Of all the myriad and pressing issues facing Amtrak these days, from replacing generations-old infrastructure to expanding high-speed rail service beyond the Northeast corridor, who knew that the U.S. Senate would decide that the most important matter of all was this - making it easier for Amtrak passengers to take along guns?
But that's exactly what happened last week when the U.S. Senate voted 68-30 on an amendment that would require Amtrak to accept firearms at all stations with checked baggage within six months or lose all federal funding. In other words, Amtrak just got a proverbial gun put to its head for trying to keep real guns from being put to passengers' heads.
There was a time, of course, when Amtrak passengers could check a bag containing a firearm. But that was before the events of 9/11 and 3/11, the latter referring to the date in 2004 when terrorists bombed Spanish commuter trains, killing 191 and injuring nearly 2,000 more.
Passenger rail isn't like air travel. There aren't a lot of security arrangements or personnel. Even if Amtrak checks a bag - a service offered at relatively few stations, Penn and Union stations among them only for certain long-haul trains - there's no separate or secure cargo area. In many cases, such bags get stowed in 60-year-old baggage cars with equally dated security.
Amtrak management has already identified a host of problems in overturning the ban on the transport of all firearms. At the very least, according to Amtrak Chairman Thomas C. Carper's recent letter to members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, more time is needed to evaluate how this could be done safely.
But Mr. Carper's objections aren't strong enough. The better question is: Why make this a priority at all? Can't people transporting guns simply find another way to travel?
Of course they can. After Amtrak instituted the ban on firearms five years ago, the switchboards in Washington weren't exactly deluged with complaints. Why? Probably because the average customer doesn't check baggage or carry a gun. Why turn Amtrak topsy-turvy to accommodate a distinct minority of its passengers?
The one thing Amtrak doesn't need is such a distraction. Passenger rail in this country still lags the rest of the world, the legacy of decades of mismanagement and inadequate capital investment. With the country facing so many pressing energy and environmental concerns, rail transportation can't be neglected much longer. Yet now the Senate is asking that precious money be spent on this boondoggle to accommodate the National Rifle Association crowd?
The decision smacks of the kowtowing Congress did to the NRA last spring by voting to allow loaded guns to be carried into the nation's parks and wildlife refuges. Should enabling people to bring guns everywhere they go be such a high priority?
Of course not. If Congress is anxious to threaten Amtrak, do it over serious service improvements like a better on-time record, not over something few of Amtrak's 27 million riders need or want.
