Should be birds of the same sinkies feathers flock together.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Why did singaporeans take things into their own hands to shame jover chew?
- Thread starter makapaaa
- Start date
Should be birds of the same sinkies feathers flock together.
Bro...seriously, in China...this thing is much more common and with much more strong arm tactics...the gong an is also likely to beon the take so no point going to them....
When justice cannot neither be sought in law enforcement nor in the courts, expect vigilante justice in any form.
Sinkapore is fast becoming like Gotham.
LKY is Don Falcon.
Ho Jinx is Fish Mooney.
Teo Chee Hean is The Riddler, always asking "What do you think?" type of questions.
I wonder who in the PAP fits the description of The Penguin?
Khaw Boon Wan.
Singapore is protecting Singaporean against foreigner!
the answer to the question why sinkies takes matters into their own hands is simple....
1. Chenghu bochap
2. Sinkies lost faith in PAP, SPF and CASE
public confidence has eroded that PAP, SPF and CASE can solve our day to day problems..so many see it deem fit to take things into their own hands loh...
1. Chenghu bochap
2. Sinkies lost faith in PAP, SPF and CASE
public confidence has eroded that PAP, SPF and CASE can solve our day to day problems..so many see it deem fit to take things into their own hands loh...
But, but, PM Lee had just said that: PAP will always do its best for Singapore. No?
If CASE or SPF could do something about this Jover Chew chump, do Singaporeans take the law into their own hands?
If he got ball to cheap and yet to talk cock to the public and didn't repent he will received this sort of karma, god is fair. He deserved it.
[h=1]WHY DID SINGAPOREANS TAKE THINGS INTO THEIR OWN HANDS TO SHAME JOVER CHEW?[/h]
<!-- /.block --> <style>.node-article .field-name-link-line-above-tags{float: right;}.node-article .field-name-ad-box-in-article {float: left;margin: 15px 15px 10px 0;}.node-article .field-tags{clear: both;}</style> Post date:
7 Nov 2014 - 12:35pm
<ins id="aswift_0_expand" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: inline-table; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><ins id="aswift_0_anchor" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: block; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><iframe name="aswift_0" width="336" height="280" id="aswift_0" frameBorder="0" marginWidth="0" marginHeight="0" scrolling="no" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowfullscreen="true" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; position: absolute;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></ins></ins>
<pic credit: SGAG's instagram>
For harassing Mr Jover Chew who has been harassing his customers, lawyers said that the people serving citizenry-led justice against Mr Chew can be liable for harassment.
By now, Mr Chew needs no introduction, being the owner of the shop Mobile Air at the Sim Lim Square, who has caused a Vietnamese tourist to have to go on his knees to beg for his money to be returned, and another Chinese tourist to have a bag of coins thrown at her, while she also had to go on her knees to pick the coins up.
Yes, Mr Chew has scammed his customers. And not only that, since the start of this year, his shop has received 18 complaints – no other shop at the Sim Lim Square can beat his record. Not that they want to.
But for the graver deeds that Mr Chew has done to his customers, some lawyers have been quoted by mainstream media as saying that Mr Chew can take legal action against those whom have “harassed” him.
A perversion of justice? But of course, one bad act doesn’t deserve another.
Yet before we even debate about the use of the law, would it not be wiser to understand why the incidents even happened in the first place?
What about how Mr Chew’s shop has engaged in several scams without having been penalised for it? What do the lawyers have to say about that?
What about the hundreds and thousands of dollars lost by unsuspecting tourists and consumers, who have no recourse except a warning served by the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) against Mobile Air, and even when consumers are able to get a refund, it is only a partial one?
What of the Police who were called in for the two recent incidents which have made the news but where the Police could not even arrest or charge Mr Chew for his misdeeds?
Perhaps it might be all too convenient to turn it on angered Singaporeans to silent the ongoing discourse.
But why did some individuals feel the need to take things into their own hands?
The people behind the SMRT Ltd (Feedback) Facebook page had said, “Since the Singapore Police Force and CASE is so f***ing useless, we'd like to volunteer to make sure the owner of Mobile Air, Jover Chew come beg to SMRT Ltd (Feedback) for mercy like how Heather Chua did before we released his identity to AMK Police Division.”
Thereafter, SMRT Ltd (Feedback) started to release personal information about Mr Chew on their Facebook page.
A shirt, with the words, “You C**B** (Hokkien swear word)”, was also left outside Mr Chew’s shop, by other individuals.
Mr Chew’s shop has been closed for the past few days, since his shop became infamous.
<ins id="aswift_1_expand" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: inline-table; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><ins id="aswift_1_anchor" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: block; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><iframe name="aswift_1" width="336" height="280" id="aswift_1" frameBorder="0" marginWidth="0" marginHeight="0" scrolling="no" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowfullscreen="true" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; position: absolute;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></ins></ins>
Even before we got to the current stage, this situation could have been prevented.
A more pertinent question to ask is – if the authorities were able to take effective action at the start to prevent Mr Chew from scamming or to even penalise him for scamming the consumers, would the current backlash have followed?
Reasonably, no, they wouldn’t have.
One has to question why citizenry justice has taken root in Singapore, from the filming of ungracious acts on trains to the photos taken of people relieving themselves in public.
If this is what it takes to make known an issue or if Singaporeans have to kick up a ruckus before the authorities would even take notice of the situation, what recourse do Singaporeans have?
Should the question not be directed to the authorities instead? Why did they not act?
=> Ass Loon: KNN! I donch need resources to fix the Oppos ah? *chey*
Why could the police not take action? Why could CASE not take action but only give warnings?
Did the authorities think it serious enough to think of alternative ways of doing things in the first place, to resolve the issues before they sink deeper into the mess that we see now?
Yes, citizenry justice is a new concept in Singapore, but it is one which has evolved as a response to the perceived lack of justice.
Where your only recourse lies in taking things into your own hands because the authorities which could have but did not, the question is not to ask how we should penalise Singaporeans for doing so, but why the authorities failed in the first place.
There are many learning lessons to be learnt, but if the blame is pinned only squarely on Singaporeans, then I am afraid we have not learnt at all.
In China, chinese protect chinese and cheap the foreigner, just the opposite of sinkapore-sinkaporean protect the foreigners and punish the sinkaporean.
See how many years you want lo? There's always the "x" symbol which he will hide with his fingers until your initial payment has gone through first.LHL said "best" but did he provide warranty boh
Similar threads
