Speaking Out Against Firearms on Amtrak‏

mrreynolds · September 21st, 2009, 08:35 AM

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez, Representative Carolyn McCarthy, Philadelphia Mayor Michael A. Nutter, Trenton Mayor Douglas H. Palmer, Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy and Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly today stood together in Penn Station to urge the House of Representatives to reject legislation that would allow Amtrak train passengers to travel with guns in checked luggage.

The Senate passed an amendment to the transportation and housing appropriations bill on Sept. 16, that would force Amtrak to install a system to screen and check firearms so passengers could legally keep weapons in their checked bags within half a year, or Amtrak will lose 1.6 billion dollars in federal funding.

Amtrak currently does not have a system for screening weapons, nor does it allow firearms to be carried or checked in.

The bill still needs to go through Congress and Mayor Bloomberg made an announcement to express his views.

"If anyone in Congress thinks the threat of terrorist attacks on trains have gone away, they are mistaken," the mayor said.

Bloomberg said that the Amtrak security was already pretty lax, and if the new bill passes, there wouldn't be anything keeping someone from carrying multiple assault weapons in their baggage.

"And the American people will blame the Senate if a terrorist attack does occur," he said. "It has nothing to do with the second amendment and the right to bear arms, but everything to do with keeping passengers safe."

Congresswoman Caroline McCarthy (D-NY) was present and expressed her concern for the bill as well. When she learned that the bill would allow guns on trains, she thought, "What else are they going to do? Why make their [police officers] jobs harder by letting guns on trains?"

She recounted that in 1993 on a train in Long Island, her husband was killed and her son injured because a gun had been brought onto the train.

"And now you're going to make it legal to bring guns onto Amtrak?" she asked. "It's not right and we can do a better job."

Speaking to the notion that having guns on trains may prevent deaths and injuries if an attack occurred, because they would help the passengers defend themselves, Congresswoman McCarthy replied that having more guns on the train would only result in more, not less damage.

"We just don't need any more guns. We don't need any more danger," Mayor Bloomberg said.

Jerramiah Healy, mayor of Jersey City, was present as well, and called the bill gratuitous. He said that there was no outcry from any group that said they needed firearms to better protect themselves on the railroads, and that this was only gun lobbyists wanting to get their way. He also said it would be expensive, as well as foolhardy.

Amtrak currently does not have equipment to screen for firearms, nor the money for a screening system. If Amtrak were to lose the federal funding for the railroad, however, it would be a severe burden.

[LINK]

Rugergirl · September 21st, 2009, 09:27 AM

Baaaah

StevePVB · September 21st, 2009, 09:32 AM

I've never ridden on Amtrak so I may be a little slow here.

"Amtrak currently does not have equipment to screen for firearms, nor the money for a screening system." The Congresswoman was worried since her husband had previously been killed by someone that had a gun on an Amtrak train.

Oh never mind. I just figured it out. The BG didn't see the "No Guns" sign on the train. If they had posted the sign in a more visible spot he never would have brought his gun on the train.

JohnD13 · September 21st, 2009, 12:08 PM

What a surprise! Bloomberg has something anti-gun to say!

ccw9mm · September 21st, 2009, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Congresswoman Caroline McCarthy (D-NY) was present and expressed her concern for the bill as well. When she learned that the bill would allow guns on trains, she thought, "What else are they going to do? Why make their [police officers] jobs harder by letting guns on trains?"

No upstanding citizen carrying life-saving equipment makes the job of law enforcement officers tougher. If anything, it makes it easier. In the end, though, that point's irrelevant if IT SAVES LIVES to have people able to defend themselves against crime.

Quote:

She recounted that in 1993 on a train in Long Island, her husband was killed and her son injured because a gun had been brought onto the train.

Don't forget, lady, that a criminal did this, and that criminal had the gun irrespective of already being disallowed to carry that firearm on the train. Didn't make a darned bit of difference to your unarmed son and husband, did it? Perhaps if they had the ability to defend themselves, then they would be alive today. Ya think?

Quote:

"And now you're going to make it legal to bring guns onto Amtrak?" she asked.

Damn right. That you lost your unarmed son and husband, McCarthy, to naivete and inability to defend themselves is no reason to punish all other citizens and force them to likewise be as unarmed as your family members were.

WHY NOT do something good, for a change, and HELP upstanding citizens become well-protected, well-armed, well-trained people who are perfectly capable of withstanding attack until the cavalry arrives, instead of forcing everyone to become lambs waiting for slaughter? Eh?

Quote:

"It's not right and we can do a better job."

Yes, THAT isn't right. We can do better than what you're proposing. Don't dare disarm me and everyone else merely because you and yours were disarmed and incapable of defending against attack. Be bummed about THAT condition ... and work to FIX IT, instead of forcing everyone else to live through what your dead son and husband had to.

Bark'n · September 21st, 2009, 12:31 PM

Well of course those bozo's will speak out against it.

Actually, not sheep, just anti-gun control freaks!

nutz4utwo · September 21st, 2009, 12:36 PM

Will these people ever learn? BG's and terrorists don't follow the law! That is what makes them BG's and terrorists!

rmilchman · September 21st, 2009, 01:12 PM

So they have poor scanning today, which means those terrorists could already by using Amtrak to transport firearms. And this new regulation makes the public less safe somehow?

Once again they aim to criminalize those that abide by the law.

How many armed guards did the politicians have with them for protection? It's nice knowing our taxes go to protecting the politicians, but they feel we can not spend money to protect ourselves.

ccw9mm · September 21st, 2009, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmilchman

How many armed guards did the politicians have with them for protection? It's nice knowing our taxes go to protecting the politicians, but they feel we can not spend money to protect ourselves.

Our pre-tax dollars go to support the protection of brainless politicians.

More of our pre-tax dollars go to support their attacks on upstanding citizens.

But, we must use additional after-tax dollars when it comes time to defend against them when they get really riled and come against us.

Something is stinking in the cupboard ...

MattLarson · September 21st, 2009, 01:30 PM

If ignorance truly is bliss, Boomberg and McCarthy must be two of the happiest people on the planet.

The proposal is to allow firearms in checked baggage. Checked as in inaccessible to the passenger during the trip.

The baggage compartments on the Superliner cars (the only cars in the system that take checked baggage) are on the outside of the train car.

Matt

September 21st, 2009, 08:35 AM	#1
mrreynolds Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Harlem, NY Posts: 424	Speaking Out Against Firearms on Amtrak‏ Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez, Representative Carolyn McCarthy, Philadelphia Mayor Michael A. Nutter, Trenton Mayor Douglas H. Palmer, Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah T. Healy and Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly today stood together in Penn Station to urge the House of Representatives to reject legislation that would allow Amtrak train passengers to travel with guns in checked luggage. The Senate passed an amendment to the transportation and housing appropriations bill on Sept. 16, that would force Amtrak to install a system to screen and check firearms so passengers could legally keep weapons in their checked bags within half a year, or Amtrak will lose 1.6 billion dollars in federal funding. Amtrak currently does not have a system for screening weapons, nor does it allow firearms to be carried or checked in. The bill still needs to go through Congress and Mayor Bloomberg made an announcement to express his views. "If anyone in Congress thinks the threat of terrorist attacks on trains have gone away, they are mistaken," the mayor said. Bloomberg said that the Amtrak security was already pretty lax, and if the new bill passes, there wouldn't be anything keeping someone from carrying multiple assault weapons in their baggage. "And the American people will blame the Senate if a terrorist attack does occur," he said. "It has nothing to do with the second amendment and the right to bear arms, but everything to do with keeping passengers safe." Congresswoman Caroline McCarthy (D-NY) was present and expressed her concern for the bill as well. When she learned that the bill would allow guns on trains, she thought, "What else are they going to do? Why make their [police officers] jobs harder by letting guns on trains?" She recounted that in 1993 on a train in Long Island, her husband was killed and her son injured because a gun had been brought onto the train. "And now you're going to make it legal to bring guns onto Amtrak?" she asked. "It's not right and we can do a better job." Speaking to the notion that having guns on trains may prevent deaths and injuries if an attack occurred, because they would help the passengers defend themselves, Congresswoman McCarthy replied that having more guns on the train would only result in more, not less damage. "We just don't need any more guns. We don't need any more danger," Mayor Bloomberg said. Jerramiah Healy, mayor of Jersey City, was present as well, and called the bill gratuitous. He said that there was no outcry from any group that said they needed firearms to better protect themselves on the railroads, and that this was only gun lobbyists wanting to get their way. He also said it would be expensive, as well as foolhardy. Amtrak currently does not have equipment to screen for firearms, nor the money for a screening system. If Amtrak were to lose the federal funding for the railroad, however, it would be a severe burden. [LINK] __________________ All Firearm Owners Are Welcome SmallArmz.info Impact Guns / U.S. Concealed Carry

September 21st, 2009, 09:27 AM	#2
Rugergirl Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Michigan Posts: 1,193	Baaaah __________________ Disclaimer: The posts made by this member are only the members opinion, not a reflection on anyone else, nor the group, and should not be cause for anyone to get their undergarments wedged in an uncomfortable position.

September 21st, 2009, 12:31 PM	#6
Bark'n VIP Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: West Central Missouri Posts: 4,298	Well of course those bozo's will speak out against it. Actually, not sheep, just anti-gun control freaks! __________________ -Bark'n Semper Fi "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, will prey on those of us who without one, would surely perish."

September 21st, 2009, 01:30 PM	#10
MattLarson Moderator Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Central Florida Posts: 2,849	If ignorance truly is bliss, Boomberg and McCarthy must be two of the happiest people on the planet. The proposal is to allow firearms in checked baggage. Checked as in inaccessible to the passenger during the trip. The baggage compartments on the Superliner cars (the only cars in the system that take checked baggage) are on the outside of the train car. Matt __________________ Hope is not a plan.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

September 21st, 2009, 09:32 AM	#3
StevePVB Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 257	I've never ridden on Amtrak so I may be a little slow here. "Amtrak currently does not have equipment to screen for firearms, nor the money for a screening system." The Congresswoman was worried since her husband had previously been killed by someone that had a gun on an Amtrak train. Oh never mind. I just figured it out. The BG didn't see the "No Guns" sign on the train. If they had posted the sign in a more visible spot he never would have brought his gun on the train.

September 21st, 2009, 12:08 PM	#4
JohnD13 Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Castleton on Hudson, NY Posts: 108	What a surprise! Bloomberg has something anti-gun to say!

September 21st, 2009, 12:36 PM	#7
nutz4utwo Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western, WA Posts: 1,040	Will these people ever learn? BG's and terrorists don't follow the law! That is what makes them BG's and terrorists!

September 21st, 2009, 01:12 PM	#8
rmilchman Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 393	So they have poor scanning today, which means those terrorists could already by using Amtrak to transport firearms. And this new regulation makes the public less safe somehow? Once again they aim to criminalize those that abide by the law. How many armed guards did the politicians have with them for protection? It's nice knowing our taxes go to protecting the politicians, but they feel we can not spend money to protect ourselves.