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.
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.
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.
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.
I have the utmost confidence in the TSAs ability to make rail stations just as bad as airports.
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………)
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.
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.
I feel like you said “No” and then agreed with me.
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.
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.
When the train’s average speed is 50mph and no-one uses them then the target isn’t big enough for large scale terror.
Your position is very confusing.
Sorry. I should have lead with “Yes I agree”.
If trains became less lame then the target would be more interesting for terrorists and the TSA might be more likely to set up shop.
deleted by creator
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.
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).
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.
An explosion in the front carriage of a train going 200mph is not going to be good for anyone travelling behind it.
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.