PPS voices opinion on armed fare checkers on public transit (school, costs)

[guy2073]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

Well I guess the punishment for not paying for your ride on the T must be to be shot on site, so I guess they need to be armed. Maybe fare jumpers are the reason the Port Authority is perpetually bankrupt???

Because someone is armed doesn't mean they are going to shoot someone, if they are trained transit police why not carry every tool possible.

[PghYinzer]

Originally Posted by guy2073

Because someone is armed doesn't mean they are going to shoot someone, if they are trained transit police why not carry every tool possible.

I agree it doesn’t mean that they are going to shoot someone, but let’s say a situation escalates quickly and shots are fired. Shots fired on public transit over something that started with someone thinking someone didn’t pay their $2.75 fare.

I think that the Port Authority Police should have guns, although I think we could easily have non-armed, non-officer fare checkers do random spot checks on the T. The police have better things to do.

[RonSantoRules]

Originally Posted by guy2073

Because someone is armed doesn't mean they are going to shoot someone, if they are trained transit police why not carry every tool possible.

Nm

[gg]

Originally Posted by UKyank

Random fare checks on mass transit by police literally happens in just about every country with a decent transit system everywhere; not sure why pps thinks it’s students are apparently the only people too dumb to deal with this?

You know this is a good point. Why not prepare students for what it is like many places. Never thought about it that way.

[gg]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

Why armed?

In this country, I feel police need to be armed especially how many are getting shot just because they are police. Sorry but they need to protect themselves from someone attacking them and they need the guns they have.

I don't think this whole thing is a very big deal, but don't have much of an opinion. Was interested in what others have to say.

[sealie]

On Metra they have Tasers. Can’t speak for Boston.

[szug-bot]

Originally Posted by PghYinzer

I agree it doesn’t mean that they are going to shoot someone, but let’s say a situation escalates quickly and shots are fired. Shots fired on public transit over something that started with someone thinking someone didn’t pay their $2.75 fare.

I think that the Port Authority Police should have guns, although I think we could easily have non-armed, non-officer fare checkers do random spot checks on the T. The police have better things to do.

Right, but with that logic, TEACHERS should be armed, first and foremost.

But i think when do we stop this madness? I am pro gun ownership, but to collect fares? If the fare collector/checker were armed, shouldn't bus drivers be armed? Toll booth collectors, and so on.

And who pays for the arms and the training?

They do not have to be armed. That is beyond reasonable.

[PghYinzer]

Originally Posted by szug-bot

Right, but with that logic, TEACHERS should be armed, first and foremost.

But i think when do we stop this madness? I am pro gun ownership, but to collect fares? If the fare collector/checker were armed, shouldn't bus drivers be armed? Toll booth collectors, and so on.

And who pays for the arms and the training?

They do not have to be armed. That is beyond reasonable.

Crossing Guards, Bag Boys/Girls at super markets, and perhaps Wal-Mart greeters.

[gg]

Okay wait a minute. These are POLICE OFFICERS and as someone that knows a lot of cops, let me clue you in on how it works. The port authority police WILL respond to any police event in the area. In other words if there is a shooting nearby, they will help the situation. They need to be armed as all police officers in the US are. You can't have unarmed cops in our country with all the guns everywhere. That isn't fair to them or anyone.

This is no big deal. Go to the airport and see the guns everywhere. We need to get with the times.

[tyovan4]

I think part of the issue may be that the fare evasion, as it is planned, is set as a criminal offense. Obviously, the police would check for any other outstanding warrants, etc, etc. I think arming the officers in this instance is more obviously for their protection - as if they have to detain someone on an unrelated charge, its obvious that a person may be willing to engage in force against the officer trying to detain them (as we most obviously, and most sadly, saw in New Ken this month).

I believe the other half of the complaint of those opposing armed fare-checkers, is that they want the fare evasion to be handled as a civil offense (a la a parking ticket) and not to have other information checked (warrants, immigration detainers, etc) at the time that the fare evasion ticket is issued.

I hope that this shines more light onto the arguments.