Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
I don't think we'll be allowed to carry concealed, but before it was completely illegal to have any firearms on board, so it is a good first step. Hopefully it will stay in the final bill this time and not get vetoed.

"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."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
687 Posts
Senate OKs measure that would allow guns on Amtrak
GOP senator wants guns allowed on Amtrak
The above quoted are the Titles atop 2 Articles I have read.

They purposely make it sound like anyone can just walk on with a gun.

I hate the Media.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
I have never understood the big deal about having a firearm on a train - it's not like you're gonna hijack the train and force it to Cuba.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,461 Posts
That is excellent news. We now have one more mode of travel that is 2A friendly to a degree. Once in a rare while I wonder what it would like to take an Amtrak trip to somewhere.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,038 Posts
I have never understood the big deal about having a firearm on a train - it's not like you're gonna hijack the train and force it to Cuba.
+1 :congrats:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Just like checking them in with an airline.

Wonder if this effects CCW permit holders at all?
If "just like" with airlines, then CHL folks won't be exempt from anything.

Though, I don't see it should be anything other than treating CHL's like we do folks with automobile travel. I mean, it's not like the train's gonna fall out of the sky, and there frankly isn't any other justifiable rationale (IMO) to deny CHL folks the right to carry on-board a silly train. It is NO different than a bus, a taxi, a street car, light metro rail, or a personal car.

I have never understood the big deal about having a firearm on a train - it's not like you're gonna hijack the train and force it to Cuba.
It's ludicrous in the first degree. It shows how controlling the autocrats really think they need to be, even for worthless, unjustifiable reasons. There is no social benefit obtained by such restrictions on the actions of upstanding people, and criminals will find away around the silly finger-waggling and signs anyway.

My suggestion for the appropriate way to handle federal futzing, at least until unrestricted, unregulated carry by upstanding citizens becomes the law of the land: you're required to legally comply with the rules/regs in any state you transit through, as with traveling via your car. Make any federal statutes like THAT, and I'll be reasonably satisfied with the job the bureaucrats did. Otherwise ...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,584 Posts
Baby steps...but it still sucks.:aargh4::hand1::banned:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,177 Posts
So if a terrorist hijacks the train,I must first unlock the case and get my gun out,then I gotta unlock a second bag and retrieve my ammo,then I gotta load my gun.Now I know why I don't ride the choo choo
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,964 Posts
So if a terrorist hijacks the train,I must first unlock the case and get my gun out,then I gotta unlock a second bag and retrieve my ammo,then I gotta load my gun.Now I know why I don't ride the choo choo
No. The gun will be in your checked baggage, and you won't have access to it.

Matt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,829 Posts
The title of this thread is "Amtrak now required to allow transport of firearms."

The linked item states that the Senate has so voted, but there is no mention of a House vote or a presidential signature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
The Real Story Here

It is not the guns, it is the total lack of real security for passengers getting on the train, and the lack of control of checked baggage that is the real story. Firearms were banned in stages, first after 9/11, and later after the attacks on the trains in Madrid (like making it against Amtrak regulations is going to stop some Mumbai whack job from taking a gun to the train station).

The NY Times, in an editorial today on this Senate action, spills the beans. It appears that random checks of people and baggage are made, but unless you waved your pistole around - or you were caught printing, there is no structured security to keep you off carrying concealed, let alone in your carry-on (or even your checked, for that matter) luggage.

The Times, in its normal anti-gun rant, is against this because it would require the baggage car to be secured, and an airline sterile area appraoch would have to be created for passengers and carry-on luggage.

Banners always seem to be stupider than we think they can be. Bin Ladin and his Merry Band now know how to hit Amtrak (and the commuter rail lines around NYC) courtesy of the NY Times.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,047 Posts
Well, small steps...

If checked baggage only, that kind of sucks, but still you can travel with your firearm. I have avoided train travel altogether because I can't bring my gun to my final destination.

No worse than air travel but certainly not any better. It sucks! But a step in the right direction.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
Amtrak:

Honest passengers are unarmed? Check.
Train runs through remote areas far from any law enforcement response and possibly even cellular reception? Check.

If I was a criminal/terrorist, I'd be drawing out some plans right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Amtrak:

Honest passengers are unarmed? Check.
Train runs through remote areas far from any law enforcement response and possibly even cellular reception? Check.

If I was a criminal/terrorist, I'd be drawing out some plans right now.
Why they haven't placed a brick of C4 onto 1000 lines of track, by now, is beyond me. Easy as pie to disrupt the entire network.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
The title of this thread is "Amtrak now required to allow transport of firearms."

The linked item states that the Senate has so voted, but there is no mention of a House vote or a presidential signature.
That is correct; the bill has to get through the House and His Barackness before Amtrak's policies will change.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Is there strip-searching of every passenger, and/or detectors screening every passenger? If not, then how can armed criminals be kept from Amtrak trains? I'm just asking.

Seems to me that criminals get on trains, armed, daily. The only thing denial by our elected autocrats of the carrying of life-saving equipment (defensive tools) does is to disarm potential victims in advance of crimes. I have yet to find a senator who can explain this lunacy adequately well. I'm not holding my breath. :call2:

Still, passing the minor-improvements Amtrak Act is better than not passing it, I suppose. Though, it won't impact the ratio of armed felons to upstanding citizens one bit. Until elected autocrats stop treating us as criminals for protecting our families, we'll remain potential criminals in their eyes. :mad:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,217 Posts
Exactly. This does nothing to keep passengers any safer. Until Amtrak allows carry on trains, I wont be riding ( and probably not even then ). But to tell people they cant even transport a gun in their stored luggage is beyond belief.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top