With the development of high-speed rail and rapid rail, trains have also become the preferred mode of travel for many people. However, on the bus, we are often faced with various riding rules and usage regulations, and these regulations often have gray areas in practice, such as whether the lower berth is allowed to be used temporarily by other passengers during the day, which is easy to cause controversy.
An aunt in her 70s wanted to temporarily sit on the lower bunk occupied by a young man in the car, but was refused, and an argument broke out between the two sides, which also caused a heated discussion among netizens. The main point of contention is whether the lower berth is considered a public seat during the day and can be used temporarily by others, and whether the passenger who purchases the lower berth ticket has full control and exclusive use rights.
Judging from the regulations, there is no clear definition of whether the underbed is open to others for temporary use during the day. It is also difficult to give a standard answer, and it needs to be judged by the specific number of trains and the actual situation. Buying a ticket for the lower bunk naturally represents the right to use an area, but it is difficult to draw a clear line to distinguish what is "used".
For example, is it possible to set up barriers at will to block others, should other passengers be appropriately corrected, and should relationships between people be reflected in the details. In particular, should we show more empathy and care for the elderly, weak, sick and disabled passengers, and should we also take into account others in public transport and pursue the democratic concept of "one more step and one more way"?
From my personal point of view, the lower bunk should be regarded as a semi-common area most of the time during the day. Of course, the owner of the lower berth has the right of first refusal, but it also needs to be moderately accommodated. On the premise of not affecting our own use, we should reflect more care for others. Most disagreements can be resolved well through friendly communication. Solving problems by means of violence or moral kidnapping is often unpopular.
We can have empathy and flexibility in the rules of public transportation, and we can limit others by not arguing meaninglessly. Each of us should abandon the ultra-individualistic thinking in public and not only see our own rights, but also consider the needs of other passengers around us.
For the elderly, weak, sick and disabled passengers, it is already very inconvenient to move around in normal times, and if they can't take a break in the car, it will be even harder. Especially when the bottom bunk is under the white sky, if you can give a little help, it means a lot to others. Passengers with lower berths should not be completely exclusive.
If it really doesn't affect your normal activities, it doesn't hurt to reach an agreement through friendly communication. After all, we are all only temporarily sharing this small public space, and we can only build a harmonious atmosphere by understanding and compromising with each other. If there is a real situation where there is no coordination, we should not insist that either side is 100% right or wrong.
It can be mediated by other passengers or the captain of the bus to find the best solution in a fair and democratic way. Only in this way can the interests of all parties be met to the greatest extent and the function of public transportation can be truly realized. It is hoped that everyone can cultivate more empathy and moral values, and only through tolerance and understanding can we build a more harmonious and harmonious society.