Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate passes measure to allow gun transport on Amtrak

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:36 PM
Original message
Senate passes measure to allow gun transport on Amtrak
Source: CNN.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Senate voted Wednesday to prohibit federal funding to Amtrak unless it allows licensed gun owners to transport their weapons on the passenger trains by next year.

The measure, an amendment to the Transportation and Housing Appropriations bill, passed 68-30.

The House passed its version of that appropriations bill in July. It did not include a provision to allow guns on Amtrak.

The Senate measure says Amtrak would lose federal subsidies if it prohibits passengers from bringing their guns on board under restrictions similar to those imposed on airlines.

"Under current practices, all of the American domestic airlines permit firearms in their checked luggage. Other American passenger railroads also allow checked firearms," Wicker said on the Senate floor.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/16/amtrak.guns/inde...



This country is truly nuts. Guess I'll be using Canada's VIA instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. love your screen name
that's what seeing this headline gave me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrDan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. you mean you would support separation of U.S. citizens from their necessary weapons?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Good. Now when will the government allow kindergartners to pack heat.
Guns are a right and are people. There's nothing in the Constitution about any limits.

Congress MUST act Now for FULL FREEDOM for this consumer item!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rubberducky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. I NEVER thought I would urge my only child to move to another country.
It hurts me so much, but I`m starting to truely feel that he would be better off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Which one?
The good ones tend to have tight immigration laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanusAscending Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
57. I watched that vote...
It was my impression that it was "set aside...laid upon the table" to die??? I couldn't figure out why so many dems voted for it!! IT DOESN"T MAKE SENSE!! Could be CNN got it wrong??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
82. The sky is falling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
97. Why?
Please explain why this would require fleeing the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rubberducky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #97
105. Oh, Please, "fleeing the country " is a bit over the top.
I simply meant that I had always thought that this was the greatest country to live in. But, now that I am an older and (perhaps) wiser I feel that other countries are worth a second look. He is my only child and next year he will have electrical enginering degree. I`ve just encouraged him to think outside the box. He has worked so freaking hard for this degree that I hope he can USE it, I most assuradly don`t want to see him working "in the service" industry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #97
132. Insofar as a passenger has access to the luggage, this is a threat to safety.
Unless Amtrak can show that passengers absolutely cannot access their checked luggage, I just won't be taking the train anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #132
135. Better not get on a bus or walk on the sidewalk anymore either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KurtNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. Hopefully there is something in there to require Amtrak to clean the bathrooms
on their trains. A woman on my last Amtrak returned from the bathroom and told her seatmate: "Just piss your pants -- at least it will be your OWN urine."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
7. So what? In checked baggage? Good.
This makes sense. WTF is the problem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Checked means in storage? Or Carry On. Is Carry On considered checked also?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
One_Life_To_Give Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Same restrictions as currently on airlines
UNloaded in Checked baggage. Where no passenger can get to it in flight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Yup. Unloaded and *locked* in checked baggage.
I swear. Did no one else read the article??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a la izquierda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. I've taken Amtrak a bunch.
Know where "checked" luggage is? Usually by the steps. Inside the actual car.
So, anybody could go get their gun if it met their fancy. To qualify this, I've taken Amtrak between NYC and DC several times, and between OKC and Dallas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
One_Life_To_Give Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Pehaps one reason they are given time to comply?
Nothing in the rulking says that they have to allow a checked gun to be stored in the same car as the passengers. It merely has to be like an airline where you can have the gun shipped with you to the destination.

Remember this is a Dem controlled Senate that supported this. So it's not really some open carry thing. The person both dropping off and retreiving the weapon will also be required to Legally be able to posses it. Which for a MA to DC run should add considerable hurdles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
53. Do people think that a gunman is going to hijack a train and take it to Cuba or something?
Why all the paranoia? We have stringent rules about guns in airplanes being locked up because there's the threat of hijacking. You can't exactly take an Amtrak train to a non extradition treaty country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #17
25. I guarantee
Criminals (should any use Amtrak) already carry on Amtrak
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #25
60. Probably plenty of law-abiding folks, too.
I swear. I don't even know how to fire a gun (I mean, pull the trigger probably, but I've never tested that theory), and I don't see any problem with people transporting their firearms in the baggage compartment, locked up safe.

How else are they supposed to get them where they're going? Say I want to ride the train to Wyoming and go hunting, do I mail it ahead? Can you even mail a rifle?

Sometimes DU is disappointing in its inability to read beyond headlines. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #60
62. If they're illegally carrying a gun
Then ,by definition, they're not law abiding
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill McBlueState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #62
107. good point
NRA fans seem to want to divide the population into "criminal" and "law-abiding" as though they're immutable characteristics, rather than descriptions of what one is up to at any given time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #17
119. And in a sleeper car,
full access to baggage. I've been on a few long distance trains.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
11. What's next? Aircraft?
:banghead:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. You're putting me on, right?
...Even you? Did no one read the article?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. They're using airline rules, for fuck's sake.
Translation for the slow readers: you can already take a gun on an airline under these EXACT SAME RULES, and you always have been able to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #15
89. It's far harder to GET to checked baggage in an airline, for fuck's sake
Think about it for a nanosecond.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #89
91. You think so?
Every airplane has access from the passenger compartment to cargo, and generally most trains have a seperate compartment for baggage.

And still nobody has explained what, exactly, the harm is. It's not like somebody is going to hijack an Amtrak route and take it to Cuba, nor is it like you can't get a gun on there now if you wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
12. What is this "license" you speak of?
In the vast majority of the country (also known as Free America") no "license" is required to purchase, own, or carry a firearm. So what's all this crap about "Licensed" gun owners?

Now we need to get Amtrak to let CHP holders carry on the train (providing their CHP is valid in that state)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #12
20. It's from the School of Bad Journalism that created this graphic...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
14. Shoot em up cowboy
Where does it end?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Licensed gun owners are substantially less likely to shoot an innocent than a police officer.
So seriously, put away the silly stereotypes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. Again, WTF is a 'licensed " gun owner? NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #24
52. People with a permit for a concealed handgun.
Nationwide, something like 2% of the population (on average) is licensed to carry a concealed handgun. That varies pretty heavily: here in New York, I suspect it's much lower, while the highest rate in the country is Oregon, where 6% of the population has a concealed carry license.

As a whole, people with concealed carry permits commit violent crimes at a rate one third less than that of the police themselves, and two thirds less than that of the general population.

Of course none of this counts Vermont and Alaska, the only two states in the US where you can carry a concealed pistol without a license of any kind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. Ok , next question
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 05:59 PM by Treo
Nationwide, something like 2% of the population (on average) is licensed to carry a concealed handgun
Does this mean that non permit holders will be unable to transport a firearm on Amtrak? What about Vermont or Alaska residents? No permit is required for concealed carry in those states. (OT but.. And they don't seem to have piles of dead bodies in the street)

I dislike the term "licensed gun owner" because I see it as a Grabber tactic to make people assume that one must posses a license to own a firearm. That's why i tend to call it out when I see it

EDIT HTML mistake no text changed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #54
92. Okay...
"Does this mean that non permit holders will be unable to transport a firearm on Amtrak?"

The article doesn't specify. Possibility A is that you won't be allowed to transport non-concealable guns. Possibility B is that whatever laws a given state has in relation to transportation of firearms would apply.

"What about Vermont or Alaska residents?"

I would assume that if we're talking Possibility A, then within Vermont, you could check a firearm. Amtrak doesn't serve Alaska, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
40. Where does WHAT end? Did you even read the article?
Guns in checked baggage, just like airlines do now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #40
69. You think its ok to carry guns, I don't
You think you are safer with a gun, I think I am in more danger when you have a gun.

You can't change that. That's how I feel, that's how you feel, we don't have to agree.

Just voicing my opinion.


OK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ManiacJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #69
71. The guns are not being carried; they are being transported in baggage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #69
72. How you feel
Is how you feel based on any objective reality? if I really am safer carrying a gun shouldn't that trump your subjective feeling that you not safer if I'm armed?

Unless you live in Illinois odds are you're around armed citizens every day and just don't know it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 05:41 AM
Response to Reply #72
98. And that makes me uncomfortable
Just waiting for the first guy to take his gun out and shoot at me in my car because I did move fast enough for him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #98
101. 99.9% of the time the perp will be a criminal in illegal possession of a firearm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #98
113. IF that ever happens
The odds that it will be a CHP holder or legal gun owner (in some states no permit is required to conceal a weapon in your vehicle) are almost nil, you do know that right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
18. In checked baggage, just like on airplanes
I was not aware of the present restriction. It seems pretty ridiculous considering that you can transport them in checked baggage on airplanes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
21. I'm not a gun fan, but even I don't see how this is so bad.
Come on folks, read the article. They'll only be allowed to carry a firearm in their checked luggage, not on their person.

I can't see how this is harmful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. It may actually increase use of public transportation
Which is a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IntravenousDemilo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #21
33. On a plane, do you have access to your checked bags during the flight?
I've never seen a separate, inaccessible-to-the-public train car for storing luggage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #33
65. I've traveled Amtrak before
Not all of them have real checked baggage, but some do. I'm just guessing this only applies to the ones who do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
23. Here are the regs, sound ok to me
The measure lays out the following guidelines:

Before checking the bag or boarding the train, the passenger must declare that the firearm or pistol is in his or her bag and is unloaded.

The firearm or pistol must be carried in a hard-sided container.

The hard-sided container must be locked, and only the passenger has the combination or key.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #23
37. Looks fine to me.
Personally I think there should be a lock on the gun, then stored in the locked hard container but that's just my double/triple precautionary instinct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
26. Butch and Sundance will be mighty happy to hear that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #26
48. I was thinking the same thing...
"Bring it on," Frank and Jesse!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomm2thumbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
27. this oughta help our auto industry get back on its feet, if nothing else does /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
28. This will cause Amtrak to shut down. That's what this Amendment is designed to do:
Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington, was opposed to the measure.

"In order to receive any federal funding under this amendment, Amtrak would have six months to build a process for checking and tracking firearms," she said.

"It would have to find the manpower necessary to screen and guard firearms, and it would have to purchase the equipment necessary. Now, there is nothing in the underlying appropriations to pay for any of that. So this amendment is going to put a severe burden on them, and if they do not comply, Amtrak will shut down."

This is a gift to oil companies. It will force more people to use less efficient ways to get to their destinations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #28
44. Nah, wrong
The same system used right now at airports could be used. Very easy to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Libertas1776 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
29. I understand
that the new regulation is supposed to be similar to the airline ones. Heck, you can bring all kinds (well almost) of weapons on a plane as long as they are checked. You can even check metal throwing stars.

My question is: is the luggage on Amtrak trains really checked, or does it simply sit at one end of the car? I know its like that in Europe. Because if it is right where someone can have at it, well that pretty much defeats the whole purpose doesn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Sparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
30. Disgusting ...
"The Senate measure says Amtrak would lose federal subsidies if it prohibits passengers from bringing their guns on board"

Blackmail !!

I hope the Democrats can find another way of getting the money to Amtrak, even if its a friggin grant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Reminds me a bit of the technique used to make the
drinking age 21.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #30
35. Amtrak will get the money. It will comply with the law
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #30
46. Whats the problem that you see here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Sparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #46
56. Blackmail.
If they want to pass legalisation where it's possible to bring hand guns on to Amtrak, it should be done on its own accord or in another form, and not to blackmail Amtrak through federal funding.

and secondly, i don't want guns on trains, planes or any other form of public transport. It aids the nutjobs and the terrorists, and serves no public purpose.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #56
58. It aids nothing, except the ability to easily move one's property from A to B.
And Federal funds have been used to force changes all over the place, such as the threat to cut off federal highway funds for states that did not raise the drinking age to 21.

But to state it only "aids the nutjobs and terrorists" is as ignorant as you can get. Thousands of people check their guns in baggage everyday, without indecent. Are these the nutjobs and terrorists you speak of?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #58
63. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. Thanks for showing your true side
How does allowing guns in checked baggage aid terrorists? What terrorists have been aided by this policy? You speak from your ass, friend, and your breath smells like shit.

As I see that you consider anyone that owns a gun to be a nutjob or a terrorist, I dont see how this conversation can go anywhere but downhill, so I bid you a good day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Sparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. Your Welcome, my gun toting liberal red neck friend !
I hope you see the light some day and come to realize that everyone is a lot more safe the less guns there are lying around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #66
67. See, you and I agree!!!!
I am against guns lying around too! They should be properly stored and secured when not in use.

And while I guess you can consider me to be "gun toting" I am as far from redneck as one can be. But I know that when its habitual to talk out of your ass, its hard to stop. I support you, though, and will be here to point out when you have done it again. Have a nice day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #67
70. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #70
77. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Mr. Sparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. ..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #66
80. In other words you can't demonstrate where a terrorist checked a bag with a firearm in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #80
95. Just another anti blowing smoke.
Because he can't his argument up with facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 06:03 AM
Response to Reply #66
99. When are the prohibitionists
going to concede that more guns does not equal more crime. Statistically the number of guns in private hands have been proven to have absolutely nothing to do with violent crime stats..if anything they reduce violent crime since US violent crime has been declining for 20 years bringing us to 40 year lows, same goes for accidental shootings. I guess it is much easier to make false proclamations based on thin air than to actually research the issue, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
31. It's just funny and shows where the country's priorities are
OMG, I gotta transport my guns! = Vital issue of national concern.
I feel sick, but I can't afford to go to the doctor = Just die already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 06:18 AM
Response to Reply #31
100. Yep,
the priorities of many states revolves around some of their largest industries, in the case of my state one of those industries would be tourism...hunting tourism to be exact. In 2003 Kansas sold 60k non resident hunting licenses. Those licenses infuse nearly half a million dollars into our state parks and wildlife management system, our only state government agency which is 100% self supporting using no tax dollars. Not to mention the peripheral tourism money infused into the state. Most of this money goes into the poorest towns as they tend to be in the most remote areas of this vast state and offer some of the best upland bird hunting on the planet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
34. Difference being,
on an airplane the passenger has no access to checked baggage. On a train they get to keep it with them the whole trip if they are in a sleeper. They may even have access in a regular seat. I'm not sure. I've only traveled long distance in a sleeper car.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. What makes you think criminals on the train don't already have guns? NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #38
86. Did I say
I thought that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #86
90. Then shouldn't the law abiding be able to? NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #90
94. I don't want ANYONE
carrying a gun on my train ride.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #94
102. So cops shouldn't be allowed on trains?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #102
116. Stooping
to the ridiculous usually indicates the absence of substantive argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #116
134. So you are ok with certain people having firearms on a train?
That would make the following statement incorrect, "I don't want ANYONE carrying a gun on my train ride."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #134
136. ...
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #136
138. So your intial statement was incorrect. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackson1999 Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #94
110. They wont (legally, at least)
The gun will be locked in checked baggage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #110
117. The checked baggage
stays with the passenger on long distance rides in a sleeper car. I think they are parked by the door for seated passengers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #94
114. OK., but that's not a viable option
So let's pick something that might have a shot at working.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #114
118. Let's?
Do we know each other that well? No, I didn't think so. I do know you and I will never see eye to eye on the gun issue. You're a frickin gun lover. I wouldn't step foot in your home or allow my children on your street. Sorry. Just the way it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #118
120. But you allow your children on YOUR street
Do you think there's not a home W/ guns there? One of three homes in America has at least one you know. All of my guns (W/ one exception) are locked in a safe and for the privilege of carrying the exception I submitted to a CBI background check proving that I had no prior HX of violent crimes. I'm probably the safest person you could have a round you W/ a gun. Can you say that about the thugs that carry guns around you every day?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #120
121. Yes, in fact,
some gun loving asshole across the street threatened to shoot my son when his unattended 3 yo ran her tricycle into his friend and fell over. She ran in to daddy crying and daddy came threatening to kill my son. So yeah, I know about assholes who feel the need to have guns.

And the last person I would trust with a gun is the one who brags about being the "safest" guy in town. Your cocky attitude and lack of healthy fear/respect for a deadly weapon just scares the shit out of me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #121
122. I meant "safest"
In terms of thoroughly vetted by TPTB before being issued a permit. Although I am absolutely anal about firearms safety having been shot by some one who wasnt several decades ago. There are 100 + MILLION legal gun owners in this country and the overwhelming majority of them have never broken a firearms related law (unless you want to stretch the definition to cover speeding W/ a gun in the car). Your homeboy down the street would have been guilty of felony menacing and brandishing a weapon (whether he actually presented or not) in Colorado so he doesnt sound like a legal or responsible gun owner anyway.

According to the 2006 CDC stats, there were 16,883 suicides and 12,791 homicides with firearms. Meanwhile, 46,664 people died in traffic accidents and 56,326 died of the flu and pneumonia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #122
123. Well, damn.
We need to stop breathing and driving. They're not necessities, after all. But hold onto those guns.

Ridiculous argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #123
124. Not an argument at all
Merely pointing out that you do thing that are FAR more dangerous that associating W/ "Frickin' Gun Lovers" everyday.

A gun is an inanimate object, it can do absolutely nothing W/ out human intervention. Functional, reliable firearms have only been around for the last 400(or so) years. Prior to the that the strong ruled by virtue of their strength, most people never got more than 8 miles from the place they were born and women were property. Is that what you want to go back to? Firearms are used roughly 2 MILLION times every year to prevent crimes (often w/out firing a shot). But you want to throw all that away based on your emotional assessment that you don't like guns and MY argument is ridiculous?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #124
125. You just sound nutty.
Another reason you probably shouldn't own a gun. I've said this once already. I'll say it again. You and I will never see eye to eye on this. So quite trying to convince me with silly arguments like women will go back to being property if everyone isn't running around with a firearm.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #125
126. That's fine if we never agree
I just wanted to point out that your illogical point of view was based purely on emotion not reason

Think how much differnt Annie Le's story might have been if she had a CHP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #126
127. If it were women, and only women,
who carried guns, then I suppose you might have a point. And a safer world it would probably be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #127
129. True fact
Criminals are far less likely to attack a victim (regardless of gender) who they know is armed. If thats true Annie would have been safer W/ a gun.

Again, I go back to the gun is an object, W/ out criminal intent it's nothing. I believe in punishing the CRIMINAL to the full extent of the law, Your son should have called the police and filed a complaint.

I also believe that every firearm should be secured ( I count under direct personal control as "secured") at all times if not in use.

I bet that up to this point we agree almost 100%

I am throughly convinced that criminals will obtain firearms irrespective of any gun control law.

I bet we even agree on that.

The difference is that I believe the simplest solution to that problem is to quit punishing law-abiding citizens for the actions of thugs.

Final statistical fact

States ( such as Vermont in which no permit is required for concealed carry) W/ less restrictive gun laws have lower crime rates. Based on this I believe that more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens is a good thing.

That's what we disagree on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #129
137. Please, just let it go.
You're wasting time. I can agree to disagree. Can you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #137
139. yes
Nothing in the world requires you to respond to my post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
36. Assholes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. Who are these Assholes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
39. How is a gun in checked baggage a threat to you or anyone else?
What is truly nuts are those of you with an irrational fear of guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #39
42. Unlike airplanes, train baggage compartments are accessible during the trip.
That's my concern.

There may be rules about not accessing them, but they are physically accessible, unlike an airplane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. Just goes to show that you know not what you are talking about.
Nearly all passenger aircraft, except those smaller, regional planes, have access to the cargo hold from the passenger deck. You have seen too many movies where access to baggage cars is unregulated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. If that is the case, then guns should also be banned from airplanes.
Even on checked luggage.

Thanks for the heads up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #51
55. And why is that? Has there been a problem with people getting to their guns in checked baggage
that I dont know about. I refer you back to my "irrational fear" statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #55
59. There wasn't a problem with boxcutters or carry-on liquids either.
Things change.

Question. Are people also allowed to pack ammunition in their carry-ons? That could change the way I think about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. No, pure and simple.
And box cutters have been banned (but you can put them in your checked baggage). Not happy about the liquids ban, its completely bunk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #59
81. So you think the box cutters used on 9/11 were in the checked baggage? That's just stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #81
85. Like a moth to the flame. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #85
88. The sky is falling, put your head back in the sand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #81
87. Self delete.
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 09:37 PM by Fire_Medic_Dave
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #59
115. Yes, under the same rules that allow the transport of ammunition on airliners.
The ammunition must be in the original box or a similar container that protects the ammunition from rough handling, and the quantity is limited (no more than a few boxes is allowed, IIRC).

Small arms ammunition is *not* explosive (contrary to the movies), and unchambered ammunition does not go shooting off; even if there were a fire, the case just splits and vents, like a can of shaving cream or hair spray.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
41. Did ANYONE actually READ the fucking thing?
Guns allowed in checked baggage just like airlines do now. Nowhere does it state that passengers will be carrying loaded weapons ON THEIR PERSON while riding the train.

Are you people stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
45. Have Gun Will Travel......Palidan..1879
The USA is in Time Warp.........
Richard Boone says it was a TV show
not something that a thirds world nation needs.
Neevermind.



usa ..........?????

The wild wild west......so civilized
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. WTF are you talking about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #45
50. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThoughtCriminal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
68. This may shut down Amtrak next year
According to an email I received from the National Association of Railway Passengers

Amtrak Chairman Thomas Carper has written a letter to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation warning that Amtrak does not have the infrastructure, nor the systems in place, to meet this request in such a short time frame across its entire network.

Now, did anyone think that this GOP sponsored amendment provided any funds for Amtrak to upgrade the baggage handling?

According to the NARP alert, one source claims this would shut down the railroad because Amtrak does not currently have "the infrastructure needed to properly secure baggage at this time."

Also,

Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) apparently is considering a hostile amendment that would eliminate unspent Amtrak funds from the current (FY 2009) appropriations law and the Recovery Act. This would threaten millions of dollars used to provide train service throughout the country. "Unspent" simply reflects timing issues; Amtrak still needs the funds.


--
For sponsor Sen. Wicker (R-MS) it's a GOP 2-fer. Panders to gun owners AND may result in a shut down of Amtrak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
73. Amtrak baggage policy for carry-on and checked baggage
The checked baggage goes in the baggage car.

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Am...

Actually, I've not observed any security that would prevent you from carrying a substantial infernal machine on board.

There are occasional roving patrols with dogs, but you would have to be pretty unlucky to encounter one.

I think they are relying on the fact that it is hard to fly a train into a large building.

As for someone carrying a 9 mm on board and shooting up people, well that can happen in any crowded place anywhere. It has happened on trains, but it has happened in malls as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #73
76. Stop bringing facts to a hissy fit.
Kinda deflates all the hand wringing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #73
79. How dare you confront the sky is falling crowd with facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThoughtCriminal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #79
84. Facts
1. Amtrak does not have the infrastructure or funds to meet this mandate (see letter from Amtrak Chairman and NARP)
2. The amendment provides zero funding for Amtrak to meet this mandate
3. If Amtrak does not meet this mandate by next March, All of their funding is lost

When comparing Amtrak's ability to that of airlines, you should keep in mind that the airlines probably receive more federal subsidies for airport baggage security every year than the entire Amtrak appropriation.

That said, I have NO problem with Amtrak allowing guns in checked baggage, but this bill threatens to ELIMINATE ALL FUNDING if they do not comply, and does NOTHING to make that possible. If the amendment's author was at all interested in providing safe transportation of personal firearms, he would have included a provision for implementation.

Nope, it is just another lame attempt to kill passenger rail travel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brickbat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #73
83. But wait, the subject line said "guns"; I am required to FLIP MY SHIT IMMEDIATELY. Just. Because.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
74. Good. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
75. I have no idea what the current rules are, but I think in fact you can carry anything you want to
aboard a train as long as it's in a piece of luggage. No laundry baskets or rubbermaid "tubs" allowed though.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ejbrush Donating Member (186 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
93. Fear and Loathing in...Grand Forks?
It was an amazingly tiring and stupid day at work, and it is well past my bedtime, but I gotta chime in.

Just how many shootings occured on Amtrak in the first place? Really. I'd like to know. Then compare it to the number of guns on the train that didn't shoot anyone.

This might come as a complete shock, but there are other reasons a person might bring a firearm on the train with them other than murder and mayhem. I have witnessed it with mine own eyes.

Eight years ago, my wife and I took a train trip from Madison, Wisconsin (technically Columbus, WI, since some genius decided there was no reason to have the Empire Builder go through the freakin' state capital) for a cousin's wedding. 'Twas October, which means waterfowl season in the Upper Midwest. Let me tell you - that train was packed, cheek to jowl, with guys in GoreTex and camo, up from Chicago and Milwaukee and Madison, bound for the flyways of North Dakota. The baggage compartment was so full of shotguns that we had our bags in our laps the whole way there.

Get this - not one of those guns got up and shot anyone. Really - scouts honor. Not one hunter got drunk and belligerant and trigger happy. Not one. Cripes, I'd be more scared of one college kid with a sword than an entire train of heavily armed goose hunters. Yet, here is an entire thread of wailing and rending of cloth over how our trains will be awash in blood.

Please - get a grip. If it sounds like I'm cranky, I am. I've got another cousin's wedding in October. I love taking the train to Devil's Lake, it is better than driving 11 hours to get there. Sure would be nice to take an afternoon and chase some ducks out of the potholes, but I won't be able to this time, since my Evil Ol' Shotgun is going to be left at home.

Also, I'm going to bed now, so don't expect me to reply to any posts. For the record, I could probably spend a good hour discussing the morality and ethics of hunting a non-hunter, if it were in person, face to face. Not online, as the inter-tubes are probably the poorest form of meaningful discourse to come along since Samuel F.B. Morse tried to have a telegraph round-table discussion. As it is late, and I am cranky, I will let the magic of the inter-tubes continue this fear-mongering without me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
96. Why is everyone freaking out?
It's the same rules as planes.

Doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackson1999 Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #96
111. Because it has the "G word" in it....
And they don't realize that this was allowed by Amtrak up until 2004. And, despite giving lip service to 'hunters and sportsmen', they have an irrational fear of guns and gun owners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alarimer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
103. As long as it is ONLY in checked baggage that no one can get to, it is okay.
If they have any access to it all, it should not be allowed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
104. Good flippin' grief
They are truly cowards. Who would think a Democratic senate would bow to the yahoos?

Your right to bear arms doesn't mean any arms, any place, any time. And it doesn't outweigh others' rights to travel safely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackson1999 Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #104
109. Please tell me how this would be dangerous.
and think before you post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill McBlueState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
106. It would be better
if the Senate could fund a functioning national rail system first, and only then worry about details like what you can bring in your luggage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackson1999 Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
108. ENOUGH ALREADY....

The responses here do not give me much hope for the Dems. I don't know what drives me more nuts.....

1. That so many here have not bothered to read the article.

2. That so few people realize that you could do this up until 2004.

3. The fact that so few of you regularly ride Amtrak and dont realize that many trains have separate, non-passenger accessible baggage cars (this will probably only apply to those trains).

4. That so many Dems who give lip service to supporting "hunters and sportsmen" can't even get behind this sensible rule change.

5. That Dems like Schumer, Fienstien, etc. have suddenly become "fiscal conservatives" and claim "it would be too expensive"

6. That so many of you oppose this with a knee jerk reaction but cannot name one scenario where it would be dangerous.

7. That you are so afraid of an inanimate object.

8. That you are throwing a hissy fit even tho the Brady Campaigns says they have no problem with it.


If anybody wonders why gun control is such poison to the Democrats, just read the responses in this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackson1999 Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
112. This will make terrorist attacks a certainty!!!
This is outrageous. It will certainly make terrorist attacks easier. This is all that has to happen.

1. Terrorist buys a gun.

2. Terrorist puts gun in locked box and declares it at check in.

3. Cased locked gun is taken by Amtrak and placed in separate, non-accessible baggage car.

Now the terrorist has some options here.

4a. During his trip, he can overpower the crew, and use an acetylene torch to break through the metal, locked door to gain access to the baggage cart.

4b. He can hold one of the crew hostage (I dunno, with a steak knife?) demand the keys, and gain access.

4c. He can jump off at one stop, run over to the baggage car. Get his gun case, unlock it and retrieve the gun, and jump back on the train.

5. Mayhem ensues.

Do you people see how stupid your opposition is to this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mad_Dem_X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
128. Say WHAT now?
Why the fuck would someone need to carry a gun on a train? :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Treo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #128
130. I can think of a few
Duck hunter traveling to and from

CHP holder traveling to and from

Completive shooter traveling to and from

DV victim W/ no other practical means of self defense traveling to and from

Person who just wants to traveling to and from

JPFO member yada yada

Pink Pistols member yada yada

and so on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #128
133. Another person who didn't read the article cited in the OP
This isn't about carrying a gun on a train.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
131. Airline passengers don't have access to their checked baggage.
That is not always true on Amtrack.

What a shame -- I like to take the train. Now I'll avoid it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Aug 20th 2014, 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC