A perfect example of a bad example

[Anonymous]

Here's some more fuel to the fire from the Brotherhood of Locomotive engineers web site:

QUOTE:
MODESTO, Calif. -- A woman was killed early Tuesday trying to beat an Amtrak train through an intersection, the fire department said.
The woman, who was alone in her vehicle, passed around crossing arms that were already down, spokesman Hugo Patino said. The train hit the car, shearing off its front end and causing it to erupt in flames.
The force of the collision sent the car spinning, and it hit a second vehicle that also caught fire.
Patino said a passerby pulled three passengers out of the second burning vehicle. At least two people were hospitalized.
The names of the victims had not been released late Tuesday.
None of the 102 passengers on the train was injured, but an Amtrak spokesman said passenger and freight trains would be delayed throughout the day.

Who was saying that every crossing needs gates?
Looks like they didn't do much good here.

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Willy2

Ed: I surely know that you are not trying to promote another website. I just think that a website with such a name must be quite a strange website and it sounds like it is a little bit cruel to the railroads. Still if CSX crew members post in it, it must not be as bad as I thought it may have been.

I kind of think that Marth Stewart is a little bit too haughty for her own good, but I don't think that she should go to jail. Still she always annoys me and my grandma is constantly going on about the things she learns from Martha. She also says that the reason Martha got convicted is because all of the guys in the world are jealous that they can't do what Martha does. Kind of a whacky opinion isn't it? [xx(][%-)][B)]

Now we are also talking about Martha Stewart in this topic!

Willy

Willy - Grandmas are very wise people! I have stated on this forum before - she had a lot of good tips and unlike 99.9% of all the other cooking/home type shows, she didn't fling her hands or make a lot of noise or BAM! - she was very relaxing to watch - sometimes too much so......zzzzzz

But in the world of big business, others got a hand slap or stood in the corner for a few minutes - Martha was grounded. (I have heard before that off-camera she wasn't the nicest person in the world. But she didn't attend any of the cocktail parties I don't go to anyway with me!) So I am with your Grandma. I liked her too!

Mookie

[Willy2]

Ed: I surely know that you are not trying to promote another website. I just think that a website with such a name must be quite a strange website and it sounds like it is a little bit cruel to the railroads. Still if CSX crew members post in it, it must not be as bad as I thought it may have been.

I kind of think that Marth Stewart is a little bit too haughty for her own good, but I don't think that she should go to jail. Still she always annoys me and my grandma is constantly going on about the things she learns from Martha. She also says that the reason Martha got convicted is because all of the guys in the world are jealous that they can't do what Martha does. Kind of a whacky opinion isn't it? [xx(][%-)][B)]

Now we are also talking about Martha Stewart in this topic!

Willy

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Not trying to promote another web site here...
But, CSX sucks is a web site created by the employees of CSX, has quite a few photos, and lots of comment threads, from time claims to fatigue problems.
Kinda a peek into the minds and feelings of a Class one railroads employees personal journal.

Its crude, full of some harsh language, and has a lot of interesting photos of what can go wrong.

If you can put up with the language, read the threads, if not, just look at the photos, some funny, some scary.

Ed

Gee Ed I was all ready for some harsh language and a good crude website tour but the site looks like it's offline til May, so I had to go visit Martha Stewarts home page and read her coments about the court ruling. Man that girl can cuss!!!!

Jeff

[edblysard]

Not trying to promote another web site here...
But, CSX sucks is a web site created by the employees of CSX, has quite a few photos, and lots of comment threads, from time claims to fatigue problems.
Kinda a peek into the minds and feelings of a Class one railroads employees personal journal.

Its crude, full of some harsh language, and has a lot of interesting photos of what can go wrong.

If you can put up with the language, read the threads, if not, just look at the photos, some funny, some scary.

Ed

[Willy2]

This seems to be becoming a very interesting topic! We've had talk about missouri, about bad crossings, about good crossings, and about wreckless drivers.

I won't even go to CSXsucks.com because to me it is just an insult to myself and to railfans to even go there. Still, it would be interesting in a vile sort of way to see what is in that crazy website. I am glad that Mike and Missouri are gone, that's all I can say!

Willy

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

I think it is, or was, mostly a male thing. The west was settled by men heading out there and the wives went along - because that is what you did!

Mountain climbing, surfing, jumping out of airplanes that aren't on fire, crossing wires strung between buildings, bungee jumping - and the latest - living in a cage with seriously poisonous snakes. Most of these are men things.

So why wouldn't you challenge yourself to get across those tracks before the train gets you - you were the winner and the train was the loser - at least that is what should happen. For women - it is inattention and in a hurry. Too many distractions and too much going on!

And neither is a good excuse.

In nature, both inattention and contests to establish alpha male-dom are both effective means of culling the herd. I would compare the lady on the cell phone driving her minivan/SUV to the antelope or zebra at the watering hole......a moments inattention means the cheetahs are feasting on fresh meat tonite. As for the other.......Darwin's rules apply......

[Mookie]

I think it is, or was, mostly a male thing. The west was settled by men heading out there and the wives went along - because that is what you did!

Mountain climbing, surfing, jumping out of airplanes that aren't on fire, crossing wires strung between buildings, bungee jumping - and the latest - living in a cage with seriously poisonous snakes. Most of these are men things.

So why wouldn't you challenge yourself to get across those tracks before the train gets you - you were the winner and the train was the loser - at least that is what should happen. For women - it is inattention and in a hurry. Too many distractions and too much going on!

And neither is a good excuse.

[dharmon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by wabash1

Now before everyone starts flaming me and calling me a murder think open minded. I dont like hitting these people at crossings and killing them.

It won't be me. I'm on your side

[Anonymous]

I think you have something there, Madame La Mookie. My father used to tell tales about his exploits with the Lackawanna. His advice- "Don't try to jump a train doing more than five miles an hour." He was raised in the 1920's and gleefully told me tales about stealing rides on the backs of trolley cars in Brooklyn- and having classmates killed doing the same thing.
Most people (present august company excepted) don't equate trains with people. They can't see the engineer on board anymore, and after an accident they have no idea of what the engineer (or conductor) carries around in their head. People are used to the idea that all trains are Thomas the Tank Engine. They aren't aware that a train is a big animal that will get them- and that the engineer and conductor can moderate, but not stop, the behavior of that animal.

Erik

[Mookie]

ah - a fleeting thrill at someone else's expense! That has to be why they do it - something in the human psyche that needs to tempt fate and something much, much larger than they are w/o consideration for anyone else.

Moo Freud!

[wabash1]

Out of the 100+ crossings i must blow for each trip the crossings i have the most trouble with are

1) crossing that are in dropped speed zones usually 30 mph or less. they cant wait the train is going slow i can beat it. or it might stop lets hurry and get by it. in one area they dont even slow down they keep on going. ive watch these people slide to a stop when i enter the crossing.

2) the other big problem is in the country where for years it was cross bucks only. then recently they up graded the crossing to have lights and gates on a gravel road. Now the drivers opinion is we have a warning device that tells us a train is comming for decades they would pull up and stop not knowing if a train is comming. now with lights they can race the train. and at 60mph there is not much of you left to bury.

at night i cant see the driver ( usually) but during daylight i can and it is amazing how many of these idiots look at you try and judge your speed and then go. at night time you can tell if they are racing you watch the brake lights. the truth is if these people dont care if they live or die why should we. are we not taking the side of angles on tracks and wanting safer crossings or let these people go. by saying more needs to be done is saying the railroad is at fault. and that these bad choices of these bad drivers somehow the railroad needs to stop people from doing this to themselves. Now before everyone starts flaming me and calling me a murder think open minded. I dont like hitting these people at crossings and killing them. and it does make for a lousy day all the paper work and questions. and more questions then when you think it is over here comes the claims agent wanting a taped statment on what happened. then more paper work. they got hit and i got punished.

[Anonymous]

Do I really need to go over the "SOO Line 4-6-2 hauling the North Dakota local" bit again? I really don't think so--you've all heard it a half million times anyway. But I disagree with Ms. Moore: I believe crossing accidents have gone up. And as many others have said, the railroad usually was the one granitng the rights to build a crossing anyway.

And just out of curiosity, what exactly is a "good" crossing? Let me go on a little brain storming session here:

1.) Flashing red searchlights, warning drivers up to three miles away.
2.) Crossings activated by trains within thirteen miles.
3.) Three foot thick cinder-block gates which swing shut, providing no means of going around the crossing.
4.) The destruction of all vegitation within a two mile radius of a crossing.
5.) The abolition of railways.

Now let's use a litle common sense here. The only one of those sarcastic comments which could be used was increasing the area of the crossing signal activator, providing more warning time. I would support this, but on the other hand it would provide more incentive for some drivers to run crossings.

See you around the forums,
Daniel

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie

QUOTE: Originally posted by Doggy

As I've said ALL crossing don't care if they have one train a day THEY ALL NEED GATES WITH LIGHTS so beancounter excutives SPEND YOUR LOOT

I disagree - a little more responsibility on the part of the drivers is needed. You can put up anything you want - it won't stop a good share of them. They have to be taught from infancy to be more responsible. We have gates and lights here and they go around them as if they are a nuisence and non-existant! So don't put the blame on the railroads - put it right where it belongs - right square on the nut behind the wheel!

Mookie, you are EXACTLY RIGHT!!!! The responsibility at ANY RR Xing lies in the hands of the motorist, NOT the RR!!!! Let's change that last line to "right sqare on the LOOSE NUT behind the wheel"!!! What was that famous quote from "Forrest Gump"?....................is as ............ does!!!

[dharmon]

I'm glad I missed out of the M&M twins. I was a lurker back then and pretty much decided not to join the forums becasue of it. Then I came back, and I'm glad I did.

I am sorry that folks continue to die in train-auto accidents, but unfortunately, unless the train is running without lights at night, and intentionally not sounding the horn, I find it hard to believe that anyone can be hit by a train. It's called lack of situational awareness, stupidity, carelessness whatever, but it is preventable and the driver is the only one who can prevent it. Okay..so my car stalled on the tracks....my fault...Yes. Because if I stalled on the tracks trying to beat a train...it's my fault. If I was injured or killed becasue I was sitting in my stalled car instead of bailing out of it....my fault...I can buy a new freakin car. Crossing a non gated crossing without caution....my fault. You don't go into a intersection without looking both ways..same deal here. I'm real sorry folks continue to die but they are doing so becasue of their own action and lack or loss of SA. I know that common sense is not a common virtue, but as is become more common in today's society...it is just one more case a of general lack of responsibility and accountability for the consequences of one's own actions. Funny how we want no train horns sounded but want to hold crew responsible for folks blatantly running around the arms.......sight lines...give me a break....that's just a item to latch on.....how bout growing up, getting off the damn cell phone and lokking around when you drive....We need cameras in the cab of locos, similiar to the Houston Metro cameras to document this stuff. So the lawyer can show the jury...and here is where Mrs. John Q Soccermom, while talking on the cell phone, looked straight at the train and then drove her minivan around the crossing arms just moments before the impact.

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by coalminer3

Mookie - I bet you made sure there were consequences ( consistently enforced). I do the same thing with my "tribe." I'll also bet you took time to listen (i Mean REALLY listen and respond to questions). I'll also bet some days (we'll keep it on topic) you felt you'd been in a train wreck. I know I do.

BTW, people come up and say to me, "I wish my kids would behave..." what can you say to a remark like that?

work safe

You should say thank you and pat yourself and your wife on the back for raising good kids! We who work our tails off to raise our kids the right way - deserve a little credit, so be like the Mookie and take it! I am going to post something under my weekend musings, so be sure to read about a young person I know!

Moo

[coalminer3]

Mookie - I bet you made sure there were consequences ( consistently enforced). I do the same thing with my "tribe." I'll also bet you took time to listen (i Mean REALLY listen and respond to questions). I'll also bet some days (we'll keep it on topic) you felt you'd been in a train wreck. I know I do.

BTW, people come up and say to me, "I wish my kids would behave..." what can you say to a remark like that?

work safe

[Anonymous]

Some cities have installed cameras at intersections and also inside patrol cars. It's an expensive lay out to do initially, but in one city (Paradise Valley, AZ) you end up getting a ticket in the mail (and you can see the picture they took of you at the courthouse). I wonder if the railroads have ever considered installing cameras at gate crossings and having the local cops write tickets off them?

Erik

[Anonymous]

I went to that CSXsucks website for2 seconds, and I was disgusted that people like that are allowed to live in the USA. Those m&m twins are perverse, siiiiccccckkk people.
I do not want that site on my computer ever again, in fact I went to it by GOOGLE so it wouldn't be on the list of websites I visit. "rabid loon" doesn't begin do describe how sick and twisted those people are. The only place they belong is in a "rubber room" at a max. security mental center/ prison. I can't believe how demented some people really are

[Anonymous]

A while ago in my town some idiot kids ages 16-20 (older than me by the way) decided it would be cool to put a stolen van onto a grade crossing and let a train hit it. When the Kansas City Southern coal drag came along, I can just imagine the horror of the engineer and conductor, who probably thought someone was in the van. That train crew had already flipped over a few hoppers at Roodhouse, hit a deer a little north of where this happened, so I bet those guys (or ladies) were pretty stressed out. For those of you who say that honest people are hard to come by these days, I agree with you-I;m only 14 and have seen some very bad and wrong things done to other people. put the responsibility where it belongs-we all make mistakes but that gives us no right to blame other people. People need to be safer on the road indeed, there's something like a car accident every 30 seconds, a fatal one every 20 minutes. Make you wonder how many of those happened by a crossbuck.

[JoeKoh]

Ed is correct.The M&M twins were a pain.Missouri would argue until the cows came home and then some.simply put you have a choice when you come to a crossing.I choose to stop look listen and live.gates and lights are good but its the person behind the wheel.
stay safe
Joe

[edblysard]

Rick,
Lucky dog you, you missed the M&M twins, a pair of forum members, Mike and Missouri.
Mike was just a instigater, and Missouri was flat out rabid loon.
Both would start a thread out with a almost intelligent question or statement, and after a few replies from other forum members, would suddenly become hostile, accusing railroads of conspiring to muder innocent drivers, stealing crossing devices, defrauding the public, all sorts of bizzar accusations, including muder.
Missouri's favorite accusation/gripe was the line or angle of vision at crossings.
When it was pointed out that most of the property surrounding railroad crossings was private porperty, and that railroads had no legal ability to clear the property, he responded that railroads had the moral necessary to buy the land and clear it.

If you get the chance, visit CSX sucks .com, and read Mr Robert Pines postings there, one and the same person as Missouri, which was his user ID here, before the editors at Trains.com removed his access to this site..

Discussing anything with him was sorta like arguing with a brick wall, you can, if you want to, but all you ever got out of it was a headache.

I too went to Mrs Moores site.

The first thing that bothered me was the front page image of children playing in the middle of the tracks, with a train approaching in the back ground.
Now, I feel very sorry for the lady, I would lose my mind if something even remotely like that happened to her son ever happened to any of my three daughters.
But...
From what I could gather from the site, they too think railroads get to choose what safety devices are, and are not installed at crossings, and that railroads somehow bear the responsibility of what drivers of private vehicles do at such crossings.
From their standpoint, we, the railroads, should protect their children from doing dangerous things, like running through railroad crossings without looking both ways.
She also feels we should remove buildings and vegatation along the sight lines at crossings, reguardless wether the railroad owns the property the obstruction is on or not.
I e-mailed her, and explained that while each state has different laws reguarding who builds what part of each crossings, and who decides what is installed, down here in Texas, the state or local DOT gets to make these decisions, often after having sued the railroads for access and a easement to use.
Her reply was the law of emminent domain allows railroads to remove or destroy private porperty to keep the sight lines clear, and that if railroads dont install quad gates and insure clear vision for several thousand feet each way, that we were murders.

Well, maybe in Ohio, but in Texas, you enter someones private property, with out express permission, and destroy or remove something, you will be,
A: Shot.
B:Shot again.
C: Shot several more times, just to make sure.
D: If you survive being shot to ***t, your sued for all your worth.


In her message to her son, Mrs Moore commented on the fact that had her son been better able to judge the speed of the approaching train(which implies he saw the train before entering the crossing) he might have made a better decision about trying to beat it to the crossing.

In our e-mail discussion, I pointed out that there really is only one decision anyone should make at a crossing, when they know a train is approaching, the decision to stop clear of the crossing.
Her response was that "all children are impaitent, the railroad should be responsible for making sure they cant harm themselves at the railroads crossings"
She went on to state that all railroaders who opperate trains over these "killer" crossings should either refuse to do so, or slow down to a speed that allows us to stop our train before we run over the person who made a bad judgement call.
She finished her response with the statement that those of us who dont , are murders.
I pointed out to her she may get better results by approaching the people who design and install the crossings, which we dont want in the first place,to which she responded by again referring to railroaders and railroads as murders.

Not the best way to garner the help or sympathies of a select group of people, calling them murders for doing their job.

Through out her triade, she constantly referred to OLI as a conspiricy to hide the "truth" from the public, and to shift blame for all crossing accidents onto the driver.
That was one of Mike P and Missouri's favorite themes also.
So, again, a brick wall to argue with, and the same results.

After a few evenings of researching her, and several members of the organization, and reading their messages, I came away with this.

Unlike MADD, which is active in schools, and functions with the cooperation of almost every law enforcement agency in the US, and who is making a concerted effort to educate young drivers of the danger of drinking and driving, including stressing the importance of making good decisions before you get behind the wheel of your car,
Angles on the Tracks, and it members, seem more intent on taking the decision making process out of the hands of the driver, and finding some way, no matter how ludicrus, of placing liability on the railroad in such a manner that monetary recovery becomes the major issue.

What they are asking for is economicaly impossible, and in quite a few instances, legally impossible too.

They want that pie in sky, someone else to be completly responsible for their kids, and if they cant get that, they want the right to sue, not only the railroad, but the railroaders involved, for unlimited recovery.

Sad, but it boils down to, "if you cant prevent my kids from doing something dumb, and protect them from themselves, I want to be able to sue you for as much as possible when my kids get hurt or killed, as a result of their bad decision making skills".

I am a reasonable person, I try to remain level headed, and to look at all sides to any issue before I form an opinion, and said opinion is subject to change, based on additonal facts and information provided.

My personal opinion is that the safest crossing is the one that isnt there.
Underpasses and overpasses make sense, dead people and lawsuits dont.

With that, all I can really add to this is,
Thank God they are in Ohio, and I hope they stay there.

Ed

[Puckdropper]

Rick, may I attempt to sum up your post in one sentence? Get all the facts before making a decision.

Bad crossings can kill good drivers, but chances are you know it's bad. Part of driving is watching all that's around you and looking for hazards. That doesn't just mean eight year olds playing in the front yard, that means unsafe roadside conditions.

If a private (like a driveway) crossing is bad, come to a complete stop and roll the windows down. Even private crossings have to be whistled for, and if you can hear a whistle, don't cross. I heard an Amtrak before it even activated the crossing circuits. (Stopped and watched, but a semi could have passed over the tracks at about 20 mph safely.)

[daveklepper]

I think this discussion is a most important one and already says everthing I have to sat on the subject. Dave Klepper

[Rick Gates]

Opinions on this subject vary, and because we are in a Trains forum, will be one sided on behalf of the railroads. They also, seem to have taken an aside based on our own morals and values and upbringing. From what I can glean from these responses, I should agree with most everyone, and I believe as Hillary said, "It takes a village." My parents raised me much the same as you have related yours, the rod was not spared. Because they are my parents, they would say that I turned out OK. Many would disagree. Bias is in play here. Of course, my daughters are great too. Willingness, open-mindedness, and honesty are needed to best see all sides of any issue. The "blame" we are always so ready to access, does not always lie squarely on any one piece of the puzzle. For instance. I checked on the http://angelsontrack.org/report.htm. The first thing I saw raised my predjudice as a railfan. It was their motto: "Bad Crossings Kill Good Drivers." From my own experiences, I tend to believe that most crossing accidents are the driver's fault. I investigated futher, with an open mind, and found that this website/orginization spawned from a tragic accident March 25, 1995 in Ohio. Six young people were hit by a Conrail train traveling at 60mph through a road crossing with only crossbuck signs and an obsructed view due to trees and overgrowth vegetation. Three were killed and the other three seriously injured. Two of these were brothers. From what I can see, their mother Vicky Moore is responsible for starting this organization, possibly and in part, as a way of dealing with her grief over the loss of her son Ryan. I can relate to this as some of the victims of the Chase accident started a similar watchdog/lobby group called "Safe Travel America." The Mission statement of Angels on Track, mentions only Ohio (for now) and, indicates it is to help "highway authorities" fund improvements for safety including education. It seems to me that they are not placing any blame squarely on the shoulders of railroads though they invite their cooperation. I still believe the motto may be misleading however, I would also be mislead into a predjudiced attitude (as has been done by others concerning this group) if I did not investigate further with an open mind. Writing spited letters without checking all the facts will only invite spiteful replies. We have read that example. I believe RR crossings should be eliminated or fully protected wherever possible. This is not practical at many locations and would be paid for by us, the taxpayers. Education about this subject that reaches everyone seems the best approach. That would take efforts by all those that are knowledgeable about the subject. The neighbors helped to raise kids in my neighborhood when I was growing up also. They didn't blame the unions about their job situation, they attended meetings and had their voice heard. They attended, PTA, City/County forums, not only voted, but wrote letters and attended town halls. I was taught not to keep complaining about a situation if I did nothing about it. So, I stay involved in union meetings and the like to further the chances of positive change. What might these tradgedies spar you to do? You folks are very knowledgeable. [:-^]

[Anonymous]

"MISSOURI", the person not the state, must be connected to that organization somehow.

[Anonymous]

There is a new group, or relitivly with the wacky point of veiw that the railroads are to blame. The Group is called Angels on Tracks.

Here is a post from Train-sim.com message boards.



Forwarded message I got this morning.
(Orginal sender's name hidden)
> > dear angels on track,
> > >
> > > I agree with your effort's to get railroad crossing's to be
> > better
> > > lighted with crossing light's, gates, etc. But I must say that
> > your
> > > slogan of " Bad crossing's kill good driver's" is not even true.
> > First
> > > off, the railroad has been here for over 150 years. Back in the
> > old day's
> > > train's crossed crossing's that only had a crossing sign at over
> > 90 MPH.
> > > People did not get killed. They looked, listened, and then crossed
> > the
> > > track. A driver that does not take the time to look before they
> > cross is
> > > stupid. The railroad has al way's had the right of way, and will
> > al
> > > way's. There is nothing that can be done about that. If you want
> > to make
> > > a difference, put the responsibility where it belong's. On the
> > stupid
> > > driver that think's that he or she does not have to slow down,
> > look, or
> > > listen. The Federal law requires engineers to blow there horn. Now
> > The
> > > engineer also suffers with a death at a crossing. many people have
> > had to
> > > get serious care because at night they dream of the face of the
> > child
> > > staring at them just before impact and there is nothing that they
> > can do.
> > > Please. They are just doing there job. They are just as innocent
> > as the
> > > person that crossed in front of the train and got hit. This nation
> > has
> > > gone way to far in not putting the responsibility on the person
> > who is
> > > actually responsible. So again I agree with you trying to get
> > more
> > > protection, but your slogan is false. If they were good drivers
> > they
> > > would not have pulled out in front of that train.
> > >
> > > B.P.
>
> > Mr. Porter. Thank you for contacting our Foundation, and while
> > you state you take exception to our slogan "Bad Crossings Kill
> > Good Drivers", I must tell you that the opinions of others will
> > never
> > alter the mission or focus of our Foundation.
> >
> > This slogan was not just pulled out of a hat. It is based on fact.
> > Only approximately 20% of our nation's railroad crossings are
> > protected with gates. Most, if not all, railroad crossings do not
> > meet FHWA/AASHTO sight line requirements for safe passage
> > across tracks. Even crossings with protection (gates and lights)
> > malfunction. Crossings with passive markings (crossbucks, stop
> > signs, Buckeye crossbucks) do not warn of an approaching train.
> > All of these are BAD CROSSINGS and kill hundreds of people
> > each year. To believe that all railroad crossing accidents are
> > caused by irresponsible motorists, is a unfounded stereotype that
> > has been accepted by unknowing individuals.
> >
> > And contrary to your statement ("back in the old days train's
> > crossed
> > crossings that only had a crossing sign at over 90 mph.
> > People did not get killed").... thousands were killed each year
> > and thousands were injured during the late 1800's and early/mid
> > 1900's. Crossing accidents have only decreased due to railroad
> > mergers,
> > crossing consolidations and closures, and installation of
> > protection
> > devices (gates). The safest year in railroad history (1999), 1369
> > people were injured and 402 people lost their lives. I find that
> > solemn
> > statistic to brag about, especially to those, like myself, who have
> > lost
> > a loved one to a dangerous crossing.
> >
> > To say all you have to do is look, listen and cross, is a dangerous
> > assumption and a deadly one at best. If you can't see down the
> > tracks
> > because sight obstructions such as trees, buildings, brush, parked
> > railroad
> > equipment, how can a motorist tell if a train is coming? If the FRA
> > whistle
> > ban is adopted
> > this coming December trains will not sound their horns at whistle
> > posts
> > posted 1/4 mile down the track, what will you listen for? Do you
> > honestly think that the railroad companies and their employees
> > always
> > follow required safety procedures such as train speeds, flagging
> > crossings
> > that have malfunctioned, etc., and the railroad companies have no
> > responsibility
> > for public safety?
> >
> > The fact is there is alot that can be done about dangerous railroad
> > crossings.
> > First, there is no excuse why all railroad crossings are not
> > protected with
> > properly functioning gates. Second, there is nothing precluding
> > the
> > railroads
> > from funding installation of protection (gates), they just choose
> > not to.
> > Third,
> > instead of always blaming the motorists for virtually all railroad
> > crossing
> > accidents,
> > current educational programs and organizations (funded by railroads)
> > should
> > present an unbiased message, based on facts, to address the true
> > causes
> > for railroad crossing accidents. These messages are used to focus
> > on the
> > victim and not the railroads conscious disregard for public safety.
> > Fourth,
> > all speed tapes and event recorders should be turned over to an
> > independent
> > agency after an accident, not the railroads involved. Also taking
> > into
> > account
> > most highway patrol, sheriff departments, emergency personnel, and
> > first
> > aid responders have been trained by our nation's railroads in
> > "railroad grade
> >
> > crossing accident investigation" to determine the cause. Now who do
> > you
> > think they will find at fault?
> >
> > You might be interested in knowing that we have the continued
> > support and
> > well wishes from current and past railroad employees. We also have
> > the support from experts within the railroad industry. To tell me
> > that you
> > support our Foundation's goals to install gates at all crossings,
> > but then
> > take exception with our slogan, can only be taken as lack of
> > knowledge
> > on your part as to what needs to change. Nowhere in our slogan do
> > we
> > mention railroad employees, we address the crossings. And, bad
> > crossings
> > also kill railroad employees. You might want to visit the
> > http://www.csx-sucks.com
> > website. Go to safety. Read the posts from those employees. They
> > support
> > what we are saying, and confirm the lack of concern that exists
> > today for
> > dangerous crossings. And, we also have the RRESQ link posted on
> > our
> > website (Crossing To Safety section). If we were not interested in
> > the
> > safety of all, public and railroad employees, why would we have a
> > link on
> > our website?
> >
> > I will not argue with you. I will repeat that you are sadly
> > mistaken
> > and too readily willing to accept what has been accepted for far too
> > long
> > as to what causes these accidents. Only those people with a
> > sincere
> > wi***o stop these needless tragedies, will open up their minds and
> > look at the other side of the story............that which has not
> > been
> > told in the past. May God send peace and understanding to your
> > heart to understand our Foundation.
> >
> > Vicky L. Moore, Trustee
> > The Angels on Track Foundation
> > Crossing To Safety
> > "BAD CROSSINGS KILL GOOD DRIVERS" (R)
> >
> >
> >
> > Well Vicky L. Moore,
>
> Thank you for at least writing back. I have to say that I am
> ignorant of some thing's and you have given me some interesting info. I
> thank you for that information, but I believe that you also are ignorant
> of some thing's, but you said "I will not argue with you. I will repeat
> that you are sadly mistaken". That lead's me to believe that you are not
> as you said ready to "open up their minds and look at the other side of
> the story......" So I will not waist your time or mine. Good luck in your
> work and I wish you well.
> Have a super day
>
> B.P.




Here is the link if any are interested. http://www.train-sim.com/dcforum/DCForumID1/8049.html

I also find it funny, that an organization like that feels the need to send hate mail to railfans who have a quite different point of view...

[edblysard]

Macguy,
You bet, cops arent just cops anymore, they are social services, dispute resolution experts, arbitrators, and baby sitters, along with being cops.
People call them for just about every thing from their 4 or 5 year old being a snot nosed brat to getting their cat out of a tree.(it happens, Mookie, sorry)

And like you, I got my fanny waxed quite often as a kid, with no permanent injury, either to my fanny or self image.
But you can bet your last dollar I would never be rude to someone older than myself, and I dont act like a self centered jerk in public,and dont allow my kids to do so either.
Once they grow up and move out, they can speak and act any way they choose, but as long as they live under my roof, they will use the manners my wife and I taught them, or get a dose of applied psychology.

Ed[:)]

[Puckdropper]

I have no experience in raising children, but have lots of experience in being raised. One thing that is very clear in my family is the fact that Dad and Mom love us and each other. They also love God and have taught their children the truth about Him. (Read the Bible, not one of those "special" ones, but an honest to goodness Bible.) Perhaps this is the biggest help in bringing up children. Unconsciously, a child will know that he (substitue female pronouns if you wish) misbehaved and his parents DON'T want to punish him, but MUST because they LOVE him.

We all help in raising our cats. They know the rules, and we enforce them, but we love them. They know to stay off the kitchen counter, but can get up on the bathroom sink, etc... Every so often, a good yelling reminds them of what they're supposed to do, and if that doesn't work, they get picked up and looked straight in the eye. (Or sometimes rudely pushed off whereever it was they were.) They know we mean business. Cats are like children, most the times a non-abused child responds sufficiently to being yelled at or preached to, but occasionally need something physical as punishment.

You can have all the warning devices in the world, but without knowledge of their use or without a healthy mistrust of electronics (meaning you trust them to work, but know they don't always) collisions will still happen.