Sen. Schumer wants rail passenger screening like at airports

Here is a "brief passage" from a press release issued March 7 by the office of Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y

• On the heels of last week's news that Grand Central Station was a potential target for a terrorist attack, today Sen. Charles E. Schumer released details of a study that shows that Long Island Railroad stations lack the critical security infrastructure to keep their riders safe. A survey done twice in the last year shows that even after the Department of Homeland Security issued directives to enhance physical security at LIRR stations, the MTA has not taken the necessary steps. In an effort to combat this scenario, today Schumer sent a letter to James Dermody, the President of the LIRR asking for an update on the status of the security upgrades and asking the LIRR to be more proactive in following the DHS guidelines.

Here's "the rest of the story"

Senator Schumer is exactly right.

And we need to start screening people's cars before they drive on the interstates too, because you never know when a terrorist with a bomb might drive into the Big Dig in boston or a tunnel under the Hudson River and wreak havoc.

(in case you can't tell yet I'm being sarcastic)

The fact of the matter is that airplanes are a special case. 9/11 proved that airplanes are missiles loaded to the brim that, if under the control of a terrorist, can be directed at any target at any time during its flight. Airplanes are unique in that they are flying 30,000 feet above the ground, so any explosion on board is certain to cause 100% fatalities. Even so, I still wish that we didn't have to give our names and have ID's checked when boarding. The "No-Fly" list is absolutely absurd. The security measures at airports should be limited to metal detectors (or radiation detectors or biological agent detectors or whatever) and baggage inspection.

While I wouldn't be opposed to having more security personel at train stations, their duties should be limited to public safety. Subjecting commuters and travelers to random searches of their person and luggage just isn't going to work.

Needless to say, I don't think that Amtrak should be taking names and checking IDs of people who ride their trains. This is basically like mandating a passport for in-country travel, which makes the U.S. a police state. I'm sorry, I just don't want some higher ups in the FBI, NSA, HSA, or WHOEVER, knowing where I'm going, and each and every time I ride the train or bus or plane home to visit my folks. That's a police state. That's scary.

That's what we're living in.

Some of the measures make sense to me: blast-proof wastebaskets, security cameras, dogs, etc are sensible measures that don't impede the flow of passengers or significantly impact operations.

I hate to engage in morbid speculation, but it would seem to me that if a terrorist group wanted to really freak out America, it wouldn't choose passenger trains. There are much easier ways to wreak much more damage.

In my opinion, screening passengers at Penn Station or Grand Central
is/would be absolutely impossible. There are entrances from all over the
place, both places but especially Grand Central are spread out and it
would result in commuter bedlam. What about all of the stations outside of New York City of which some are in rather small isolated locations and
do not serve a lot of people.
What is the point in having security at Grand Central or Penn Station and
not having it at Berlin, Mystic, Croton Falls, Montauk or every other
station big or small?
How about the New York City Transit Authority, security at every station?
I do not think that this type of security is workable.
A greater police presence aboard the trains, in the stations and along the
right of way would help.
Instead of giving the railfans a hard time, they ought to be enlisting them
for help here too. There are a lot of them out in the field, probably most
of them have cell phones and can reach police quite quickly.
Screening passengers would be all show and little effective action.
Noel Weaver

You people with your heads in the sand will change your tunes when some terrorist hijacks an Acela Express and runs it into the basement of the Empire State Building!

This is not specifically an Amtrak issue, more of a New York State issue or a Rail Travel issue in general. I suggest this thread be moved.

-otto-

Once again here we go again. The government is going to save us.

Hey Chuck who going to save us from you? Can't you fix the crossings
first.

STEAMED OFF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
/-- --~-oo--oo--

In my opinion, screening passengers at Penn Station or Grand Central
is/would be absolutely impossible. There are entrances from all over the
place, both places but especially Grand Central are spread out and it
would result in commuter bedlam. What about all of the stations outside of New York City of which some are in rather small isolated locations and
do not serve a lot of people.

You're right, Noel. Based on my observations while I've visited Penn Station, I've seen a whole lot of entrances and exits (very similar to South Station in Boston) and it would cost a lot of money just to guard EVERY entrance out of Penn Station towards the public streets conveyance. Same with GCT, too many entrances and egress exitways to guard up.

As for Washington Union Station, they had the "bomb sniffer" device out for a while, but there too, there are too many entrances to watch over like NYP and BOS.

I have to do more research on Schumer to see what he's about because everytime I see him on the NEWS it seems as if he complains allot but does not offer any drawn out plans.

This is a good example. It sounds to me as if Chuck may not have thought this through prior to making this proposal. One of the appeals to train travel; is not having to go through the screening process which gives people more time to deal with. As a commuter I'd hate to have to get to the station an hour before the train boards, especially during Rush Hour in NYC.

Don't get me wrong, I know the threat is real but if everyone wanted to take Schumer's position on this, we'd have to do the same for Subways which can cause allot more damage as they run under or in close proximity to buildings. Imagine screening passengers for subways. There's just no way.

I think allot of these proposals are made just so people can say they did something. It's easy to point out flaws and critique infrastructure but you show me someone who can critique and come up with a reasonable solution and I'll show you someone who will get a great deal of support.

How about something to protect us from Sen. Chuckie Schumer? Lest we forget it was his brainchild (along with now deposed NJ Senator Toricelli) to ban the CIA from dealing with anyone overseas with less than a squeaky clean record. He also has taken every opportunity in his career to cut funding for the CIA, FBI, Customs & Immigration, Coast Guard, etc. Yet he was rewarded last year with another 6 year term - perhaps he can help close the barn door now that the horses are out.

You can put security at every Amtrak station, commuter terminal, and so on and "they" will just select a different target. How about putting our resources at the borders to try to keep undesirables out altogether? I realize there are some nut cases who are US citizens who are a risk (i.e Oklahoma City). But if our main thrust is al-queda types we need to tighten things up and make entry into the country itself much more difficult. The logistics of implementation, and inconvenience to the public, would be far easier if the efforts were made at the borders of the country, rather than the depot steps.

About a week ago or so my friend and I flew down to Bradford, Pa. This small community and low use airport is served by USAir Express. About 4 or 5 flights a day to PIT.

Many years ago I use to fly to BFD often to have lunch. I could walk in and out of the terminal without anyone even asking me anything. The other day, it is completely fenced off. Can't get into the terminal with out someone punching the codes in and then when you leave you have to walk all the way around the building and go through the FBO. No more free access.

While eating I noticed a couple of USAir Exp. agents. Then a TSA agent. It really started to sink in that the TSA is everywhere...even small stations like BFD. I thought it was kinda funny at first. A lone TSA agent here in little BFD. But small airports is where they, at least classically, try to get things on board.

I remember many years ago when I worked for Trans World Express. A situation out of Ithaca comes to mind. At the time we had screeners and metal detectors but it wasn't like security now a days. Anyway, a passenger came to the check point. He had carry on luggage which went through the screener. The alarm went off and the agents secured the machine so no access was allowed. The guy was trying to get guns through the check point. I don't remember if they were pistols or rifles but it's the small stations that are vulnerable.

I don't have any answers to this growing problem but in my opinion, if "they" want to hit us, nothing will stop them. They'll find a way. Would any of Schumers suggestions have worked in Madrid?

Would any of Schumers suggestions have worked in Madrid?

This is a bit of something, but coincidentally, that Madrid 3-1-1 massacre's first yearly anniversary is tomorrow.......

Ah yes Sen. Schumer. I recall on the day of 9/11 one of the news networks put him on and he "lectured" all of us as the day unfolded and the towers collapsed.

He comes up w/all these costly ideas to 'band-aid' issues w/o really addressing the root cause of societal problems. The guy is very scary, IMO. Also an extremely NASTY person too (in some cases).