Opposing Views: VIDEO: Should Guns Be Allowed on Amtrak Trains?

Should Guns Be Allowed on Amtrak Trains?

By Opposing Views Editorial Staff , To Protect and Serve Opposing Views - October 23, 2009

Comments(18) | (0)

A new congressional proposal is setting up a showdown between the railroad industry and second amendment advocates. This measure will allow passengers to bring declared, unloaded guns as checked baggage aboard trains. Currently airlines allow the same thing, but the National Railroad Passenger Corporation says it cannot comply with that.

Fox News reports:

Regarding Article

VIDEO: Should Guns Be Allowed on Amtrak Trains?

Amtrak...

Doesn't have any grounds to refuse people of this civil liberty. They can piss and moan all they want. Rights are rights.

- SolarSanitizer October 23, 2009 1:05PM

Reply to this Recommend (1)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
All I want to know is.........

WHY would you need a gun on an Amtrak train, are the trains being robbed again?

- bhall October 23, 2009 4:09PM

Reply to this Recommend (0)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
- Checked luggage, not carry-on.
  
  Sometimes people travel and want their gun at their destination.
  
  - SolarSanitizer October 23, 2009 4:31PM
  
  Reply to this Recommend (1)
  
  Thank You for your Comment
  
  We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
  - That is lame.....
    
    Do YOU EVEN believe that there are enough people that need a gun somewhere else that a federal law needs to be changed.
    
    - bhall October 23, 2009 8:04PM
    
    Reply to this Recommend (0)
    
    Thank You for your Comment
    
    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
    - Lame
      
      Point out the federal law outlawing guns in checked baggage on a train.
      
      Then, make a reasonable case for why it is in the government 's interest to prevent unloaded guns from being placed in a locked baggage car on a train.
      
      Lame indeed.
      
      - SolarSanitizer October 23, 2009 8:36PM
      
      Reply to this Recommend (1)
      
      Thank You for your Comment
      
      We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
    - Geography.
      
      If a person has a Second Amendment right to carry a gun what does where he is have to do with it?
      
      - mike1948 October 23, 2009 11:14PM
      
      Reply to this Recommend (1)
      
      Thank You for your Comment
      
      We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
    - Even more lame.
      
      Even more lame is your completely incorrect assumption that people are only victims of crimes in their home state or city. Yes, this stupid and restrictive law needs to be changed to allow people to carry their guns with them when they travel, like they already do on planes.
      
      - LagerHead October 26, 2009 9:04AM
      
      Reply to this Recommend (0)
      
      Thank You for your Comment
      
      We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
- Why?
  
  Why would you have needed a gun of Flight 77 on 9/11?
  
  Duh!!!
  
  - Don Earl October 23, 2009 8:45PM
  
  Reply to this Recommend (1)
  
  Thank You for your Comment
  
  We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
  - No Gun needed
    
    The hijackers didnt have a gun... Anyway they were in the cockpit - what good would a gun have done - no one knew what was going on.... A pair of stilheto would of been use as deadly.
    
    - carisun October 25, 2009 4:30PM
    
    Reply to this Recommend (0)
    
    Thank You for your Comment
    
    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
    - Interesting.
      
      And here I was assuming that they started out the flight in the passenger area of the plane, not the cockpit. Or was my assumption correct? If so, could they possibly have been prevented from entering the cockpit in the first place?
      
      - LagerHead October 26, 2009 9:05AM
      
      Reply to this Recommend (0)
      
      Thank You for your Comment
      
      We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
well, well, this would actually be a common-sense change.

If airlines can do it--e.g., provide firearms transportation as baggage for their customers--then why shouldn't Amtrak do it?

why not, ms. hall?

- jfh October 23, 2009 8:25PM

Reply to this Recommend (1)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
- I think it is a little funny that you refer to
  
  me as Ms. Hall. As a gay man, only my close friends call me Ms. Hall, do I know you?
  
  - bhall October 26, 2009 7:02PM
  
  Reply to this Recommend (0)
  
  Thank You for your Comment
  
  We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I'll Use Stones

To weigh down my carry-on. Then when someone illegally enters the train from a station with no metal detectors or police surveillance (I've rode Amtrak before; their security is not very impressive) and uses their gun to rob people I will swing my rock-filled satchel at them.

Checked luggage on a train does not put anyone at risk, especially when the firearms inside of them are unloaded. This is a non-issue only made into one because some people have this misconception that being in the presence of an unloaded weapon dramatically raises their ability to get shot.

- m46607 October 24, 2009 1:38AM

Reply to this Recommend (1)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Of Course Guns Should be Allow on Amtrak

It is a simple fact that guns should be allowed on Amtrak trains , stations etc. The very fact this system is tax-payer funded as well as supported by individuals purchasing tickets for a trip within the US implies the right to defend oneself. Not to mention the freedom guaranteed by the Constitution to all citizens includes trains, planes & any other form of transportation . Emotional idiots have dictated policies for citizens without regard for the very basis of our country & it's formation. This applies to religion , guns, free speech , among other freedoms. The current administration is typical of the mindset of a few that desire to control all citizens & force their narrow, self-serving views on a 'free' people (at least for the moment). This has worsening since the early ' gun control ' attempts during the early days of our country & it is time to stop this. All restrictive laws should be repealed immediately & future laws must have an reasonable expiration date attached prior to ratification. This includes ' hate crime ' legislation, all this racial bull as well as all social programs. It is time to return to our roots - all people are free & equal no matter what race , creed or national origin. Stand up for your rights & learn to sink or swim on your own. The individual is responsible for himself or herself...not the government . Grow up & accept life as an adult & this country will correct the errant course it is currently taking.

- pops1911 October 24, 2009 7:23AM

Reply to this Recommend (1)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Guns everywhere...

No guns should not be allowed on Amtra... guns should be allowed on private property, on a shooting ranges, and your business (if you're a business owner). The 2nd Amendment has its limitations. The founding farthers surely were not thinking about AmTrak nor Southwest Airlines. Everything should have a limit - jut like free speech has a limit. We need to stop the violence in America!

- carisun October 25, 2009 4:28PM

Reply to this Recommend (0)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
- Exactly why guns are needed.
  
  The founding fathers certainly had no intent to limit guns to ranges and private property. Especially after they had just finished fighting a war against a tyrannical government in places that were definitely not their private property or shooting ranges, which really didn't exist for private use at that time.
  
  [The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
  - James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.
  
  [T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.
  - Zachariah Johnson
  
  And if you think that taking away a law -abiding citizen's right to bear arms decreases violence, I encourage you to read John Lott's books, "More Guns, Less Crime" and "The Bias Against Guns." Both are very thorough statistical analyses of gun laws and their affect on crime . I would also like to point out the opposite case, Kennesaw, GA, which hasn't had a murder in 20 years despite a law requiring all households to have a gun.
  
  Stop the violence indeed. But disarming citizens while criminals remain armed will have the exact opposite effect.
  
  - LagerHead October 26, 2009 9:25AM
  
  Reply to this Recommend (0)
  
  Thank You for your Comment
  
  We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I must really be............

missing something in this issue. I have lived for 60 years and I cannot understand this obsession with guns in general. I suppose that a gun is some form of "comfort" for some people. And if a gun is in the baggage department unloaded that it should not be an issue. But it seems to me that a few ruin things for a lot. I PERSONALLY think it is a little nuts.

- bhall October 26, 2009 6:59PM

Reply to this Recommend (0)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I guess I'm not taking the train...

...if I intend to travel somewhere where I am legally able to have a firearm for self defense. I do travel by air fairly regularly and always check my unloaded and secured sidearm when doing so. My travel decisions are often dictated by whether I am able to do so, and I avoid methods and destinations that restrict that ability. I hear California is nice, but I'll never go there for just this reason.

- JDR October 27, 2009 2:49PM

Reply to this Recommend (0)

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.