5 ms·

You’d think that all the empty packages on the ground would be a clue that there is package theft going on and that they should do something about it. Like avoi

You’d think that all the empty packages on the ground would be a clue that there is package theft going on and that they should do something about it. Like avoid stopping in those areas, organize security, something. USPS recently lost my package in transit through LA, given the timing it seems likely it was stolen in one of these raids.

jevoten 5y ago
> Like avoid stopping in those areas That may be illegal due to various anti-discrimination laws: > But Free and other riders were baffled over proposed legislation that would lower mandatory penalties for taxi drivers who refuse to pick up certain passengers, or turn down requests to take passengers to a specific destination. https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-metro-cabbies-fines-refusing-fares-20180705-story.html https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-metro-cabbies-fines-...
- EdwinRobbins 5y ago
  These are freight trains, so unlikely to fall under such laws.
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    And they are through trains - they don't do local pickup and delivery.
- cjbgkagh 5y ago
  I figured cargo was separate to passenger. I assume they have their reasons to stop, like making way for traffic, or waiting for more cargo. Just wish they’d prioritize alternative solutions. At this stage I’m going to have to send packages by air instead. A little harder to hijack.
- ip26 5y ago
  Never taken cabs in New York, but that seems insane. How can cabbies be legally compelled to take fares e.g. somewhere they fear for their own safety, or on a route that will lose them money?
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    There are lots of laws like that. Yesterday, I went to a pizza restaurant. It was myself and another person waiting in the restaurant. A person walks in with a large pitbull. Immediately the other person ran to the opposite corner and asked the person with the dog to wait outside the restaurant because they had been a victim of a pitbull attack. And, of course, the person with the dog pulled the service dog card. At this point, the business owner can do nothing. Once someone says a dog is a service dog, no one can ask them to leave until after the dog causes damage, per the ADA. The person in the restaurant with the dog immediately claimed they forgot the vest that says their dog is a service animal. This tells me the dog was definitely not a service animal, because anyone who actually needs one knows that no proof is required. Anyway, my point is the laws in the US right now let any dog owner walk around with impunity and impose dogs on people who do not want to be around dogs. Which means I have to modify my behavior with my toddlers and leave places where any random person can bring a Rottweiler or pitbull. Edit: In the dog situation, you can even go further and see that NY state just forced owners of less dangerous and aggressive breeds to subsidize owners of more dangerous and aggressive breeds. Why would the government need to get involved in subsidizing risks of various dog breeds? https://www.syracuse.com/state/2022/01/new-ny-state-law-bans-insurers-from-rejecting-you-over-what-kind-of-dog-you-have.html https://www.syracuse.com/state/2022/01/new-ny-state-law-bans...
    - zebraflask 5y ago
      I don't think the problem is with service animal laws, which I think are genuinely well-intentioned, but with the type of people who would consider owning a potentially dangerous dog in the first place. Some animals really aren't suitable as pets for the vast majority of owners - which might be a more fruitful discussion than objecting to service animals too quickly.
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        I did not write that I object to service animals. There is clearly no enforcement of service animal laws, which are lacking, and no recourse for anyone harmed by them, which is what I was trying to point out. There are already laws that ban dogs from restaurants and grocery stores. But there is a higher law that says if you say the words service dog, then no one can say anything to you and you do not have to prove anything, rendering the laws banning dogs from restaurants and grocery stores useless.
EdwinRobbins 5y ago
I think they are forced to transit these areas. Only so many rail lines that exist and they have to slow down due to practicalities of congestion at freight and trainyards which the low speed makes them vulnerable to being boarded.
- asdff 5y ago
  Especially given that its the port of LA we are talking about that these trains are traveling to and from for the most part. Most goods from Asia in this continent have come through that port.
Justin_K 5y ago
They have been making arrests but the D.A. releases on $0 bail the next day. So theses criminals just go right back at it.
- ameister14 5y ago
  Until they are convicted, sure - the problem with cash bail is of course that it's a 3:1 ratio of unconvicted to convicted people in jail at any given time and it massively disproportionately affects the poor. The average person unable to make bail has a salary of around 14k; the average bail is set at $10,000. You're a retail worker making 26k a year. You're arrested, and can't come up with $1,000 to get a bond, so you stay in jail for a couple of weeks, lose your job and get evicted. Now the prosecutor comes to you with a choice: take a plea deal and get out now with time served or go to court - the court date is of course in a month and you'll have to stay in jail over that period. Innocent until proven guilty matters.
  - ajsnigrutin 5y ago
    So, make the whole judical process faster, especially for simple crimes.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  That's not how it works. They're going to have bail and will probably pay it no matter what. People shouldn't be imprisoned until their trial outside exceptional circumstances. Stealing packages doesn't qualify.
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    Dangerous people should be jailed and flight risks should be jailed. Everything else is just a bail bond racket and power play by prosecutors. If the "charged" commits another crime or breaks the limits of his "freedom" they should go right back to the slammer until their court date.
    - heavyset_go 5y ago
gruez 5y ago
>they should do something about it. Like avoid stopping in those areas, organize security, something "UP considering rerouting it’s trains out of LA county. UP asks DA to be harder on theives. Says they’re back out on the tracks a day after released" https://twitter.com/CBSLAKristine/status/1482115852216385538 https://twitter.com/CBSLAKristine/status/1482115852216385538
- cjbgkagh 5y ago
  Thanks, I guess the wheels are turning. My comment was facetious, clearly they know, I just wish the people involved given the evidence would be able to act faster and more decisively.
  - asdff 5y ago
    Acting faster and more decisively would cost the parties that be more money than the underlying problem costs them in the first place.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  https://nitter.kavin.rocks/CBSLAKristine/status/1482115852216385538 https://nitter.kavin.rocks/CBSLAKristine/status/148211585221...

jevoten 5y ago

> Like avoid stopping in those areas That may be illegal due to various anti-discrimination laws: > But Free and other riders were baffled over proposed legislation that would lower mandatory penalties for taxi drivers who refuse to pick up certain passengers, or turn down requests to take passengers to a specific destination. https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-metro-cabbies-fines-refusing-fares-20180705-story.html https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-metro-cabbies-fines-...

EdwinRobbins 5y ago
These are freight trains, so unlikely to fall under such laws.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  And they are through trains - they don't do local pickup and delivery.
cjbgkagh 5y ago
I figured cargo was separate to passenger. I assume they have their reasons to stop, like making way for traffic, or waiting for more cargo. Just wish they’d prioritize alternative solutions. At this stage I’m going to have to send packages by air instead. A little harder to hijack.
ip26 5y ago
Never taken cabs in New York, but that seems insane. How can cabbies be legally compelled to take fares e.g. somewhere they fear for their own safety, or on a route that will lose them money?
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  There are lots of laws like that. Yesterday, I went to a pizza restaurant. It was myself and another person waiting in the restaurant. A person walks in with a large pitbull. Immediately the other person ran to the opposite corner and asked the person with the dog to wait outside the restaurant because they had been a victim of a pitbull attack. And, of course, the person with the dog pulled the service dog card. At this point, the business owner can do nothing. Once someone says a dog is a service dog, no one can ask them to leave until after the dog causes damage, per the ADA. The person in the restaurant with the dog immediately claimed they forgot the vest that says their dog is a service animal. This tells me the dog was definitely not a service animal, because anyone who actually needs one knows that no proof is required. Anyway, my point is the laws in the US right now let any dog owner walk around with impunity and impose dogs on people who do not want to be around dogs. Which means I have to modify my behavior with my toddlers and leave places where any random person can bring a Rottweiler or pitbull. Edit: In the dog situation, you can even go further and see that NY state just forced owners of less dangerous and aggressive breeds to subsidize owners of more dangerous and aggressive breeds. Why would the government need to get involved in subsidizing risks of various dog breeds? https://www.syracuse.com/state/2022/01/new-ny-state-law-bans-insurers-from-rejecting-you-over-what-kind-of-dog-you-have.html https://www.syracuse.com/state/2022/01/new-ny-state-law-bans...
  - zebraflask 5y ago
    I don't think the problem is with service animal laws, which I think are genuinely well-intentioned, but with the type of people who would consider owning a potentially dangerous dog in the first place. Some animals really aren't suitable as pets for the vast majority of owners - which might be a more fruitful discussion than objecting to service animals too quickly.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      I did not write that I object to service animals. There is clearly no enforcement of service animal laws, which are lacking, and no recourse for anyone harmed by them, which is what I was trying to point out. There are already laws that ban dogs from restaurants and grocery stores. But there is a higher law that says if you say the words service dog, then no one can say anything to you and you do not have to prove anything, rendering the laws banning dogs from restaurants and grocery stores useless.

EdwinRobbins 5y ago

I think they are forced to transit these areas. Only so many rail lines that exist and they have to slow down due to practicalities of congestion at freight and trainyards which the low speed makes them vulnerable to being boarded.

asdff 5y ago
Especially given that its the port of LA we are talking about that these trains are traveling to and from for the most part. Most goods from Asia in this continent have come through that port.

Justin_K 5y ago

They have been making arrests but the D.A. releases on $0 bail the next day. So theses criminals just go right back at it.

ameister14 5y ago
Until they are convicted, sure - the problem with cash bail is of course that it's a 3:1 ratio of unconvicted to convicted people in jail at any given time and it massively disproportionately affects the poor. The average person unable to make bail has a salary of around 14k; the average bail is set at $10,000. You're a retail worker making 26k a year. You're arrested, and can't come up with $1,000 to get a bond, so you stay in jail for a couple of weeks, lose your job and get evicted. Now the prosecutor comes to you with a choice: take a plea deal and get out now with time served or go to court - the court date is of course in a month and you'll have to stay in jail over that period. Innocent until proven guilty matters.
- ajsnigrutin 5y ago
  So, make the whole judical process faster, especially for simple crimes.
sudosysgen 5y ago
That's not how it works. They're going to have bail and will probably pay it no matter what. People shouldn't be imprisoned until their trial outside exceptional circumstances. Stealing packages doesn't qualify.
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  Dangerous people should be jailed and flight risks should be jailed. Everything else is just a bail bond racket and power play by prosecutors. If the "charged" commits another crime or breaks the limits of his "freedom" they should go right back to the slammer until their court date.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago

gruez 5y ago

>they should do something about it. Like avoid stopping in those areas, organize security, something "UP considering rerouting it’s trains out of LA county. UP asks DA to be harder on theives. Says they’re back out on the tracks a day after released" https://twitter.com/CBSLAKristine/status/1482115852216385538 https://twitter.com/CBSLAKristine/status/1482115852216385538

cjbgkagh 5y ago
Thanks, I guess the wheels are turning. My comment was facetious, clearly they know, I just wish the people involved given the evidence would be able to act faster and more decisively.
- asdff 5y ago
  Acting faster and more decisively would cost the parties that be more money than the underlying problem costs them in the first place.
dredmorbius 5y ago
https://nitter.kavin.rocks/CBSLAKristine/status/1482115852216385538 https://nitter.kavin.rocks/CBSLAKristine/status/148211585221...