Empire Builder CHI-PDX a Drug Smuggling Route?

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Most of the long distance trains, especially the ones to the west coast, are considered drug smuggling routes. It is a fairly low cost way to transport drugs without the security issues of air travel.

It know is fairly common for police to search the Zephyr in Reno, and I have seen TSA police (or whatever they are called) with their drug dogs several times in Galesburg to search the Zephyr and Southwest Chief.

Now, don't go thinking that every passenger on the train is running drugs. It is a very very small portion of the passengers.
 
I remember getting off the SWC at Albuquerque once and the cops came up to me. They asked me if they can search my bags. I said no. They then asked if a dog could sniff my bags. I said yes. The cop then said the dog sniffed drugs and then they demanded I let them search my bags. I had no choice but they found nothing and let me on their way.

When they said one way trips are targeted, I wonder if they would consider multi city trips where you only travel one way on many routes as "one way trips".
 
Sorry, someone asks to search my bags I'm going to tell them they need either a warrant or a fishing license!
 
Maybe we should cancel the Portland section of the Buiilder as a "drug corridor" and use the money to re-establish the Broadway!
 
Sorry, someone asks to search my bags I'm going to tell them they need either a warrant or a fishing license!
You would have no legal basis for making a such a demand.

They don't need a search warrant.

All they need is 'probable cause' to search a person or their property, as provided for by the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, someone asks to search my bags I'm going to tell them they need either a warrant or a fishing license!
You would have no legal basis for making a such a demand.

They don't need a search warrant.

All they need is 'probable cause' to search a person or their property, as provided for by the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Yup, but they have to have a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion to get to Probable Cause, but neither travel by train (one way or not) nor refusal to submit to a voluntary search is RAS enough to reach PC.

The standard threat in these cases is "We'll get the warrant, but you'll have to wait here while we do, and the train will leave without you". To which my reply is and will always be "Knock yourselves out boys, the train goes slow enough that I'll just catch back up to it".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, someone asks to search my bags I'm going to tell them they need either a warrant or a fishing license!
You would have no legal basis for making a such a demand.

They don't need a search warrant.

All they need is 'probable cause' to search a person or their property, as provided for by the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Yup, but they have to have a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion to get to Probable Cause, but neither travel by train (one way or not) nor refusal to submit to a voluntary search is RAS enough to reach PC.

The standard threat in these cases is "We'll get the warrant, but you'll have to wait here while we do, and the train will leave without you". To which my reply is and will always be "Knock yourselves out boys, the train goes slow enough that I'll just catch back up to it".
One question, have you ever actually done this and how did it turn out?
 
Haven't had the need or opportunity to on Amtrak yet, but have done it in other settings (traffic), and the officer sent me on my way once he figured out I was one of those "stickler for our rights" people and not just trying to dodge a search.

Too often people just roll over and take it. And that's why we're steadily losing our rights as a country.
 
Haven't had the need or opportunity to on Amtrak yet, but have done it in other settings (traffic), and the officer sent me on my way once he figured out I was one of those "stickler for our rights" people and not just trying to dodge a search.

Too often people just roll over and take it. And that's why we're steadily losing our rights as a country.
I was honestly wondering because I have heard (on this board, particularly in a extensive "Reno cops" thread awhile back) is that, yes, you can refuse, but you'll probably be detained and the train will leave without you. While the cops may not have the authority themselves to put you off a train, the cops can and do ask the conductor, and he DOES have absolute authority to put you off, for any reason. You can complain to Amtrak after the fact and complain to the police agency after the fact, but in the meantime, your trip just got sideswiped.

I understand the thought, and at a traffic stop by all means, I would refuse a search, too, on general principle. The consequences would just be a delay in my daily life. However, on a train trip, in all honesty, I would probably submit to a search rather than having a trip ruined, which is a likely outcome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
On my last trip through Reno, we had a sightseeing day built in in San Francisco before resuming our trip on #14 to San Diego the following day.

I was fully ready to tell the officer that I'd be just as happy to drive over Donner Pass when we were through, as stay on the train - even if their search warrant baloney was feet-dragged out to take most of the day, I'd still be in SFO that night with a one-way rental car. On this trip, we were not selected for the fishing expedition though.

While it's true that the conductor can and might put you off, some things are worth the risk (to me at least). As an aside, per the Contract of Carriage, the Conductor DOES have the right to inspect, and refusal to allow him to do so would lead to little ground to stand on vis a vis Amtrak. That being said, I'd have little or no problem with the CONDUCTOR searching my belongings voluntarily, because a) he's not a LEO, b) he's not "looking for the next big score", he's just looking to get his train over the road safely, and c) is in my experience MUCH less likely to over-inflate, fabricate or otherwise "respect my authoritah" create an issue where none exists.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is this like the Auto Train? :(

Cops are people. They just want to do their job. They also want to go home after a shift and have a couple of beers and a nice meal and go to ballgames with their kids on the weekends or whatever.

They have no reason to hassle people, unless they suspect that they can catch people carrying drugs on those trains. I don't doubt many innocent passengers will be inconvenienced by the searches and questioning.

But just think about it... do you want the cops NOT to do their jobs and let Amtrak trains becomes the preferred mode of transportation for the drug dealers/mules? Or have the drugs end up on the streets of Chicago?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is this like the Auto Train? :(

Cops are people. They just want to do their job. They also want to go home after a shift and have a couple of beers and a nice meal and go to ballgames with their kids on the weekends or whatever.

They have no reason to hassle people, unless they suspect that they can catch people carrying drugs on those trains. I don't doubt many innocent passengers will be inconvenienced by the searches and questioning.

But just think about it... do you want the cops NOT to do their jobs and let Amtrak trains becomes the preferred mode of transportation for the drug dealers/mules? Or have the drugs end up on the streets of Chicago?
Cops are not doing their jobs going on fishing expeditions like they were doing in Reno. There really is something called the 4th amendment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is this like the Auto Train? :(

Cops are people. They just want to do their job. They also want to go home after a shift and have a couple of beers and a nice meal and go to ballgames with their kids on the weekends or whatever.

They have no reason to hassle people, unless they suspect that they can catch people carrying drugs on those trains. I don't doubt many innocent passengers will be inconvenienced by the searches and questioning.

But just think about it... do you want the cops NOT to do their jobs and let Amtrak trains becomes the preferred mode of transportation for the drug dealers/mules? Or have the drugs end up on the streets of Chicago?
I wish I could be so naive as you.
 
I wish I could be so naive as you.
not "naive"

just being realistic.... I lived in a country for 2 years... the cops there are so afraid to use their authority... or even fire their weapons... that the criminals prospered.
That's unfortunate, but in this country, we have the 4th Amendment.


Edit: (I can't believe I just used the phrase "in this country". I feel like I should post a picture of a super-patriotic eagle and listen to country music and eat a hot dog omg help...)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was honestly wondering because I have heard (on this board, particularly in a extensive "Reno cops" thread awhile back) is that, yes, you can refuse, but you'll probably be detained and the train will leave without you. While the cops may not have the authority themselves to put you off a train, the cops can and do ask the conductor, and he DOES have absolute authority to put you off, for any reason. You can complain to Amtrak after the fact and complain to the police agency after the fact, but in the meantime, your trip just got sideswiped.

I understand the thought, and at a traffic stop by all means, I would refuse a search, too, on general principle. The consequences would just be a delay in my daily life. However, on a train trip, in all honesty, I would probably submit to a search rather than having a trip ruined, which is a likely outcome.
You're sadly right that it'd probably be better(much as I'd hate such a search) to cooperate with a bag search, than risk being thrown off the train since you wanted to refuse a bag search. I can't imagine many people sneak transporting drugs on Amtrak trains, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few secretly did. Had been hearing about the border patrol checkpoints set up on expressways that aren't too far away from the Mexico border(i.e. one on I-8 east of San Diego), and it's kinda sad to hear about those checks having to be done on Amtrak trains. Especially when you hear examples about people simply getting off an Amtrak train at the end of the EB westbound train in Portland(and from the linked article on the 1st post of this thread), being targeted for such a search.
 
If you think that the police are universally just nice guys doing their jobs, you're sadly misinformed.

That's unfortunate, but in this country, we have the 4th Amendment.

Edit: (I can't believe I just used the phrase "in this country". I feel like I should post a picture of a super-patriotic eagle and listen to country music and eat a hot dog omg help...)
ronald_reagan_the_liberator_by_sharpwriter-d7lmkqs.jpg
 
Sorry, someone asks to search my bags I'm going to tell them they need either a warrant or a fishing license!
You would have no legal basis for making a such a demand.They don't need a search warrant.

All they need is 'probable cause' to search a person or their property, as provided for by the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The 4th Amendment doesn't specifically say that probable cause is needed to search without a warrant. It says that probable cause is needed to obtain a warrant. There are cases where searches can be conducted without a warrant, but typically someone has to witness a crime being committed. The unreasonable search and seizure language has been interpreted in a myriad of ways.

https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/know-your-rights-can-you-be-searched-without-a-warrant
 
At least the Amtrak Agents in Sacramento know how to profile and alert down line and contrary to what some say, profiling works. On one of my Zephyr runs, 4 Undercovers were waiting outside my Sleeper when we hit Reno with their target already selected. Mexican couple who paid cash for a 1 way to Chicago. Sure enough one of their grips was billowing with bundles of narcotics. It was fun being able to stand right there as this all went down-like being on the "set" of Cops.
 
I wish I could be so naive as you.
not "naive"

just being realistic.... I lived in a country for 2 years... the cops there are so afraid to use their authority... or even fire their weapons... that the criminals prospered.
Here in Albuquerque, the cops are so unafraid to fire their weapons that the Federal government has had to step in, and yet we are still number 5 in violent crime. So, you will have to excuse me if I'm skeptical that giving carte blanche to the frat boys with guns we so generously call law enforcement officers will do anything to stop drugs or any other manner of crime. They have given us no reason to trust then with it and every reason not to.
 
Ditto for Austin and Texas where shootings of Civilians (overwhelmingly people of color) by Police is a regular occurrence that has cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in settlements of law suits.

And now,the Morons that are in charge of this State have allowed College Students and any others with Gun permits to Open Carry Firearms on College Campuses and in Public Places including the University of Texas that just Memorialized the Tower Sniper Shootings from 50 years ago! !

And we sit back and wait while the death count gets higher!

Unbelievable!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you think that the police are universally just nice guys doing their jobs, you're sadly misinformed.

That's unfortunate, but in this country, we have the 4th Amendment.

Edit: (I can't believe I just used the phrase "in this country". I feel like I should post a picture of a super-patriotic eagle and listen to country music and eat a hot dog omg help...)
attachicon.gif
ronald_reagan_the_liberator_by_sharpwriter-d7lmkqs.jpg
Ha. Perfect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top