Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:11:09 EST
From: <CSS3@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Re: Deaths on Railroad Property: common sense or am I an Idiot?

    I write to second many of the thoughts recently expressed in the posts by
 David Soderblom and Garth Groff in regards to the recent thread concerning
 the lawsuit filed after two boys were killed while trespassing on a railroad
 bridge in Virginia. Many of the thoughts expressed in those posts were ones
 I had while reading some of the responses to the thread.

     I would not go so far, thought, as to suggest that all of those who said
 they hoped the mother would lose her lawsuit are necessarily calloused or
 believe that people who trespass on bridges "deserve what they get" if they
 are killed. What I thought I read was the thought that people who do what
 many of us consider stupid things when near or on railroad property should
 be told so, but they do not necessarily deserve to die or be crippled for
 life. Unfortunately, railroads operate some heavy machinery that can be very
 unforgiving when an accident occurs.
      I also thought that many of those who wrote were expressing, although
 not directly, a legitimate question of what responsibility does a RR have to
 pay for the suffering and injuries of those injured on its property in cases
 where the RR seemingly did nothing to cause the accident other than merely
 being in the RR business. There no doubt are some who believe a RR owes
 nothing to a member of the public who is injured due to that person's
 seemingly (by laymen's terms) stupidity, i.e. crawling underneath a stopped
 train, driving around lowered crossing gates, walking across a bridge, etc.
     From my own point of view, I am not prepared to go quite that far.
 Railroading is a business that can be harmful to the public and I am not
 prepared to make a blanket assertion that railroads -- or any business for
 that matter -- should be absolved of all responsibility, blame and financial
 liability when an accident occurs that does not appear to be the railroad's
 faulty. The liability of railroads is a complex issue that cannot be
 adequately addressed in a post. It's an interesting debate and I'm sure there
 are many faithful readers of the net who hold strong views on the matter.
      No doubt some railroads have been forced to pay money in frivilous
lawsuits. But what is a frivilous lawsuit? Without knowing all of the facts, I
am not prepared to say the lawsuit filed by the Virginia woman is frivilous.
I agree with Dave that perhaps we should withhold moral judgment until we know
all of the facts of an accident. And I also don't doubt that railroading, while
 it will always be a dangerous occupation if safety precautions are not taken,
 has become a safer endeavor to both its employees and the public because
 some people have challenged railroad practices in court. Sure, railroads are
 safety minded. But I also don't doubt they are more safety minded than they
 might be otherwise because they always have the threat of lawsuits hanging
 over their heads and/or have lost a few suits in the past.
    Keep in mind the business of railroads is making money. Period. And one
 way they do that is to minimize expenses, including expenses for safety. No
 doubt railroads have special problems in that they own thousands of miles of
 exposed property. No railroad could afford to hire guards 24 hours a day to
 keep every child off every bridge or every foot of track.
     Again, the issue is more complex than this. I suspect many people who
 posted here want to see a way to force people to take at least some measure
of responsibility for their own safety and/or actions. I can understand that.
But I can also understand why some of these people are led to sue railroads
 for injuries and at times I wanted to see a little more understanding of
 that. I'd like to believe it is not so much that people who posted here
 are callous and uncaring, but more of a case of wanting to see more people
 take responsibility for their own actions.

 craig sanders