filmed me on the MRT and wouldn't stop — Am I really powerless to do anything?'
It's a situation that triggered a strong reaction online, exposing a grey area between legality and personal limits. Although filming other people in public spaces like the MRT is not against the law, the incident raises more profound questions about harassment and permission, especially when someone expresses distress and embarrassment.
Reddit users weighed in with a combination of hands-on advice and some humorous responses. One of the most common recommendations is to report it to SMRT staff. 'Not much you can do, other than maybe just reporting to SMRT staff for them to have a record of the person,' one netizen wrote.
Another Redditor prompted the original poster to file an unused exit claim via the public transport app if she alighted from the train precipitately to avoid the guy. 'They'll look over your journey history and will, in all likelihood, refund the difference,' the commenter advised.
However, the responses weren't all about officialdom, as some netizens proposed a more forceful tactic. 'Film him back,' one Redditor commented — a suggestion backed by others, who further advised, 'Record him back to assert dominance,' and even, 'Shine your phone torch light back at him.'
While these ideas may seem daring (or even a little rude), they demonstrate a fundamental desire for control in a circumstance where one feels disrespected and vulnerable. When does it cross the line?
More than a few commenters highlighted the fact that while public filming isn't prohibited, to cause someone anguish through insistent filming can be viewed as harassment, and if the person filming follows you around or shifts positions just to stay near you, the situation could spiral into nuisance, stalking, and aggravation, which are serious legal offences in Singapore.
One Redditor proposed a technique to document such behaviour: 'Record him at your initial position, then move to a different location. If he follows and you capture him again, now you have potential proof of stalking.'
Another commenter suggested taking a photo of the man as proof, notifying him that his behaviour is upsetting, and seeking help from the station staff or even the police if the conduct continues. Navigating the legal and personal boundaries
This MRT incident is a reminder that while public spaces provide inadequate privacy, that doesn't mean improper behaviour should go unchecked. Feeling discomfort when being recorded is valid, and so is speaking up.
Whether it's notifying SMRT staff, making a police report, or merely stepping away and recording the episode for your defence, there are steps you can take.
In an era when cameras are always on, the most significant lesson to learn is that respect for other people's ease, well-being, and consent still counts, even in public.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
44 minutes ago
- CNA
Social experiments reveal gaps in Singapore's vigilance against terror threats
Most Singaporeans fail to recognise or act on potential terror threats. Two social experiments found that only one in five noticed suspicious items placed in public. Most of those who did walked away. The Home Affairs Ministry is stepping up efforts to raise public awareness and improve response. Aslam Shah reports.
Straits Times
6 hours ago
- Straits Times
SMRT given stern warning after TEL train departed station with door half open in December 2024
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox The incident in December 2024 occurred after three of the operator's employees failed to follow standard operating procedures. SINGAPORE – The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has issued a stern warning to rail operator SMRT after a Thomson-East Coast Line (TEL) train left Gardens by the Bay station with a door half open. The incident in December 2024 occurred after three of the operator's employees failed to follow standard operating procedures. SMRT said on July 29 that it has taken disciplinary action against the staff members involved in the incident, and provided them with re-training to ensure that similar incidents do not occur. LTA issued its warning after completing its investigation into the incident, but it did not say when it did so. An investigation report published on June 25 by the Transport Safety Investigation Bureau (TSIB), a department within the Ministry of Transport, suggested that the incident was caused by human error. It took place at around 6.30pm on Dec 17, 2024 , with about 15 passengers on the affected train car. A door on a Woodlands-bound train at Gardens by the Bay station opened only halfway and remained half open when the train was about to depart fo r Marina Bay station. As such, an assistant station manager – with around three years of experience in this role – was tasked to investigate the door fault, but he did not find any obstacle hindering the closure of the door, noted TSIB. He was then instructed by the train service controller – with around 1½ years of experience in this role – to isolate the door or remove the electrical power supplied to the door's opening and closing mechanism, after attempting to push the door into a closed position. But the door still remained half open, the report showed. At the same time, the train service controller and the chief controller – who has 2½ years of experience – released the train hold, instead of following protocols to press the command to close train doors. Releasing the train hold will close the train doors, but also allow the train to move off from the platform if the door service switch is turned to the 'off' position. This is because the signalling system will conclude that the train is ready to depart since the other train doors are closed and the faulty door is excluded from the signalling system. On the other hand, if a train hold is in effect, pressing the command to close the train doors will not allow the train to move – even if the door service switch is turned to the 'off' position, said TSIB. The train service controller and the chief controller released the train hold without confirming that the door was closed, according to the report. Following that, the assistant station manager also did not inform the train service controller that the door was still stuck, and instead tried to turn the door service switch to the 'test' position but mistakenly flipped it to the 'off' position when the door was still half open, said TSIB. He had wrongly relied on his memory to turn the door service switch to the 'test' position , as SMRT does not teach its assistant station managers about this function . But he had observed this being done to open and close the train doors during the testing and commissioning phase of TEL, the report showed. TSIB noted that the 'test' position for the switch should only be activated for train maintenance purposes to test a door's opening and closing abilities, and should not be used when trains are in operation. The wordings for the 'normal', 'test' and 'off' positions are not visible when the door cover of the switch is not slid open, said TSIB. According to SMRT, assistant station managers are taught only about the 'off' position and are instructed to turn the switch in a certain direction . They are not required to open the door cover to confirm the position of the switch. But the investigation was unable to determine the reason behind the door's inability to open fully at Gardens by the Bay station, as it could open and close normally during the inspection at the depot after the train was withdrawn from service. SMRT raised the possibility that there could have been an unseen foreign object lodged along the doorway, preventing the door from opening or closing. It could have been dislodged when the train moved from Gardens by the Bay station to Marina Bay station. TSIB added that the three staff members did not follow the rail operator's standard operating procedures. For instance, the train would not have moved with one of its doors half open if the train hold command was being applied when the staff members tried to close the train doors, regardless of the position of the door service switch. 'It would be desirable for the rail operator to remind its operational staff to adhere to standard operating procedures so that correct steps are taken for handling a train door fault,' advised TSIB. The bureau also noted the risk of operational staff wrongly recalling the direction in which they should turn the door service switch to, and suggested for SMRT to label the switch positions on all door covers. On the safety actions taken, TSIB said that SMRT has issued a reminder to its operational staff on the importance of adhering to protocols for handling a train door fault. According to SMRT's protocols, the train service controller and the chief controller would press a command to close the train doors and monitor the closing of the train doors through closed-circuit television cameras. However, if the faulty door is still unable to close, the operations control centre will send an assistant station manager down to investigate the faulty door by checking for any obstacle along the doorway. And if the assistant station manager still cannot close the door after conducting checks, he will inform the operations control centre and passengers will be asked to disembark from the train, so that the train can be withdrawn from service. The bureau noted that SMRT has designed stickers to be installed on door covers to guide its staff on the correct way to turn the door service switches. SMRT said on July 29 that stickers have been installed on 80 per cent of the TEL fleet, with the installation for the remaining trains expected to be completed by early August. LTA has also noted SMRT's follow-up actions. Responding to The Straits Times' queries, it said on July 29 that this incident has been assessed as 'an isolated occurrence', but it has issued SMRT a stern warning. It noted that during the incident, the staff on board the train had positioned himself at the open door to ensure that no commuters approached it. LTA added that the issue was promptly addressed, and the door closed when the train arrived at Marina Bay station, before it continued operations. On adhering to standard operating procedures for handling train faults, SMRT said it conducts regular refresher training and assessments to ensure that its staff maintain high levels of competency. It added that it carries out regular exercises and drills to strengthen staff members' confidence and operational proficiency. Mr Lam Sheau Kai, president of SMRT Trains, said on July 29 that TSIB did not issue any safety recommendations, as the rail operator had taken appropriate safety-related actions. 'We remain steadfast in our commitment to delivering safe and reliable journeys through continuous training, rigorous operational drills and proactive safety initiatives.' SMRT added that such incidents are rare, with only one other recorded occurrence at Ang Mo Kio station on North-South Line in March 2019 . A door on one side of a train car was fully open when the train moved from Ang Mo Kio station towards Yio Chu Kang station at around 7.30pm on March 12, 2019 . The station manager was suspended with immediate effect.
Independent Singapore
9 hours ago
- Independent Singapore
Man caught urinating on lorry in Geylang while friends take photos
Photo: Reddit Singapore: A Reddit user posting on subreddit r/singaporehappenings has drawn public attention to a disturbing incident involving a group of foreign visitors allegedly behaving inappropriately in Geylang. The user recounted witnessing a man urinating on a parked vehicle while posing for photos taken by his companions. 'Took place near Geylang Lorong 9, at around 6 p.m. I had just dabao-d beef hor fun from the nearby stall and chanced upon this [alleged] bunch of tourists. One of them was peeing onto the lorry's tyre while laughing and posing for pictures taken by his friends,' the post reads. According to the poster, no video or close-up photos were taken, but they claimed to have clearly witnessed the stream of urine coming from the man, directed at the lorry's tyre. The act has sparked online outrage, and netizens have encouraged reporting the incident to the authorities, citing the date, time, and location for potential investigation. An average of 600 people were fined each year for urinating or defecating in public from 2020 to 2024, according to the National Environment Agency (NEA). The highest number of fines, totalling 1,300, was issued in 2023. Public urination is an offence under the Environmental Public Health Act and carries a penalty of up to $1,000 for a first offence, and up to $2,000 and $5,000 for the second and third offences, respectively. () => { const trigger = if ('IntersectionObserver' in window && trigger) { const observer = new IntersectionObserver((entries, observer) => { => { if ( { lazyLoader(); // You should define lazyLoader() elsewhere or inline here // Run once } }); }, { rootMargin: '800px', threshold: 0.1 }); } else { // Fallback setTimeout(lazyLoader, 3000); } });
