1352
America, exblain (thelemmy.club)
submitted 3 weeks ago by to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world
448 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 42 points 3 weeks ago (16 children)

I have the utmost confidence in the TSAs ability to make rail stations just as bad as airports.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 3 weeks ago

    Oh you complain now, but as soon as someone hijacks a train and steers it off course into a building, you’ll be begging TSA to grope you before letting you cram yourself into a reasonably spacious train seat that a public entity runs and has no reason to maximize the number of bodies it can cram into one area to create more shareholder value.

    (I’m not crying you are……..)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

    They already do the inspections for rail stations and they're about 1/10th as annoying and time-consuming as the ones for airports.

    Trains just don't have the capacity for a 9/11 so I don't see that changing any time soon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

    Trains just don't have the capacity for a 9/11

    Not to bring down buildings, but in terms of terrorism they sure do.

    Any modern 9/11 attempt will be made by cargo jet. So protection against aircraft bringing down buildings is provided by the US airforce, not the TSA.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

    I feel like you said "No" and then agreed with me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    I agree with your whole statement, but disagree if it is broken up into separate parts.

    Passenger vector terrorism is equal on trains and planes (and busses to a much lesser extent). This is the TSAs area.

    Infrastructure damage is much higher on planes, but this also applies to the 10% of flights that are cargo and the TSA has no influence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    For whatever reason it's just not equal in the US as far as I'm aware. Maybe it's a benefit of a society who thinks trains are lame.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    When the train's average speed is 50mph and no-one uses them then the target isn't big enough for large scale terror.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    Your position is very confusing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    Why would there be security checks at train stations? I know those are a thing in some countries, but this never made any sense to me. They aren't where I live; a train can't be driven into buildings and if something does explode on them (exactly as possible as in any crowd), the train will simply stop, not fall from the sky.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    A similar number of people would be injured/die from a plane explosion as a train explosion.

    Your arguments against no security checks apply equally to trains and planes (and busses).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    Not really because an explosion on a train or bus doesn't cause the entire vehicle to crash into the ground, only to stop. An explosion on a train or bus is going to kill or injure people in its radius of impact, but people sitting far away from it (granted: not many of those on a bus, but very much so on a long train) won't be injured. On a plane, if that plane stops operating mid-flight, even people on the other end of the plane from the explosion are unlikely to survive.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    An explosion in the front carriage of a train going 200mph is not going to be good for anyone travelling behind it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago

    OK, "won't be injured" wasn't exactly true; but they are still in a lot less danger than someone in the same situation on a plane. A train or bus can stop anywhere on its route if there is a dangerous situation, a plane cannot, so in my mind it makes a lot of sense that there are security checks before boarding a plane, but not when boarding a train or bus.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent