Regarding whether to 'shop' someone - or whether to 'have a go' - I think most people are influenced by their perception of the seriousness of the crime, in particular whether it is a crime with victims.
Regarding the robbery above - well no-one's going to dispute that robbery is a serious crime: there are clearly identifiable victims who suffer harm: the person who successfully foils a robber will be guaranteed plaudits as a 'hero' no matter what. But someone who 'shops' a shoplifter - a fare-dodger? These are still crimes but the victim is not so obvious (in fact the 'victims' are all of us: we all lose out if fares go up to make up these losses); and the accuser might then be castigated as an 'interfering busybody'.
A few days ago I had clear sight of a van turning a corner - handheld phone clearly visible clamped to the driver's ear. No question about it: an offence being committed, I ought to report the driver. The van wasn't being driven 'badly' in any obvious sense and wasn't endangering me: just that an offence was being committed.
So I noted down the number, got as far as our local police's website, and started filling things in. This turned out to be quite a tortuous and long-winded process - many questions to answer!
I backed out half way through.

OK, so I let a driver get away with it: tomorrow he might repeat the offence and this time hit someone. Kill them, perhaps. Do I have that on my conscience? Or alternatively, if I had 'shopped' him, presumably a police officer would in due course have been dispatched to his address to give him a 'talking to'. That officer would thereby be taken off the road for a short time - a time during which he might have witnessed and prevented a much more serious offence being committed...
There are some questions for which there are no clear answers. Perhaps others would like to say what I
should have done...