if people could learn to drive.

[Anonymous]

Wow, that is a good word change, thats cool! i even printed it out and i'm going to bring it to work

I like your version better, Mr Smith,

Kev.

[vsmith]

Kevin,
I rewrote your song to something a little closer to reality, hope you dont mind...


The gates were clearly lowered, and the train was on it's way.
But I ain’t stopping cause by God I have the right of way.
My SUV went round the gates and the train did not give way.
The train still marches on!

(chorus) Glory, Glory, What a hell of a way to die!
Glory, Glory, My car is flying thru the sky!
Glory, Glory, This ain’t the way I’m supposed to die!
The Train still marches on!

(chorus)

My SUV was first to cross, I had the right of way.
Because my cause is righteous, I ignored the crossing gate.
Now St Peter tells me I’m going to go the other way.
The train still marches on...

(chorus)

My family now is grieving and all they do is cry.
Because I was a stupid *** and wouldn’t let the train go by.
My Lawyer now will sue because faultless was I.
The train still marches on!

(chorus)

This song is dedicated to a fallen member of this forum, where ever you are Missouri,
remember to check under your bed or those evil wicked trains or they will come and get you..

This is sort of a Mad TV version of just how serious trying to beat a train can be, people get maimed, or they never get anything ever again, and its just ignorance, arrogance, or indifference that kills them.

[vsmith]

Now I understand why the Europeans have spent so much time and money building seperation crossings (underpasses and overpasses) so dips**t morons like this dont make the local headlines. The only way this can be stopped is by doing the same thing, but thats a big infrastructure cost commitment and no one in DC is listening. Of course even if we did this, some idiot would figure out a way to get stupid and drive off a bridge and land on the tracks, and of course it would be the RR fault for building a dangerous overpass.

In England there was a story of a very drunk guy who urinated off an overpass onto the high voltage catenary lines of the RR below. You can guess what happened to him ZZAAAPPPP!!!!

[Anonymous]

I have come to the conclusion that most people are just stupid. You don't run a stop sign at an intersection, so why the hell do ya do it at a rail crossing? They need to realize that STOP sign is for them and not us, and it means just what is says STOP dumb!@#. I thought of something the other day that will never happen but could signifigantly lower the stupid level of running stop signs at grade crossings. Speed bumps. Not too many people are gonna hit one of those at 55. These could be placed at crossings with stop signs especially in bad areas where sight is limited. Seems like a good idea, but would cost $$a lot . Money for installing the bumps, the signs, labor, and other costs, would be great, but its just an idea.

[dehusman]

Yes you can fit a car under a train.
Train stops on a crossing equipped with flashing lights after dark . The railroad is up on a ballast section so the crossing is about a foot above the roadway. One of those big black, no underframe, LPG cars straddles the two lane road, one truck on one curb the other truck on the other curb. The guy come barrelling down the road, sees the headlights and house lights on the other side of the tracks, sees the flashing lights, doesn't see a headlight coming (its already past the crossing) so guns it to "beat the train".
Squeezes the car right under the tank of the tank car and rips out the trainline, putting the train in emergency. The roof of the auto crushed down an broke the guys neck, he's DRT (dead right there) his dip spit cup in his lap, cooler of s on the seat beside him. Other than a broken train line, no damage to the car.

Dave H.

[Anonymous]

Another rail related dumb lawsuit.....some drunk guy in Chicago urinated on the "third rail".....his parents sued the CTA....arguing they should have put up warning signs (like a DRUNK would pay any attention!)...and they won, 1.5 million dollars!

It's STUPID!

~Ra'akone

[Train Guy 3]

If you drive into a train IT'S YOUR FAULT. If you go past lowered gates and get hit IT's YOUR FAULT. You can't sue anyone for that or can you................ I guess you could sue for...... for there not being enough warnings... the warning lights not being bright enough.... the gate being to small... heck you might be able to sue for the train tracks just being at a particular place.


I just don't get people these days. They think you can sue anyone for anything, sue people when it's thier fault, and sue for just plain stupid things. I'm glad to see some cases were throw out the courts, like those fat kids sueing McDonalds for making them fat.

People try and sue the railroad for the trains making there house shake when it goes by and for how much noise it makes. Poeple wanna sue because coal dust has come of the cars and landed on there stuff. Now someone tell me what are the chances that their house was bulit before the railroad track was laid down.

People in a town near me tried to sue NS for the coal dust thing. The town wouldn't even exist if it hadn't been for the tracks being laided. They should be thankful the railraod created a place for them to live and company for them to have a job at. They said the trains went by to fast making the dust drift and that the trains should slow down. I can't believe them. They didn't try to sue the company next door for dumping toxins in the river and infecting the fish. They didn't try to sue the power plant next door for the constant humming and the coal dust off their coal pile. People just amaze me these days.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin

So the guy drives under a stopped train at a crossing (with lights) at night at speed.... he lost. What if he hit a kid on a bike he "didn't see"?... then he would have won, wouldn't he?

You know a fellow engineer And myself would have a song we would start singing if we heard of a story about a Stupid driver going through a Crossign with a train approaching.. it went like this:

(sing it to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic)



The gates were clearly lowered, and the train was on it's way
The gates were clearly lowered, and the train was on it's way
The gates were clearly lowered and the train was on its way
And the train still marches on!

(chorus) GLORY GLORY what a hell of a way to die!
Glory Glory what a hell of a way to die!
Glory Glory what a hell of a way to die!
Yet the Train still marches on!

(chorus)

The driver was the first to cross, The first to also die
The driver was the first to corss, The frist to also die
The driver was the first to cross, The first to also die
And the train still marches on...

(chorus)

The family now is at a loss and they begin to cry
because a stupid fool tried to take it on the fly
The family now is at a loss and they begin to cry
And the trains still march on!

(chorus)

Now I already know this song will offend some peopele, yet you msut realize I have NO,( Zilch) and any other synnym that means Zero, sympathy for people who try to race the train, thsi is clearly what this song is devoted to, the morons of that category.

[corwinda]

QUOTE: Originally posted by ironhorseman

WAIT, WAIT, WAIT--- You mean to say someone drove UNDER a train????[:0] How in the world? Of ALL the trains I've see I don't know of ANY that could be driven under in ANY car (not even those low, low, ground hugging solar powered cars).

I'm sure it means the vehicle wedged itself under the railcar. (Possible with just about anything other than a doublestack well or depressed center flatcar.) Although ordinary tank cars are high enough that a low car might get all the way through (sans roof) if it was going fast enough.

[vsmith]

Unfortunatly you are partly correct. Cyclist do stupid things but alot is due to idiot unattentive drivers fumbling for their cellphones. Out here we have more than our share of complete morons behind the wheel. These are the people who hit firetrucks because they "didnt see it" Heaven help the poor cyclist out here.

Legally, a bicycle is technically a motor vehicle and technically subject to the same laws as any car or motorcycle. For example, that means that yes a cyclist is legally supposed to cross lanes into the left hand turn lane and use the signal if he's making a left turn. It also means that technically he supposed to ride in the traffic lane the same as any other vehicle.

In reality only IDIOTS do this, I am an avid cyclist and I wouldnt do this for all the Bunnies at Hef's place! We live in a time when guys on Harley's sporting mufflers that are so loud that they'll shake your teeth loose are getting hit by people who "just didnt know he was there". Its shear stupidity to joust with traffic, yet I see it all the time. Roadies (the guys who ride them skinny tire bikes) who flaunt the traffic laws entirely and race thru red lights. I ride on the street with the same mentality of a pedestrian, I dont try to prove that the road is mine, cause I know it aint.

I stopped riding on my road bike years ago cause it got to damn dangerous, way too many close calls and idiot or just plain evil drivers out to hurt you. I'll stick to my mountain bike, bears and rattlers are far easier to deal with that Mr Idiot and Mrs AngrySUV Mom.

I'm not going to comment on the brainless wonder that managed to hit a moving train at what I supposed was a working crossing gate. Sometimes you are dealing with a person thats just simply too stupid to live.

[AltonFan]

QUOTE: Another idea.....maybe set up cameras at some crossings....and notices that "racing" is illegal....so anyone who escapes tragedy by the skin of their teeth will be reminded in the form of a ticket.

They're actually doing this at some of the crossings around here (suburban Chicago). The only problem is that some of the people being ticketed are people who happen to be already crossing when the signals go off.

QUOTE: And about hitting someone on a bike: Don't ever get hit by a car while riding a bike, not just because of the potential physical injury, but because chances are it'll be your fault when you get to court. Don't hit a pedestrian with a car, but don't be on a bike and get hit by car, at least in the United States. This happened to someone my dad knows and there is no legal recourse for the bike rider.

If this is true across the US, I'm glad to hear it. I see too many bicyclists on roads they really don't belong on, blocking traffic, and ignoring stop signs and stop lights, taking right of way, and doing other stupid things. If I get caught running a stop sign with my car, even if there is no one else anywhere near the intersection, and I get a ticket, a fine, and increased insurance rates. Too many bicyclists simply breeze through busy intersections, and nothing happens.

However, I have a feeling that bicyclists enjoy pretty much the same protection as pedestrians, at least here in the Land of Lincoln.

In too many cases, corporations would rather settle a lawsuit, even if they were not to blame, and much litigation is carried on under this expectation. One lawyer where I work did once point out that fighting the suit in court is always an option, and that juries (in Cook County, at least) are often unwilling to award damages.

[ironhorseman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin

So the guy drives under a stopped train at a crossing (with lights) at night at speed.... he lost. What if he hit a kid on a bike he "didn't see"?... then he would have won, wouldn't he?

WAIT, WAIT, WAIT--- You mean to say someone drove UNDER a train????[:0] How in the world? Of ALL the trains I've see I don't know of ANY that could be driven under in ANY car (not even those low, low, ground hugging solar powered cars).

I'm going to assume by what is written that the guy crashed into the train. I'm also guessing by the text this guy's argument is that he didn't see the train. Did he really not "see" the train or did he not want to see?

Some parts of the country would find in favor of the motorist and other parts would find in favor of the railroad. Go figure. I have my bachelors degree in criminal justice and I still don't understand why the courts make decisions the way they do. Nobody knows. We've had this dicussion in every class and everyone pretty much agrees there's something wrong with the CJ system but nobody's for sure what it is or how to fix it. What works in Massachusetts doens't work in Minnesota and likewise for Kansas and California.

There's a case where a kid, a teenager, got a 15 year prison sentence because he punched another kid for stealing his girlfriend, yet this one serial killer continues to be set free because in order for the police to solve these crimes this killer has bargained for reduced sentences and has spent only a few months in prison. It's literally a revolving door for him. And while he's free he kills more people. And he gets off again because he has information to other crimes. Now tell me there ain't something wrong with that picture.

I get angry and frustrated when courts do things like this but I'm not surprised anymore. It's really the lawyers fault, both prosecutors and defense attorneys. It's all a big game to them called "see how we can twist the law and fool the jury today." Either side may know the truth of the case, but to save face both would rather spin lies to support their cause than admit the truth and risk embarassment. It's all about status and reputation, not about what's right. And sometimes you'll get inexperienced lawyers to take cases. An accounting attorney can be court appointed to a death penalty case depending on the state's public defender laws.

That's why people hate lawyers, those of us that have to deal directly with them, but the blame falls on the court in the public eye because they see the courts as allowing law-breakers to get away with it. In a trial by jury the judge is only the moderator, a referee.

And about hitting someone on a bike: Don't ever get hit by a car while riding a bike, not just because of the potential physical injury, but because chances are it'll be your fault when you get to court. Don't hit a pedestrian with a car, but don't be on a bike and get hit by car, at least in the United States. This happened to someone my dad knows and there is no legal recourse for the bike rider.

[jchnhtfd]

At least we aren't alone -- the same kinds of idiocy, and legal reward for idiocy, permeate our whole society. jhhtrainsplanes has it just about right -- but until something can be done about a legal system which is designed to reward stupidity, what are you going to do?

[techguy57]

Yeah, I just pretty much said the same thing on the "Which is more amazing post?" only a lot wordier. You know, maybe Darwin was really onto something. If only we could make it so they couldn't hurt bystanders...

Mike

[Anonymous]

I am going to try to keep off the soap box and keep in put up.

I do not understand the mentality of people, courts, judges, and juries. There are stop signs up at many railroad crossings. There are lights, and bells at most others. It is illegal to run a stop sign. It is illegal to cross the tracks when the lights and bells are flashing and ringing. Yet the families of the deceased lawbreaker will be "awarded" for the stupidity of the law breaking incident ( and potential Darwin Award winner). I just can't get this to add up in my book.

[Anonymous]

Another idea.....maybe set up cameras at some crossings....and notices that "racing" is illegal....so anyone who escapes tragedy by the skin of their teeth will be reminded in the form of a ticket.

~Ra'akone

[Anonymous]

Funny thing is some idiots try to cash in on tragedy.....that's right, they SUE the railroad.....even though there's perfect physics involved......trains can't stop on a dime like autos, and there's no way to make them able.

Some people seem to think railroad tracks are for decoration. And they don't realize that ANY TIME is train time.

~Ra'akone

[eastcoast]

Hey, when its a tie at the crossing, YOU LOSE.
That person paid the ultimate price for a preventable
action. Happens almost like this everyday in my town.
People try to beat the local and come within inches of
tragedy. The crossing only has lights and most ignore them.

[TH&B]

So the guy drives under a stopped train at a crossing (with lights) at night at speed.... he lost. What if he hit a kid on a bike he "didn't see"?... then he would have won, wouldn't he?