You're right, Amtrak did this prior to 2001. However, some Amtrak regs are written by folks who have had no experience with guns, and they only hear about guns in relation to crime and criminals and police activity. That tends to color their attitude towards guns and gun owners. They also have little to no contact with individuals who are responsible gun owners, which makes it easy for them to think of gun owners as "gun crazies." With them, you have to first answer WHY someone would want to own a device like a firearm, then answer why one would want to ship it somewhere.
OOPS!!!
- Thread starter chertling
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
- Status
You're right, Amtrak did this prior to 2001. However, some Amtrak regs are written by folks who have had no experience with guns, and they only hear about guns in relation to crime and criminals and police activity. That tends to color their attitude towards guns and gun owners. They also have little to no contact with individuals who are responsible gun owners, which makes it easy for them to think of gun owners as "gun crazies." With them, you have to first answer WHY someone would want to own a device like a firearm, then answer why one would want to ship it somewhere.
Green Maned Lion
Engineer
Even worse is the fact that in two years or so we'll likely see a Congressional report about how much money Amtrak looses on baggage cars and we'll have to impliment some SDS like program to cut those costs. And of course they'll forget all about this little mandate.
Last edited by a moderator:
I am afraid Jim, especially, does not realize that there are guns aboard AMTRAK every day.
Only the gang-bangers have them, of course.
Calling law-abiding gun-owners, who do not carry guns on AMTRAK because it is against the rules,
"gun nuts" is fine, right?
Is it ok if I call raving liberals "nuts" also?
If not, why not?
Only the gang-bangers have them, of course.
Calling law-abiding gun-owners, who do not carry guns on AMTRAK because it is against the rules,
"gun nuts" is fine, right?
Is it ok if I call raving liberals "nuts" also?
If not, why not?
OK with me to call raving liberals "nuts", some are! Just be willing to admit the same about gun nuts who think cop killer bullets and machine guns are OK
like those lunatics that run around to political meetings with guns and signs that say stuff like "Were unarmed this time" and "Bury Obama Care with Kennedy"! I am fully aware that there are millions of guns around, I live in Texas and have spent most of my life in big cities where criminals are armed to the teeth, sort of like it's always been in this country! I would ask when was the last time there was a killing with a gun on an Amtrak train, I really have no problem with weapons being checked as long as they are not available to be accessed or stolen along the way! Do you have a plan how to pay for this system, and if so as long as I dont have to pay for it I have no problem with licesened, law abidiing citizens transporting unloaded weapons on any means of transportation! Please dont tell us that toting guns around in public, especially @ schools makes us safer, this is insanity and is NUTTY! :blink: Law abiding citizens checking unloaded weapons on any means of transportation, no problem! Anyone except law enforcement and military packing weapons in public, insanity!
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,507
I think the big issue is that Amtrak can't figure out a way to secure valuable equipment in a baggage car - no matter what that equipment is. Most stuff that is worth a lot of money - electronics, photographic equipment, musical instruments - can be carried on the train by the passengers and stashed in the overhead or in the room. In fact, no one in his or her right mind would check a fancy computer or a violin on Amtrak. But, guns, be they for hunting or target shooting, are a whole other animal. They cannot be carried on board, for pretty good reason - they must be checked. However, the baggage car is several steps short of being a bank vault. Something as valuable as a sport rifle could easily walk away from the baggage car somewhere between Milwaukee and Minot, and Amtrak would be liable for the loss. That liability could be legal as well as financial since a stolen firearm could be more dangerous than a stolen laptop.
So, I see Amtrak's side of this (even though the ban on checking firearms is relatively recent - well post-911). A baggage car is not like the luggage hold on a aircraft that gets closed at the origin and is not opened until the destination (we hope). It is like a self-storage locker that is left unlocked day and night. Putting things of obvious value in there is not wise.
So, I see Amtrak's side of this (even though the ban on checking firearms is relatively recent - well post-911). A baggage car is not like the luggage hold on a aircraft that gets closed at the origin and is not opened until the destination (we hope). It is like a self-storage locker that is left unlocked day and night. Putting things of obvious value in there is not wise.
Amtrak OBS Gone Freight
OBS Chief
- Joined
- May 20, 2005
- Messages
- 576
I for one, would not check any of my firearms with Amtrak when I can simply ship it insured via "Fed Ex" or "UPS" to the address of where I am going. I would transport them in my carry on if that were permitted, but it is not, so shipping them would be my only option. One of the shipping carriers listed above would be a more secure means of transporting these items in my opinion. Under the current scenario, there is too much of a chance weapons could be stolen, etc. If Amtrak 's handling of these situations can be set up similar to how the airlines handle it, then I might be interested, though I have never tried it with an airline.
I have never really had a need to carry my firearm with me on vacation, etc, even though I am sure there are scenarios it would be nice to have it when I get to the destination.
Personally, for the most part I trust no one else with my firearms as they are my utmost responsibility! I take my guns with me if I drive, but I have to take the time to review the laws of the state(s) that I am visiting / passing through, and sometimes it is just easier to leave the firearm locked up at home if I have to be gone for short trip. Otherwise, I will just ship it to where I will be staying being it is legal for me to have the firearm at such location, and I can do so with one of the companies listed above.
It will be interesting to see how Amtrak institutes this into their policy. Most likely it is going to require Amtrak to provide additional staff to handle it as well as additional means to provide security. Security isn't like the airports as there are so many points of entry and exit into the system throughout the Amtrak system. Still, even though it is possible to sneak prohibited items on board trains, I believe we are much safer aboard an Amtrak train than a jet plane any day! If you have to evacuate that train, you can usually do so fairly easy unless your stuck on a high bridge / trestle, etc. You also won't fall that far if your train crashes than you will on that plane!!!
And by the way, Amtrak already carries some passengers in sealed boxes in baggage car! They just usually don't have to get up to eat and go to the bathroom. And they always need assistance on and off the train!
h34r: :blink:OBS gone freight...
Trainmans daughter
OBS Chief
I agree with OBS gone freight. I am responsible for my guns, and will never allow them to be transported in a baggage car which is not secure for the entire trip. Also, how does Amtrak deal with state-to-state firearms laws? Seems kind of sticky to me.
Green Maned Lion
Engineer
It is sticky, but Amtrak doesn't seem to have a choice in the matter.
I have never understood people who want to own handguns. I have used and owned rifles and shotguns in my time for the purposes that those weapons are usefully suited- satisfying my preference for game meat at costs that aren't what supermarkets charge. A handgun has one purpose- shooting people. They don't have the aim or the power to knock down a large (say, a bear) or fast (a deer, a rabbit, a bird) animal. They can be quickly aimed at a nearby target.
If you can get close enough to an animal to reliably hit them with a handgun, you might as well save yourself the cost of the bullet, pick the thing up, and break its neck. Now, I have since grown up a little. I don't think it very sporting to kill animals with guns. I prefer a bow and arrow. Yeah, the animal frequently gets away- often unhit. But at least I know that I am getting a weaker animal, and perhaps helping to improve the breed.
Likewise, I fail to see the need for people to own assault weapons. I hear "collecting", but I fail to see a need for a "collecting" weapon to be able to fire. Filling in the barrel is a nice idea there. I also completely and utterly fail to see the sport in killing a deer with a M-16. Very fair.
Or the person who told me that they hunt using a gatling gun. That's just great. You get excellent meat that way. Liquified deer. Stew anyone? And there is no sport in that. Go play Counter Strike or something. Seriously.
All that being said, it doesn't bother me if someone wants to check their cherished or preferred hunting weapon on Amtrak for travel to a place they plan on hunting. So long as Amtrak secures it, anyway.
But I still say the majority of gun owners, and I'm including hunters in this, are compensating for something.
George Harris
Engineer
OK, OK, so I am fumble fingered.
The outlaws can keep Gus for all I care, but I would like to keep the guns.
- Status
