Amtrak Begins Random ID Checks on Trains

Showing photo IDs is, at worst, a nuisance. It's de rigeur when flying these days so it's not surprising that train passengers are being asked to flash their IDs. A few thoughts:

What about buses? Has Greyhound started asking for IDs? Prior to the "fence" being erected, suicide bombings on buses were quite common in Israel?

On an unreserved train (or bus), there is no manifest to check against. What purpose would ID checks serve? If there's a wireless link to a terrorist (or criminal) database that's one thing, but I don't think my railroad ticket should pay for law enforcement.

As I said before, showing IDs is a nuisance. When they raise it to emptying the contents of your pockets into a cup and taking off your shoes and belt (just like on airplanes), then I'll start driving and worrying about when practices Days Inn and Ramada will make me endure.

IMHO There are several factors combining to create this rule

1) There is a desire to create a 'do not ride' list similar to the 'do-not-fly' list where passengers names are checked against the list. For this to work, there have to be reasonable assurances that the name on the ticket is the person travelling, otherwise there is a huge hole in that policy.

2) Many first time train riders are 'shocked' about the lack of security on trains. While this is silly and unwarranted, it does exist

3) Do something, anything mentality. Some are worried that should an attack occur they'll be hung out to dry for not implementing some security measures. Since actually providing sensible security measures for train travellers is a non trivial problem, and would require much $, instead people will apply band-aids so they are seen to be doing 'something'

#1 is probably the biggest factor

The whole ID thing is a sham at making us feel "secure". If Amtrak really wants to make their trains safer they could do a few basic things, like making the cabs on the locomotives secure by locking the doors! I've witnessed several times conductors and other Amtrak personnell walking right up to a AEM-7, opening the door and walking right in. Usually in Phila the conductor takes some coffee and donuts to the engineer, a nice gesture. I'm sure it gets lonely up there, but what's keeping anyone else from doing the same thing?

jfrey40535 wrote:The whole ID thing is a sham at making us feel "secure". If Amtrak really wants to make their trains safer they could do a few basic things, like making the cabs on the locomotives secure by locking the doors! I've witnessed several times conductors and other Amtrak personnell walking right up to a AEM-7, opening the door and walking right in. Usually in Phila the conductor takes some coffee and donuts to the engineer, a nice gesture. I'm sure it gets lonely up there, but what's keeping anyone else from doing the same thing?

It would be a simple matter to defeat the type of locks found on most trains. Anyone with the desire, and some forethought and planning would find these to be no obstacle.

But how real is the threat to take control of a train and crash it into something? Also, on the NEC and in other areas with some form of cab signals/ATS, it would be a relatively simple matter for dispatchers to safely stop (or at least bring to 15mph) speeds by setting signals appropriately.

JoeG wrote:This identity check is one of many things the government is doing to give people the illusion of being protected.

Joe hit the nail directly on the head! It gives the ILLUSION of being protected!

How many millions (billions?) of dollars have been spent on beefing up security since 9/11? Hey, Uncle Sam has to have SOMETHING to show for all that money! So, they make getting to an airplane seemingly more difficult (personal response to this...HA!) and now they figure "hey, we have to protect rail travelers, too!" Again, I say HA!

All that has been done in the name of "added security" is to make it -seem- like something is being done to prevent future strikes like 9/11 or Madrid. But, anyone familiar with railroads knows that security is impossible on or around a train. They could install complete airport-style scanners at every train station (commuter and subways too!) and STILL not cover 10% of the possibilities of terrorism. All it would accomplish is a major inconvenience and delays to the travelling public.

Airport security is just as much of a joke to a 'serious' terrorist as ever. While the days of a box cutter getting through are essentially over, in talking with a former airport security person I know, there are still ways to get weapons onboard.

In short, all the airport and train security is simply an 'appeasement' to Joe Public that things are now 'secure'. What a joke and a complete waste of taxpayers money!

Great. I have unused tickets that I can't trade in....I was going to use them with several friends to return from Newark to Philly after railfanning the New York area. My plan was to use one ticket and give the other four to them, and we'd all go home on Amtrak instead of doing the NJT/SEPTA shuffle....

Guess I'll have to make the multiple trips myself before the tickets expire!

That being said, I have no problem with ID/ticket checks in and of itself. But, it will do nothing to stop any potential terrorist, in my personal opinion.

Joe

Silverliner II wrote:Great. I have unused tickets that I can't trade in....I was going to use them with several friends to return from Newark to Philly after railfanning the New York area. My plan was to use one ticket and give the other four to them, and we'd all go home on Amtrak instead of doing the NJT/SEPTA shuffle....

According to the news articles, that practice is what Amtrak is trying to stop. That use to be a common practice with airline. One person would trade in their miles and give the ticket to a family member. The airlines embraced the ID practice way back when since it put a stop to this practice and may have lead to higher revenue.

I generaly have issues with what I call ineffective security for the sake of calling it security. I place the ID matching to the tickets for security reasons in that category. I know it calms a lot of people to know it's there. Some times the best security is the security you don't see. London, a place with a history of terrorist acts has a very high level of security, you simply don't notice how heavy it is. When a security measure pop up, people come swarming from the woodwork. This type of security doesn't impead the normal traveler. Adding restriction to Amtrak travellers I believe will cause travelers to go to the airlines instead since that would have the same inconvienece and would be quicker. As others have mention, the commuter rail lines would have more of a concern based on what took place in Madrid.

Before we "jump on" Mr. Silverliner around here, let's find out what kind of ticket he holds and wished to share amongst his friends.

If the ticket is noted as non-transferable, then Mr. Hall has a point and Mr. Silverliner should take heed. However, I have noted other multi-ride tickets about that ARE quite lawfully transferable.

So the best answer is that trite one your Doctor, Lawyer, and (NOTE) your CPA, gives out all too often: "it depends'.

RMadisonWI wrote:I have no problem with Amtrak using ID checks to protect its customers from ticket theft, but this move won't do anything to increase security against terrorism.

No one would want blow up the CZ or the Chief but maybe an NEC train I think that if it is to protect against Ticket Thieft I no problem with it.

AmtrakFan

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Before we "jump on" Mr. Silverliner around here, let's find out what kind of ticket he holds and wished to share amongst his friends.

Three of my five tickets are unreserved one-way tickets from NWK to PHL. The other two are reserved between the same points, but are still valid for use on unreserved trains. Because I usually had on some railroad-related wear on, conductors would just wave me by on my railroad ID. Three of them expire in December, and the other two expire in 2005. I can't trade them in due to the method of purchase.

metrarider wrote:1) There is a desire to create a 'do not ride' list similar to the 'do-not-fly' list where passengers names are checked against the list. For this to work, there have to be reasonable assurances that the name on the ticket is the person travelling, otherwise there is a huge hole in that policy.

Whatever you do...don't let Cat Stevens aboard...a thousand choruses of "Peace Train" would constitute a terrorist attack.

What about "The Dead?"

"Driving my train. High on cocaine..."

Official intrusions into peoples privacy has been going on in this country long before 9/11, and long before the Bush adminisration. Sobriety checks on highways, drug testing in the workplace, background checks for firearms, the IRS, etc, etc. We either accept all of it or none of it, not just the policies that we agree with politically.

mick wrote:Official intrusions into peoples privacy has been going on in this country long before 9/11, and long before the Bush adminisration. Sobriety checks on highways, drug testing in the workplace, background checks for firearms, the IRS, etc, etc. We either accept all of it or none of it, not just the policies that we agree with politically.

Sorry but I can't agree, it's not a choice between allowing no intrusions or all intrusions on our privacy. Issues such as privacy vs safety are not black and white and should not be treated as such.

Yes, I cannot wait for the day when Ted Kennedy cannot board a Amtrak train because his name appears on the 'do-not-ride' list.

Just an aside, the current do-not-fly list contains many names that might be characterised as expousing ideas that are polically challenging to the powers that be rather than real threats to our security (on the flip side, I'm sure many names are on that list that would pose a real threat if allowed to fly). It's not unreasonable to assume that the same would be true of a do-not-ride list should it be instituted.