Share
Tapatalk

Metro Safety

Metro Safety

120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 18, 2008#1

I do not often get to ride the metrolink. However, I took it to the Blues game a few days ago. As I was sitting there I witnessed a drug deal. It was done under the hood, since the guy sat down and passed it undernearth the seat, but for anyone with half a brain it was obvious what could be passed in a few seconds...then the guy looked around, and got up.



There were kids on the train during all this. What could I as a citizen do to stop this type of activity? I would love to see both of the offenders busted. It's one thing to smoke a joint or whatever if it was at your own home, totally different to do this in front of 7 year old kids.



And how often does this happen anyway?
7
New MemberNew Member
7

PostFeb 18, 2008#2

Metro should have a guard at each stop during all hours. There is never a guard at the Barnes Hospital or Grand stop. It is a free for all at these locations.
1,448
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
1,448

PostFeb 18, 2008#3

^That's not true about the Grand stop. There may not be guards there all the time, but I've seen guards there regularly.



This article may be of interest to you.
44
New MemberNew Member
44

PostFeb 18, 2008#4

There are guards at the Central West End Stop almost all the time. I use the station twice daily.



If you see something on the train, remember the car number and time of day and report it to Metro. There are on board cameras that record continuously. The digital recordings are saved for several days.
120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 18, 2008#5

Tom Shrout wrote:There are guards at the Central West End Stop almost all the time. I use the station twice daily.



If you see something on the train, remember the car number and time of day and report it to Metro. There are on board cameras that record continuously. The digital recordings are saved for several days.


How would I get the car number? Where is it posted? And out of curiosity, are metrolink trains gun-free or am I allowed to bring a weapon on-board (obviously assuming that I have a carry license).
923
Super MemberSuper Member
923

PostFeb 18, 2008#6

Really, there's nothing you can do. say something, and you could get punched - or worse.



As far as security guards go - what're they gonna do? If they're not cops, why would they risk their life over something like that? "Excuse me sir, are you dealing heroin on the train? pop pop pop..." "Oh look, I'm bleeding out of three holes in my chest." It's more to placate concecrns and maybe deter some of the riffraf, but if someone armed wants to do something, they're gonna do what they want.
399
Full MemberFull Member
399

PostFeb 19, 2008#7

I've never seen anything other than panhandling on the trains and I'm riding everyday now. Also the CWE station almost always has a guard there during the morning and evening rush hours at least. Finally, from the article Steve posted, 80% of Metro security guards will be carrying in the near future, so they could certainly back up any inqueries into criminal activities they may make.



And no you are not allowed to carry concealed weapons on Metrolink
458
Full MemberFull Member
458

PostFeb 19, 2008#8

in all seriousness, this is the big city, stuff like that happens on all big cities light rail systems (of those cities that have them of course).
432
Full MemberFull Member
432

PostFeb 19, 2008#9

I've seen guards at the CWE stop, but they seemed to focus on the west end of the platform where they stand there and check tickets. I can only remember a few instances where I saw them get up from that spot and make rounds on the platform, or otherwise do anything that a turnstile couldn't do (yeah, I went there).
2,687
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
2,687

PostFeb 19, 2008#10

They approved a plan to substantially increase security on metrolink, due to increased ridership. So, the sanctimonious vigilantes can take a break , swallow a chill pill.



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s ... enDocument



When you're ready to come back, remember the 4 "B's" - Be involved. Be informed. Be alert. Be prepared. Yeah!!!
120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 19, 2008#11

mcarril wrote:I've never seen anything other than panhandling on the trains and I'm riding everyday now. Also the CWE station almost always has a guard there during the morning and evening rush hours at least. Finally, from the article Steve posted, 80% of Metro security guards will be carrying in the near future, so they could certainly back up any inqueries into criminal activities they may make.



And no you are not allowed to carry concealed weapons on Metrolink


Like I said, it might have been an isolated incidence.



It is a bit disappointing to find out that you can't carry on Metrolink. I don't see what a good argument for that is (if we are going to make guns legal, might as well allow them to be used for their purpose). This way, people do not have to be afraid of confronting thugs.



P.S. I made junior member. Woo-hoo!!!!!
1,364
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,364

PostFeb 19, 2008#12

Hopefully MetroLink can be made more safe, although I've never had a problem.



One of my teachers got threatened by a short hispanic guy. Her husband asked them to stop cursing since there were kids on the train, and the guy said "I'll stick you." But nothing ever came of it.
2,772
Life MemberLife Member
2,772

PostFeb 19, 2008#13

I've ridden the Metro several times and never had a problem at all. It's interesting to me to hear all of the STL county people call it the "Ghettolink" and are shocked to hear that I survived a ride on it. I take like 4-5 stops through ESTL, Washington Park, etc. The people getting on at these stops typically get on and mind their business. I have never had any problems with anyone, except for a kid who was talking on his phone pretty loud.
1,364
Veteran MemberVeteran Member
1,364

PostFeb 20, 2008#14

Some singer I've never heard of on YouTube chronicled her band's trip to STL for a concert. She's from New York and said MetroLink looked cleaner.



I just thought that was interesting.



I heard that St. Charles voted down a MetroLink extension. Is that true?
2,386
Life MemberLife Member
2,386

PostFeb 20, 2008#15

I think the real question is why in the hell are we trying to send metrolink to St. Charles in the first place? The visit to Chicago over the weekend has made me a little irate, admittedly, but St. Chuck? Let's deal with the city/NS first.
1,510
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,510

PostFeb 20, 2008#16

drunkrusski wrote:
mcarril wrote:I've never seen anything other than panhandling on the trains and I'm riding everyday now. Also the CWE station almost always has a guard there during the morning and evening rush hours at least. Finally, from the article Steve posted, 80% of Metro security guards will be carrying in the near future, so they could certainly back up any inqueries into criminal activities they may make.



And no you are not allowed to carry concealed weapons on Metrolink


Like I said, it might have been an isolated incidence.



It is a bit disappointing to find out that you can't carry on Metrolink. I don't see what a good argument for that is (if we are going to make guns legal, might as well allow them to be used for their purpose). This way, people do not have to be afraid of confronting thugs.



P.S. I made junior member. Woo-hoo!!!!!


If you could carry on the Metro, I would probably never ride it. There are often sketching looking people on there and usually only using it for transportation. I can't imagine all the paranopid first timers or rare-users pulling out a gun at every instance they thought something shady was going on. That's recipe for escalation and disaster.
44
New MemberNew Member
44

PostFeb 20, 2008#17

Voters in St. Charles County defeated a proposal to levy a quarter-cent sales tax to extend MetroLink to the County. There were back-to-back defeats. I think the year was 1995.
120
Junior MemberJunior Member
120

PostFeb 21, 2008#18

Jeff707 wrote:


If you could carry on the Metro, I would probably never ride it. There are often sketching looking people on there and usually only using it for transportation. I can't imagine all the paranopid first timers or rare-users pulling out a gun at every instance they thought something shady was going on. That's recipe for escalation and disaster.


Wow. Really? Is that what happened when it became legal to carry in the City? Just a bunch of people shooting each other?

And it's not like someone that is carrying would shoot everyone they didn't like or thought was "shady". In fact, most people that LEGALLY carry guns are very responsible. If you ever go to a gun range, you will see that they are careful not to disrespect and break any laws.

It is just that if I see a drug deal right in front of my face, I don't think I should be scared to say something about it. And that's fine if you feel that way, but from my point of view this is yet another reason why I wouldn't ride the metro.



And yes, i realize the whole if I don't make trouble, trouble won't find me argument. That's silly. I am trying to improve the city that I live in, and part of that is stopping crime that I am not necessarily involved in. If I see something wrong, I fix it, whether I am involved or not. But that's just me apparently...
923
Super MemberSuper Member
923

PostFeb 21, 2008#19

If you could carry on the Metro, I would probably never ride it. There are often sketching looking people on there and usually only using it for transportation. I can't imagine all the paranopid first timers or rare-users pulling out a gun at every instance they thought something shady was going on. That's recipe for escalation and disaster.


Um - does anyone ask ANYONE if they're carrying - ever? NO OF COURSE THEY DON'T. Not being allowed to carry on metro only comes into play if you get arrested on metro and searched for a weapon. You could be carrying a freaking bazooka under a trenchcoat and no one would know the wiser. If I had a gun, and saw a "no carry sign" on a building, if they didn't have metal detectors, I'm walking in packing.


I think the real question is why in the hell are we trying to send metrolink to St. Charles in the first place? The visit to Chicago over the weekend has made me a little irate, admittedly, but St. Chuck? Let's deal with the city/NS first.


Ahhh....thus the true debate about why we have metro in the first place. Is it for TOD only, or is it part of a larger transportation management plan? The whole point for going to St. Charles was (and is) to allieviate traffic. TOD may occur, but it's not really a driver for it out there. A line to St. Charles would reduce traffic, reduce travel times (for those who would still have to drive), reduce air pollution, save baby polar bears and hug kittens...or something to that effect.



A line to the north side really doesn't do anything a bus presently doesn't do. Car ownership in the north side is lower than any other area on the MO side of the river. The population is lower income, meaning their choice of transit is effectively locked anyways. A train line to the north side effectively eliminates the need for buses in various locations, BUT it would spur TOD (in theory). Ridership on the overall metro system would likely decrease, not increase, with a north side line, because metro is more expensive than a Bus. The TOD could potentially provide new jobs to this distressed area.



So - what's more important?
3,311
Life MemberLife Member
3,311

PostFeb 21, 2008#20

I can't imagine all the paranopid first timers or rare-users pulling out a gun at every instance they thought something shady was going on. That's recipe for escalation and disaster.


I'm still waiting for ONE example of this to occur. I really LOVE "no concealed weapons" signs on buildings. I think the city should erect "no carjacking or no shooting" signs around the north side. sounds effective. what a joke.



back to the discussion. I've NEVER felt unsafe on Metro Link. it's actually a very clean system, far better than Atlanta's, in terms of cleanliness. As for St. Chuck, why waste a route on that town? Focus on the city first.
1,510
Totally AddictedTotally Addicted
1,510

PostFeb 21, 2008#21

I was waiting for those responses.



My comment was in reaction to this nugget: "This way, people do not have to be afraid of confronting thugs"



So you're saying that you would confront them now that you have a gun? But then in response to my comment everyone objects that that would never happen?



It's the false sense of safety and security that carrying gives to people that scares me. It makes people feel like they have bigger balls than they really do.



Why would you confront a drug deal EVER? Why would you confront a thug like that? That's just plain suicidal stupidity, whether you're carrying a gun or not.




JCity wrote:
I can't imagine all the paranopid first timers or rare-users pulling out a gun at every instance they thought something shady was going on. That's recipe for escalation and disaster.


I'm still waiting for ONE example of this to occur. I really LOVE "no concealed weapons" signs on buildings. I think the city should erect "no carjacking or no shooting" signs around the north side. sounds effective. what a joke.



back to the discussion. I've NEVER felt unsafe on Metro Link. it's actually a very clean system, far better than Atlanta's, in terms of cleanliness. As for St. Chuck, why waste a route on that town? Focus on the city first.


I've never felt unsafe on the Metro either. Having more guns on it would make me feel less safe.




migueltejada wrote:


Um - does anyone ask ANYONE if they're carrying - ever? NO OF COURSE THEY DON'T. Not being allowed to carry on metro only comes into play if you get arrested on metro and searched for a weapon. You could be carrying a freaking bazooka under a trenchcoat and no one would know the wiser. If I had a gun, and saw a "no carry sign" on a building, if they didn't have metal detectors, I'm walking in packing.


Then why pass a law allowing it?




drunkrusski wrote:
It is just that if I see a drug deal right in front of my face, I don't think I should be scared to say something about it.




...uh, good luck with that.




JCity wrote:


I'm still waiting for ONE example of this to occur. I really LOVE "no concealed weapons" signs on buildings. I think the city should erect "no carjacking or no shooting" signs around the north side. sounds effective. what a joke.




But this is EXACTLY what the drunk russian was proposing to do.
8,904
Life MemberLife Member
8,904

PostFeb 21, 2008#22

migueltejada wrote:
You could be carrying a freaking bazooka under a trenchcoat and no one would know the wiser.


shhhh, you promised not to tell anyone!
2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostFeb 21, 2008#23

^Puh-leeze. Bazookas are soooo last year. This is what the fashion-conscious urban NRA member is sporting these days...







I'd like to see that teen Metro drug-dealer's face with that pointed at his head! Of course, you'd both die if you pulled the trigger, but still... :)

PostFeb 21, 2008#24

Here's another option for those that can't afford, or are afeared of, carrying traditional weapons. Talk about a concealed weapon! :shock:



432
Full MemberFull Member
432

PostFeb 21, 2008#25

This far into a discussion about discharging firearms on public transit and no mention of Bernie Goetz? For shame!
Read more posts (1111 remaining)
Share