For one yuan, you gambled with the lives of an entire busload of people.

[2] Case Review
 
案件1
 
On the afternoon of May 7, 2020, the Haishu Branch of Ningbo City Court received a report from the public that two buses collided near Tongda Road, injuring three people. After receiving the report, police quickly rushed to the scene to handle the situation, and the three injured were promptly sent to the hospital for treatment.
 
 
The accident was caused by passenger Li on bus route 634, who argued with the bus driver over a one-yuan fare while boarding, then pulled the driver's arm, causing the vehicle to lose control, cross the green belt, and collide with an oncoming bus on route 22. Apart from the two bus drivers and Li, no other individuals were injured at the scene.
 
Currently, the suspect Li has been criminally detained by the public security authorities on suspicion of endangering public safety by dangerous means.
 
案件2
 
On October 28, 2018, a bus in Chongqing collided with a car and plunged into the river while crossing the Second Yangtze River Bridge. According to the investigation, passenger Liu missed her stop due to a route change and argued with the bus driver Ran, who was driving. Liu even attacked Ran with her phone twice, severely endangering the vehicle's driving safety. Ran, as a bus driver, argued with passenger Liu while driving and, after being attacked by Liu, instead of taking effective measures to ensure driving safety, released his right hand from the steering wheel to retaliate against Liu, seriously violating the professional regulations for bus drivers. The mutual altercation between the two caused the vehicle to lose control, leading to a collision with an oncoming car, and both vehicles plunged into the river, resulting in numerous casualties.
 

 
[1] Distinguishing between the "crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means" and the "crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble"
 
[2] In recent years, incidents of disputes and even physical altercations between passengers and drivers have become common. The author believes that although such incidents occur frequently, the specific conviction and sentencing are not rigorous enough. Some cases are convicted as the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means, while others are convicted as the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble. So what are the criteria for conviction between the two?
 
[3] 1. The objects infringed upon differ. The crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means infringes upon public safety, i.e., the life, health, and major public or private property of unspecified or multiple individuals, focusing on the protection of public safety. The crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble may also infringe upon personal rights and public or private property rights through its objective behaviors, but the primary object infringed upon is public order, focusing on the maintenance of public order.
 
[4] 2. The objective aspects differ. The objective aspect of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means involves behaviors that endanger public safety through "other dangerous methods." The so-called "other dangerous methods" refer to methods with danger or harm equivalent to arson, flooding, explosion, or releasing hazardous substances. Such dangerous methods are diverse and difficult to enumerate exhaustively; in summary, as long as the method used is sufficient to endanger public safety, it can be considered a dangerous method required by criminal law. The objective aspect of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble mainly involves behaviors that disrupt social order. Article 293 of the Criminal Law specifically summarizes the behaviors of picking quarrels and provoking trouble into four forms: randomly assaulting others under vile circumstances; chasing, intercepting, or insulting others under vile circumstances; forcibly taking or arbitrarily damaging or occupying public or private property under serious circumstances; and creating disturbances in public places, causing severe disorder in public places.
 
[5] 3. The subjective aspects differ. The subjective aspect of the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means involves intent, which can be either direct or indirect intent, meaning the perpetrator knows that the dangerous method or behavior they implement may be sufficient to endanger public safety and still hopes for or allows the dangerous state to occur. The subjective aspect of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble involves direct intent, and the perpetrator subjectively exhibits a distinct characteristic of disregarding social order and creating trouble out of nothing.
 
[6] 4. Additionally, the crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means is a crime of potential danger, meaning that as long as the dangerous method or behavior implemented by the perpetrator is sufficient to create a real danger to public safety, even if no serious consequences such as severe injury, death, or major loss of public or private property occur, the crime is considered completed. In contrast, the behavior of picking quarrels and provoking trouble only constitutes a crime when it reaches a vile or serious level.
 

 
The author's stance
 
In the first case, from an objective perspective, Li pulled at the bus driver who was driving, an act that hindered the driver's normal operation of the vehicle, enough to cause the bus to lose control and direction, potentially leading to casualties or property damage among passengers, pedestrians, and vehicles at any time. From a subjective perspective, Li should have known and was fully capable of knowing that his dangerous behavior would lead to such a hazardous situation, yet he allowed it to occur over a one-yuan fare dispute, completely disregarding the safety of passengers and pedestrians. Whether from a subjective mindset or objective aspect, Li's actions were extremely egregious and cannot escape legal punishment.
 
In the second case, Liu initially just missed a stop, but due to two people's impulsive argument, an entire busload of people fell from a height of 45 meters. The rushing river, the impact of the fall, and the instant immense water pressure all spelled certain death. Perhaps no one in this case needs to bear legal responsibility, but the world has lost a three-year-old child just learning to speak and an 80-year-old mother waiting for her son to come home for dinner.
 
In reality, if you encounter such a situation while taking the bus, you must stop the disruptive passenger. This is not meddling but saving lives. Some people may act recklessly over a single yuan; others may erupt in rage over a verbal dispute. Driving on the road inherently requires caution, and responsibility should be taken for both others' and one's own safety. Sometimes, it's not just passengers blinded by anger, but some drivers also act excessively. Therefore, improving drivers' professional ethics during training is very necessary. When facing such situations, drivers should remain calm and, even if they need to stop an aggressive passenger, should pull the vehicle over safely to ensure the safety of passengers and road traffic. We have seen many similar tragedies; a little more understanding and tolerance might prevent such incidents.
 

 
[1] Image source from the internet; if infringement occurs, please delete!