Why Doesn’t Amtrak Have Metal Detectors?

After bomb threats twice forced the evacuation of Amtrak trains in Eugene, Oregon, a local television station asks, “If the airport has screeners and metal detectors, why don’t train stations?” The answer they got from Amtrak? Such measures “would slow down the entire system and reduce the travel flow for passengers” (listen to the video starting at 4:00).

Needless to say, worries about slowing down the air travel system certainly haven’t prevented the government from forcing an onerous screening system on airline travelers. The television reporter points out that trains have been bombed in London and Madrid and a train station has been bombed in Russia, so perhaps Amtrak needs to do more than just rely on passengers reporting suspicious activities.

The truth is that Amtrak is protected by what might be called the “Macintosh effect.” A few years ago, computer viruses attacked mainly Windows machines and Macintoshes seemed to be immune. But they weren’t; in fact, there were just too few Macintoshes around for hackers to bother with. In the same way, the fact that American airlines carry almost a hundred times as many passenger miles a year as Amtrak makes them a much more tempting target.
How Tadalista 5 improves erectile function? purchase cheap levitra midwayfire.com Tadalista, the active ingredient, manages to inhibit an enzyme called PDE-5 (phosphodiesterase type 5) in the body. Hence, most men are scared of trying discount viagra levitra this type of enhancement. Fruits and vegetables act as natural antitoxins in levitra no prescription the body. There could be other causes of this disease through testicular biopsy? Scholars said, for the azoospermia sildenafil cipla caused by the endocrine dysfunction, through testicular biopsy, it can know the functional status of the seminiferous epithelium, and to determine whether it is a sildenafil citrate medicine, which belongs to phosphodiesterase-5 blocker family and shows wonder results on male sensual health.

High-speed rail advocates sneer at the delays caused by airport security and argue that this is a reason to subsidize passenger trains. But if trains ever actually did become popular, this advantage would be undermined as they would also become targets. Instead of spending hundreds of billions of dollars on passenger rail, it would make more sense to spend a tiny fraction of that amount to speed airport security.

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

About The Antiplanner

The Antiplanner is a forester and economist with more than fifty years of experience critiquing government land-use and transportation plans.

12 Responses to Why Doesn’t Amtrak Have Metal Detectors?

  1. paul says:

    I have heard that the logic is a terrorist would simply put a bomb on the track of a train, rather than risk putting the bomb on the train. Why be a suicide bomber on a train when you can just mine the track?

    My recollection is that after 9/11 travel experts were called to Washington to advise on building high speed rail so the nation would not be so vulnerable to terrorism in transport. One expert I talked with said he told some congressmen that all is needed to seriously damage a high speed train is six feet of chain to wrap in a ball around the rail a few minutes before the train comes. This should cause derailment and and the faster the train is travelling the worse the accident. No need for a bomb, and an action that can be repeated multiple times before capture.

    So it could be claimed that there is no need for metal detectors on trains because any terrorist would not bother to actually board the train but just damage the track.

  2. FantasiaWHT says:

    I don’t buy the analogy. A computer virus released has the ability to affect all users of similar computers, hence why making viruses for PC’s was so much more effective than making them for macs (whatever your goal happened to be). But a single bomb only has the ability to take out a single plane full of people – it doesn’t matter how many other planes are in the air at the same time. Taking out one train full of passengers probably does about the same amount of damage to human life as taking out one plane full of passengers – at least within the same order of magnitude.

    I agree with Paul that the fact there are far more effective ways of derailing a train than bringing a bomb on board one of its cars more likely explains the difference.

  3. Frank says:

    “the fact that American airlines carry almost a hundred times as many passenger miles a year as Amtrak makes them a much more tempting target.”

    I don’t buy this argument. It’s doubtful terrorists consider amount of passenger miles per year. The simple fact is that trains can’t be flown into buildings, which drastically increases casualties and the psychological effects on the populace. Large jets also have 50,000 gallon fuel tanks, turning them into massive bombs.

  4. Sandy Teal says:

    I don’t think Amtrak is more of a target than the NYC or DC subways would be. But if the US builds a very expensive bullet train, then it would be a higher target.

    But I don’t think terrorists in the US suffer from a lack of targets. Every large mall is a target that would greatly affect the economy, especially during the holidays.

  5. kens says:

    My theory is the point of terrorism is to terrorize as many people as possible rather than to kill as many people as possible. People are more likely to be terrorized by an something they perceive as a potential threat to their own safety than something they don’t perceive that way. Planes are more tempting targets than trains because (at least in the US) far more people fly than ride trains, so many more people are going to be more affected by an attack on a plane than one on a train.

  6. paulmcl says:

    By the way, Eurostar (the train that goes through the channel tunnel between London and Paris) does have metal detectors and all baggage is X-rayed just as for air travel.

  7. LazyReader says:

    If you hijack a train, where you gonna take it. Cut the overhead powerline, the terrorists ain’t going anywhere? Hijack a plane you can take it anywhere you wanna go provided Clint Eastwood isn’t on board.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibzZjGzNj7I

  8. Sandy Teal says:

    It takes MacGyver to stop a hijacked train (and a lot of bad ’80s acting).

    http://youtu.be/-YQJOe7yGT0

  9. Frank says:

    MacGyver FTW! Best part of that video is the push to MacGyver’s reaction shot to hearing the execution threat. Salt to the rescue! And moonshine…of course.

  10. LazyReader says:

    Joke of the Day: Yo Mama so fat, she got AMTRAK tattooed on her leg.

  11. Sandy Teal says:

    A Minneapolis light rail test train derailed shortly after President Obama lauded the expansion of the system, the Pioneer Press of St. Paul, Minn., reports.

    Obama touted the expansion of Minnesota’s Metro light rail system to St. Paul, which is scheduled to open in June, as an example for the nation to follow. Hours later, a train ran off the tracks.

    “I just had a chance to take a look at some of those spiffy new trains,” Obama said Wednesday of the expansion of Minneapolis’ Metro light rail.

    “They are nice and they’re energy efficient. They’re going to be reliable. You can get from one downtown to the other in a little over 30 minutes instead of when it’s snowing being in traffic for two hours.”

    Obama said other cities should follow Minneapolis and St. Paul’s lead in expanding public transit access.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/public-transit/199548-minneapolis-light-rail-train-derailed-after-obama#ixzz2ue88zbn3

  12. Andrew says:

    Randall:

    There have been far more carbombings than any other sort of terrorist incident around the world.

    Why not suggest that all cars approaching any heavily populated area be put through a border crossing like search, with the potential to have your car dismantled and you strip searched if anything is suspected?

    That makes as much sense as metal detectors on trains.

    Another comment, a terrorist on a train cannot take control of the train because the engine is seperated from the passenger cabin and inaccessible. Not like a plane, which can be hijacked. Thus, little real threat to any chaos from terrorism on a train. Further, a train is made up of many cars, so bombing one of them generally only destroys part of that one car. And even if a terrorist did get into an engine, the train can be brought to a stop by purposefully derailing it into a siding.

    The threat on a particular train is also far less. Even the very worst train derailments have only lead to 100 or less deaths on trains carrying hundreds. As 9/11 showed, the potential mayhem from a plane is far less limited.

    While people are getting worked up over terrorism, we of course lose sight of the real threat to our lives – the car out in the driveway out front. Unlike the dangers of a terrorist attack, the dangers of driving are very real. 1 in 80 Americans will die in a car accident, and far more will be severly injured, possibly crippled for life. While several thousand Americans have died in terrorist attacks, several million have died from cars – more than have died in every war America has ever fought.

Leave a Reply