Bill from NYC Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 How do you people feel about this? Normally I might not care, but it scares me in that it is just another in a series of bans which are sweeping away the rights of property owners and citizens. Imo, this is the very same thing that will soon be used to ban tailgate parties. Concerned about the 5,000 unsold seats now? Wait until alcohol is banned from tailgates and see how many people go to games. As a matter of fact, an alcohol ban might be the last straw in terms of keeping a team in WNY. This is not a San Francisco "quiche" crowd we are looking at, and a substantial of fans will simply not attend if they cannot have a Sahlens Hot Dog and a few beers, or so I think. Sorry to get ahead of myself, but these bans just keep on coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Really silly. Why can't they just deal with the policy they have and remove passengers who are causing a disturbance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Chalk up yet another daily pleasure lost as a result of our retarded legal system. As long as we allow some drunken a-hole to sue the railroad for falling on the tracks and killing himself, or allow some B word to sue a school district because her kid skinned a knee playing 'tag', rules like this will continue to happen. Maybe if trial attorneys were dealt with properly (i.e., hacked to death with machetes) instead of allowed to prosper, we might all be a little happier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 How do you people feel about this? Normally I might not care, but it scares me in that it is just another in a series of bans which are sweeping away the rights of property owners and citizens. Imo, this is the very same thing that will soon be used to ban tailgate parties. Concerned about the 5,000 unsold seats now? Wait until alcohol is banned from tailgates and see how many people go to games. As a matter of fact, an alcohol ban might be the last straw in terms of keeping a team in WNY. This is not a San Francisco "quiche" crowd we are looking at, and a substantial of fans will simply not attend if they cannot have a Sahlens Hot Dog and a few beers, or so I think. Sorry to get ahead of myself, but these bans just keep on coming. 866377[/snapback] You can't drink on the commuter trains in Massachusetts, and SHOCKINGLY the Pats fans are still allowed to tailgate with hotdogs and alcohol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 That's sick... One day a lawyer will find a way to ban life! life being sucha dangerous thing you die in 100% of the cases! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 I HATE this proposed ban because its shortsighted and takes aim at the wrong target. The average person who actually consumes alcohol ON the train is the daily commuter who picks up a tall boy for the ride home or drinks on the way IN to NYC for a night out. People do NOT get on trains for the express purpose of drinking. Riding the LIRR all my life, I can say with utmost confidence that the people who are drunk and disruptive on the trains got all loaded up BEFORE they stepped on board. Here is another reason why I think this is stupid. Banning alcohol on the commuter trains, IMO will lead to MORE drunk driving and INCREASE traffic on the roads. That's right....here's why. We are looking for alternatives for people to use their car when going to NYC, right? Well, the more perks they take away and the less attractive it is, then the less people will use it and go back to driving. If they want to halt drunk driving, then give us frequent trains, make them confortable, and allow people, especially going IN to NYC, to bring a six pack with them for the trip, to enjoy with friends. Take that away, especially the scedules, and guess what Im going to do to get to NYC? Thats right....drive. The schedule thing is what galls me more than the alcohol ban. All we hear from the MTA, Pataki, MADD, etc is "use mass transportation....dont drink and drive...blah blah". Well, guess what, azzholes? There is ONE TRAIN that leaves NYC after 12:30 to get me home on a weekend night. If Im going to NYC, its virtually imposible to catch that train. How can I use what isnt available to me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 14, 2006 Author Share Posted December 14, 2006 You can't drink on the commuter trains in Massachusetts, and SHOCKINGLY the Pats fans are still allowed to tailgate with hotdogs and alcohol. 866511[/snapback] Or at least for the time being. If you are trying to make the case that "bans" of this sort are good, please do so. You must have had a blast when the pseudo-liberal supreme court judges seized the homes of residents and gave them to businesses and developers, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 How do you people feel about this? Normally I might not care, but it scares me in that it is just another in a series of bans which are sweeping away the rights of property owners and citizens. Imo, this is the very same thing that will soon be used to ban tailgate parties. 866377[/snapback] I think the ban is retarded too. That being said, who actually owns the commuter rails? It isn't a private enterprise, right? I thought that these guys were the people most considered the owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 I'm a bit suprised someone has brought this up here. As a rider of this train for the last 4 months (since the move from Brooklyn), this issue affects me personally. A little background first.... Mitch Pally, the MTA Board Member who first proposed this, is trying to get his name in the papers. He is a freshman MTA Board member looking to cause a stir. Sources have indicated to me that Steve Levy (Suffolk County Exec who appointed him) is taking a raft of sh*t from influential folks for appointing Pally. I have yet to discover, tho I will, what Peter Kalikow's angle is on this. Pally raised two distinctly different concerns. One is consumption and the other is sales. Consumption will never be banned. A ban is unenforceable. The conductors are not booze police, they are conductors. They have no idea if you are drinking, say, a rum and coke or a coke. So, there really is no way to enforce a ban on consumption. The bars in and near Penn and GCS already serve alcohol in a styrofoam or plastic cup to go for commuters. That won't change for the bars near the stations. Folks who would normally just have a beer will be drinking hard alcohol now, however. The ban on the sale of alcohol, both on the trains and on the platform raises a very different specter and can actually happen. That is too bad. His arguments are that the State should not be playing bartender. Well, the State either issues licenses or directly sells alcohol in numerous facilities, such as Nassau County Colesium, the new Trump Jones Beach complex etc. Thus, we would be going down a very slippery slope, suggesting that the State should not be serving alcohol. Thus, what to do? I have drafted a letter outlining the above and am circulating a rider petition to be sent to each Board member opposing the idea. So far, I have approx 300 signatures. I figure I'll send it the MTA Board after the holidays, copies of course to the NY Post, Newsday etc. Here is a link to the MTA Board, if anyone knows anyone and can obtain more information about what is actually driving this... http://mta.info/mta/leadership/index.html#board The Kalikow angle is the only reason I am a tad concerned here. Pally spouting off is no big deal, I'm just wondering if there is a bigger agenda here. EDIT: I forgot one angle proffered by LIRR employees. They've been doing this for 46 years, not one incident or accident. No drunken disorderly, brawls or DWI as a result of serving alcohol on the platforms or trains. Not a bad record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Balls Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Don't know much about the NY metro area trains but the only time I took an Amtrak was a couple years ago from Buffalo to Penn Station to protest the '04 Republican convention and I couldn't have survived it without the Jack Daniels they sold on board. What was supposed to be a seven and a half hour trip took close to 12 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Or at least for the time being. If you are trying to make the case that "bans" of this sort are good, please do so. You must have had a blast when the pseudo-liberal supreme court judges seized the homes of residents and gave them to businesses and developers, no? 866583[/snapback] I'm not making a case for the ban. I'm making the case that banning alcohol on a commuter rail is completely unrelated to whether people can tailgate with alcohol in a parking lot. Much like how your smoking ban will lead to the Blue Helmets marching down Mainstreet USA. I think the "no alcohol on the train" ban is dumb, but up until two hours ago when you made me aware of this I had no idea you people could drink on your commuter rail. Amtrack has a "quiet" car, now. Maybe we should all be up in arms because it's a slippery slope towards silencing The People. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 I'm not making a case for the ban. I'm making the case that banning alcohol on a commuter rail is completely unrelated to whether people can tailgate with alcohol in a parking lot. Much like how your smoking ban will lead to the Blue Helmets marching down Mainstreet USA. I think the "no alcohol on the train" ban is dumb, but up until two hours ago when you made me aware of this I had no idea you people could drink on your commuter rail. Amtrack has a "quiet" car, now. Maybe we should all be up in arms because it's a slippery slope towards silencing The People. 866648[/snapback] The Amtrak quiet car, which I have taken down to DC, is to shut up the morons who spend the entire train ride yapping on their god awful cell phones. It has nothing to do with suppression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 14, 2006 Author Share Posted December 14, 2006 I'm not making a case for the ban. I'm making the case that banning alcohol on a commuter rail is completely unrelated to whether people can tailgate with alcohol in a parking lot. Much like how your smoking ban will lead to the Blue Helmets marching down Mainstreet USA. I think the "no alcohol on the train" ban is dumb, but up until two hours ago when you made me aware of this I had no idea you people could drink on your commuter rail. Amtrack has a "quiet" car, now. Maybe we should all be up in arms because it's a slippery slope towards silencing The People. 866648[/snapback] Are you that naive? You of all people; a wishy-washy liberal, should know fully well that there are already elements of the religious right that would love to have another prohibition. You think they like the ban, or to see people lose rights that they don't approve of? One of our posters from Connecticut stated that alcohol is already banned at UConn football games. A person who used to live in San Diego (admittedly, a very shaky source) told me that eating and drinking are banned in the Chargers Parking Lots. Again, I don't know this to be true, but it wouldn't surprise me. Rights don't disappear all at once. They are chipped away, and this is happening as we speak. People are imperfect creatures. Many people drink, eat trans-fats, and even smoke. Others have the nerve to not want to hand over their homes to the big business friends of the "liberal" supreme court justices. So yes, these things ARE connected in a way. Sadly, you will soon find this out. PS: If I ride the MTA Trains once per year, that is a lot, and I have never consumed alcohol on one of these trains. It isn't about me, know what I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 14, 2006 Author Share Posted December 14, 2006 The Amtrak quiet car, which I have taken down to DC, is to shut up the morons who spend the entire train ride yapping on their god awful cell phones. It has nothing to do with suppression. 866650[/snapback] Maybe not, but perhaps a little more tolerance is in order. I don't mean you, just generally speaking. I gotta tell you, I am more worried about another Colin Ferguson than I am about a duochebag talking loud on his phone. Btw, what would happen if someone talks in the "quiet car?" Does someone come over and kick the schit out of him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Maybe not, but perhaps a little more tolerance is in order. I don't mean you, just generally speaking. I gotta tell you, I am more worried about another Colin Ferguson than I am about a duochebag talking loud on his phone. Btw, what would happen if someone talks in the "quiet car?" Does someone come over and kick the schit out of him? 866673[/snapback] I'm not sure, it hasn't happened in the cars I've been on. The point of the quiet car was to provide an alternative to the regular cars due to cell phones. If you wanted to talk on the cell phone, go ahead in the regular cars. In the quiet car, I have always turned mine off. Its just an understanding that people in that car won't talk on the cell phone and bother everyone else. Its the whole point. I support it because it gives folks an alternative, kinda like smoking/non0smoking used to give you an alternative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 What I love are the reasons for the ban. A teen who was plastered fell through the gap getting ON the train. Just like NYPD cracking down on nightclubs because two women were killed hours AFTER leaving the nightclubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 The Amtrak quiet car, which I have taken down to DC, is to shut up the morons who spend the entire train ride yapping on their god awful cell phones. It has nothing to do with suppression. 866650[/snapback] That was my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted December 14, 2006 Author Share Posted December 14, 2006 That was my point. 866706[/snapback] Your point is lame and bogus. You don't like people to talk on cell phones on trains, so you want an unenforceable ban on "noise." This doesn't surprise me coming from a starry eyed, fake liberal. In NYC there was a big push to ban bells on ice cream trucks. Apparently, the noise disturbed the liberal yuppies. The kids liked it, but so what, right? I must admit that your side seems to be winning now, whereas rights are being taken away right and left. When this comes back to bite you in the ass, perhaps you will remember the weak kneed, wishy-washy stance you took on the issue of rights for Americans that don't exactly fly with the latest yuppie trends. Sad indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Your point is lame and bogus. You don't like people to talk on cell phones on trains, so you want an unenforceable ban on "noise." This doesn't surprise me coming from a starry eyed, fake liberal. In NYC there was a big push to ban bells on ice cream trucks. Apparently, the noise disturbed the liberal yuppies. The kids liked it, but so what, right? I must admit that your side seems to be winning now, whereas rights are being taken away right and left. When this comes back to bite you in the ass, perhaps you will remember the weak kneed, wishy-washy stance you took on the issue of rights for Americans that don't exactly fly with the latest yuppie trends. Sad indeed. 867013[/snapback] Come on...how can you not understand the need to not "offend" people. Ya know..like those of a different faith who see a Christmas Tree! Frankly, I cant wait for Chinese New Year. If I dont see a Nativity Scene or a Christmas tree dangling from one of those dragon floats, Im going to raise hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Riding the LIRR all my life, I can say with utmost confidence that the people who are drunk and disruptive on the trains got all loaded up BEFORE they stepped on board. Riding Metro North all my life I can say you are exactly right. We don't call the last train out of GCT (1:40am) the 'puke train' for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts