Another Victory in the Senate

The Senate voted for Amtrak to allow firearms to be transported aboard trains as checked baggage, in the same manner as they are permitted on aircraft.  Amtrak is complaining they don’t have the manpower, but I don’t see what manpower they need.  Last time I took Amtrak, they didn’t exactly have elaborate security measures.  Most of what goes on in a train station is even more security theater than you see at airports.

UPDATE: Helmke:

Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said he “doesn’t have problems with people transporting guns on trains so long as steps are taken to make sure they’re secured and properly stowed.”

I guess this one was a little too reasonable for them to oppose.  It would be hard to argue against, considering security concerns are much higher on planes, and you can transport firearms on planes in checked baggage.

9 thoughts on “Another Victory in the Senate”

  1. Amtrak used to just not worry about it. Railroad people tended to frown on law folks bothering their customers … trains run on private property, so carry wasn’t a problem unless the conductor decided the passenger was a problem.

    I used to advise using the train just for that reason … but now they have TSA security theatre to deal with … gotta prevent terrorists from hijacking trains and crashing them into skyscrapers, I guess.

  2. Supposedly the bill states they need to have check-in procedures and other features. The local Amtrak station is completely unmanned and has the super-tech feature of a timed lock on the door for after 10pm.

  3. What TSA on Amtrak? What security? The last time I took Amtrak, I had to put my own freakin’ luggage in the baggage car. And I was in first class. The only thing they do is check your ticket, as far as I can tell.

    Still, this is good news.

  4. Sebastian, Thanks for that Helmke quote. He’s usually reviled so viciously on the pro-gun blogs, everything from calling him a liar to insisting he really wants total bans regardless of what he says, that it’s refreshing to see evidence of his general reasonableness.

  5. …his general reasonableness.

    Yes, because being able to identify, just this once, a thoroughly lost cause is totally indicative of an individual’s “reasonableness”. Never mind that he would deny law-abiding citizens their rights, and disparages those citizens who dare exercise those rights; never mind that he has supported both the “assault weapon” ban and D.C.’s firearm ban; never mind that there has not been a single piece of gun-control legislation that he has not supported… Nope, he is completely reasonable… in MikeB’s bigoted dreams.

Comments are closed.