MTA's moronic new subway rules

anonymous

Subject: MTA's moronic new subway rules

Anyone old enough to remember the MTA's disaster trying to make sitting on more than one seat illegal? Cops were handing out fines to obese people, and most all the summonses got tossed out -so those rules went out the window. The cops knew it was dumb and opressive to try to make someone's vague idea of discourtesy an illegal act, so they enforced the law with a vengeance-- sucessfully scuttling it. This is going to be NO different.

The no-crossing-between-cars seems fairly sensible-but a summons for having a coffee or snack on the train?
Another slap at the outer boroughs - where I'm sure the bulk of the summonses will get issued (God forbid not the tourists in times sq). So the poor people with the hour commute who can't afford a Manhattan breakfast, buy their bagel and coffee in outer Brooklyn and dare to eat it on the train get socked. And as they get socked, so do the vendors and shops in those neighborhoods.

Also, have you seen the overflowing garbage cans at 7th Ave? Just where are riders supposed to put these drinks and snacks we can't bring on the trains? I bet half of them will end up on the tracks. So we'll get more stalled trains and rats.

Yes I don't like people throwing chicken bones on the subway floor, but that doesn't mean we go Nazi on 99.9 percent of the rest of us, who sometimes like to have a beverage, especially when the subway car we're riding in may or may not have AC or heat.

The NY Times story neglected to mention who to call to give your feedback about these new rules -- here's the Commandant of your new Nazi train:

Mr. Lawrence G. Reuter
President
MTA/NYCT
370 Jay Street
Brooklyn, New York 11201
(718) 243-4321
(718) 596-2146

carnivore

I agree that the no going between cars rule is ridiculous, but the one seat per person rule was a great idea. Obviously, there should be an exception for obese people, but I can't stand people who think they're so important that their bag should have a seat while there are people standing.

rbenghiat

as a visibly preggers subway rider, I've taken to loudly asking the 2-seaters if I can sit - they always look annoyed until they see the belly. then the *without fail* look sheepish. and i get to sit - phew!

actually, i've taken to asking to sit a lot of the time - it's a rare day when someone offers.. and the other day on the N i actually stood for a woman more pregnant than me, when no one else budged. sheesh.

ok. minor seat rant over.

becca

anonymous

Subject: Maybe I ranted over my point..

Which is that, of course it is rude to take up two seats, and of course it is rude to throw or spill your snack on the subway floor, but trying to LEGISLATE against it spells all kinds of trouble for commuters, the police and our legal system. You should look at old news clips about that "great idea" of summonses for seats. It really was a waste of time and money - the cops handed out summonses by the bucketload - and most got TOSSED OUT.

Wait till they hand your toddler a $25-$100 summons for a sippy cup, or your diabetic friend for having a medically necessary snack, or you because after decades of being able to have a coffee, you just abesentmindedly forgot you couldn't sip it.

We're going right down the path to the gum-chewing-is-a-felony laws of Singapore. And as for going between cars, a friend of mine pointed out that many times in her many years on the train she's had to go between cars to avoid dangerous situations on the car she stepped into -- knife fights, crazy people, etc. So event that rule might backfire.

rhodamine

these "rules" are so not going to fly, just like every other half-baked shit plan that the mta barfs up every now and then.

anyone remember the terrible photo ban? OH NOEZ!!!!

daveb

While I agree that this rule is a lost cause and won't fly... Eating on the subway revolts me. I'm sick of sticky floors and chicken bones under my feet and I don't like having to smell other people's food. Yeah, I know, I'm being uptight, but still, it's a big peev of mine.

anonymous

Subject: Re: Maybe I ranted over my point..

brooklyner wrote: We're going right down the path to the gum-chewing-is-a-felony laws of Singapore.

Actually, I had heard that they recently revoked that ban in Singapore after heavy lobbying from Wrigleys and the rest of the American chewing gum industry.

carnivore

guest=me

anonymous

Subject: Singapore gum ban

Not exactly on the Singapore post. They just repealed gum ban for "medicinal gum." But hey, this is kind of inspiring. Why not adopt an expensive and time consuming permit process here in NYC to allow toddlers and diabetics to sip drinks for medicinal purposes on the trains.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/05/25/financial0006EDT0009.DTL

anonymous

Subject: UPDATE: MTA blinks on drinks

See today's Times - Kalikow is holding off the vote. Interesting that there was a law banning open containers on the subway since 1967 - but it was never enforced.

The MTA's bid to "clarify" that law almost certainly was an effort bring enforcement back -but bviously the outrage this has generated is making them think twice.

A victory seems at hand for coffee sippers everywhere!

11238

Speaking of subway etiquette I got on the B this morning which was crowded enough that 8 people in the car were standing and a woman was on the bench indian style taking up 2 seats. I cracked up. It was like she was on her couch in her living room. Genius. :P

carnivore

That's a perfect time for the "wedge and sweep" move (say "excuse me", then wehn they ignore it, wedge your ass into the seat and sweep the offending person's crossed legs or whatever over with your ass).