After all the howling earlier this week over at the New York Times Editorial Board about Senate passage of the Wicker Amendment, its refreshing to learn that the Board of Directors of the Virginia Rail Express (VRE) voted yesterday to let train riders carry guns. While the Wicker Amendment passed by the Senate this week requires AMTRAK to let train riders check their unloaded guns in cases onto trains as is done by the airlines, the VRE Board passed a resolution just two days later (September 18, 2009) to let riders carry loaded guns.
The new official policy just conforms VRE regulations to Virginia law which is like that of most states, requiring a permit to conceal handguns, and requiring that those open carrying handguns be at least 18 years of age (no permit required). But citizen carry of loaded guns on trains in the DC Metro areas is not really new news.
The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA, pronounced "wamata) has consistently confirmed that WMATA only enforces state or DC gun laws on its trains, so in Virginia the train carry rules are as stated above, and in Maryland, one needs a carry permit for both open and concealed carry. And in fact, almost every state follows either Virginia or Maryland style carry laws on trains.
It is of course unlawful under federal law at 18 USC 922(e) to use a train or other common carrier to ship and deliver a firearm "in interstate or foreign commerce, to persons other than licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors." But this is the familiar federal rule applicable by vehicle or on foot as well - since 1968 federal law has mandated use of the gun dealer network to execute interstate gun transfers, though intestate transfers are exempt, and of course folks are free to set up residences in other states and can then sell their guns to others living in that state in private sales. See generally 18 USC 922(a)&(b).
However, as is the case in vehicle or foot travel, nobody commits a crime under federal law (unless you count DC law) for merely traveling the country while carrying your loaded gun on AMTRAK. And while this may violate AMTRAK's non-criminal "rules," these rules are constitutionally questionable under the US Supreme Court's decision in Lebron v. National R.R. Passenger Corp., 513 U.S. 374 (1995) (holding that where the Government creates a corporation by special law (i.e., AMTRAK) for the furtherance of governmental objectives, and retains for itself permanent authority to appoint a majority of that corporation's directors, the corporation is part of the Government for purposes of the First Amendment).
Interestingly, the AMTRAK rules only purport to ban carry of guns in "checked and carry-on baggage," not handguns carried on your person. AMTRAK further warrants that any passenger may refuse search or ID checks and "and a refund will be offered."
So hats off to the VRE Board for doing the right thing and clarifying that commuters can carry guns on trains just like they can off the train. And hats off to Senator Roger Wicker (R - Mississippi) for pushing AMTRAK to allow riders to check unloaded guns - after all, who wants to hold that long gun in your arms for hours and hours on the nice and comfortable Acela Express?
But let's just hope the House of Representatives passes the Wicker Amendment "as is" and not with any rider purporting to ban the currently legal carry of loaded guns by passengers on AMTRAK trains.
.jpg)
Comments
This is the worst news I've heard today. I'm shocked and saddened that people could carry loaded guns on trains -- who knows what could happen if these gun toters are provoked or want to do some target practice for fun? There's no place for guns on trains. Not every gun owner is responsible and there are plenty of wackos carrying them around.
This is the best news I've heard today! Good for the VRE BoD! Now if one of Mona's wackos gets a wild hair the folks onboard with him can take care of the situation responsibly!
Mona,
The folks with permits to carry have to go through background checks to get those permits and for the most part aren't going to do anything to lose the permit that allows them to LEGALLY carry a pistol for self defense. The wackos you refer to generally do not have permits.
Olaf
Slowly but surely, gun owners/carriers are regaining rights that have been infringed upon for near a century. It appears that the anti-gun groups such as the Brady Bunch are becoming irrellevant. That probably doesn't bode well with the criminal element of our society, since it has been the anti-gun groups that have been promoting safer working environments for the criminals.
As for Mona worrying about "wackos" carrying guns. Don't worry Mona, wackos don't own or carry guns for long before they get their selves into trouble and lose their guns, or more than that.
I'd be more concerned with the wackos that are excercizing their First Amendment rights by running their mouths irresponsibly. People like...oh say... Nancy Polosi or Mona, for example.
Great news on the VRE, but the Wicker Amendment remains troubling to me.
I know, I know, I know. It's the dripwise Chinese torture approach because we can't get an HR218 for private citizens with a license to carry. Still.
Rant over.
Heh Mona,
You may find it even more troubling to know there are between 4 and 5 million of us with a license to carry, and we carry our guns all sorts of places. On buses, commuter trains, restaurants that serve alcohol (depending on the state), state forests and parks, and in February we'll be carrying in National Parks. Not sure I'm going to "inaugurate" Mt. Rainier or North Cascades in February, but I may trek out to Olympic National Park. Should be doable in February.
When I had jury duty in 2006, I carried to court. Washington state law may be unique in that the courts are required by law to provide safe storage. Only real challenge or issue I found was that I shoulda gotten an IWB holster with snaps so it would be easier to "gun up" and "gun down".
Mona, criminals carry on trains all the time why can't the people that OBEY the law. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS, CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY THE LAW. Why do you anti-gun folks always think that people are just going to start shooting.
Anti gunners like Mona and other simple minded people only see personal carry of guns as offensive in nature, but the rest of us who have some common sense and carry to protect ourselves and others around us know personal carry is only defensive in nature.
You people are sick, scary people.
Mike:
"though intestate transfers are exempt"
I think you mean "intrastate" ;-)
--Mark
Obviously Mona, you never heard of Colin Ferguson who was a wacko on a train with a gun. He killed a number of people because he was the only one on the train with a gun. Where it was illegal, I might add. Caroline (I so happy to be a widow) McCarthy was elected to Congress on the sympathy vote because her husband was one of those killed and her son was one of those wounded. You see, no sane law-abiding citizen had the means or tools to stop Ferguson. Why? Because they obeyed the law that said they must be helpless.
Otherwise, there would have been a good chance that the attack would never have happened. Even if it did happen, there would be a very good chance that armed law abiding citizens could have stopped his attack before he killed so many.
In view of this being "the worst news I've heard today" by your testament, I assume you are aligned with the Colin Fergusons of the world.
Mona, with due respect to your right to make a fool of yourself, your comment is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.
Mark - I meant that guns acquired thru bequest and intestate succession are exempt from the usual federal residency rules. you can inherit guns across state lines and no paperwork required.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!