Amtrak should be dismantled response.

[PaulM]

I'm sure there's some potential for some kind of scam if the person who buys a ticket (online or in person, but either way without an ID) isn't the person who is riding, but that's more Amtrak-related than security-related.

There's another scenario; but it's still Amtrak related, or I should say Amtrak's and specifically the conductor's problem. Let's say someone obtains your email credentials and prints out an eTicket or finds an eTicket that you discarded, and attempts to use it. I can think 4 possibilities:

You get scanned first: When the conductor gets to the phoney passenger, what's he going to do when his device says the ticket has already been scanned? Either he checks the ID or lets it ride. Either way, he or Amtrak has a problem.

The phoney gets scanned first w/o checking ID; when he gets to you and his device says the ticket has already been scanned, either he checks the ID or lets it ride. If you produce an ID, what's he going to do. Again, either way, he or Amtrak has a problem.

You cancel the ticket before departure for a refund: When the phoney gets scanned and shows it canceled, without an ID, the passenger doesn't have a leg to stand on (I have no idea what happens when a passenger with ID claims he didn't cancel).

You cancel the ticket after departure for a refund, but a phoney used it without ID: It would seem you could easily prove you weren't on the train. But how could Amtrak prove you were, especially if at most, 10% of passengers' ID gets checked.

 

[George Harris]

I'm sure there's some potential for some kind of scam if the person who buys a ticket (online or in person, but either way without an ID) isn't the person who is riding, but that's more Amtrak-related than security-related.

There's another scenario; but it's still Amtrak related, or I should say Amtrak's and specifically the conductor's problem. Let's say someone obtains your email credentials and prints out an eTicket or finds an eTicket that you discarded, and attempts to use it. I can think 4 possibilities:

You get scanned first: When the conductor gets to the phoney passenger, what's he going to do when his device says the ticket has already been scanned? Either he checks the ID or lets it ride. Either way, he or Amtrak has a problem.

The phoney gets scanned first w/o checking ID; when he gets to you and his device says the ticket has already been scanned, either he checks the ID or lets it ride. If you produce an ID, what's he going to do. Again, either way, he or Amtrak has a problem.

You cancel the ticket before departure for a refund: When the phoney gets scanned and shows it canceled, without an ID, the passenger doesn't have a leg to stand on (I have no idea what happens when a passenger with ID claims he didn't cancel).

You cancel the ticket after departure for a refund, but a phoney used it without ID: It would seem you could easily prove you weren't on the train. But how could Amtrak prove you were, especially if at most, 10% of passengers' ID gets checked.

And this relates to Amtrak security how? It is more of a fraud action. Once you prove you are who you say you are, then if they have any concept of how to deal with the situation, you are riding and someone else should be handed over to the police, or at the least be left at the next possible stopping point, and you note I did not say station.

About 1 1/2 years ago about 6 weeks after giving a credit card number over the phone to rent a cabin for a family weekend, I bought, that is my credit card bought, a big flat screen TV for someone with a closely similar name in Florida and made cash transfers to three different prisoners in three different states. It was all taken care of by the card company and I was sent a card with a different number. I did not know until than that there are companies out there that provide cash for prisoners by a method that appears to have the essence of a cash advance against your card. The amounts in question were not very large, at least not in comparison to the charge for the TV.

What I am saying here, the discussion here is fraud, not some form of terrorist action.

I am perfectly happy with the current system of getting on trains that exists in most places, which is go stand on the platform, when the trains pulls in wait for those on it to get off, then get on, and if in coach find a seat, or if in sleeper find the space on your ticket. Even with the current non-seccurity the most dangerous part of the trip is still the drive to and from the statons.

It is still the norm in many parts of the world that your ticket does not have a name on it. Fine with me.

For the travel is a luxury people:

For the most part our train travel is not a luxury per se. It consists of trips down the valley to visit our son and family. Sit in the coach, go to the meal car and stand in line for food, eat it, read, relax, get there. Sometimes converse with other passengers, sometimes not. One recent trip that was a luxury: Ride up to Reno and back to see the Sierra and snow. Sit in coach, look out the window, go to dining car and have a meal, get some snacks from the lounge. Talk and visit. For one meal we shared a table with a couple of Russian origin. Interesting conversation mostly family and life events. they were traveling for the sightseeing also. For another, wth two men each traveling alone, most interesting conversation with a good deal of political context, but with respect for differences. They were each traveling to get between "A" and "B". By the way, breakfast out of Reno on the way back was good, we were on the tail end of breakfast service, no rush, good service also.

 

[Nathanael]

I have to chime in to agree that "ID" is a completely waste of time and does not provide any security, especially on trains.

To Amtrak's credit, Amtrak is working on monitoring the tracks for trespassers and saboteurs.

There's really very little a would-be terrorist could do *on a train*. And if they wanted to... well, IDs don't prove anything. Timothy McVeigh had a (genuine, valid) ID.

IDs are an idiotic piece of security theater. But ID checks are great for harrassing innocent people who might have lost their ID!

 

[AlanB]

I don't understand the grip Amtrak has on some of the posters here as a vacation destination. I have seen posts where people rode one train out and rode another train back and that was their entire vacation bc they love the trains that much. I didn't discover this love affair with Amtrak.

Your response seems perfectly reasonable. De gustibus non disputandum.

One person's vacation can be another person's living hell.

Cannonball,

You hit the nail right on the head here. My wife's idea of vacation; a sunny beach to lie on. I can take about 1 hour of that and I've had enough for an entire year. For me, vacation is a ski trip, a train trip to some city, a camping trip, etc. I did get the wife on 1 train trip, the Auto Train last year for the first time. She actually liked that. But now that smoking will be banned there too, that will be the end of any further train riding on her part.

So our tradition of taking one week's worth of vacation together and the rest apart will continue. And I'll continue to bring along my mom on many of my trips, since she does like it.

 

[SarahZ]

Alan - that sounds like us.

B's idea of a vacation is to stay at home and play video games for seven days straight without leaving the house. I hate being trapped at home, and he hates leaving the house, so we were at odds for the first year we were together.

We're both independent, and he respects my wanderlust, so now, if I ever want to go somewhere, I have his full blessing (and encouragement) to go without him. Not only will I not feel resentful that I didn't get to go to this place or that place, but he won't feel resentful that I dragged him to this place and that place. I get the vacation I want, since I get to do whatever I want, whenever I want, and see what I want to see, without worrying about him being bored.

It's a great arrangement that confuses a lot of people who ask, "Why wouldn't you two want to take a vacation *together*?" I explain that it doesn't make sense for either of us to strong-arm the other into doing what the other wants to do, and this way, we're both happy. His only stipulation is that I send him pictures and texts of my adventures, and my only stipulation is that he clean the kitchen after his week of bachelor-hood.

 

[Eric308]

Alan - that sounds like us.
B's idea of a vacation is to stay at home and play video games for seven days straight without leaving the house. I hate being trapped at home, and he hates leaving the house, so we were at odds for the first year we were together.

We're both independent, and he respects my wanderlust, so now, if I ever want to go somewhere, I have his full blessing (and encouragement) to go without him. Not only will I not feel resentful that I didn't get to go to this place or that place, but he won't feel resentful that I dragged him to this place and that place. I get the vacation I want, since I get to do whatever I want, whenever I want, and see what I want to see, without worrying about him being bored.

It's a great arrangement that confuses a lot of people who ask, "Why wouldn't you two want to take a vacation *together*?" I explain that it doesn't make sense for either of us to strong-arm the other into doing what the other wants to do, and this way, we're both happy. His only stipulation is that I send him pictures and texts of my adventures, and my only stipulation is that he clean the kitchen after his week of bachelor-hood.

Sounds familiar...my wife and I break it up. I'm going to PDX-SEA on the EB solo in a couple of weeks. She leaves solo to visit our daughter in Barcelona in late June. I leave in mid-July for a road trip out West all over the Rockies. Then, WE leave TOGETHER for South Carolina in September for a couple of weeks. I'm also commanded to keep the kitchen clean while she is gone.

 

[SarahZ]

Yup. We're going to SF, but we're doing some stuff separately. He doesn't like boats/open water, so he's going to hang out in the city while I go to Alcatraz.

 

[roomette]

B's idea of a vacation is to stay at home and play video games for seven days straight without leaving the house

The only thing better than a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days is a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days with your significant other GONE!

 

[BCL]

B's idea of a vacation is to stay at home and play video games for seven days straight without leaving the house

The only thing better than a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days is a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days with your significant other GONE!

Wife and kid were gone for over a week, and daddy got to live the pseudo-single life for that time. Drove out to the coast all by myself and went crazy with oysters (I am the shuck-master!). Didn't play video games for seven days straight (got to work to pay for all those travel bills) but I did get to slip in an AGR points run that my wife would have never agreed to if she was at home and wanted me to share in the child rearing. She'd think it was a huge time suck (which it was, but I digress).

 

[SarahZ]

B's idea of a vacation is to stay at home and play video games for seven days straight without leaving the house

The only thing better than a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days is a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days with your significant other GONE!

Meh. He can't complain. He has his own room, and I never nag him about how many hours he plays computer games while watching TV in his man cave. If I want to watch TV with him, I go in there and sit on the bed.

Sometimes I tease him about how much he ignores me by talking about random stuff just to see if he's paying attention. It's pretty hilarious when I start telling him a story and end it with, "and bleach potato lavender muffin pattycake," and he doesn't even turn to look at me or acknowledge it.

 

[Ryan]

As others have said, you could get blown up by terrorists at a grocery store or a movie theater just as easily as on a train. And they don't scan your ID at a movie theater or grocery store either. Why should the train be any different?

Well...so far international terrorists have not demonstrated an interest in doing so. They have, however, attacked trains. Just not here.

International terrorists? No. But Gabby Giffords and a heck of a lot of other people got shot at a grocery store a while back, and that guy in Colorado shot up a movie theater recently too, and the people in both of those places are just as dead/injured as ones killed by international terrorists.

Seems like a distinction without a difference to me.

 

[PaulM]

I'm sure there's some potential for some kind of scam if the person who buys a ticket (online or in person, but either way without an ID) isn't the person who is riding, but that's more Amtrak-related than security-related.

There's another scenario; but it's still Amtrak related, or I should say Amtrak's and specifically the conductor's problem. Let's say someone obtains your email credentials and prints out an eTicket or finds an eTicket that you discarded, and attempts to use it. I can think 4 possibilities:

You get scanned first: When the conductor gets to the phoney passenger, what's he going to do when his device says the ticket has already been scanned? Either he checks the ID or lets it ride. Either way, he or Amtrak has a problem.

The phoney gets scanned first w/o checking ID; when he gets to you and his device says the ticket has already been scanned, either he checks the ID or lets it ride. If you produce an ID, what's he going to do. Again, either way, he or Amtrak has a problem.

You cancel the ticket before departure for a refund: When the phoney gets scanned and shows it canceled, without an ID, the passenger doesn't have a leg to stand on (I have no idea what happens when a passenger with ID claims he didn't cancel).

You cancel the ticket after departure for a refund, but a phoney used it without ID: It would seem you could easily prove you weren't on the train. But how could Amtrak prove you were, especially if at most, 10% of passengers' ID gets checked.

And this relates to Amtrak security how?

It doesn't. I was just following up on D.P.'s comment that it is more Amtrak-related than security-related. His scenario seemed to deal with someone wanting to travel without being traced. Mine had do do with someone wanting a free ride. Or fraud as you aptly put it..

 

[D.P. Roberts]

And this relates to Amtrak security how?

It doesn't. I was just following up on D.P.'s comment that it is more Amtrak-related than security-related. His scenario seemed to deal with someone wanting to travel without being traced. Mine had do do with someone wanting a free ride. Or fraud as you aptly put it..

You are both right in that neither of those things have to do with security. If conductors are checking IDs, I can't figure out what security has to do with it. Checking IDs may save Amtrak money by preventing fraud, but as far as I can tell it doesn't make anybody safer. So, to the OP's concern (which is undoubtedly shared by other passengers), checking IDs shouldn't make you feel any safer, because you're NOT any safer. Checking IDs as a "security" measure is, as others have pointed out, just security theater on Amtrak.

 

[NW cannonball]

B's idea of a vacation is to stay at home and play video games for seven days straight without leaving the house

The only thing better than a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days is a stay at home vacation playing video games for seven straight days with your significant other GONE!

Wife and kid were gone for over a week, and daddy got to live the pseudo-single life for that time. Drove out to the coast all by myself and went crazy with oysters (I am the shuck-master!). Didn't play video games for seven days straight (got to work to pay for all those travel bills) but I did get to slip in an AGR points run that my wife would have never agreed to if she was at home and wanted me to share in the child rearing. She'd think it was a huge time suck (which it was, but I digress).

Oysters - me and my son are oyster-crazy - First big Amtrak trip with him when he was 4 - we did the Oyster Bar at Grand Central - not the smoky (then) bar, not the overpriced restaurant - the (then) few formica-topped tables in between. Me and the 4 year old downed two dozen raw on the half-shell , and he still remembers the "Moonstones" -- he lives in Seattle now and still loves the bivalve molluscs.

But getting back to the main topic -- "one man's ceiling is an other man's floor"

About the "Amtrak experience" -- for some of us it seems good. For others it's like what Finley Peter Dunne put in the words of his "mister Dooley" near a hundred years ago -- "I could have slept on the shelf in me closet and rubbed a cinder in my eye after"

 

[NW cannonball]

Here's the hundred year old quote from googlebooks http://books.google.com/books?id=8KYfAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=peter+dunne+cinder+closet&source=bl&ots=phFZMFn2yp&sig=mPzyarBb84yC-VG8sIxtqsRpmBI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nlWXUcTEJeTEigKWlIGQBA&ved=0CEkQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=peter%20dunne%20cinder%20closet&f=false

none of this debate is new.

 

[Braniff747SP]

Event 1. Eating with convicts in the diner car that not only were allowed on the train after they were just released, but they could not even write their name or read the menu!! (Safety & Uneducated)

Bah, what a terrible thing. A US Government corporation providing services to free citizens whom have paid their debt to society.

Truly, what a freakish society we are... allowing felons on trains! Everyone who has ever gone to jail should remain there for the rest of their lives... forget sentencing, automatic life sentence so the rest of us won't have to see these uneducated, unsafe bastards.