Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 17:07:13 -0400 (EDT) From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net> To: WSFAList at KeithLynch.net Subject: [WSFA] Re: going to Worldcon Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net> >> If I am stopped for not having "papers please" when I attempt >> to board at Union Station in two weeks, I will take Metro to >> Rockville, and attempt to board the same Amtrak train there. ronkean at juno.com wrote: > Since there are no Amtrak stops between Union Station and Rockville, > I suppose the Amtrak train would get to Rockville much faster than > would a red line Metro train leaving Union Station at the same time. > But the Amtrak train probably lingers in Rockville for some time, > which would provide some margin. It's the other way around. Boarding of the Amtrak train at Union Station starts 30 minutes before its scheduled departure. That train then takes 14 minutes to reach Rockville, where it stops only momentarily. Metro takes 34 minutes to get from Union Station to Rockville. There can be a wait of up to 6 minutes before the Metro train arrives. Fortunately no transfers are involved, as both stations are on the Red Line. That gives me four minutes of slack. Most of which would be taken up with the time it takes to walk from Gate J to Metro, and from Metro to Amtrak in Rockville. I may do a trial run on Saturday. Be at gate J (if it is indeed gate J again next time) when the train starts boarding. The instant I see whether they're checking ID, whether or not they are I'll hightail it to the Metro, ride to Rockville, and see if I can be on the Amtrak platform at Rockville when the train pulls in. Or at least before it pulls out. Rockville is a small unmanned station. If I'm lucky and someone is boarding, I'll be able to see whether the conductor checks just their ticket or also their ID. > But beyond that, it seems unlikely they would not ask for ID at > Rockville if they did so at Union Station. Consistency can only be expected with rationality. Which Amtrak is not displaying here. At Union Station, ticket checking is handled by the station staff. Boarding takes half an hour. Lots of people board. At Rockville, ticket checking is handled by staff on the train. Few if any people board. The train spends as little time at the station as possible. So there's no reason to think they would have the same policies in practice. Especially since checking ID doesn't actually do anything useful. > A possible hitch with your plan is that they might not honor a > ticket for boarding at Union Station, at the Rockville station, for > some unfathomable bureaucratic reason. You might want to check that > in advance. I already did so, and was told there would be no problem. Of course they could be mistaken or lying. Who knows? > Veering a bit off-topic, I am skeptical that a government-issued ID > is really required for domestic air travel, in the sense that one > would not be allowed to board simply for lack of ID. Many people do > not have a government issued ID, e.g. young children and some adults > who don't have a driver's license and have never bothered to get a > 'non-driver's license'. My thoughts exactly. And indeed, I was allowed to fly to the 1997 Worldcon and back, after some argument. Many others reported similar experiences. See, for instance http://home.earthlink.net/~cdtavares/flying.html But this was all before last September. (Though that isn't obvious from the above web page.) I haven't heard of anyone being allowed to fly without papers since then. John Gilmore is suing because he was prevented from flying without ID last month. See http://cryptome.org/freetotravel.htm > Common sense suggests that adults without ID would be allowed to > board after greater scrutiny, ... Common sense doesn't apply here. > It would be a good idea for someone planning to fly without ID to > inquire about it in advance, ... Go ahead and do so. I know what answer you'll get. You'll get the same answer if you phone Amtrak or Greyhound. Try it and see. >From what I've heard, Amtrak and Greyhound are lying, and don't really treat their would-be customers as badly as they claim they will. No wonder Amtrak (I don't know about Greyhound) is in serious financial trouble. > I went to www.panix.com and did not see a date on the welcome page. > Do you mean that you looked at ongoing discussion threads on Panix > to see what the participants' computers thought the date was? No, I mean I logged in and typed the "date" command, and it told me the date and time. The web is not the net. > I see a distinction between being required to show papers for > boarding a plane or other common carrier, and being required to > show papers for travel per se. How else can one travel? Drive a car? You need papers for that. You also need a car. And to know how to drive. You also have to stay awake the whole time you're traveling. Take a taxi? Prohibitively expensive for a trip from here to California and back. Catch a ride with someone? I tried. Few people care to drive that far. I know of only one car trip to the Worldcon from the east coast, and it's full, and isn't starting from DC or Baltimore anyhow. Bike? I considered that. But I know my limits. Fifty miles a day, I think I could manage, even though it's more than twice my usual peak mileage. But two hundred miles a day, every day for two weeks, including several major mountain ranges and deserts? While carrying luggage, including repair kit, food, and plenty of water? I don't think so. I'm fit, but not that fit. Especially not when I'd have to turn around a week later and do it all again to get home. Besides, I have responsibilities here in Virginia and I can't be away that long. And where would I spend each night, anyhow? (I'm very impressed that some people have biked across the US in under eight days (!). But they were accompanied by a support van carrying food, water, clothing, medical supplies, spare bikes, and a place to sleep.) Walk? I considered that, too. Perhaps I could have done it if I had left immediately after Balticon. But most of the above objections still apply. Hitchhike? Too uncertain. I might resort to this if I am stymied when I change trains or buses halfway across the country, but not otherwise. > I don't have a sense a sense of being in an evil parallel universe > over the air travel ID requirement, because there is an established > history in the U.S. of infringement of civil liberties in times of > stress, compared to more normal times. I don't agree that this is a time of stress. A terrible crime was committed last September, but I don't believe it could happen again. Airline passengers wouldn't allow it. Even if they did, reinforced cockpit doors would prevent it. As terrible as that crime was, it doesn't compare to the War Between the States, to WWII, or even to the Cold War with the USSR, each of which threatened to destroy the US. As terrible as last September's attacks were, if an equally deadly attack were to happen EVERY Tuesday, forever, it would reduce our life expectancy only to about 1970 levels. Bad, but nothing to destroy the Bill of Rights in a futile attempt to prevent. Phrased another way, if we somehow prevented all deaths except from such weekly attacks, the average life expectancy would be more than thirteen centuries. > The scary thing about an ID requirement for air travel is that > implies that the government has, or plans to have, a list of > undesirables. Otherwise, what use would there be in demanding ID? Exactly. Some people tell me that the present situation is nothing like having internal passports, since those involved a government giving or denying permission for people to travel. I respond that they're confusing passports with visas, and that many innocent people are ALREADY prevented from traveling in the US, since their names are too close to those of people on the "no fly watch list". See for instance http://www.progressive.org/webex/wxmc042702.html > The 9-11 hijackers had ID. Yes. This ought to be carved into stone on the front of every government building. -- Keith F. Lynch - kfl at keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/ I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.