Self defense and the RR

do you get guidelines and traning to deal with trespassers ???

David Benton wrote:do you get guidelines and traning to deal with trespassers ???

Yes. It's a misdemeanor, so the officer has discretion...but, here's the State law:

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/266-120.htm

This is the one for the non-paying passenger:

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/160-220.htm

Here's one for you Conductors to know the next time that a passenger argues for an extended period/fights/causes a disturbance:
(This is a Felony with serious time possible in the State Pen !)

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/160-226.htm

I just found this topic, read the the first 5 pages. Not one mention of this incident added below. Since when did rail workers loose their right to a safe working environment? Isn’t the safety of the employee’s foundation for most regulations in modern railroading?

A “hoplophobic” trainman would not be riding his scared butt on my unit for too long if I worked in those conditions. The chicken shit would be retired on the spot. A flashlight, a block of wood or a rubber hose will not deter a gang.


WEST SACRAMENTO
Train forced to stop, engineer beaten
Michael Cabanatuan
Wednesday, April 18, 2007

The engineer of an Amtrak Capitol Corridor train was seriously injured Monday night in West Sacramento after a group of people forced the train to stop, dragged the engineer from the train and assaulted him with rocks and bottles, according to Capitol Corridor officials.
The attack occurred as the train from the Bay Area neared the I Street Bridge to Sacramento's rail station and slowed for a signal, said Eugene Skoropowski, managing director of the Capitol Corridor. A group of people stood on the tracks to block the train, which stopped. When the engineer went downstairs and opened the door, he was dragged off the train and assaulted, Skoropowski said.
The engineer, who was taken by ambulance to UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento, suffered head injuries and possible internal injuries, Skoropowski said. The engineer remains hospitalized.
Skoropowski is calling for more police patrols in the area, for all vegetation around the rails to be removed, for federal agencies to consider filing federal charges in the case, for Union Pacific Railroad to take steps to speed trains through the area, and for additional security measures, including night-vision cameras.
This article appeared on page B - 9 of the San Francisco Chronicle

DutchRailnut wrote:Thats why railroad police is regulated in Code of federal regulations, railway workers are not regulated and do not get licences to carry on federal controlled property.
even local police does not have unlimited powers on railroads, infact their power is severly limited.
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/wais ... 07_06.html

Dutch,

The CFR citation you provided supports exactly what I said. Railroad police are "commissioned" by a state in which the railroad operates and are governed by the laws of that state:

§ 207.2 Definitions.
As used in this part:
(a) Railroad police officer means a peace officer who is commissioned in his or her state of legal residence or state of primary employment and employed by a railroad to enforce state laws for the protection of railroad property, personnel, passengers, and/or cargo.

Another section (§ 207.5 Authority in States where officer not commissioned) provides that once a state approves an officer, that officer has powers in other states where the railroad is located, to the extent of the laws governing such police in that other state.

No where in the CFR regulation does it say that non-railroad (e.g, state, county or municipal) police powers are limited, nor does it say that state law is pre-empted. It is well settled by the courts that pre-emption requires an express statement or at least clear and convincing evidence of an intent to pre-empt. Such with respect to police powers is not present in the regulation or the statute.

Please also see retired Officer 3rdrail's posts for further clarification. I've spent 30 years representing my employer as an attorney primarily in state and federal regulatory agency practice, and interpreting CFR and statutes has become second nature. Just like many of your very informative posts from your job experience!

Mr. Moderator(s)- May I respectfully request with Ken's permission, that this previous post, which most eloquently and reliably has explained the question of local police jurisdiction on railroad property, be made into a permanent post by which to refer to when this question inevitably comes up again. I have addressed it at least twice, and I am aware that it comes up frequently. I feel that Railroad.Net would be doing the railroad community a considerable service as frankly, I have a concern that there is widespread belief that local and state police officers do not have jurisdiction on railroad property. Should this belief transform into refusal to obey the directions of such a police officer and criminal prosecution result, under the law there would be no defense of not being aware of the officer's authority. Thank you.

3rdrail wrote:Mr. Moderator(s)- May I respectfully request with Ken's permission, that this previous post, which most eloquently and reliably has explained the question of local police jurisdiction on railroad property, be made into a permanent post by which to refer to when this question inevitably comes up again. I have addressed it at least twice, and I am aware that it comes up frequently. I feel that Railroad.Net would be doing the railroad community a considerable service as frankly, I have a concern that there is widespread belief that local and state police officers do not have jurisdiction on railroad property. Should this belief transform into refusal to obey the directions of such a police officer and criminal prosecution result, under the law there would be no defense of not being aware of the officer's authority. Thank you.

OK, not a problem

its carzy to think that all these high rate crime locations by the tracks at one time were prime location for industry at one time or anouther. I'm sure that the down turn in the economy plays just as much to theses locations with closeing factorys along these locations they seem to attract a lot of bad people. You see the same thing with a good nabour hood it looks nice and safe one day then it starts going down hill when you one get abandoned house.

We got anymore good stories? I was enjoying this thread until the gun and police debates started.

Tadman wrote:We got anymore good stories? I was enjoying this thread until the gun and police debates started.

I beleve that TFM in Mexico hires look outs and or armed guards to ride its trains. I rember seeing guys sitting on Covered Hoppers spaced out every 20 or 30 cars watching for bandits and stow-a-ways who may try to board the trains when they stop at varyed points for fuel and or drop off or pick up cars as they head to the U.S./Mexican boarder.

I know a few guys who were shot at and know of a guy who was knocked out and robbed but that's about it. My area doesn't have a lot of crime, but that doesn't mean things can't happen. I have personally never had a situation where I felt threatend. I'm 6' around 240 and can handle myself in most cases. When I work the ground I carry a brake stick. When I'm playing engineer I have an assortment of goodies onboard, should someone feel the need to get brave and climb aboard.
Those who do carry a firearm usually don't advertise it. It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

Georgia Railroader wrote: Those who do carry a firearm usually don't advertise it. It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

That, no doubt, is the long and the short of it. Don't ask, don't tell, in a different context.
Moon

Malley wrote:

Georgia Railroader wrote: Those who do carry a firearm usually don't advertise it. It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

That, no doubt, is the long and the short of it. Don't ask, don't tell, in a different context.
Moon

I'd rather be runoff than beaten or mugged. To the best of my knowledge, the only thing runoff insurance doesn't cover is insubordination, attendance, and maybe drugs/alcohol.

Explain, please 'runoff'.
Thnx,
Malley

Run Off: Taken out of service for an indefinite period of time. Put on the ground. Asessed discipline--usually, again, involving time off. Dismissed pending hearing.

Run SLAM Off the ROW:= Terminated. Fired.

Gadfly

Gadfly wrote:Run Off: Taken out of service for an indefinite period of time. Put on the ground. Asessed discipline--usually, again, involving time off. Dismissed pending hearing.

Run SLAM Off the ROW:= Terminated. Fired.

Gadfly

From context, that's what I thought, but thanks.
Malley