The outcome of this was great for them. They can get a bunch of overtime for the resulting protests. It is one of the backwards incentives in our policing model that public blowback actually helps the people it is intended to punish.
They often are criminal offenses. Lots of states have passed some variation of a law saying that violating the safety policies of public transit is its own criminal offense.(Note not saying I agree this is right, just that it exists)
That’s a dark rabbit hole. The bar to become an accredited police force in most of the US is stunningly low and a public transit system is one of the least shocking.
I was wondering about this, given that there’s no signage about eating, skeptical that there’s a law. But apparently there is. I did a search, and the only result I got about it, besides this story, was this article, talking about how they were thinking of reversing the ban (because they were starting to sell food/drink at stations), but figured it didn’t matter because it was never ever enforced anyways… (and even then, the story was all about food on the trains):
Caltrain’s official policy is that they allow food and drink (including alcohol) on their trains. (It’s even a bit famous for Friday commute-home parties.) So there’s really no way to know what the policy is if there are no signs.
As I read the law I linked to, it doesn’t become a criminal offense until the third violation.
As far as opinion, I don’t think that eating should be “criminal” ever unless the outcome causes direct harm in which case it is already reckless endangerment. I’m fine with it being fineable in certain appropriate necessary conditions if well posted, and if you don’t pay fines/tickets THAT is an offence, but making them direct crimes is something i’m very opposed to and is pretty police state, imho.
I’d prefer: “sorry sir, i apologize about this, but eating on the platform is not allowed and failure to comply to put away the food will result in me having to issue you a $250 ticket which is something that neither of us want.”
Yeah, two public transits, one with an unstated, unknown rule that you can’t eat (which can be randomly and arbitrarily enforced) and one with an unstated but fairly well-known rule you can eat and drink whatever you want…
For what it’s worth, I picked up within my first few rides that it is against the rules to eat on BART, on trains or in the fare-control area. There is some signage in stations, and I can’t swear I noticed it my very first time in the system, but certainly did within ride 3 or 4.
I may be atypical in attention to details of this sort, tho.
It’s interesting how, despite all the surreptitiously-acquired and -installedStingray and surveillance devices that cops in Contra Costa county have access to, they still manage to never be there when they’re actually needed yet somehow still have the time to do negative public outreach and overreach.
He wasn’t arrested for eating a sandwich. He was arrested for not showing ID and resisting an officer. If he had showed ID. most likely the cop would have let him go without further incident. But then again why should he show ID when the media will take the situation and twist it to make cops look bad & stupid people will believe it.
There may be historical factors at play here, also. Longest ride in the BART system when it opened (Daly City to Richmond, Concord, or Fremont) would have been maybe 45 minutes? Gilroy to 4th and King is 2.5 hours or close to.
