Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Well everyone here agrees that grade crossing are a big problem for the railroads.  And everyone assures us that the crossing problem cannot be fixed except by eliminating crossings.  Otherwise, we are assured than nothing can make a crossing safer because drivers are incorrigible.  Everyone here complains about tort liability and how unfair it is to the railroads because they can’t stop their trains fast. So now comes a far sighted proposal to finally wipe the problem off of the map from the railroads’ perspective; and what kind of reaction do we get?   Must be self-serving scheme.  Must be junk science.  Too many lawyers for it to happen.  Seriously warped and not based in reality.  No baseline in the report.  Goes after the cheapest part of crossings for savings.   Author must be on drugs.    Why on earth should railroads be liable for death, damage, or injury caused by their trains at public crossings?  Everyone knows that trains cannot stop in time to avoid a vehicle, so the country grants trains the right of way at crossings.  What kind of a society gives trains the right of way and then punishes them if they hit somebody?  I am sure that if you asked the American public if they thought it is fair to hold railroads liable for something they have no control over; they would agree that it is not fair.  I am sure they would agree to collectivize the risk so it could be properly and fairly borne by society as a whole.    I can’t imagine why any railroader or person with railroad knowledge would oppose such a change.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag