The only horror story I've read about involving UM's on Amtrak was the result of Amtrak's own staff putting the rules above common sense. If I got it wrong then please link to whatever story involves whatever incidents you really meant.
They usually do tell the truth. But also you can have police come and question. Usually they won't lie to the police. Also can get the parents phone number from them and call them. Yes, if after doing due diligence and no proof the person is underage the crew would move on. In my experience that has never happened. It was always underage child.
I don't think it really matters who, provided an adult brings you to the Amtrak station and can provide the name of the person picking you up. I would think it could even be an adult student there who would be willing to do it as a public service. The main issue is that often someone sent to pick someone up might be changed on short notice, but that's unacceptable for the unaccompanied minor policy. You'll probably need to find if they can do it at Springfield. Newark or NY Penn Station should be able to handle it.
This very topic was discussed on another thread recently and your point-of-view seemed to be the dominant one. However, as a non-parent who did many things under the age of 18 which I wouldn't allow any kids of my own to do today, there are times when I feel we don't go far enough to protect minors (realizing that the magical ticking of a clock doesn't automatically transition someone into adulthood despite what laws may enable).
As far as I know, I haven't been on a public transit system that has a minimum age required to ride alone. At the age of 6 I lived about 2.5 miles from my school and I would regularly take a public transit bus by myself. My parents or uncle would drop me off at a bus stop and I'd get off at a stop a half block from school. At age 9 I was taking public transit by myself for musical training in San Francisco. I had red (90%) discount BART tickets and back then San Francisco MUNI's under 12 youth fare was 5 cents. As far as I can tell there's no particular minimum age for taking such buses or even commuter trains around here.
You're surprised more children aren't being attacked on trains more often? What a bizarre (and uniquely American) outlook. Statistically speaking, the primary threats to children come from family members, family friends, close neighbors, and other minors already known to the child. These are the sorts of people with easier opportunities for abuse than waiting to attack in public on a moving train. Actual strangers are far less likely to attack a child in the first place and yet far more likely to be suspected of foul play. Even in the case of the rare stranger that is both motivated to attack and willing to risk discovery, it's going to be a crime of opportunity rather than a crime of passion. That means probability of success and suitability of escape are going to be valued highly and are likely to delay or dissuade an attack on a train relative to other easier opportunities. If anything riding a train as a child is probably safer today than when most of us were children. Potentially safer than any other time in the history of train travel even.
At least some do. I found Eurostar (via the Chunnel between England and France) has a similar policy as Amtrak. Under 12 requires an adult and 12-15 requires an unaccompanied minor form be signed. It doesn't sound like they require any payment, and they even say they don't really do anything other than watch the form be signed. Amtrak says 13-15, while Eurostar says 12-15. Amtrak requires a wristband and makes it seem as if they'll actually check the ID.
I was thinking the same thing. We have a litigation happy society on this side of the pond. Don't know if it's some over on the other side.
On the other side of the pond, if you sue over something dumb and lose then you have to pay the winning side's legal fees. It helps discourage people from suing over something dumb....
Too small of a sample size. The issue is that Amtrak has been more or less been given a monopoly on intercity rail in the United States, and they have a single published unaccompanied minor policy. In the UK there's a variety of different operators, and I found three policies (unaccompanied check-in, no unaccompanied under 12, we know it when we see it) that are different.
The longest I could find is approximately 244.7 miles from Montauk, NY to Newark, DE. It would require at least 4 transfers (Babylon/Jamaica, New York Penn, Trenton, Philadelphia Center City) and 3 railroads (LIRR, NJT, SEPTA). If MARC and SEPTA are linked up, it will one day be possible to go from Springfield, MA to Spotsylvania, VA entirely by rail without using Amtrak.
I don't know but I am aware of times men tried to make "friends" with minors. Both male and female minors. The minors in a majority of those times were responding positively to the attention from those men. Perverts have their act down pat and can be persuasive to younger people. One minor tried to leave the train early but the minor was intercepted at the door. Have also had men touch, assault, young, but not minor men and women on the train.
Lawyers write the policy.
I've personally witnessed conductors, car attendants, and dining staff try to make "friends" with male and female minors. The minors seemed to respond positively to this attention. Were those employees "perverts" as well? If perverts are as common and as cleaver as you claim then they surely they've already infiltrated Amtrak's labor force by now. Good thing for Amtrak that being a friendly stranger isn't a crime, yet? Otherwise half the OBS might be charged with aggravated grooming by now.
Finally we get to an actual crime on the train and we still don't have even a single example involving an actual minor. Not from you, not from Triley, and not from RSG. Big talk but no proof, let alone an actual conviction. Perhaps if you were to lower your standards even further and cast an even wider net you might eventually find an example somewhere, but if it takes that much effort then perhaps this endless sea of criminal perversion you're trying to sell us doesn't actually exist? Or at least doesn't exist in the manner described outside of your hyper suspicious imagination?
