Getting back to container cargo theft:
I have presented an idea to eliminate container cargo theft from those stack trains.
Since much of the cargo is insured, I wouldn't be surprised if the insurance companies wake up (eventually) and offer two insurance rates for these containers: one for a secure container, similar to what I have described, and another rate for the as-is containers. Which do you think will be higher, so as to offset the insurance losses on those non-secure type containers?
Ed
It's entirely possible that insurance companies won't touch a container that goes through the port. In the first world war, there was a German cruiser in the Indian ocean called the S.M.S. Emden that harassed shipping to the point that insurance companies wouldn't touch a ship that was in that area so a lot of shipments didn't move. Stopping commerce was what it was all about. I think that could happen here.
7j43kGetting back to container cargo theft:
I believe your suggestion for more secure containers are a necessary part of a solution.
The "bolt" affixed from inside the bottom container, which secures the doors of a top container, also on the inside, gives me concerns about potential leakage. How would you address that?
I'm sure something could be made to work
This whole problem was turned on in 2020. The easiest solution is to just turn it off.
The problem with container theft goes back to almost the beginning of the advent of serious container movement as an organized gang activity in the LA Basin. It already had taken hold with TOFC movements and autoracks before that. It got worse with the construction of the Alameda Corridor which funneled three railroads into one access route into the port (s).
Gangbangers did get killed/injured falling off moving trains, espeially during starts or stops. Ken Fath, a former member on this forum (since passed away) was a special agent turned Damage Control officer for Team Chico, ... the big man had plenty of stories about intermodal theft and the LAPD "don't care" attitude enforced by city hall.
The lack of assistance from LAPD (and other jusidisdictions nearby) is also something that is not new. That problem extends even more to illegal dumping. LAPD had a bad habit of herding the homeless onto railroad property and then telling the railroad to clean it all up.
-Former LA Roadmaster
Bucky's comment don't fly with those that have been there and those that are there now.
EuclidThe easiest solution is to just turn it off.
I'm forced to think of the episode with the Nike container in Chicago, where the final disposition was that it was determined to be "entrapment" leaving a big chunk of cheese so tempting that the rats just couldn't resist.
So long as you have prevailing mindsets such as that out among the general population, I doubt that stricter enforcement is gonna happen.
Then you have all those activists looking for patterns in incarceration, trying to claim that the system is the problem due to bias, etc.
I don't see much promise in any crackdown lasting long enough to make significant impact.
The worst part of this is UP could fix the track fluidity issue, resolve the issue on it's own without outside help but chooses not too. Instead it stands by the wayside while it's clients property is looted from it's custody. What a great message on client service to send to the marketplace......not.
mudchicken The problem with container theft goes back to almost the beginning of the advent of serious container movement as an organized gang activity in the LA Basin. It already had taken hold with TOFC movements and autoracks before that. It got worse with the construction of the Alameda Corridor which funneled three railroads into one access route into the port (s). Gangbangers did get killed/injured falling off moving trains, espeially during starts or stops. Ken Fath, a former member on this forum (since passed away) was a special agent turned Damage Control officer for Team Chico, ... the big man had plenty of stories about intermodal theft and the LAPD "don't care" attitude enforced by city hall. The lack of assistance from LAPD (and other jusidisdictions nearby) is also something that is not new. That problem extends even more to illegal dumping. LAPD had a bad habit of herding the homeless onto railroad property and then telling the railroad to clean it all up. -Former LA Roadmaster Bucky's comment don't fly with those that have been there and those that are there now.
I am not referring to theft in general. I am talking about what is happening with this particualr explosion of theft in LA that is all over the news lately. U.P. says this began in 2020, and they explain why it began, and how they want to end it by reversing what started it.
CMStPnPThe worst part of this is UP could fix the track fluidity issue, resolve the issue on it's own without outside help
Shouldn't the DA do his job prosecuting criminals?
The victim is not the one to blame.
York1 John
I feel for the train crews who have to face this lawlessness day in and day out. Certainly not good for the blood pressure.
York1Shouldn't the DA do his job prosecuting criminals?
I'm not trying to sound combative, but...and then do what with them?
Prison berths cost money, and often are already in short supply. They frequently have purges in the state prison system where non-violent offenders with short time left get cut loose early to make more room for incoming "traffic". I saw it happen several times while I was living out there.....many repeat offenders I knew personally have been beneficiary numerous times.
So, with that being the reality, which I am sure prosecutors are acutely aware of the chronic shortage....I suspect there are factors driving what we see as overly lenient enforcement, that never make it to the table in context with the discussion we are allowed to have here.
Plus we've got a society that is determined to see the offenders as victims,.... on top of the above fiscal limitations.
https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/california-governor-visits-site-of-train-thefts-announces-funding-to-address-issue/
Still in training.
York1 CMStPnP The worst part of this is UP could fix the track fluidity issue, resolve the issue on it's own without outside help Shouldn't the DA do his job prosecuting criminals? The victim is not the one to blame.
CMStPnP The worst part of this is UP could fix the track fluidity issue, resolve the issue on it's own without outside help
The 'Law & Order' mind set has the idea that arresting and convicting 'criminals' solves the problem. It does not. It just make the problem worse as now 'the state' has to house, supervise and feed those that have been convicted. People are being convicted at rates in excess of the states ability to house supervise and feed those the state sends to prison. Prison in reality is a 'school of higher learning' for the criminal 'profession' all paid for by the state.
I don't have the answers, but what is currently happening is not the correct answer.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
I know I'm missing the big picture or something, but I'll ask anyway. How big is this area we are talking about? Can't they fence it in better? The governor says he's going to pledge $255 million over 3 years. How much fence can you buy with that?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
BaltACD The 'Law & Order' mind set has the idea that arresting and convicting 'criminals' solves the problem. It does not. It just make the problem worse as now 'the state' has to house, supervise and feed those that have been convicted. People are being convicted at rates in excess of the states ability to house supervise and feed those the state sends to prison. Prison in reality is a 'school of higher learning' for the criminal 'profession' all paid for by the state. I don't have the answers, but what is currently happening is not the correct answer.
What other remedy do you propose? Too many people don't know, or aren't willing to admit, that a certain percentage of the general population have made a conscious or unconscious decision that they are going to be criminals, they are always going to be criminals, and they aren't interested in rehabilitation. I don't know what that percentage is, but I suspect it's between 10% and 20%; anyone with actual knowledge feel free to correct me. There is nothing society can do to protect itself against these individuals but (1) lock them up, or (2) kill them. If you lock them up, at least you keep them from preying on decent people while they are inside. What are you going to do, tie them to a chair somewhere? Because that is the only way you are going to keep them from committing crimes against the general population.
I have seen enough of these people's arrest records to put my hand on a Bible and swear that locking up a relatively small number can make a significant dent in the overall crime rate. When a 40-year-old has a 5-page or longer arrest record, it's a safe bet he (statistically more likely to be male) is a full-time criminal, and works diligently at it.
There is another group of individuals who are occasional or sometimes criminals, or they haven't committed to being career criminals. Some of these individuals can be reached, and through counseling, training and vocational/educational opportunities these people MAY (emphasis on MAY) become productive members of society. But their rehabilitation is 100% dependent on them - they have to want it and work for it, it can't be forced on them. I'm a hard-liner on punishment for crime, but I'm 100% in favor of providing such counseling, training and vocational/educational opportunities, which can also benefit the third group of criminals.
These are the individuals who have been convicted of one crime, and find the experience so traumatic that they are going to do everything in their power to go straight. These people can benefit from the programs mentioned above, and I'm in favor of providing them, but this group isn't a huge threat to society.
SALfan1 BaltACD The 'Law & Order' mind set has the idea that arresting and convicting 'criminals' solves the problem. It does not. It just make the problem worse as now 'the state' has to house, supervise and feed those that have been convicted. People are being convicted at rates in excess of the states ability to house supervise and feed those the state sends to prison. Prison in reality is a 'school of higher learning' for the criminal 'profession' all paid for by the state. I don't have the answers, but what is currently happening is not the correct answer. What other remedy do you propose? Too many people don't know, or aren't willing to admit, that a certain percentage of the general population have made a conscious or unconscious decision that they are going to be criminals, they are always going to be criminals, and they aren't interested in rehabilitation. I don't know what that percentage is, but I suspect it's between 10% and 20%; anyone with actual knowledge feel free to correct me. There is nothing society can do to protect itself against these individuals but (1) lock them up, or (2) kill them. If you lock them up, at least you keep them from preying on decent people while they are inside. What are you going to do, tie them to a chair somewhere? Because that is the only way you are going to keep them from committing crimes against the general population. I have seen enough of these people's arrest records to put my hand on a Bible and swear that locking up a relatively small number can make a significant dent in the overall crime rate. When a 40-year-old has a 5-page or longer arrest record, it's a safe bet he (statistically more likely to be male) is a full-time criminal, and works diligently at it. There is another group of individuals who are occasional or sometimes criminals, or they haven't committed to being career criminals. Some of these individuals can be reached, and through counseling, training and vocational/educational opportunities these people MAY (emphasis on MAY) become productive members of society. But their rehabilitation is 100% dependent on them - they have to want it and work for it, it can't be forced on them. I'm a hard-liner on punishment for crime, but I'm 100% in favor of providing such counseling, training and vocational/educational opportunities, which can also benefit the third group of criminals. These are the individuals who have been convicted of one crime, and find the experience so traumatic that they are going to do everything in their power to go straight. These people can benefit from the programs mentioned above, and I'm in favor of providing them, but this group isn't a huge threat to society.
Law enforcement - to be effective has to hold the 'fear factor' over the population it polices. That factor was eliminated with the enactment of Prohibition. While the laws were enacted, they were not embraced by a sizable portion of the population that wanted their booze - legal or not. Prohibition created the real profit motive in organized crime to supply the population what they wanted (and it didn't hurt that Organized Crime in many cases bought the police in their areas of business.) Move that on to all the other areas of human failues - gambling, prostitution, drugs and finally traffic enforcement and you have the police interacting with the population on a almost first name basis and there is no fear in the interaction.
Familarity breeds contempt is the saying and it rings true in many cases.
Throw in disproportionate enforcement with one class ending up with years in prison and another class walking out of the courtrooms without a care in the world when charged with the same cimes and the same levels of evidence.
I don't have the answers.
The UP isn't moving anywhere. That's b.s.
The LAPD isn't going to do much more than they're doing now, which is little-to-nothing. Nor is the LA criminal justice system.
If this problem is to have a long-term solution, it's up to the UP and shipping companies to devis and implement it on their own.
One solution: FENCE OFF the entire corridor for as many miles as it takes.
Heh... isn't the US government in possession of prefabricated 30' high "border fencing" that isn't being used? Ship that to LA and install it in the most sensitive areas.
But it's going to take more than that, as this organized looting is going to spread elsewhere.
What's needed is a new, easily-applicable method that prevents container doors from being opened once loaded onto the well cars. Something that is passive, not "intrusive" (i.e., confined exclusively to the OUTSIDE of the container), will not interfere with stacking on ships or at terminals, and cannot be defeated with torches, let alone bolt-cutters.
In essence, once the containers are stacked and loaded onto the cars, there should be no way to open the doors on either end until they're physically off-loaded from the cars, and the passive security is removed.
Whoever can devise such a system is gonna make a lot of money.
OldEngineman The UP isn't moving anywhere. That's b.s. The LAPD isn't going to do much more than they're doing now, which is little-to-nothing. Nor is the LA criminal justice system. If this problem is to have a long-term solution, it's up to the UP and shipping companies to devis and implement it on their own. One solution: FENCE OFF the entire corridor for as many miles as it takes. Heh... isn't the US government in possession of prefabricated 30' high "border fencing" that isn't being used? Ship that to LA and install it in the most sensitive areas. But it's going to take more than that, as this organized looting is going to spread elsewhere. What's needed is a new, easily-applicable method that prevents container doors from being opened once loaded onto the well cars. Something that is passive, not "intrusive" (i.e., confined exclusively to the OUTSIDE of the container), will not interfere with stacking on ships or at terminals, and cannot be defeated with torches, let alone bolt-cutters. In essence, once the containers are stacked and loaded onto the cars, there should be no way to open the doors on either end until they're physically off-loaded from the cars, and the passive security is removed. Whoever can devise such a system is gonna make a lot of money.
You are describing the same anti-theft "method" that I wrote about earlier in this topic.
I'm glad you agree with me, and I appreciate your support.
The UP isn't moving anywhere. I agree. But their freight might. The shippers whose containers are getting emptied can bring them through any port they want. As I've mentioned, the boxes could be dropped at Oakland, instead of LA.
Then UP can haul empty stack trains. Shorter ones, anyway. Less profitable ones, anyway.
UP is making a big stink about this because they are hearing from their shippers. UP isn't losing money; it's losing a reputation. The shippers are losing money, and they don't like it. Same for the insurance companies that are involved.
Fence in the Alameda Corridor installed new in the 90's was trashed by 2005. (including the fancy Israeli super security zig-zag stuff).... Chain Link / Cyclone fence doesn't work (absolute joke and ought to be banned, even with razor wire) - It'll have to be heavy duty commercial steel fence which isn't cheap. (Close to $1million a mile done right)
All you have to do is go down in Orange County/ San Diego County to see how well fencing goes over. (See STB FD-36433 at Del Mar) Don't Fence Me In
And then you have to maintain it. (More importantly, WHO is gonna maintain it?) Statutes on railroad livestock fencing is one thing, people is something else. The Chicago-StLouis HSR corridor is already dealing with those issues.
Until there are "consequences" for LA's "finer citizens", this will continue. The guv is down there picking up trash* "for show" because the federal money will dry-up fast after this, the high speed rail mess in central CA (which got abused wasting tons of $$$ moving homeless around, a transportation infrastructure project turned into a social welfare project) and other CA politician mishandled/mismanaged projects. Federal spending will stop until CA (and LA in particular) gets its act together.
Congestion in the ports and the LA Basin (compounded by record traffic) is not going to be solved by one railroad (UP) all on it's own.
(Norfolk Southern and intermodal truckers have electrified fence in some of their installations around intermodal yards and that doesn't work either plus the extra room for barrier isolation safety zones is not there ... Wonder what Gomez Addams would do? 10 Digit item number for land mine?)
(*) Picking up trash on railroad property without 214 flag protection? Isn't that an FRA Code-1 violation?
York1Shouldn't the DA do his job prosecuting criminals? The victim is not the one to blame.
Yes there are two problems with that. First is as BaltACD stated and the second is you missed the part in the story where it stated this was probably driven by ORGANIZED CRIME. Which to Law Enforcement means the street criminals are expendable to the prosecution and easily replaced if the paid for lawyers of the CRIMINAL SYNDICATE does not keep them out of jail. No problem finding more to step in their shoes. The real criminals sponsoring these crimes are far removed from the scene and difficult for LE to reach.
It is interesting to ponder LA's reluctance to productively cooperate, in context with the cold shoulder that railroads have shown communities in response to complaints about blocked crossings (and decaying infrastructure). If the railroads insist that what happens on their property is beyond local jurisdiction, then perhaps this outcome might have been forseeable?
Bruised egos and bent jurisdictions, just like we see sometimes on Blue Bloods.
Convicted One,
I've tried replying to you on two of your posts, and get a 403 when I submit. So, going along the lines of "it isn't me, it's you" (I think I've heard that one before), I'll respond indirectly:
There isn't a leak problem with the method I described because there is only a hole in the bottom of the container--more of a drain than a hole, then. It COULD have a cover or gasket, but KISS really does apply here. Any successful solution has to fit that.
Convicted OneIt is interesting to ponder LA's reluctance to productively cooperate,...
What goes around comes around; sometime double.
California and specific locations like LA are seeing small businesses, and individuals, fleeing to AZ, ID, NV. and TX. because of this and the taxes paid to clean up what is damaged or destroyed by these same miscreant participants.
It is sad to see this once beautiful State deteriorate.
If a company that is located in the LA area gets a container, it will be delivered by truck, and never be on the UP.
If a company moves inland to somewhere like AZ, then their container MIGHT be on UP. It is not up to UP to decide that. And if they move farther inland, the odds the container will travel on the UP will increase. Again, the UP does not make that decision. That decision will be made by either the shipper or the receiver.
Euclid What should the District Attorney do to cooperate?
I'm sure that you've read the numerous posts from our regulars here in pertaining to communities complaining to the railroads about blocked crossings.
So, you know what they say about payback?
Why would any community that has been force fed the drill about trains being beyond their jurisdiction, expend their resources to the benefit of non-cooperative extra-jurisdictional entities?
Specific to the last sentence in your original reply, ...exactly!! if UP wants to hire on-site security to establish a pre-emptive deterrent,..no one is stopping them
7j43k So, going along the lines of "it isn't me, it's you"
Honestly, I don't believe either of us is the fault. It's the baling wire and chewing gum holding this place together.
diningcarIt is sad to see this once beautiful State deteriorate.
People get the government they deserve brother, the "leaders" out in California weren't voted in by the man in the moon.
My 1st line: What goes around comes around.
Convicted One Euclid What should the District Attorney do to cooperate? I'm sure that you've read the numerous posts from our regulars here in pertaining to communities complaining to the railroads about blocked crossings. So, you know what they say about payback? Why would any community that has been force fed the drill about trains being beyond their jurisdiction, expend their resources to the benefit of non-cooperative extra-jurisdictional entities? Specific to the last sentence in your original reply, ...exactly!! if UP wants to hire on-site security to establish a pre-emptive deterrent,..no one is stopping them
When I ask what the DA could do to cooperate, I am asking what options he has to act in a cooperative way. But, considering that he believes his practical de-criminalization of the train theft is what he considiers to be the correct policy for the benefits I described above; it is unlikely that can do anything to cooperate.
Regarding your point about security, in terms of law enforcement, what should U.P. do on their own to prevent the thefts? If they applied enough policing manpower, and have the power to arrest trespassers, what exactly would be a successful action?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.