Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: Metro to conduct Random Searches

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    Metro officials announced today that they will begin randomly inspecting backpacks, gym bags and any other containers that riders carry with them onto the bus and rail system, in an effort to deter possible terrorist attacks

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2700856&s_pos=

    Wonder how this will effect Mrs. Fryfrye who takes the bus (in Virginia only) from time to time and carries her revolver in her purse.

    Perhaps we now need a formal letter from Metro on this? Understanding has always been that local laws apply.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    fryfrye wrote:
    Metro officials announced today that they will begin randomly inspecting backpacks, gym bags and any other containers that riders carry with them onto the bus and rail system, in an effort to deter possible terrorist attacks

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2700856&s_pos=

    Wonder how this will effect Mrs. Fryfrye who takes the bus (in Virginia only) from time to time and carries her revolver in her purse.

    Perhaps we now need a formal letter from Metro on this? Understanding has always been that local laws apply.
    http://www.virginia1774.org/METROLetter.jpg

    (Letter is from 2002)
    The relevant text from that letter is:


    "As to your question, there is no WMATA regulation or tariff which would preclude persons from carrying concealed firearms while aboard Metrorail or Metrobuses in the Commonwealth of Virginia. This does not mean that there are no other laws, rules or ordinances which apply, although our queries to police authorities have not indicated the existence of such restrictions.
    I would like to clarify our view with regard to the application of Va. Code $15.2-915, which you quote in your letter. That law limits the ability of localities to adopt ordinances restricting the carrying and transport of firearms and ammunition. Please note that in our view, this provision does not apply to WMATA, since WMATA is not a locality as the term is defined in $15.2-102 of the Code."

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    I think this is the letter in some form or other that has always been my basis for carrying while on Metro in VA.

    We should get an update... last line about reviewing "legal options" seems that they could have modified their view on this.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    Here is some more info from the legal document creating the " Washington metropolitan area transit zone"

    From:

    http://ssl.csg.org/compactlaws/washi...authority.html


    "" (e) The Authority shall have the power to adopt rules and regulations for the safe, convenient and orderly use of the transit facilities, including the payment and the manner of the payment of fares or charges therefore, the protection of the transit facilities, the control of traffic and parking upon the transit facilities, and the safety and protection of the riding public. In the event that any such rules and regulations contravene the laws, ordinances or regulations or police operational rules of a signatory or any political subdivision thereof which are existing or subsequently enacted, these laws, ordinances or regulations of the signatory or the political subdivision shall apply and the conflicting rule or regulation, or portion thereof, of the Authority shall be void within the jurisdiction of that signatory or political subdivision. In all other respects, the rules and regulations of the Authority shall be uniform throughout the transit zone." "

    The relevant portion is really just:

    "these laws, ordinances or regulations of the signatory or the political subdivision shall apply and the conflicting rule or regulation, or portion thereof, of the Authority shall be void within the jurisdiction of that signatory or political subdivision."

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,156

    Post imported post

    If METRO is paid (either partially or fully) by tax dollars, they can't ban guns (nor conduct random searches).

    I REFUSE to live in London, Jr.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    nova wrote:
    If METRO is paid (either partially or fully) by tax dollars, they can't ban guns (nor conduct random searches).

    I REFUSE to live in London, Jr.
    Any commentary on why you feel that they can't ban gun? Specifically, when WMATA says " Please note that in our view, this provision does not apply to WMATA, since WMATA is not a locality as the term is defined in $15.2-102 of the Code."
    Do you believe that statement is incorrect, and that WMATA is a locality? or preemption applies for some other reason?

    I am not being argumentative, I haven't had time to do the research to determine if their argument makes sense. If you already have it would save me some time.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,156

    Post imported post

    mkl wrote:
    nova wrote:
    If METRO is paid (either partially or fully) by tax dollars, they can't ban guns (nor conduct random searches).

    I REFUSE to live in London, Jr.
    Any commentary on why you feel that they can't ban gun? Specifically, when WMATA says " Please note that in our view, this provision does not apply to WMATA, since WMATA is not a locality as the term is defined in $15.2-102 of the Code."
    Do you believe that statement is incorrect, and that WMATA is a locality? or preemption applies for some other reason?

    I am not being argumentative, I haven't had time to do the research to determine if their argument makes sense. If you already have it would save me some time.

    IMO it's no different than Waterside or any public university. None of these places should be able to ban guns. To take it one step further, METRO is considered public transportation. I don't see how preemption wouldn't apply. Of course, I'm being idealistic.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    nova wrote:
    mkl wrote:
    nova wrote:
    If METRO is paid (either partially or fully) by tax dollars, they can't ban guns (nor conduct random searches).

    I REFUSE to live in London, Jr.
    Any commentary on why you feel that they can't ban gun? Specifically, when WMATA says " Please note that in our view, this provision does not apply to WMATA, since WMATA is not a locality as the term is defined in $15.2-102 of the Code."
    Do you believe that statement is incorrect, and that WMATA is a locality? or preemption applies for some other reason?

    I am not being argumentative, I haven't had time to do the research to determine if their argument makes sense. If you already have it would save me some time.
    ┬*

    IMO it's no different than Waterside or any public university. None of these places should be able to ban guns. To take it one step further, METRO is considered public transportation. I don't see how preemption wouldn't apply. Of course, I'm being idealistic.
    I agree, I am just trying to figure out "what the law says".
    Preemption says " No locality shall adopt or enforce any ordinance"

    A locality is defined as: ""Locality" or "local government" shall be construed to mean a county, city, or town as the context may require."

    WMATA is not a county, city, or town...So does preemption actually apply to Metro? Or is this a case where WMATA is some sort of magical hybrid multi-state venture that exists outside of our normal definition?

    I would love to have someone with some knowledge of the things involved to chime in here.

  9. #9
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Midlothian, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    596

    Post imported post

    mkl wrote:
    nova wrote:
    mkl wrote:
    nova wrote:
    If METRO is paid (either partially or fully) by tax dollars, they can't ban guns (nor conduct random searches).

    I REFUSE to live in London, Jr.
    Any commentary on why you feel that they can't ban gun? Specifically, when WMATA says " Please note that in our view, this provision does not apply to WMATA, since WMATA is not a locality as the term is defined in $15.2-102 of the Code."
    Do you believe that statement is incorrect, and that WMATA is a locality? or preemption applies for some other reason?

    I am not being argumentative, I haven't had time to do the research to determine if their argument makes sense. If you already have it would save me some time.

    IMO it's no different than Waterside or any public university. None of these places should be able to ban guns. To take it one step further, METRO is considered public transportation. I don't see how preemption wouldn't apply. Of course, I'm being idealistic.
    I agree, I am just trying to figure out "what the law says".
    Preemption says " No locality shall adopt or enforce any ordinance"

    A locality is defined as: ""Locality" or "local government" shall be construed to mean a county, city, or town as the context may require."

    WMATA is not a county, city, or town...So does preemption actually apply to Metro? Or is this a case where WMATA is some sort of magical hybrid multi-state venture that exists outside of our normal definition?

    I would love to have someone with some knowledge of the things involved to chime in here.
    If it is a state or local government entity (and authorities are), it needs the permission of the General Assembly to ban guns. VCDL does not know of any such legislative authority for WMATA.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    69

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Post imported post

    www.wmata.com is WMATA's site. Click on "contact us"

    I stopped riding Metro during the week some time ago, when they determined that since their parking attendants were embezzling money, ridership would pay for it by using smart cards only and eliminating attendants. (Was ANY money ever recovered? I think not.) I ride only on weekends, and don't pay for parking.

    I just let them know I will no longer ride at all.

    How can public "service" treat the public like this?
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Post imported post

    I had occasion to speak with a Metro transit police officer (soon to make Lt, according to him) this morning. When he said his civilian job was with Metro Transit Police, I asked him about the searches. His response "It's for your own safety." and he wasn't very pleased when I said "No, it's for some bureaucrat's peace of mind."

    The situation wasn't appropriate for a long, in-depth discussion, as he was on duty in his Air Force Reserve role, but he had no qualms telling me a gun on Metro was considered a "dangerous item" and wasn't permitted.

    I did get a response to my comments to Metro, but with the caveat:

    THIS EMAIL MESSAGE IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE RECIPIENT NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE NAMED RECIPIENT, OR THE AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT TO THE NAMED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, COPYING, OR OTHER USE OF THIS INFORMATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED AND NO PRIVILEGE IS WAIVED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY THE ABOVE NAMED INDIVIDUAL IMMEDIATELY.
    Dontcha love that from a public official?

    I have written requesting permission to re-post his response. If I don't get permission, I'll have to paraphrase. Basically, the response was 4-5 paragraphs of "shut up and color; this is how it will work."
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  13. #13
    Regular Member dbc3804's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Henrico, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    79

    Post imported post

    I love the way that companies and government agencies plaster those warnings on the bottom of every email. It is particularily fun when it has been replied to several times and the list of warnings is longer than the original messages.

    I consider email over the internet to be as private as skywriting and ignore those warnings.

    Danny

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Roanoke, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    170

    Post imported post

    Tess wrote:
    I did get a response to my comments to Metro, but with the caveat:

    THIS EMAIL MESSAGE IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE RECIPIENT NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE NAMED RECIPIENT, OR THE AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT TO THE NAMED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, COPYING, OR OTHER USE OF THIS INFORMATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED AND NO PRIVILEGE IS WAIVED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY THE ABOVE NAMED INDIVIDUAL IMMEDIATELY.
    Since you are the intended recipient of the message, its dissemination is not prohibited. Go ahead and post it here!

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Tess wrote:
    I have written requesting permission to re-post his response. If I don't get permission, I'll have to paraphrase. Basically, the response was 4-5 paragraphs of "shut up and color; this is how it will work."
    Just for fun, you could FOIA the e-mail and then post the FOIA-response copy of the e-mail.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Tess wrote:
    I have written requesting permission to re-post his response. If I don't get permission, I'll have to paraphrase. Basically, the response was 4-5 paragraphs of "shut up and color; this is how it will work."
    Just for fun, you could FOIA the e-mail and then post the FOIA-response copy of the e-mail.
    Dude, you are my hero. That's brilliant.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Tess wrote:
    I have written requesting permission to re-post his response. If I don't get permission, I'll have to paraphrase. Basically, the response was 4-5 paragraphs of "shut up and color; this is how it will work."
    Just for fun, you could FOIA the e-mail and then post the FOIA-response copy of the e-mail.
    Virginia Freedom of Information Act ┬ž 2.2-3700

    http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp...0+cod+2.2-3700

    I believe his original request for this information constitutes a FOIA request, and therefore, would not be subject to the cut and paste BS at the bottom of the e-mail anyway.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Post imported post

    Tosta Dojen wrote:
    Since you are the intended recipient of the message, its dissemination is not prohibited. Go ahead and post it here!
    Y'know, first I read this and thought I couldn't. Then I could. Then couldn't. It's not really clear. However, the more I read and think about this, the more I believe you to be right. Here goes.


    Thank you for writing to Metro regarding our new Security Inspection Program. The program which will be random, unannounced and focused on explosive detection is aimed to deter terrorist attacks and increase the overall safety of the Metro system. Passengers can expect bag inspections at any Metro facility when circumstances warrant heightened vigilance. However, it should not be assumed that there is a specific threat to the Metro system when we are conducting random bag inspections.

    Prior to launching the Security Inspection Program, Metro Transit Police met with officials at the Transportation Security Administration and transit agencies in New York, Boston and New Jersey where police regularly conduct inspections of passengers┬┐ belongings. Legal Authority to inspect packages brought into the Metro system has been established by the court system on similar types of inspections in mass transit properties, airports, military facilities and courthouses.

    On Monday, October 27, Metro began posting large red and white signs at Metroail station entrances informing passengers about the inspections. Inspection points will be set up at Metro facilities and passengers will go through inspections before entering a rail station or boarding a bus and before paying a fare. The inspections are estimated to take only a few seconds and will be conducted by specially trained Metro Transit Police Officers and explosive-detection dogs.

    Transit Police will randomly select a number, such as five. Then every fifth person will be asked to step aside and allow their carry on items to be inspected. Additionally, passengers displaying suspicious behavior may also be subject to having their bags searched. Individuals who refuse to have their bag or bags inspected will not be allowed to enter the Metro system with those carry-on items. They will be free to leave the system with their items.

    The bag inspection program is an ongoing effort to protect Metro riders, employees and facilities. Passenger cooperation will help to ensure the program is fast, smooth and successful. For additional information about our new security initiative program, please go to our website, http://www.metroopensdoors.com. Also, http://www.wmata.com/faqs/preview.cfm?faqID=50 offers a list of Frequently Asked Questions about our Security Inspection Program. Thank you again for taking the time to share your comments with us. I hope this information helps to address your concerns.

    To speak to a Blue-Orange Line Customer Service Representative for Comments, Complaints or Suggestions, please call 301-562-4606 weekdays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. You can leave a message at all other times or e-mail us at http://www.wmata.com.

    If you ever need to speak with a Customer Information Agent for assistance with general questions, please call 202-637-7000; 6 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. The Web site is also a valuable resource for customers to find out more details about trip planning, bus and rail fares, service disruptions and other information.

    Sincerely,

    Paul Bumbry
    Rail Transportation Customer Service Manager
    It's definitely a "shut up and color" message. It seems almost a challenge: "Legal Authority to inspect packages brought into the Metro system has been established by the court system on similar types of inspections". Makes me want to OC and be denied entrance, to give me standing to sue, particularly as I am legal within the Commonwealth. However, that's a fantasy; I have other things I must do and therefore will not deliberately seek a suit. I can be more effective at more things if I choose wisely. (Not to say I wouldn't relish the suit, mind you.)

    I'm not sure why he might think I'd only be concerned about blue/orange lines.
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    I still have about $5 on my Metro card.

    Anyone else want to mass-OC on the Metro?
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post


    Sincerely,

    Paul Bumbry
    Rail Transportation Customer Service Manager
    Angling for his position in the Civilian National Security Force, at least a Gaulieter.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    http://www.wmata.com/faqs/preview.cfm?faqID=50#366

    What if you find a gun?
    The District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia have different gun laws. Metro Transit Police will take the appropriate action based on the laws of the jurisdiction

    Where does Metro get the authority to search passengers?
    Metro Transit Police will not be searching passengers. Inspections will be limited to carry-on items, including but not limited to backpacks, luggage, briefcases and any other container capable of concealing explosives in an amount sufficient to do significant damage to passengers, employees or property on the Metro system.

    Sounds like to me I just have to keep my concealed handgun on myself and not in my bag. Its no OC'ing but I can still protect myself.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Post imported post

    Bundabar wrote:
    http://www.wmata.com/faqs/preview.cfm?faqID=50#366

    <snip>

    Where does Metro get the authority to search passengers?
    Metro Transit Police will not be searching passengers. Inspections will be limited to carry-on items, including but not limited to backpacks, luggage, briefcases and any other container capable of concealing explosives in an amount sufficient to do significant damage to passengers, employees or property on the Metro system.
    <snip>
    Bullpuckey. If that isn't waffling, I don't know what is. Searching my possesions is equivalent to searching me.

    OC is fine, then. They won't search me.

    In my conversation with the MTP officer yesterday, i was told differently. The officer with whom I spoke (assigned in Virginia, if I understood him correctly) informed me he would treat a gun as "a dangerous item".
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  23. #23
    Regular Member IanB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,896

    Post imported post

    Tess, if I visit you at your house this weekend will you pick me up from Huntington?

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Post imported post

    YOU BETCHA!!!!!!!
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Oh, me too! I wanna ride the Metro!

    I will not allow any costumed thugs to search my person or property. If they try I will refuse and call a cab.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •