Trespassers 'outraged' at getting tickets

[selector]

If it is argumentative, then it is time to close this thread.  It's all been said.

See you around the forum.

-Crandell

[henry6]

If the property ain't yours, you ain't supposed to be there unless invited or have some other kind of permission.  Otherwise, you are tresspassing.  Tresspassing is illegal.  Why are we discussing this?

[Ulrich]

I wasn't being antagonistic..maybe argumentative but not antagonistic...do you know the difference?

[Beach Bill]

Troll or no troll...I was simply trying to stir up lively discussion. If that's causing trouble then so be it.. Back in 1776 some folks called Patroits we're also looked on as a bunch of trouble makers.

I'm not sure I see the comparison.  James Madison, John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, et. al., were speaking the Truth as they knew it, not taking an antagonistic or inflammatory position just to be writing something.  History has demonstrated the strength of their thought. 

Bill

[zardoz]

Back in 1776 some folks called Patroits we're also looked on as a bunch of trouble makers.

Ah, yes, the good old days.....

[Ulrich]

GD, zugmann's post wasn't directed at you.  It was for an earlier poster whom he thinks is deliberately posting inflammatory comments designed to stirr things up.  The term troll is used for those who jump around on forums and try to cause trouble, then flee when they have done what they set out to do and search for more fertile ground.  FWIW, I don't believe the person to whom he referred is a troll, but exhibits troll-like behaviour when it meets his needs.  It is in keeping, or consistent, with his utilitarian ethics that he expressed earlier when he stated that he trespasses regularly because it is in his interests to do so. 

Troll or no troll...I was simply trying to stir up lively discussion. If that's causing trouble then so be it.. Back in 1776 some folks called Patroits we're also looked on as a bunch of trouble makers.

[jwhitten]

 

She must be important she has 3 names!

 

 

Uh, no.

 

3 names means she's an assassin.

 

1 name means she's important. 

[ironhorseman]

Taken from TRAINS news clip.

Who would want to bet if this idiot would stub her toe as she trespassed. Would want to SUE for not being protected.

Just like the durnk that got electricuted after climbinbg on top of the train and touching the high wire.  

 

September 12, 2008 CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. - People caught trespassing on CSX property here are lashing out at police for issuing them tickets, according to a story in Charlottesville's The Hook newspaper.

"We're paying that officer," said Marya Dunlap-Brown, who was slapped with a ticket Aug. 13 after she trespassed on railroad property. "Get a criminal," she said. "Catch someone dealing drugs."

According to Operation Lifesaver, 486 pedestrians died last year after being hit by trains. But Dunlap-Brown said police shouldn't patrol the tracks for trespassers. "And if the railroad is worried about safety," she said, "the railroad should put their own officer down there."

The police department's effort to crack down on trespassing has netted numerous tickets. On Aug. 28, 58 alleged trespassers made the court list.

I don't think that dumb lady realizes she's going to get much worse than a ticket if private securiety caught her trespassing. Probably detainment, fine, or lawsuit. They might call the police to pick them up and take them downtown for processing. Remember the movie "Into The Wild"? The kid got the snot beat out of him for riding a boxcar. And that was his first warning. Or is that just Hollywood?

A police officer is obligated to take action if he or she sees a crime, of any scale, being committed. It doesn't have to be JUST railroad trespassing. What if it was on a factory property? Behind McDonalds after business hours? On top the watertower? I don't think this cop was patroling exclusivly the railroad. He was probably driving by and happened to see it, or maybe makes a single check during a shift, lasting long enough to cover part of area, just merely a look, not a sit-and-wait, that is IF he's not tied up with calls and accidents and paperwork.

[jeaton]

So basically you where teaching your son that it is OK to break the law if you think it is right to do so and if you are being careful and don't get caught........ 

 Just great Dad..............

  "I used the occasion to explain the danger to Matt and made it clear that he was never to do what we were doing unless I was with him.  I also made it clear that we were trespassing and could get a citation if we were seen by an officer.

I have been around long enough to have been able to go on railroad property and nose around without being stopped by railroad people or local law enforcement.  In the last 50 years, there have been many more changes than just high awards to persons injured while trespassing or "9/11".

 

Thanks for the complement.  However please explain to me where I said it is OK to break the law if we don't get caught. 

He is actually my stepson, so it is not totally my fault that he is a bright kid.  Doing the "Just say No" thing doesn't fly. The point of the whole excercise was give him one of many lessons on safe behavior, while at the same time also letting him know that trespassing on railroad property is a misdemeanor.  You wouldn't know, but the branch line through our town usually sees only one very short train a day, usually running in the middle of the night, with a top speed of 25 miles an hour, sounding the horn almost continuously for the half dozen closely spaced street crossings.  A a result, on a nice day, one will often see kids strolling on or along the tracks as if it was the scenic path through the park.  My objective was to get him to understand first the safety issue and second that it is a violation of the law.  Incidently, perhaps they have to deal with more serious matters, but I don't know of our local police force citing anyone for trespassing on the railroad.  My motive was that I did not want him to someday join his buddys on a stroll down railroad tracks somewhere and get himself injured or killed by a train. 

By the way, the state of Wisconsin places stop signs on all streets and roads at rail crossings that are not protected by train activated signals.  The lesson on that was that you don't come to stop at those sign just because running it is against the law.  You stop so you can check to see that there is no train approaching.  It is, as you might see, the same primary reason one observes a stop sign at a street crossing.  If a person's only reason for not breaking a law is because the act is against the law, that person doesn't have a clue. 

I don't know whether there were more or less injuries to people trespassing on railroads 50 years ago, but it seems clear that there is much more rigorous enforcement of that law today. I offered reasons above for the change between then and now, but I would add that the increased enforcement may also be because it is an effort to protect people from the consequence their seemingly clueless unsafe behavior. 

I do know that in the many year in the 1960's and 70's that I poked around railroad property, on the job or not, I was never questioned, asked to leave or cited for a trespass violation by anybody.  Never-the-less, If I had been stopped, I wouldn't have been whining that the authorities should be spending there time catching "real" criminals. 

One last thing, I turned 18 in 1959 and within a couple of months of that birthday I was employed in train service and with that I knew very well how to stay safe around railroad. property 

 

 

[bawbyk]

So basically you where teaching your son that it is OK to break the law if you think it is right to do so and if you are being careful and don't get caught........ 

 Just great Dad..............

  "I used the occasion to explain the danger to Matt and made it clear that he was never to do what we were doing unless I was with him.  I also made it clear that we were trespassing and could get a citation if we were seen by an officer.

I have been around long enough to have been able to go on railroad property and nose around without being stopped by railroad people or local law enforcement.  In the last 50 years, there have been many more changes than just high awards to persons injured while trespassing or "9/11".

 

[jeaton]

The WSOR's branch to Elkhorn runs adjacent to our town's golf course.  The tracks are in a bit of a cut and the area between the edge of the course and the tracks is a jungle of brush and low trees.  After slicing a few balls into that rough, my son Matt and I decided that we might find a good quantity of lost golf balls there.  We worked our way down to the edge of the ballast and came up with a couple of dozen fresh balls.  No doubt we had gotten onto the railroad property and were trespassing.

It was the middle of the day and even though the WSOR local usually only comes up the branch in the middle of the night to switch the industries on line, I watched for trains while Matt looked for balls in the ditch by the tracks.  I used the occasion to explain the danger to Matt and made it clear that he was never to do what we were doing unless I was with him.  I also made it clear that we were trespassing and could get a citation if we were seen by an officer.

I have been around long enough to have been able to go on railroad property and nose around without being stopped by railroad people or local law enforcement.  In the last 50 years, there have been many more changes than just high awards to persons injured while trespassing or "9/11".

In times passed there were many more locals and switch jobs and with 5 or more men on each job, there it was much easier for a crew man to spend a little time watching or chatting with a "visitor".  Today, the two or three man crews are far to involved getting the job done.  As efficient as they may be, the use of radios instead of visual communication make the job more dangerous and require constant focus or "situational awarness" to do the job safely.  They simply can't be bothered by a stranger hanging around their work.

While 911 has been a factor in a perception that there is a greater chance of sabatoge, there is also an increase in the incidence of the theft of railroad property and freight being carried.  Enforcement of trespassing laws becomes a defense against those acts.  Those laws can be applied without regard to the intent of the trespasser.

I agree that court decisions have tended to more frequently award damages to people injured while trespassing.  I would not put all that on the acts of plaintiff's lawyers.  These days chances are fairly good that half of the 12 people on a jury will have had themselves, a family member or a friend lose a job due to a large company closing a plant or laying off a big chunk of the work force.  I have no doubt that payback is an underlying motive for some decisions favoring the plaintiff and for allowing large awards.  Fair or not, the potential for having to pay large damages to injured trespassers is certainly a reasonable excuse for rigorous enforcement of trespassing laws.

 

[gardendance]

According to Operation Lifesaver, 486 pedestrians died last year after being hit by trains.

Bottom line, 486 trespassers died...and that is 486 too many.

the original post in this thread did not say 486 trespassers, it said 486 pedestrians. It did not mention if they were trespassing, or even whose fault the incidents were.

I agree that that is 486 too many deaths, but lacking further info, which I'm too lazy to try to get, I don't believe any of us can decide what the bottom line is, or decide how to prevent those types of deaths from happening in the future.

[al-in-chgo]

I know that area very well and unless the tracks have been fenced off, it's dangerous still.

The tracks run elevated to the overall landscape west of there across old US-29 and east of there adjacent to the U.Va. hospital, then come to ground level further east after heading past the University of Virginia Hospital and crossing the street that borders it.  (The tri-weekly Cardinal stops at the ex-Southern Rwy depot instead of downtown in the old C&O depot, which was decomissioned by Amtrak as a train stop over 30 years ago.)  

But in between being elevated and being elevated, the line runs at ground level right in the heart of the student retail area, for I'd guess about a third of a good-sized block.  Elliewood Avenue on one side has college-oriented shops (Kinko's if it's still there), and the other side has "The Corner," one of those typical collegiate shopping streets (it's also C'ville's Main Street IIRC) with the sub sandwiches, Univ. of Va. t-shirts and so on.  It's quite tempting to think of crossing there to Elliewood and back, although it is not terribly far to head south and stay off CSX right-of-way totally.  I should also add that to the west is a blind curve and also extremely limited sight lines to the east.

I know as a student I did it more than a time or two and that it's dangerous.   

I wouldn't do it now based on the kinds of accidents I've read about here over the past few years. 

That stretch doesn't haul as much coal as it used to but nonetheless it is the old C&O mainline Washington (Newport News-) - Charlottesville - White Sulphur Springs - Cincinnati.   

 

[TimChgo9]

   Same at the ICG, I remember the local was switching into the S&H facility there in Hillside, and the crew let my friends and I help throw the switch to the spur one time.  The crews were always friendly, and when they could, would chat with us about their jobs. 

And now for something from the "Small World" Department":      My Dad, Jack Althoff, was conductor on the ICG's "Broadview Switcher" that handled the S&H Warehouse.  That was an old IC caboose with the small side door, #199725, which I have duplicated in HO (Courtesy of Hallmark!) in his memory.   I'd have to look through some old photos to verify dates, but my oldest son Thomas was born in '78 and I recall that Dad was on the Broadview Switcher when we first took Thomas up to meet "PaPa".   I got to ride with him one day, which included a bit of time on the engine when they went up the Addison Branch.  Dad passed away in 1995, but did get a couple years living and fishing on the lake in Minnesota and then a couple years in Arizona after the winters got too hard.   Thanks, Tim, for bringing back that memory.

Even then, Dad used to get very frustrated with folks that would walk across the tracks right in front of the oncoming train as if they could stop the train like a sports car. 

Bill

Wow, small world indeed....I'll bet I talked to your dad a couple of times.  I don't recall faces or even names, it's been so long (30 years now) but, those days spent hanging around the tracks, and the friendliness of the people I met, sure bring back some great memories over here too.   Glad I brought back some memories for ya.  

[narig01]

Correction She has one name, "IDIOT"!

A point was raised that I am a firm beliver of.

I a person wants to jump off the top of a building. Why should some else say , "NO" and spend tax payers money to stop.

If a person over doses on drugs. Why should we have to pay for the services to save.

If a person gets hit by a train. Then they should pay for my time lose waiting for the clean up and their removal.

1. person may not look before jumping & fall on someone on the street.

2.OD on drugs. What kind of drugs. PCP . Saving this person from a bad habit may prevent this person from going nutso at someone else.

3.Get a lawyer & sue.

Rgds IGN

[Beach Bill]

   Same at the ICG, I remember the local was switching into the S&H facility there in Hillside, and the crew let my friends and I help throw the switch to the spur one time.  The crews were always friendly, and when they could, would chat with us about their jobs. 

And now for something from the "Small World" Department":      My Dad, Jack Althoff, was conductor on the ICG's "Broadview Switcher" that handled the S&H Warehouse.  That was an old IC caboose with the small side door, #199725, which I have duplicated in HO (Courtesy of Hallmark!) in his memory.   I'd have to look through some old photos to verify dates, but my oldest son Thomas was born in '78 and I recall that Dad was on the Broadview Switcher when we first took Thomas up to meet "PaPa".   I got to ride with him one day, which included a bit of time on the engine when they went up the Addison Branch.  Dad passed away in 1995, but did get a couple years living and fishing on the lake in Minnesota and then a couple years in Arizona after the winters got too hard.   Thanks, Tim, for bringing back that memory.

Even then, Dad used to get very frustrated with folks that would walk across the tracks right in front of the oncoming train as if they could stop the train like a sports car. 

Bill

[Randy Stahl]

I hear the argument all the time that a tresspasser is familier with the train schedules , in fact not long ago on the Moosehead sub we had a group of trespassers that although they were familier with the train schedules they didn't recon with the fact that we can run a train there anytime we want to without telling anyone. This group ventured out onto a 150' tall Onawa bridge and were nearly struck by MY ballast train . There are little escape platforms but those are far too close to the moving train to be safe especially since alot of our trains have centerbeams and unloaded flats that have either tie down straps or loose banding . I did barely manage to get my train stopped but they were all crammed onto one of the escape platforms and would not move .. what the hell are these people thinking ?????

[edblysard]

Part of the reason is that we now live in a society where there is no longer any absolutes...no absolute right, or absolute wrong, but only varying degrees of not quite right....

It's not really "wrong" to trespass on railroad property, if you feel your need to be there is greater than the railroads need to operate safely.

Or it's not really wrong to trespass if you only do it on occasion...or only do it to tag cars and further express your artistic side through graffiti.

And of course, if your drunk, or under the influence of a narcotic, then it can't be really wrong...after all, your no longer responsible for your actions, your were drunk or stoned, so "someone" else has to or should have protected you from the danger of your actions.

 

Bottom line, 486 trespassers died...and that is 486 too many.

There is no valid reason for anyone not employed by or under contract by a railroad to be on railroad property.

None.

You can try to rationalize any reason you choose, but if you don't work here, you're putting yourself in danger, and endangering myself, my crew and my friends.

If you get a citation for your actions, then that's fine by me.

[RRKen]

I understand that liability is the main reason that railroads enforce no trespassing laws.  My question asks what has changed since the 1960-1980 period, for instance, that has placed the trespassing issue on the front burner.  Perhaps it is because there are more people and more trespassing today than in the past.  But, even so, that trespass increase would have happened gradually, whereas the trespassing enforcement issued seems to have exploded onto the scene just recently.

 The cost of injuries to trespassers has just exploded.   Mind you, any injuries that happen do not come from some "fund" or insurance policy, it comes from the bottom line.   So imagine a CEO wanting to increase shareholders equity, or find funds to expand capacity, you are looking for avoidable costs to trim, it (trespassing) becomes a major target.

[Soo 6604]

I wrote a while ago about Provincial police in Ontario patrolling Hwy 400 with aircraft enabling them to nab speeders.     Minimum fine is $2,000 with car confiscated for several weeks, and demerit marks added to their licence, which will increase their insurance.    Maximum fine is   get this    Maximum fine $10,000 with car confiscated permanently.     Loss of licence I believe for five years & imagine what their insurance will cost when they are able to drive again.    This for speeding, drunk driving, tail-gating, etc.

Reason I'm stating the above is that in all the posts abour rr trespassing, I very seldom see what the penalties are?     Are they very severe or just a slap on the wrist?

Last winter, by buddy went hunting along CN Shawano Sub (maybe 3 movements a week where he was "trespassing"). He would use the ROW to further his progress by 100 feet or so then head into the woods a few thousand feet. Go parallel with the tracks, head back towards the tracks and then start over again. All the property was public, with permission or his. Except for the ROW. He usually mingles with the crew when they switch out a spur, gives them venison sticks (basic bribery) so they wouldnt report him. Hes familiar with the traffic and the usual times when the trains run during the winter months. Sometimes he even gets a heads-up from the crew when they go on duty and about what time theyll be in the area (for the venison sticks no less). Anyways, there was a track inspector doing his thing and saw him. Called the cops and when everything was said and done. It cost him $168.50.

Will he do it again this winter? Probably. He just said about the fine "I guess we (him and his wife) wont be going out to dinner for the next 3 weekends".

[joegreen]

I would say what has changed is more lawyers, not to offend those of that profession. 

That and the rise of "I am not responsible for my actions."  Which leads to lawsuits when someone is injured on someone else's property without permission to be there.

Jeff  

 Thats true....but as long as those people are winning in court they'll probably continue day by day with the same attitude. Thats what sux

[TimChgo9]

Quick question: 

Why has trespassing become such a hot issue all of a sudden?  Is it all in reaction to 911?

 

As Zugman said, Liability.  

 I for July,  for every railfan seen, we had 11 trespassers a day on the average around the yard.   I noted that on one day, 21 people using the yard as a short cut.      Just for the mere reason they  did not want to walk up the overpass.  

Twice in July, we had people, non-employees,  walking across the service tracks to take photos.  Twice in July, we had people on ATV's on the tracks of an industrial lead (arrested finally, ATV's confiscated for reasons other than trespassing).     Attempted theft of wire in town, three cases, one subject detained (caught in the act by a signal maintainer).   Five kids playing chicken on a RR bridge in town.   Four cases of illegal dumping.   One case of attempted theft of bridge bolts (foreman interupted him).    One case of stolen ties.   One case of damage to warning devices (arrested for various warrants).   Attempted theft of a stop sign  (held by police for warrants).  One case of shopping cart left on tracks (now scrap).  One case of a brush fire started on the property.  Numerous people chased off of railroad property because they were trying to hop a train coming from a "hobo convention".    No count on the number of near misses at grade crossings in town.  

Thanks to MCPD and all crafts involved for the information.  

Does this answer the question?  

I understand that liability is the main reason that railroads enforce no trespassing laws.  My question asks what has changed since the 1960-1980 period, for instance, that has placed the trespassing issue on the front burner.  Perhaps it is because there are more people and more trespassing today than in the past.  But, even so, that trespass increase would have happened gradually, whereas the trespassing enforcement issued seems to have exploded onto the scene just recently.

I remember back in the 1970's when I was a kid, we could pretty much go anywhere around the CNW and the IC tracks that were near by... The IHB was different story.  Their policies regarding trespassers have always been tough. 

My brother and I used to walk to Proviso Yard from time to time, back when we were in 6th and 7th grade (This would be about 1978) and we would hang out at the Berkely Station, but also kind of wander around the area inside the yard right by the station.  On a couple of occasions some of the yard folks would come over and talk to us, or show us what was going on.  We never walked on locomotives, cars, or went places that we knew were dangerous, but we did walk around a bit.  Same at the ICG, I remember the local was switching into the S&H facility there in Hillside, and the crew let my friends and I help throw the switch to the spur one time.  The crews were always friendly, and when they could, would chat with us about their jobs. 

I don't know what the changes were that caused the "less tolerant" attitude.  I suppose it's just the general change in society, more people becoming less predictable, more litigious, and generally, less caring about the world around them.  I remember my neighborhood growing up, and it was a place where everyone knew everyone else, and the neighbors all look out for one another.  It's not like that anymore in alot of places.  There is less trust, less honesty, and less other things.  Perhaps, when the railroads were more lenient, people began to take advantage of them, and problems began to occur, and they figured, in order to protect themselves, and their property, they figured they had to crackdown. 

If they felt the need to do that, that's fine, it's their property, and their business, and they have every right to protect it, using whatever reasonable measures are available to them. It is a bit sad that the open-ness is gone, but, that's the way things go.  

Growing up, I was taught that trains were dangerous, and that screwing around by the tracks was a sure route to injury or worse..... I guess in this day and age, some people either don't get it, won't get it, or just don't care.  

As far as trespassing enforcement "exploding" in recent years, perhaps that's true, but one only has to look to 9/11 for the reason. 

[jeffhergert]

I would say what has changed is more lawyers, not to offend those of that profession. 

That and the rise of "I am not responsible for my actions."  Which leads to lawsuits when someone is injured on someone else's property without permission to be there.

Jeff  

[Anonymous]

Quick question: 

Why has trespassing become such a hot issue all of a sudden?  Is it all in reaction to 911?

 

As Zugman said, Liability.  

 I for July,  for every railfan seen, we had 11 trespassers a day on the average around the yard.   I noted that on one day, 21 people using the yard as a short cut.      Just for the mere reason they  did not want to walk up the overpass.  

Twice in July, we had people, non-employees,  walking across the service tracks to take photos.  Twice in July, we had people on ATV's on the tracks of an industrial lead (arrested finally, ATV's confiscated for reasons other than trespassing).     Attempted theft of wire in town, three cases, one subject detained (caught in the act by a signal maintainer).   Five kids playing chicken on a RR bridge in town.   Four cases of illegal dumping.   One case of attempted theft of bridge bolts (foreman interupted him).    One case of stolen ties.   One case of damage to warning devices (arrested for various warrants).   Attempted theft of a stop sign  (held by police for warrants).  One case of shopping cart left on tracks (now scrap).  One case of a brush fire started on the property.  Numerous people chased off of railroad property because they were trying to hop a train coming from a "hobo convention".    No count on the number of near misses at grade crossings in town.  

Thanks to MCPD and all crafts involved for the information.  

Does this answer the question?  

I understand that liability is the main reason that railroads enforce no trespassing laws.  My question asks what has changed since the 1960-1980 period, for instance, that has placed the trespassing issue on the front burner.  Perhaps it is because there are more people and more trespassing today than in the past.  But, even so, that trespass increase would have happened gradually, whereas the trespassing enforcement issued seems to have exploded onto the scene just recently.

[ButchKnouse]

I hate trolls....

your post came right after mine. Are you responding to me? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the terminology, what do you mean?

The police department's effort to crack down on trespassing has netted numerous tickets. On Aug. 28, 58 alleged trespassers made the court list.

 

It sounds like the cops are writing tickets left and right. They wouldn't get involved unless it was turning into a major problem.

ButchKnouse, I'm assuming you're expressing your opinion, you think it's a major problem because the cops are getting involved, but the only quotes in the article are

According to Operation Lifesaver, 486 pedestrians died last year after being hit by trains

please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't operation lifesaver a national program, that's 468 pedestrians nationwide?

The police department's effort to crack down on trespassing has netted numerous tickets. On Aug. 28, 58 alleged trespassers made the court list.

Again, please correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't that be a county court? So we're talking about tickets for the entire county, wouldn't that be several independent police departments and county sherrif? And what does "made the court list" mean? The way the paragraph's written I can see how one would get the impression that some maverick cop wrote 58 tickets in one day.

I'm guessing it's more likely to be how many tickets are outstanding, awaiting some sort of resolution with the court. What's the relationship between that number and the number of tickets issued in an average day? That's less than 1 ticket a day for 2 months. Don't speeding tickets and jaywalking citations allow a month or so for you to pay the fine? If that's the case I'd be surprised if a normal court list would have less than 58 items on it for normal 1 a day countywide enforcement, and I wouldn't consider that a crackdown.

However getting back to your idea that there is a major problem, it's not necessarily the trespassing that's the problem. There is also the phenomenon that there was some more serious suspected offense, for example vandalism, but not enough evidence to charge the person whom the cops saw walking away from the broken switchstand. When the feds put Al Capone in prison for tax evasion it didn't necessarily mean that they were cracking down on tax evaders.

My opinion is based on the facts. The local police (not the RR police) are ticketing trespassers on RR property by the dozens. Trespassing seems to happen everywhere, but this particular town has the police cracking down, which must mean there have been problems with vandalism and/or theft to the point where the local police have felt the need to step in. If they can't catch them in the act of a more serious crime, they can at least get them for trespassing  and hopefully make them think twice about getting on the RR property to begin with.

But a bridge would silence the whiners like the woman who was "outraged" by getting a ticket.

[selector]

GD, zugmann's post wasn't directed at you.  It was for an earlier poster whom he thinks is deliberately posting inflammatory comments designed to stirr things up.  The term troll is used for those who jump around on forums and try to cause trouble, then flee when they have done what they set out to do and search for more fertile ground.  FWIW, I don't believe the person to whom he referred is a troll, but exhibits troll-like behaviour when it meets his needs.  It is in keeping, or consistent, with his utilitarian ethics that he expressed earlier when he stated that he trespasses regularly because it is in his interests to do so. 

[gardendance]

I hate trolls....

your post came right after mine. Are you responding to me? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the terminology, what do you mean?

The police department's effort to crack down on trespassing has netted numerous tickets. On Aug. 28, 58 alleged trespassers made the court list.

 

It sounds like the cops are writing tickets left and right. They wouldn't get involved unless it was turning into a major problem.

ButchKnouse, I'm assuming you're expressing your opinion, you think it's a major problem because the cops are getting involved, but the only quotes in the article are

According to Operation Lifesaver, 486 pedestrians died last year after being hit by trains

please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't operation lifesaver a national program, that's 468 pedestrians nationwide?

The police department's effort to crack down on trespassing has netted numerous tickets. On Aug. 28, 58 alleged trespassers made the court list.

Again, please correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't that be a county court? So we're talking about tickets for the entire county, wouldn't that be several independent police departments and county sherrif? And what does "made the court list" mean? The way the paragraph's written I can see how one would get the impression that some maverick cop wrote 58 tickets in one day.

I'm guessing it's more likely to be how many tickets are outstanding, awaiting some sort of resolution with the court. What's the relationship between that number and the number of tickets issued in an average day? That's less than 1 ticket a day for 2 months. Don't speeding tickets and jaywalking citations allow a month or so for you to pay the fine? If that's the case I'd be surprised if a normal court list would have less than 58 items on it for normal 1 a day countywide enforcement, and I wouldn't consider that a crackdown.

However getting back to your idea that there is a major problem, it's not necessarily the trespassing that's the problem. There is also the phenomenon that there was some more serious suspected offense, for example vandalism, but not enough evidence to charge the person whom the cops saw walking away from the broken switchstand. When the feds put Al Capone in prison for tax evasion it didn't necessarily mean that they were cracking down on tax evaders.

[Beach Bill]

Reason I'm stating the above is that in all the posts abour rr trespassing, I very seldom see what the penalties are?     Are they very severe or just a slap on the wrist?

I didn't keep my Code of Virginia volumes when I retired from policing, and haven't gone on-line to verify, but from what I recall: 

In Virginia, Trespassing is a "Class 1 Misdemeanor", with a maximum possible penalty of up to 1 year in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000.    In APPLICATION, the penalties are usually a fine only of $100 or less.   Usually, penalties are only higher than that for repeat offenders.  General District Courts almost universally allow people to set up a payment plan to pay their fine if requested.  Also, there is a provision in Virginia Code that allows a property owner to sign a document allowing local law enforcement to represent them in court on trespassing charges.  The Officer issuing the summons would testify in court about how the property was posted, that the offender was present on that property without authorization, and that it was in a location within the jurisdiction of that court.  That way, the property owner (CSX) doesn't have to send a paid representative to every court appearance of multiple offenders.

 Bill

[videomaker]

Issuing tickets doesn't work...look at the graffiti murals that must take hours to paint...

Besides...how much public taxpayer money is invested in railroads? And CSX (as well as others) are asking for more to improve infrastructure. If the taxpayer is putting money into the business then the taxpayer has a right to walk along its right of way (within reason)...just my opinion.  If you're going to take a hard line with me just for being on your property then don't take my money.

Look at this way,CSX could be paying the city to have their officers write ticket on CXS propety and CSX will send an attorney to the court dockets to defend the rr position..The judge will proably rule for the city and it will be a win win for both Charolottsville and CSX..If it goes to court and the def. ask for a jury trial,then you take your chances with a jury..