News report on Amtrak safety and terrorism!

[Anonymous]

[:-^]Well, back to terrorism concerns! Commuter Rail/ Subway are the concern. All those who feel that it is a Homeland Security/Federal issue and not local, consider this! If a train is targeted, (let's say a Metra in Chicago) the impact of that incident will only be in Chicago. If its on Amtrak, still only possible places that can be impacted are along that line! Both of these cases support the idea that these are State or local issues! Remember the constitution and LIMITED government.
Airlines are the exception. Here's why. If an airplane is the target, it can be flown anywhere (as long as ther's enough fuel!) Even across borders! Ever stop to think about Mexican Airliners and cities like San Diego or El Paso? Here you need the Feds. And probably some F-15s!! As has been said, terrorism is about the biggest possible strike by the most shocking means. From crashing a plane full of people into a building to torturing a wheelchair-bound 80 year old cruise ship passenger and then dumping him overboard.

[AntonioFP45]

RudyRockville MD,

I agree with your statement. My response was more aimed at some of your younger railfans. In my 25 years of railfanning, I've been challenged twice. The first time was friendly, as I wrote above, the other incident not so friendly where an SCL Train Master at Tampa Yard got rather stern with me back in 1978. Both times a cool head was best in the situation,

In past threads I've read where some of them were challenged and understandably they felt uncomfortable, but some reacted angrily and hostily which will only make a situation worse for the person being challenged as well as railfans in general.

Peace out, Amigos![:D][^][8D][8)][:)]

[edblysard]

Wisser hit on something that slipped a lot of minds,
The terrorist didnt want to blow up the airplanes as a act of terror, but use them, the planes, as a weapons.
Much harder to do that with a train, for obvious reasons.

Blowing up a passenger train would make the news, of course, but I think it wouldnt be grand enough for them.
Its the press coverage for their cause they are after most.

Ed

[Anonymous]

[2c]
I belive in this situation the best defense is a good offence. There is no way in **** we could ever make this place safe with "homeland security", all they are going to succede in doing is spend ungodly amounts of money and take away more and more of our freedom. Not to mention making the terrorists successfull in terrorising us.
Better security on airlines is not a bad idea and is more practical than railroads because of the difference in accessability. The only area (practicaly) that airlines need to secure is the airports. Thats a lot different than the railroads. Its not just the stations but also the thousands of miles of track that would have to be secure, and that will never happen, there is just to much area to cover.
I think the right approach is to attack the problem at the source, and go kick some [censored]. Thats just how I am [:D]

[RudyRockvilleMD]

Antonio:
Railroad crews have been told to be more vigilant since September 11, 2001, however this messsage could be reinforced.

If my experience is meaningful I was railfanning outside of Enola yard twice in March 2003 (before and after we invaded Iraq) and nobody challenged me or turned me in to the police even though I was on public property. After the explosions in Spain last week I was in Richmond VA photographing trains from public property, and I was in Bowie, MD photographing Amtrak and MARC trains on the NEC from an overhead vantage point this past Monday and nobody bothered me.

[AntonioFP45]

[V]Sad to say that all of this will affect railfans as well as railroad security. Train crews will now be urged by their superiors to be even more vigilant.[:0]

[:)][8)]I still remember my teen years of hanging out at the local Amtrak station for hours, walking into rail yards [8)](saying hello to the personnel) and standing near the SCL Main Line and watching or photographing trains with friendly SCL crews waving. I was totally unhampered or scrutinized. Those days are gone forever..[sigh][sigh]

I would suggest to railfans though that while railfanning, if you're approached and questioned by security or train crew members not respond harshly with the typical : "I have the right to be here!"or "You can't tell me to leave, I'm on public property!"[B)][|(][:-,]

I've read these types of responses before on similar threads. Quite a few from our younger railfans. I'm not saying be a pacifist, but we have to realize that railroad personnel are already working under pressure [/red]and the bombing in Spain is likely going to have a lot of railroaders even more stressed out.

It's best to keep cool and respond calmly if you are challenged. Chances are they want to "feel out your intentions" and after a positive response when, if they ever see you again, they'll likely not be hostile or will even wave.

Some years back, I was challenged by a female railroad employee near a CTC tower (now closed). I politely told her my name, that I was a railfan and wanted to see the GE locomotives that were due to pass by in a few minutes. I calmly moved closer towards the street. She calmed down right away and even smiled! [:I][:X][^]

We musn't forget that people committing suicide "by way of train" and vandals hang out near the tracks too! [V]

The attitude that [b]"we are railfans that also look out for our transportation network" (yes, even the UP!) needs to be emphasized more instead of yelling out Constitutional Rights jargon which most adults in this lawsuit happy society are already familiar with.....

[RudyRockvilleMD]

I saw the same thing on Fox 5's Ten PM News about Amtrak not inspecting carry-on luggage before passengers board trains. However, as somebody else said commuter trains might be the most likely targets for terrorists because they are more crowded. Screening onboard luggage on trains is more difficult than screening carry-on luggage on aircraft in that many Amtrak and commuter trains pick up passengers at unstaffed stations where there are no facilities for preboarding carry-on parcel inspection while airlines mostly pick up passengers only at airports with preboarding luggage screening facilities.

After the terrorist attacks on commuter trains in Spain the freight railroads, Amtrak, and Washington's Metro reportedly increased their security and surveillance. Metro deployed more officer-dog teams to search for explosives, however, the increased surveillance on Amtrak or the freight railroads wasn't as noticeable.

[Anonymous]

See my comments above in Ed's Hockey thread.

LC

[jeaton]

Does anybody really think there might be any rationality on the issue of security or prevention of terrorist attacks? I repeated the numbers put out by CNN comparing the amount of money spent on airline security vs. rail security. Truth is I'm not opposed to most of the things that have been done to improve airline security, even if it's a pain in the *** for airline travelers. But getting something more done is just not in the cards because of the growing Federal deficit. We are, after all having to spend a couple of hundred $ Billion in the extremely high priority business of getting that regime change and getting rid of those weapons of mass destruction. There are lots of other projects that have a much greater priority than protecting the lives of a few people that might get hit in an attack on our trains. For example, this year we have to deploy a balistic missle defense system at a cost of $10 Billion per year, plus the cost of ongoing research.

The fact that fly swatters would be just as effective and cheaper is irrelevant.

[zardoz]

Bravo, Ed. Well said!

[edblysard]

You know,
we could argue the minute aspects of it all day long, but the fact is, even with the US Army, we still couldnt close the borders to our country.

So, if the terrorist want in, they can get in, and do what they wish.

Short of turning America into a country that resembles the former Soviet Union, with a national military police, and internal passports, and personal restriction that I doubt even the most right wing of us would tolerate, we are pretty much as secure as we can be.

So, unless we want a new cold war, we are left with two choices....

Go over there and fix whatever it is they want, in the manner they want it, which I doubt would even begin to calm things down, or,
go over there and conquer them completly.

No, I am not a "all or nothing " kinda of guy, but when your backed into a corner, and your options are limited....

So, if we are going to go over there, then lets go full bore.

Skip the police action nonsense, and the "liberating" crap, and just flat declare war.
Then turn the troops lose, and get out of the way.

Make sure everyone in the world understands that, if you are dumb enough to strike America, then the consequences will be devestating.

If, on sept 13th, we blanketed Afganistan air space, and blew up every thing that moved military or civilan, period, in a week, the civilan population would have gladly handed us Osama.

I for one, am tired of the semi- police state we seem to be creating here, and there is no way we can keep them out, so lets take the fight to them.

Counter terrorism intelligence?
What a joke.
Did the homeland security guys have a inklling about what was about to happened in Spain?
No, and I doubt they have a real clue about much else other than next years budget request.

Teddy Roosevelt had the right idea, walk softly, and carry a big stick.

Well, walking softly, in the guise of liberating Iraq, dosnt seem to be doing the job, so lets break out the big stick.

Poking our noses in over there does nothing but add fuel to the fire, so either step in and wipe floor with them, or gather up our stuff and get out, but this nonsense of trying to be the enforcer on one hand, and the great liberator on the other wont work.

Its time to kick butt, or put up with living in a world where fear is the norm.

Tired of being afraid?

Ed

[Anonymous]

Given the tragedy that has unfolded in Spain, you have to wonder why greater emphasis isn't placed on extra security/vigilance at some of the nations's busiest passenger stations--at least from a government standpoint. The potential for devastating losses of life and total chaos is just as tremendous should terrorists strike bustling stations like those in Chicago or D.C. How Norm Mineta deemed that intercity and commuter trains were somehow not worthy of increased security presence is beyond comprehension. I wonder how the guy would feel if something happened and his loved ones were aboard a train--or in the area of impact? Surely the President would address the nation and offer his 'sincere and heartfelt sadness' over yet another act of terrorism--but how would he field questions about the lack of security preparations from the outset?

Perhaps precious little can be done to stop those who seek to wreak havoc and destruction. Not taking any precautionary measures however is a slap in the face to everyone who rides Amtrak (and commuter) trains. I feel as though the government is telling us, "Frankly, we could care less." Which, in reality, is exactly what they're saying by their callous disregard for the safety of those who ride trains. It's sad that something horrific has to occur (Spain) before those in charge here took notice. Now that it has, what if anything, will be done to protect us as much as humanly possible?

[Anonymous]

THIS IS A WAKE UP CALL TO BUSH AND NUM-SKULLS AND I HOPE FOX GETS PUNSHIED BY THE GOVERMENT

[tree68]

Speaking from the "inside." DHS has been given the responsibility/authority for the F.I.R.E Act (grants to fire departments for a variety of things). This year it was $750 mil. Next year it's supposed to be closer to $900 mil, but Dubya wants to cut it to around $500 mil. Of course, that's to be shared nationwide.

As has been mentioned above, the local authorities are going to be the "first responders" that Dubya and crew keep harping about, yet they don't want to give them the money to do the job. It is very frustrating to us.

[Anonymous]

This is just great! Now thanks to Fox with the help of what happened in Spai there will be 2 very bad things for railfans. A: We're gonna get arrested from public property again (at least my favorite railfan location around here is a railfan park). B: Those morons are gonna get ideas now.

[ironhorseman]

I’m afraid Antonio is right on the point where action won’t be taken unless something happens. We haven’t seen security like it now before 9/11.

But I don’t think Amtrak is the biggest target. Based on what I’ve seen I’ll tell you why. The terrorist are hell bent on inflicting the maximum amount of casualties and destruction as possible in each attack. What’s gonna happen if they bomb one Amtrak super liner? To cite a recent Amtrak derailment in Kansas City, it was the Chicago-bound Southwest Chief. The report said there were only about 150 on board. For crying out loud you’d think there’d be more on board than that! But I guess because it’s not summertime is probably the reason for the low number. I’ve only been on that train in the month of July and it’s been pretty well full. A charter bus carries only about 55 seats whereas a super liner coach has 75-100 seats I think, approximately. Now, do you think it’d be easier to do a multi-train attack on Amtrak long distance trains or a tight urban light rail or subway system? Which would cause more chaos and more destruction? And don’t think that I’m giving them any ideas because they’ve more than likely scouted out such scenarios in the past before 9/11.

I think we all here on the forums realize our rail systems are vulnerable. “But if they’re vulnerable why haven’t they been attacked yet?” you might ask. Well, here’s why. Going right back to what I said above, the terrorist are hell bent on inflicting the maximum amount of casualties and destruction as possible in each attack. They try go in unprepared and fail at an attack on the trains security is going to heightened to the levels as airports and it’d be impossible to smuggle bombs or guns on board a train again. If they cause minimal damage and kill only a few that’s a failure in their minds. The terrorist are all or nothing. If they couldn’t have pulled off the 9/11 events they weren’t gonna do it until they were ready. They want to make the biggest and most dramatic effect as possible. Once they lose that edge it becomes harder and harder and pull of something spectacular. That one guy who was caught had planned to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge because Osama picked it from the Godzilla movie. But the operative said it was “too hard” to destroy. (thanks to 19th century engineering [tup])

That’s the way I see it. It’s all or nothing to them. Terrorist will hit hard or wait until they can. They’re not taking pot shots. They’ve lost their edge in using our airplanes to attack us. Are we gonna have to wait until our trains are attacked to protect them from terrorists too? All it would take would someone with a bomb gun to get on a train and make a threat, not even kill anyone, to cause security to tighten and the media to go into a frenzy.

[zardoz]

Just think how safe we could make our country if we took all the money we are now spending to "liberate" Iraq, and spend it securing OUR freedom and way of life !!!

Most municipalities' officials complain that "homeland security" demands that the cities do all of the preparedness for terrorism, yet are not funded properly to do what they are asked to do. Just like dubya's BS about "No Kid Left Behind" program. Sounds good in media sound bites; however, bushco continues to CUT funding for schools.

Those of us that have jobs where a certain level of production is expected, but the equipment to do as asked is not supplied, can relate to the frustration of that situation. Now take that level of frustration and apply it to the police and fire departments, where they now do not having sufficient resources necessary to potentially save many lives.

Yikes.

[AntonioFP45]

Mookie, Zardoz

What do you suggest? Not support homeland security? Zardoz is correct in that our security is "full of holes" but some positive results have come from the Homeland Security Act. Even with holes, I do feel a little safer stepping on board an airliner than I did a year ago.

I don't have the answers but what then happens when (not if, when) the next attack occurs? Mr. Kery doesn't have a plan for it and Mr. Bush seems to be doing little or nothing about our borders.

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

Antonio-

What you say about security sounds good; however, that is mostly what our "homeland security" policy is, just good sounding rhetoric. There are so many security holes in our (and other free countries) that a truly determined terrorist can and will find a way to do their damage.

So is it worth it for us to lose some of the the very freedoms we are worried about losing, just so our government can appear to be doing something about the problem???? (Don't forget---this IS an election year)

Zardoz - on this point we do agree. I have never been too enchanted with the Homeland Security idea. I think it was just a spend money/feel good/sound good thing.

And since it is an election year - You darn right I am going to vote - early and often!

[JoeKoh]

Well we as railfans can step up and if we see anything unusual we can call the local cops or the 800 #s for the RRs.please stay safe
Joe

[zardoz]

Antonio-

What you say about security sounds good; however, that is mostly what our "homeland security" policy is, just good sounding rhetoric. There are so many security holes in our (and other free countries) that a truly determined terrorist can and will find a way to do their damage.

So is it worth it for us to lose some of the the very freedoms we are worried about losing, just so our government can appear to be doing something about the problem???? (Don't forget---this IS an election year)

[AntonioFP45]

Hopefully,

David Gunn, who up until now has been a very aggressive no-nonsense president jumps on this issue and garners the support of transit and commuter rail executives.

Those of us on these threads can easily call or e-mail or congressional reps. I used to think it was a waste of time, but during an election year senators and governors are usually more willing to listen their constituents and I have seen results.

[AntonioFP45]

Eastern, [;)]

I'm only speaking for myself, but yes if it means that my family and friends would be even a little safer riding the rails. [8)]

Many of us worry about our civil liberties being compromised by "unreasonable" searches.[B)] But this wouldn't be the case of cops smashing a door down, this would be about helping to ensure safety. That shoe bomber on the airliner 2 years ago is a good example of why, IMHO, many civil libertarian leaders need to realize that while they demand that government leaders in the U.S and Canada play by the rules, terrorists won't! Their rule book: "To cause as much destruction, civilian casualties and mass panic in the shortest amount of time. The cause is just! Your reward awaits you!"

There was a very good debate on a news cast between a liberal leader with a good heart and radio host Todd Schnitt. Good points from both sides. The main argument from the gentleman was that today's situation is no different than during the COLD WAR. Schnitt pointed out that the CRITICAL DIFFERENCE that many libertarians won't acknowledge is that during the Cold War, the concept of M.A.D (Mutually Assured Destruction) was in place. So there was a balance as the U.S ,Soviet Union, and to a small degree, China knew that each opponent would suffer massive destruction once the "DEF-CON Buttons" were pushed.

The Islamic extremists leaders of today have "soldiers" and even ordinary citizens that have ABSOLUTELY no fear of being killed and taking thousands of innocents with them and are willing to do it right now. These are not the 1950s, 60s or 70s anymore.

It is a completely different world now. We have to adjust our ways of thinking, traveling and doing business to adjust to this or otherwise continue to be victims as has France and Spain. We have to be more vigilant than ever as time marches forward. U.S and Canadian security for rail is far below the standards needed as trains are incredibly easy targets. [V]That's a reality that sooner or later we all may have to deal with. [;)][C):-)]

[jeaton]

Just saw an item on CNN. (Numbers are approximate). While 2 million people fly every day, 12 million ride public rail transit. Government expenditures on "Homeland Security"? Rail=$150 million. Air=$11 BILLION.

Any questions?

[Anonymous]

The situation that took place in Spain was just another attack on the transportation sytem of another nation.I cannot see AMTRAK nor VIA having the
security of the air lines but would we railfans desire this..being scanned ect befor
boarding trains or subways ect.we as a whole need to act as the whole.

Be Alert be wise be Free
David Brown
Saint John NB Canada

[zardoz]

Antonio,

It seems as though the "wake-up" call you mentioned is the incident in Spain. Perhaps now security will improve (for all the good it will do).

Also, everyone, FYI: security has been increased around railroad structures (like tunnels, bridges, etc) so be extra careful out there.

[AntonioFP45]

Agreed DonClark,

But it's not an Amtrak issue as much as it is a Homeland security issue. When Amtrak is mentioned, many in the general public think "Long Distance Trains".

It's frustrating that many seem to forget that there are literally several thousand commuter trains running in this country in urban and some suburban regions. Because of the frequency and high volume of passenger traffic on many commuter lines, these might be considered by these "wack-job-suicidal" extremists as easy targets.

Since 9/11 this country has become extraordinarily complacent. Even though I'm a "conservative independent" and vote with my with my conscience rather than party, Mr. Kery scares me. If he gets elected he'd better get on the ball otherwise, we'll be sucker punched again---probably even harder than 9/11!

[Anonymous]

Amtrak can't even afford to man many of its stations to sell tickets, much less a security guard at everyone....

[AntonioFP45]

Just heard bits and pieces on a FOX news affiliate.

Apparently, a news organization decided to test Amtrak's security.

A "mysterious or unmarked "bag was placed on one of Amtrak's "Silver Series" trains in West Palm Beach, Florida. The bag made it all the way to Washington D.C.

Not once was the bag looked or checked over by Amtrak employees!
Good Goobley! I'm an Amtrak rider, and I find this pretty scary! [:0]

To top it off, just last year Transportation Secretary, Norm Mineta did not deem security on passenger and commuter trains as "high priiority".

This is a wake up call, but sad to say, IMHO, that regardless whether Mr. Bush or Kery are in the White House next term, the government won't likely do much in the area of security for passenger trains until "something happens"! [V][:(!]

I pray that I'm WRONG! [B)][V]