Folks, I apologize for the length, especially since it has nothing to do with firearms, except from the standpoint of how the media can paint a biased picture, not by intent, but just because of the slovenly state Journalism has sunk to today.
My oldest boy is a railroad engineer and was involved in a non-fatal but scary crossing accident. No use printing the whole article, but you can infer it from my boy's reply to the reporter who printed this crap.
"Hi Pop: Well, the newspaper article about the collision the other night came out in last night's paper. As usual, it was loaded with inaccuracies, so I sent this attached email to the reporter who did the article. Makes you wonder what else the press has/is screwing up if they screw up a simple matter like this. I am happy to report that the girl is doing fine. Amazingly, she suffered only a fractured wrist, and ankle. My hat's
off to the design enginees at Honda! (The car was totalled and the girl, conscious all the time, had to be cut out of the wreckage.)
Joey, Regarding this article... I was the engineer on the train that night, and want to point out some innaccuracies in your report. I realize that you probably got a lot of your info from the police, which would
explain some of the mistakes, as they only talked to me, and not my conductor, or brakeman who witnessed the accident. I was 450 feet away from the scene, and never saw or felt a thing.
When we parked the train, and went back to our office to fill out accident reports, and discuss what had happened, this is where the innaccuracies in you report would later become obvious. Here goes --
Paragraph one: "an unlighted freight car" Both my conductor, and brakeman were with the freight car, and had their lanterns, which WERE lighted/on. My brakeman was on the ground waving his lantern horizontially trying to get her attention. When it became clear that she wasn't stopping, my brakeman dove into the center of the freight car, as
Jennifers car impacted under his feet. If it were not for his quick reaction, her car would have cut him in half.
Paragraph three: "at an unmarked track crossing" The crossing is clearly marked with reflective crossbuck signs at the crossing. There are also reflective "RR Xing ahead" signs posted about 100 yards either side of the crossing. I drove this route last night to make sure of this. "Traveling at speeds of 30 to 35 MPH, witnesses said" The posted speed limit there is 40 MPH. In the nearly three years we have safely used
that crossing, I can honestly say I have never seen anyone do anything close to 30 MPH. 45 to 55 MPH is more common. 30 MPH is a figure that the police somehow determined. With no skid marks at the scene, this would seem to be a guess on their part. Both my conductor,and brakeman have estimated her speed well in excess of 30 MPH. Also, no one was there but my crew to see the accident. "Witnesses" arrived about a minute later.
Paragraph five: "The train, which had four empty freight cars..." We had five cars, not four. 60 more feet, and an additional 35 tons to stop.
Paragraph six: "A railroad crossing sign is the only indication of the tracks". See comments on paragraph three, and even though I am not required to do so, I was blowing the whistle. She probably didn't hear it as police confirmed that her radio was on.
I hope this clears things up for you, and I would hope that you do a little more through report next time, instead of just parroting what the police say.
On a side note, the press is always quick give the "victims" story in matters like this, but always seem to forget that there's two or three people on the train who will be living with the events of the day as well. Some railroad employees have seen more people die than a modern day soldier, or cop ever will. However, we are all very glad to hear that she is doing well, and wish her a speedy recovery."
The girl sounds like she was not even Condition White, more like Condition Opaque.
My oldest boy is a railroad engineer and was involved in a non-fatal but scary crossing accident. No use printing the whole article, but you can infer it from my boy's reply to the reporter who printed this crap.
"Hi Pop: Well, the newspaper article about the collision the other night came out in last night's paper. As usual, it was loaded with inaccuracies, so I sent this attached email to the reporter who did the article. Makes you wonder what else the press has/is screwing up if they screw up a simple matter like this. I am happy to report that the girl is doing fine. Amazingly, she suffered only a fractured wrist, and ankle. My hat's
off to the design enginees at Honda! (The car was totalled and the girl, conscious all the time, had to be cut out of the wreckage.)
Joey, Regarding this article... I was the engineer on the train that night, and want to point out some innaccuracies in your report. I realize that you probably got a lot of your info from the police, which would
explain some of the mistakes, as they only talked to me, and not my conductor, or brakeman who witnessed the accident. I was 450 feet away from the scene, and never saw or felt a thing.
When we parked the train, and went back to our office to fill out accident reports, and discuss what had happened, this is where the innaccuracies in you report would later become obvious. Here goes --
Paragraph one: "an unlighted freight car" Both my conductor, and brakeman were with the freight car, and had their lanterns, which WERE lighted/on. My brakeman was on the ground waving his lantern horizontially trying to get her attention. When it became clear that she wasn't stopping, my brakeman dove into the center of the freight car, as
Jennifers car impacted under his feet. If it were not for his quick reaction, her car would have cut him in half.
Paragraph three: "at an unmarked track crossing" The crossing is clearly marked with reflective crossbuck signs at the crossing. There are also reflective "RR Xing ahead" signs posted about 100 yards either side of the crossing. I drove this route last night to make sure of this. "Traveling at speeds of 30 to 35 MPH, witnesses said" The posted speed limit there is 40 MPH. In the nearly three years we have safely used
that crossing, I can honestly say I have never seen anyone do anything close to 30 MPH. 45 to 55 MPH is more common. 30 MPH is a figure that the police somehow determined. With no skid marks at the scene, this would seem to be a guess on their part. Both my conductor,and brakeman have estimated her speed well in excess of 30 MPH. Also, no one was there but my crew to see the accident. "Witnesses" arrived about a minute later.
Paragraph five: "The train, which had four empty freight cars..." We had five cars, not four. 60 more feet, and an additional 35 tons to stop.
Paragraph six: "A railroad crossing sign is the only indication of the tracks". See comments on paragraph three, and even though I am not required to do so, I was blowing the whistle. She probably didn't hear it as police confirmed that her radio was on.
I hope this clears things up for you, and I would hope that you do a little more through report next time, instead of just parroting what the police say.
On a side note, the press is always quick give the "victims" story in matters like this, but always seem to forget that there's two or three people on the train who will be living with the events of the day as well. Some railroad employees have seen more people die than a modern day soldier, or cop ever will. However, we are all very glad to hear that she is doing well, and wish her a speedy recovery."
The girl sounds like she was not even Condition White, more like Condition Opaque.
). It struck me that the media builds giant 2 story lies on a bunch of little lies. Each one is easy to disprove, but mostly so trivial it isn't worth it to do so. The result is a large house of lies, that can stand up to a heavy storm.
, Art