Limited security on Amtrak trains; lawmakers want more

"“Passenger screening protections on Amtrak are nothing like on air travel or even what the public must go through to enter this very building here,” said Congressman Brian Babin, who serves on the sub-committee.

Target 7 was able to obtain a copy of the Amtrak police department's strategic plan report for 2022 to 2026.

The report shows that in 2021, about 65 passengers were screened per 100,000 people,"

https://www.koat.com/article/security-a ... e/45727894

Kinda hard to do. You'd have to rebuild tons of stations, staff them up, and limit access on commuter rail.

An congressman who wants more haven't taken MARC out from Union Station to fly out of BWI.

As Senator Schumer often brings the topic of airline security, I keep asking why he doesn't bring up how easy it is to bring a loaded gun into Penn Station (the Merillon Avenue massacre might ring a bell for those recall).

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Fri Nov 03, 2023 11:35 am
Kinda hard to do. You'd have to rebuild tons of stations, staff them up, and limit access on commuter rail.

There’s also the small matter of INTRASTATE travel. Congress’ authority does not reach to Pacific Surfliner, most Metra runs, and all of CTA for starters.

Lest we forget, Brightline has a security checkpoint at each of their station; guess it is part of their modeling the travel experience after an airline flight.

Really, I think anyone had best accept that security checks are simply part and parcel of "when two or three gather together". Any public events I attend (symphony concerts) include such. Those here who attend other public events that I do not (sports, "other" concerts) will surely concur that same is the order of the day.

And finally, with regards to my quotation found at Matthew 18:20, I would not in the least be surprised if there are houses of worship with same.

Where will it end? Don't they realize attacking a bridge in some remote location will produce the same, if not greater result?

arthur d. wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2023 5:21 am Where will it end? Don't they realize attacking a bridge in some remote location will produce the same, if not greater result?

Yes, but that is far more difficult to secure but security theatre shows people you are caring. I think this is something to show we are securing someplace where the Federal government has already bothered to exercise control over firearms (interstate transportation albeit to ensure an airplane can't be turned into a weapon a la the 9/11 hijackings) instead of taking any steps to reduce violence in this country. It's all theatre as far as I am concerned.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2023 5:08 am Really, I think anyone had best accept that security checks are simply part and parcel of "when two or three gather together". Any public events I attend (symphony concerts) include such. Those here who attend other public events that I do not (sports, "other" concerts) will surely concur that same is the order of the day.

The policy of no oversize bags or backpacks at sporting events and concerts was a response to the Boston
Marathon (sadly an intelligence failure).

STrRedWolf wrote:Kinda hard to do. You'd have to rebuild tons of stations, staff them up, and limit access on commuter rail.

An congressman who wants more haven't taken MARC out from Union Station to fly out of BWI.

Hard to do has never been a disqualifier.

Securing Amtrak is certainly easier than replacing 95% of the internal combustion vehicles and installing hundreds of thousands of charging stations nationwide, yet that's what your president seems to want to do.

FRA and DHS can impose a safety standard that will affect Metra, Surfliner et al and be completely within their authority. FTA can do the same.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

Actually securing Amtrak will likely be harder than replacing 95% of the internal combustion vehicles and installing hundreds of thousands of charging stations nationwide because it means securing every mile of trackage used by Amtrak. The attacks against Amtrak have so far been attacks against isolated railroad infrastructure that have successfully prevented existing signaling and safety systems from recognizing the attack. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Palo ... derailment

eolesen wrote: ↑Sat Nov 04, 2023 9:04 am Hard to do has never been a disqualifier.

Securing Amtrak is certainly easier than replacing 95% of the internal combustion vehicles and installing hundreds of thousands of charging stations nationwide, yet that's what your president seems to want to do.

FRA and DHS can impose a safety standard that will affect Metra, Surfliner et al and be completely within their authority. FTA can do the same.

"Hard to do" here also includes "expensive to do". Remember, you got to retrofit every station to be gated and inaccessible to anyone else. They will also need to be staffed, even if they are flag stops. For stations along freight lines, that means pocket tracks, enclosed platforms, raised platforms for many, actual station buildings for many as well. For commuter passengers at Amtrak stations, it means you're serving local rail on a pair of tracks and Amtrak secured on another, and thus four tracks with secure rail. All of which needs more land...

Which is going to take a TON of money. That's going north of the $1.2 trillion USD for all infrastructure, but it's all going into rail. All of it.

Is all of Congress going to pony up the cash for that?

A little off topic but... A good friend of mine was federal officer (FBI retired) we traveled all over the country to watch baseball. Security at most stadiums he would present his credentials and there was no issue with him having his service weapon on his person. Here is where the theater begins. Boston whist walking through security to get on Lansdowne St. he was scanned I saw the guard hit his pistol with the wand it beeped nothing was said. My buddy never presented anything to anyone. Chicago, Wrigley Field he is told by a Chicago cop unless he places his service weapon in a lock box he will not be allowed into the stadium. Last I looked Gold trumps Silver, Federal trumps State. I have never seen a grown man get so pissed asking to speak with a supervisor. He was told rules are rules did not matter if he was a federal agent. Surrender the piece or watch it at a bar. I would think you one would want a trained and armed law officer near by if something were to happen. But... as Spock would say most illogical

Now back to our regular programing

RandallW, passenger screening doesn't equate to right of way security. Nice try.

When passenger screening was added at airports in the 1970's, it was an unfunded mandate. Terminal designs didn't account for screening at the time, but 20 years later it was commonplace as facilities were replaced or renovated.

When DHS and TSA took over screening responsibility, it became funded by usage fees on every ticket sold. It's more or less self sustaining.

If TSA has to screen Amtrak passengers, that cost and inconvenience will be passed on to riders.

Chicago PD managed to secure The Bean overnight. It might be ugly at first, but securing a train platform for 30 minutes isn't exactly rocket science.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

I didn't try to equate the two--I'm just pointing out that its much easier and more common to attack trains by attacking the ROW instead of attacking the train as a passenger and if someone was seriously concerned about those attacks, they'd be working to prevent the known attack patterns.

A bit off-topic, but if anyone would like a pre-TSA trip "down memory lane" (well, for me) check out this 1970 flick, Airport. There were some four sequels - each getting more absurd than the preceding one.

But "it's a trip" to watch people coming and going anywhere in the "real life" MSP (fictional: Chicago Lincoln International) - and the best: people "dressing up" - suit and tie or dresses - to go on an airplane flight. Even the "bad guy" was wearing a suit.