Passenger Trains > article: how should rtd(denver) deal with drug problem on trains?

https://www.westword.com/news/how-denvers-rtd-is-trying-to-tackle-drug-use-problems-on-trains-16294692

66

Throw the offender in jail.

Posted from Android

goduckies Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Throw the offender in jail.
>
> Posted from Android

They've been doing that since the sixties and yet the problem still exists.
Got any better ideas?

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> goduckies Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Throw the offender in jail.
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> They've been doing that since the sixties and yet
> the problem still exists.
> Got any better ideas?


While in jailed forced rehab and you pee clean for 6 months before you are released. And make sure the jails are air tight as far as drugs getting in. Make it a 20 year sentence if any guard is caught helping get drugs in.

the article mentions the rtd transit police chief wants to increase the police force AND establish a stricter code of conduct.  hopefully, they will obtain the funding to increase their police force.

increased fare enforcement on the trains and at the stations/stops would also help.............

66   

goneon66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the article mentions the rtd transit police chief
> wants to increase the police force AND establish a
> stricter code of conduct.  hopefully, they will
> obtain the funding to increase their police
> force.
>
> increased fare enforcement on the trains and at
> the stations/stops would also help.............

>
> 66   
And the problem is not that simple, you know those taxes are easy to say but try getting anything out of the public.  Funding for many things except for squatter housing and feeding are now what gets funded at the expense of other things like keeping people safe is not. Also voting in better leadership would help out at all leveels. The DAs catch and release with little or no bail is a huge problem nation wide it seems and laws keeping people in jail for serious crimes is another.

Adding police isn't a panacea.  Four hundred police didn't seem to do much for those 17 people murdered at Uvalde.

It took four Border Patrol SWAT officers to disobey the scene commander and go in to get the job done.

i seriously doubt most people who want to use drugs on public rail transit and/or at the stations want to do it in the presence of uniformed law enforcement.

i also wonder how many people on public rail transit that violate "codes of conduct" are paying their fares.

in this day and age, i would think more paying customers that use public rail transit would welcome more uniformed law enforcement officers enforcing "codes of conduct" on their trains and at the stations..........

66

https://pix11.com/news/politics/pixonpolitics/more-patrols-key-to-reduction-in-nyc-subway-crime-nypd-transit-chief-says/

66

goduckies Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> While in jailed forced rehab and you pee clean for
> 6 months before you are released. And make sure
> the jails are air tight as far as drugs getting
> in. Make it a 20 year sentence if any guard is
> caught helping get drugs in.

I worked in retail as a young clueless guy 3 decades ago. Knew a smart, nice co-worker who got addicted to meth. He turned glassy-eyed and frail. Went to jail for undisclosed conviction (drug related?) and our boss gave him a second chance when he got out of jail. He looked healthy, fit, and articulate since jail kept him clean. Within a few months, he went back to meth and became glassy-eyed and frail again. While still able to work, the boss had to eventually let him go.

That wasn't all. Part-time employee (attractive young woman) got snared into this meth "circle of friends" and became glassy-eyed, frail, and paranoid. Don't think she did anything to get jail time, so no rehab for her, and she stopped showing up for work. 

Seems your proposal only works temporarily for most people. And things have become much worse in 3 decades. Reality sucks.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Adding police isn't a panacea.  Four hundred
> police didn't seem to do much for those 17 people
> murdered at Uvalde.
>
> It took four Border Patrol SWAT officers to
> disobey the scene commander and go in to get the
> job done.

Yes, of course, using a specific non-normal situation as a con to a general advise is perfectly correct and useful.

longliveSP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Adding police isn't a panacea.  Four hundred
> > police didn't seem to do much for those 17
> people
> > murdered at Uvalde.
> >
> > It took four Border Patrol SWAT officers to
> > disobey the scene commander and go in to get
> the
> > job done.
>
> Yes, of course, using a specific non-normal
> situation as a con to a general advise is
> perfectly correct and useful.

Adding more police officers to any situation is not a universal cure. 

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> longliveSP Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Adding police isn't a panacea.  Four hundred
> > > police didn't seem to do much for those 17
> > people
> > > murdered at Uvalde.
> > >
> > > It took four Border Patrol SWAT officers to
> > > disobey the scene commander and go in to get
> > the
> > > job done.
> >
> > Yes, of course, using a specific non-normal
> > situation as a con to a general advise is
> > perfectly correct and useful.
>
> Adding more police officers to any situation is
> not a universal cure. 

Thank you captain obvious.

Generally speaking, adding a general policy/requirement/law/etc to all general situation will not be perfect for all covered situations.

longliveSP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > longliveSP Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Adding police isn't a panacea.  Four
> hundred
> > > > police didn't seem to do much for those 17
> > > people
> > > > murdered at Uvalde.
> > > >
> > > > It took four Border Patrol SWAT officers to
> > > > disobey the scene commander and go in to
> get
> > > the
> > > > job done.
> > >
> > > Yes, of course, using a specific non-normal
> > > situation as a con to a general advise is
> > > perfectly correct and useful.
> >
> > Adding more police officers to any situation is
> > not a universal cure. 
>
> Thank you captain obvious.
>
> Generally speaking, adding a general
> policy/requirement/law/etc to all general
> situation will not be perfect for all covered
> situations.

In other words,there was no need for your gratuitous comment in the first place?

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> longliveSP Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > longliveSP Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > > Adding police isn't a panacea.  Four
> > hundred
> > > > > police didn't seem to do much for those
> 17
> > > > people
> > > > > murdered at Uvalde.
> > > > >
> > > > > It took four Border Patrol SWAT officers
> to
> > > > > disobey the scene commander and go in to
> > get
> > > > the
> > > > > job done.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, of course, using a specific non-normal
> > > > situation as a con to a general advise is
> > > > perfectly correct and useful.
> > >
> > > Adding more police officers to any situation
> is
> > > not a universal cure. 
> >
> > Thank you captain obvious.
> >
> > Generally speaking, adding a general
> > policy/requirement/law/etc to all general
> > situation will not be perfect for all covered
> > situations.
>
> In other words,there was no need for your
> gratuitous comment in the first place?

Well, if you had not made a stupid post comparing a nationwide problem that is affecting in some ways railroads to a specific horrendous situation that occurred in a small town and has nothing to do with railroads...

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> goduckies Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Throw the offender in jail.
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> They've been doing that since the sixties and yet
> the problem still exists.
> Got any better ideas?

No, it worked pretty well until 2015 when they stopped enforcing laws. Try again.

Posted from iPhone

cchan006 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> goduckies Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > While in jailed forced rehab and you pee clean
> for
> > 6 months before you are released. And make sure
> > the jails are air tight as far as drugs getting
> > in. Make it a 20 year sentence if any guard is
> > caught helping get drugs in.
>
> I worked in retail as a young clueless guy 3
> decades ago. Knew a smart, nice co-worker who got
> addicted to meth. He turned glassy-eyed and frail.
> Went to jail for undisclosed conviction (drug
> related?) and our boss gave him a second chance
> when he got out of jail. He looked healthy, fit,
> and articulate since jail kept him clean. Within a
> few months, he went back to meth and became
> glassy-eyed and frail again. While still able to
> work, the boss had to eventually let him go.
>
> That wasn't all. Part-time employee (attractive
> young woman) got snared into this meth "circle of
> friends" and became glassy-eyed, frail, and
> paranoid. Don't think she did anything to get jail
> time, so no rehab for her, and she stopped showing
> up for work. 
>
> Seems your proposal only works temporarily for
> most people. And things have become much worse in
> 3 decades. Reality sucks.

Ive talked to numerous people in my days of a driver that were hooked and finally recovered. Most said them getting in jail and forced clean finally made them open their mind. Well that help for all? No, but if it helps even 20%, that's better than the zombie world we have now.

Posted from Android

longliveSP wrote:

> Well, if you had not made a stupid post comparing
> a nationwide problem that is affecting in some
> ways railroads to a specific horrendous situation
> that occurred in a small town and has nothing to
> do with railroads...

My, my, how little discernment we have. I thought it was a good point from the other poster, an applicable observation (about police) followed by an specific example. Not that hard to understand, unless you've got too much needless rage...

JG



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/15/23 00:16 by jgilmore.