Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
638 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
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]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,954 Posts
:sheep: Baaaah
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
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.

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? :confused:

"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?

"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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,047 Posts
Well of course those bozo's will speak out against it. :sheep:

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

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,644 Posts
Will these people ever learn? BG's and terrorists don't follow the law! That is what makes them BG's and terrorists!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
823 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
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 ... :twak:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,964 Posts
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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,686 Posts
Oh that's JUST what we need, another Gun-Free Zone to welcome predators to a target-rich environment. Y'all ever notice that these maniacal murder sprees never happen at a 101st Airborne Reunion or an Outlaw Biker Rally? The shooters may be crazy, but they're obviously not...stupid. :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
Such stupidity. With an already lax system, anyone can bring an 'assault weapon' with or without this bill passing. I love how polititians think that just by signing some paperwork, the rest of society will fall politely in line and obey.

I also hate the made up phrase 'assault weapon'. Can I not assault someone with a pen or my own hands, making them also assault weapon.

And lastely speaking to keeping passengers safe. Who kept the passengers safe on 9-11. Those who actually realized what was going had to use a beverage cart to 'assault' the terrorists. The only protection is self protection in situations like these.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
823 Posts
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
But those bad people might bring a blow torch with them to cut there way into the baggage compartments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
If ignorance truly is bliss, Boomberg and McCarthy must be two of the happiest people on the planet.
They're not called "Bliss Ninnies" for nothin'.

The proposal is to allow firearms in checked baggage. Checked as in inaccessible to the passenger during the trip.
Yup. Just as worthless as we thought.

Amtrak trains need to have the noose loosened, to allow folks the means to defend themselves ... like the criminals already have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
631 Posts
Oh what a buncha BS! I'm positive that the good folks on Flight 93 would have LOVED to have access to a couple of guns prior to the crash. They might have survived and been living heroes instead of dead ones.

GUNS do not create crime. CRIMINALS are responsible for crimes perpetuated upon the defenseless.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,228 Posts
I am REALLY confused;Right now (with no screening in place) anyone can bring a weapon onto a train in carry-on baggage if they don't care about the law.
Under the proposal, people who care about obeying laws could legally bring a weapon onto a train in checked baggage.
How does the new proposal by Congress actually make anyone less safe??:scratchchin:
I guess I'm just stupid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,177 Posts
If Amtrak already has Lax security measures in place,that is the exact place terrorists will hit,you just acknowledged they have no way to screen for guns or explosives,I am willing to bet Terrorists are looking at blowing up Amtrak trains.Terrorists aren't stupid and they will do trial runs with inert stuff to see what they can and can't get onboard.Remember Spain and London
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
How does the new proposal by Congress actually make anyone less safe?
My references to "less safe" were specifically in comparison to someone's ability to carry life-saving tools on buses, taxis, their own cars, and what could be done on trains if the autocrats didn't choose to restrict the ability of upstanding people to defend themselves.

Compared to current restrictions, an upstanding citizen still will have no ability to use the stored weapon in a self-defense situation that occurs while on the train. In that sense, there is no change. Obviously, though, a person will have access to the firearm on both ends of the trip, now. In that sense, it's an improvement. But as compared to what should be the case, that there shouldn't be any restrictions at all (IMO), upstanding citizens are still put at risk by these silly rules.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,152 Posts
Going by the thinking of Mr. Bloomberg and all his cronies feeling that guns make trains unsafe, logic would only dictate that his thoughts would also mean that more guns anywhere would be unsafe. That said, I propose Mr. Bloomberg and all his friends officially and publicly disband their public and private armed security teams for any and all travel and events and provide proof that any such action has taken place. He should no longer allow police with dangerous guns to provide him with protection, nor anyone else for that matter, public or private entities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,461 Posts
Guns in Checked Luggage

=MattLarson;1306054]The proposal is to allow firearms in checked baggage. Checked as in inaccessible to the passenger during the trip.
This is the part of the pending legislation that has these idiots confused. IF they would take the time to read this legislation and realize that passengers will NOT have access to their checked firearms they might be less concerned for the safety of the passengers. All these misguided people see is people with guns.

But as far as some anti-2A politicians go, this is like forcing a square peg into a round hole. They are looking at this pending legislation in the wrong way. If I plan on traveling with a handgun in my checked luggage I am not threat to ANYBODY! I would love to see these idiots explain how I would access my checked firearm from the passenger compartment of the train.

At times I'm amazed at the faulty logic these people use.

You cannot change the minds of some anti-gun public officials. All we can do is hope that this pending legislation passes intact.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top