Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Handcuffed and arrested for eating French fries in a Metro > > station, 12-year-old Ansche Hedgepeth may now be kicked off > > her double-dutch jump-rope team or even suspended from school > > for her snacking infraction. > I supposed that this seems to come from a law-and-order attitude of the > public; they want transit companies to crack down on passengers. In > other words, to treat passengers like criminals! > I remember when I went to "junior high" (or intermediate) school back in > the early-1960’s (during the Beatles era but before the revolution of > the late 1960’s), that gum chewing and sunglasses were illegal on the > campus; but a violation meant a trip to the vice-principal’s office for > detention or "non-privilege" (meaning no social events, intramural > sports [e.g. jump-roping?], etc.). You had to do something drastic > (like smoke-bombing) to get suspended from school.
In our area a child who brings an Advil to school gets same the penalty as the child who beats another senseless. These school administrators have no common sense or backbone! — Frederick E. Jorden http://fejcpapc.com/ Frederick E. Jorden, CPA PC (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211
Response:
>> So, please explain your point. Do you support the severity of the > action taken by the authorities in this case? Or are you simply so > intolerant about the smell of French fries that you feel children > should be handcuffed and arrested for bringing them onto Metro > property, rather than being issued a ticket or a verbal warning? >I feel that an official action stronger than a verbal warning was >justified and necessary, given the willful intent and the reported >history of problems at the location.
Where is the proof that there was willful intent to disregard the rule, as opposed to careless or ignorant behavior? >DC laws require taking into custody for minors.
I somehow doubt that minors are required to be arrested for any and all offenses. >I’m not a lawyer nor a psychologist, so I defer >to them to judge whether that is good policy.
If I’m not mistaken, that’s what this whole discussion is about. >Handcuffs were probably going too far
Now I’m confused. You do or you don’t support what the Metro police did? >but then again, I really can’t say since I’m also not a >police officer who lives with danger daily.
We’re talking about Metro police here, not the DCPD. The level of "daily danger" is quite a bit lower.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> So, please explain your point. Do you support the severity of the >> action taken by the authorities in this case? Or are you simply so >> intolerant about the smell of French fries that you feel children >> should be handcuffed and arrested for bringing them onto Metro >> property, rather than being issued a ticket or a verbal warning? >I feel that an official action stronger than a verbal warning was >justified and necessary, given the willful intent and the reported >history of problems at the location. > Where is the proof that there was willful intent to disregard the > rule, as opposed to careless or ignorant behavior?
The arresting officer asked the girl if she was aware that eating on the Metro was illegal. She said she was aware, but was eating anyway because she was hungry. >DC laws require taking into custody for minors. > I somehow doubt that minors are required to be arrested for any and > all offenses. > [snip]
The statute that was enforced is DC-specific. If a Metro officer decides to arrest a minor while within the DC city limits, he/she has to use handcuffs. No option. If the incident occurred in MD or VA, it would have been at the officer’s discretion wether or not to use the cuffs. Sounded kind of weird to me, having different laws depending on where you are on the Metro, but it has to do with regional jurisdiction. For example, if you kill someone at the Vienna Station, you might get the death penalty, but do the same thing at the New Carrolton Station and the most you’ll get is life in prison. Before you buy.
Response:
> >I feel that an official action stronger than a verbal warning was >justified and necessary, given the willful intent and the reported >history of problems at the location. > Where is the proof that there was willful intent to disregard the > rule, as opposed to careless or ignorant behavior?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28074-2000Nov15.html "She said she never talked to the officer, although Metro police insist that she was asked whether she knew eating was against the law and that she said she did." > I somehow doubt that minors are required to be arrested for any and > all offenses.
"But, McDevitt pointed out, juveniles charged with criminal offenses in the District must be taken into custody." >Handcuffs were probably going too far > Now I’m confused. You do or you don’t support what the Metro police > did?
I’m recanting slightly. I support the general idea of a fine or arrest, but after thinking about it, applying handcuffs was probably going too far. That aspect of the Metro Police policy may need to be reexamined: "And, he said, it is department policy to handcuff anyone who is arrested, no matter the age. ‘Anyone taken into custody has to be handcuffed for officer safety,’ McDevitt said. Youngsters ’can kill you, too.’" >but then again, I really can’t say since I’m also not a >police officer who lives with danger daily. > We’re talking about Metro police here, not the DCPD. The level of > "daily danger" is quite a bit lower.
Perhaps you’ve missed the news of the spate of homicides at or near Metro stations? Granted, there are no 12-year-old girls that are suspects in these murders, but in this politically correct world, if officers used such discretion (and common sense) for handcuffs, they might be accused of age and gender profiling. — Michael Malak
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > } > }You mean you can eat on the subway there? If so, I wager the Singapore > }subway has hard plastic seats and a rubberized floor. The DC metro has rugs > }and stuff that would be hard to clean if they got stained, hence the strict > }policy. > Naa, he’s saying they just cane them on the spot. > If that indoor/outdoor carpeting in the Metro (not to mention the > hard plastic seats) is hard to clean, someone got cheated. > (yep, I’ve eaten on the Metro. Didn’t get caught, though. Been > really drunk on the Metro, too, and I’m sure I’m not the only one; > will they arrest you if you get sick all over the rug?)
Nope — as long as you make a concerted effort to yark in the trash-cans, they don’t much care if you hurl in the stations. Flooding the rug is something on which I am sure they would frown, but it’s not exactly an intentional act like whipping out a burger and chowing down. > — > "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit > of justice is no virtue."
– Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae. "People that are really very weird can get into sensitive positions and have a tremendous impact on history." — Vice-President Dan Quayle
Response:
> So, please explain your point. Do you support the severity of the > action taken by the authorities in this case? Or are you simply so > intolerant about the smell of French fries that you feel children > should be handcuffed and arrested for bringing them onto Metro > property, rather than being issued a ticket or a verbal warning?
I feel that an official action stronger than a verbal warning was justified and necessary, given the willful intent and the reported history of problems at the location. DC laws require taking into custody for minors. I’m not a lawyer nor a psychologist, so I defer to them to judge whether that is good policy. Handcuffs were probably going too far, but then again, I really can’t say since I’m also not a police officer who lives with danger daily. — Michael Malak Before you buy.
Response:
> Wrong. Over half of Amtrak’s patrons nationwide pass through New York’s > Penn Station, which has fast food restaurants.
Correction: one third (8 million) of Amtrak’s patrons nationwide (23 million) pass through New York’s Penn Station. — Michael Malak
Response:
>I supposed that this seems to come from a law-and-order attitude of the >public; they want transit companies to crack down on passengers. In >other words, to treat passengers like criminals!
Maybe if the baby-boomers had raised their kids with better discipline in the realm of public decorum, even the rules against eating would be unnecessary, let alone draconian enforcement of them. (Full disclosure: I’m a baby-boomer, but never raised a family…and I’m reading this thread from dc.general, not a kids/parenting newsgroup.) There seems to be a trend toward off-loading to the state certain responsibilities that parents used to take upon themselves. Curfew laws are another example — and D.C. has one of those, too. — http://www.clark.net/~whatnews
Response:
>It’s about time. I like public transportation, but the one thing >I hate is smelling McDonald’s french fries. It’s a perpetual >problem on Greyhound, but can also be a problme on Amtrak. The >girl in this incident knew it was wrong, but willfully violated >the rules anyway.
No one is disputing the fact that there are rules against food on Metro property, nor the fact that what she did was against those rules, nor the fact that these rules are designed to promote cleaner conditions in the Metro system, nor the fact that the authorities were within their rights to cite the girl for breaking these rules. So, please explain your point. Do you support the severity of the action taken by the authorities in this case? Or are you simply so intolerant about the smell of French fries that you feel children should be handcuffed and arrested for bringing them onto Metro property, rather than being issued a ticket or a verbal warning? Zero tolerance does not call for zero common sense.
Response:
> Most train stations in the eastern corridor apparently have no food > vending available and many are, in fact, unattended stations where > one can wait for a train, but cannot even purchase a ticket, let > alone food or McDonalds. So, the likelihood of encountering the smell > of McD’s fries, which someone objected to, on an *Amtrak* train remains > very low.
Wrong. Over half of Amtrak’s patrons nationwide pass through New York’s Penn Station, which has fast food restaurants. I bring water and snacks onto Amtrak — but they’re cold, not cooked. — Michael Malak
Response:
> McDonald’s fries, BTW, are not available on Amtrak and are not in > the train stations which I have used to access Amtrak, so you need > not worry about smelling them on Amtrak except in very rare occasions > when someone arrives to catch a train with them in hand and still has > some left when the train pulls out of the station. > As you can plainly see, there is indeed a McDonald’s in DC’s Union > Station: > http://www.unionstationdc.com/directory.html > —
Sitting in Florida and riding the train the length of the eastern seaboard [pretty much], I cannot "see" or intuit that. I can, however, restate the obvious, which was my point: travelers on trains that routinely go further than regular commuter trains should not be in any way prohibited from eating or remaining hydrated. Most train stations in the eastern corridor apparently have no food vending available and many are, in fact, unattended stations where one can wait for a train, but cannot even purchase a ticket, let alone food or McDonalds. So, the likelihood of encountering the smell of McD’s fries, which someone objected to, on an *Amtrak* train remains very low. Of course, if *you* object to the smell of McD’s french fries you may choose to avoid Union Station in Wash. DC. It appears that they are in the station; they are not, however, sold on the train.
Response:
> > Handcuffed and arrested for eating French fries in a Metro > station, 12-year-old Ansche Hedgepeth may now be kicked off > her double-dutch jump-rope team or even suspended from school > for her snacking infraction.
I supposed that this seems to come from a law-and-order attitude of the public; they want transit companies to crack down on passengers. In other words, to treat passengers like criminals! I remember when I went to "junior high" (or intermediate) school back in the early-1960’s (during the Beatles era but before the revolution of the late 1960’s), that gum chewing and sunglasses were illegal on the campus; but a violation meant a trip to the vice-principal’s office for detention or "non-privilege" (meaning no social events, intramural sports [e.g. jump-roping?], etc.). You had to do something drastic (like smoke-bombing) to get suspended from school.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Eating food in the metro system is a crime, by VA, DC, and MD law. In > DC, the prohibition is covered by DC Criminal Code Title 44, Chapter 2, > Section 44-223(b) which states, in annotated form: "It is unlawful for > any person either while aboard a public passenger vehicle … including > vehicles owned and/or operated by WMATA, which is transporting > passengers in regular route service within the corporate limits of the > District of Columbia; or while aboard a rail transit car … or WHILE > WITHIN A RAIL TRANSIT STATION… to: (1) Smoke or carry a lighted or > smoldering pipe, cigar, cigarette; (2) CONSUME FOOD OR DRINK; (3) Spit; > (4) Discard litter …" > Because this happened in DC, the officer had no option but to handcuff > the kid. Had it happened in MD or VA, it would have been at the > discretion of the officer to cuff or not. That said, it is kinda > overkill. I wish they’d cuffed that guy I saw last year on the Metro > who was clipping his toenails (?!). That oughtta be a crime. > — > Bloodmonkey Media, Inc.
Or the officer could have simply taken the fries away from the 12 yr. old girl and warned her. — (ken) ‘VOTING FOR DUMMIES" — A voting guide for Florida Voters: http://www.zyworld.com/maryland/scale.htm To respond to this place (-) between x and d. Because e-mail can be altered electronically, the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.
Response:
> (yep, I’ve eaten on the Metro. Didn’t get caught, though. Been > really drunk on the Metro, too, and I’m sure I’m not the only one; > will they arrest you if you get sick all over the rug?)
I don’t think so, but at rush hour they will clear the whole car, and your fellow commuters/victims will not like you very much. Actually you don’t have to get drunk to get sick on Metro. All you need to do is eat something bad for breakfast and then be lucky enough to get you a "jerk" motorman who moves the train down the track like a 16-year old trying to learn how to drive a stick shift. Gawd help you if you’re a pregnant lady… — Why vote for the lesser of two evils? CTHULHU 2004 "Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn!"
Response:
> McDonald’s fries, BTW, are not available on Amtrak and are not in > the train stations which I have used to access Amtrak, so you need > not worry about smelling them on Amtrak except in very rare occasions > when someone arrives to catch a train with them in hand and still has > some left when the train pulls out of the station.
As you can plainly see, there is indeed a McDonald’s in DC’s Union Station: http://www.unionstationdc.com/directory.html — Michael Malak
Response:
They are called Chips Before you buy.
Response:
} }You mean you can eat on the subway there? If so, I wager the Singapore }subway has hard plastic seats and a rubberized floor. The DC metro has rugs }and stuff that would be hard to clean if they got stained, hence the strict }policy.
Naa, he’s saying they just cane them on the spot. If that indoor/outdoor carpeting in the Metro (not to mention the hard plastic seats) is hard to clean, someone got cheated. (yep, I’ve eaten on the Metro. Didn’t get caught, though. Been really drunk on the Metro, too, and I’m sure I’m not the only one; will they arrest you if you get sick all over the rug?) — "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue."
Response:
Added: dc.urban-planning,misc.transport.urban-transit > Handcuffed and arrested for eating French fries in a Metro > station, 12-year-old Ansche Hedgepeth may now be kicked off > her double-dutch jump-rope team or even suspended from school > for her snacking infraction.
It’s about time. I like public transportation, but the one thing I hate is smelling McDonald’s french fries. It’s a perpetual problem on Greyhound, but can also be a problme on Amtrak. The girl in this incident knew it was wrong, but willfully violated the rules anyway. — Michael Malak
Response:
> Added: dc.urban-planning,misc.transport.urban-transit
> Handcuffed and arrested for eating French fries in a Metro > station, 12-year-old Ansche Hedgepeth may now be kicked off > her double-dutch jump-rope team or even suspended from school > for her snacking infraction. > It’s about time. I like public transportation, but the one thing > I hate is smelling McDonald’s french fries. It’s a perpetual > problem on Greyhound, but can also be a problme on Amtrak. The > girl in this incident knew it was wrong, but willfully violated > the rules anyway.
Considering that many people travel for hours and even days on an Amtrak train it would be inappropriate to suggest that Amtrak ban all food and drink. McDonald’s fries, BTW, are not available on Amtrak and are not in the train stations which I have used to access Amtrak, so you need not worry about smelling them on Amtrak except in very rare occasions when someone arrives to catch a train with them in hand and still has some left when the train pulls out of the station. -Aula, ridden Amtrak and found the cigarette smoke much more objectionable than any potential food smell.
Response:
Almost twenty years ago the metro goons arrested a woman for eating an apply and stripped searched her. She won about $30,000 in damages. I would advise the little girl to 1) get a good lawyer, and 2) stop wasting her time on a "double-Dutch jump-rope" team. > Maybe this officer should be arrested for false arrest and child > abuse and kidnapping? This IS bullshit.
It is bullshit. But it isn’t child abuse or kidnapping. It is just a "cop"
Response:
> >Maybe this officer should be arrested for false arrest and child > >abuse and kidnapping? This IS bullshit. > Welcome to Singapore! [snip] > Speaking from Singapore, I haven’t yet seen any 12 y-o kids being > arrested for eating on the MRT (Metro equivalent). Nor have I seen them > handcuffed.
You mean you can eat on the subway there? If so, I wager the Singapore subway has hard plastic seats and a rubberized floor. The DC metro has rugs and stuff that would be hard to clean if they got stained, hence the strict policy. –Steve
Response:
>School May Punish Girl Who Ate in Metro Station
<snip> Appologies for crossposting. I heard about this. They arrested and handcuffed a 12 year old for eating some fries in the Metro? This is absolutely fucking ridiculous. What the hell is this, Oceana? Jesus allmighty the metro and everyone else should be sued to hell for doing something so incredibly idiotic! As if telling her to dispose of the food would not have been sufficient to remedy the situation! Ugh. — Gino "Il Guerriero" Genovese "History is an Endless Waltz in three measures; War, Peace, and Revolution." Mariemaia Khushrenada – Gundam Wing: The Endless Waltz
Response:
> >Maybe this officer should be arrested for false arrest and child >abuse and kidnapping? This IS bullshit. > Welcome to Singapore! > Metro said they were responding to commuter complaints of > trashed cars, but I’d like them to release the actual count of > complaints and see an alleged food-splattered car before > I could be sympathetic to either the purported complainants > or to Metro.
Speaking from Singapore, I haven’t yet seen any 12 y-o kids being arrested for eating on the MRT (Metro equivalent). Nor have I seen them handcuffed. Rupa
Response:
>Maybe this officer should be arrested for false arrest and child >abuse and kidnapping? This IS bullshit.
Welcome to Singapore! Metro said they were responding to commuter complaints of trashed cars, but I’d like them to release the actual count of complaints and see an alleged food-splattered car before I could be sympathetic to either the purported complainants or to Metro. — http://www.clark.net/~whatnews
Response:
School May Punish Girl Who Ate in Metro Station By Petula Dvorak Washington Post Staff Writer Friday , November 17, 2000 ; Page B01 Handcuffed and arrested for eating French fries in a Metro station, 12-year-old Ansche Hedgepeth may now be kicked off her double-dutch jump-rope team or even suspended from school for her snacking infraction. Administrators at Deal Junior High School set up a conference for next week to discuss those punitive options, said Ansche’s mother, Tracey Hedgepeth. "I couldn’t believe they want to punish her even more," said the mother, who questioned how the school’s jurisdiction over her daughter’s behavior could extend to a Metro station hours after the school day ended. Deal Principal Reginald Moss said he can’t publicly discuss Ansche’s case. But he said the school system’s regulations stipulate that the administrators have jurisdiction over students when they ride on transportation provided by the school. Ansche, like many other students, uses a student fare card provided by the school. Ansche was caught by one of a dozen undercover officers dispatched to the Tenleytown-AU Metro station as part of a week-long crackdown on illicit snacking. The seventh-grader had bought some French fries before riding an elevator into the station about 4 p.m. Oct. 23. Metro police are unapologetic for the actions, pointing to their zero-tolerance policy. Yesterday, when Moss called Ansche into his office, he told her that the handcuffing may have been too harsh. Moss said he tells students that they must go straight home. "He told me I should have gone straight home and not stopped to buy any food," Ansche said. "He said that’s why he wanted to suspend me." But Ansche said she told Moss that she was hungry. She doesn’t eat lunch because cafeteria food is "too gross." "He said I should take some chips or a cupcake and put it in my book bag so I have a snack when I’m hungry. But that means I have to eat it before I go into the Metro." Moss verified that an administrative conference has been scheduled but said there has been no determination on punishment. The station in question draws students from Deal, Wilson High School, Georgetown Day and Sidwell Friends. "It’s a matter or supervision," Moss said of the school’s vigilance over students away from campus. "You have about 3,000 kids at the Tenleytown station area every day." At the beginning of the academic year, Moss said, every parent received an automated call reminding them of Metro’s rules. Fliers are sent out throughout the year reiterating the policy. The principal, who assigns school personnel to the area around the Metro station every day, said he could still use more help. "I think that had the rules been enforced and had Metro put enough people there
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.