[tahiti]

"The reflective-material regulation...(means) railroads will have to shell out about $90 million to bring the remaining equipment up to the new standard,"

Amendment V

"nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 98—963

JEREMIAH W. (JAY) NIXON, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI, et al., PETITIONERS v. SHRINK MISSOURI GOVERNMENT PAC et al.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

[January 24, 2000]

Justice Stevens, concurring.

"therefore, I make one simple point. Money is property;"

The regulation is obviously unconstitutional unless the taxpayers fund the regulation has compensation for taking private property for public use.

[upchuck]

And what about motorists that approach an unlighted railroad crossing at night with our headlights turned off? What about us, huh?

[balrog666]

Strobes would be cheaper and more reliable.

[Alberta's Child]

These railroad crossings are locations where a private railroad crosses a public roadway, so the notion that railroads can operate outside any public regulation is a pretty specious one in my opinion.

Railroads have been among the most heavily-regulated industries in the history of the United States (for a number of reasons), which explains why an agency like the Federal Railroad Administration even exists in the first place.

[patricktschetter]

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/regrev/evaluate/809222.html

Explain why the railroad industry shouldn't have a similar safety device, when they don't even have side marker lights at relatively close spacing like trucks do. I live a few blocks from a rail line that's often active at night and I know of several crossings on that line which just have a crossbar sign. Spotting dark freight cars at those crossings is very difficult even in good conditions.