Dry Run
"AFTER more than six months of discussion about banning alcohol on commuter trains, a committee put together by the board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has recommended that the ''cocktail hour'' be allowed to continue on the trains and platforms of the Long Island and Metro-North railroads.
If the board adopts the recommendation, as is likely, bartenders employed by the Long Island Rail Road will continue to sell alcohol during rush hour on two eastbound trains and on platforms at Pennsylvania Station, Hunterspoint Avenue, Jamaica and Flatbush Avenue, beginning at about 3 p.m.
As a board member who has been involved with this issue from the beginning -- indeed, I was the one to first raise the issue back in December -- I think that the sale and consumption of alcohol on commuter railroads is a terrible practice.
Those who disagree point out that people make about 500,000 trips per day on the Long Island and Metro-North lines and yet last year, police officers issued only 287 tickets for alcohol-related disturbances. And of the 994 cases in 2006 in which passengers needed medical help because of extreme drunkenness, in almost every instance the riders had done most, if not all, of their drinking before getting on a train.
But this isn't about statistics. It's not a matter of how many incidents or accidents have occurred or will occur or where alcohol may be purchased. It's a matter of public policy.
It is inconceivable to me that in this era when both New York and Connecticut have strong public policies against the public consumption of alcohol and strict drunken driving laws, that a state agency (Metro-North's New Haven line has a full-fledged bar that is run in cooperation with Connecticut) would actually encourage public drinking by selling alcohol to its patrons, most of whom must drive after getting off of the train. This willingness to encourage drinking on the train is tantamount to giving people alcohol while they are driving.
Commuters, of course, are entitled to drink at home. But when they are on the railroad, they are actually in everyone's home, including the nondrinkers on the train.
It is unfair to allow anyone to drink around those who may not want to and may not want someone who is drinking near them. One would not drink in someone else's house without being invited to do so and without taking into account the wishes of everyone else. We similarly should take into account the wishes of others who are on the train. After all, if passengers wanted to be around drinkers, they would go to a bar.
I also don't accept the argument that we should continue the current alcohol policy because that is how it has always been and any change would be difficult to enforce. Times change, public policy changes and the definition of acceptable behavior changes as well.
In addition to the public policy discussion, there is also the obvious liability issue for the authority. Selling alcohol to people who may eventually get behind the wheel could lead to very unfortunate events.
We no longer allow smoking on the trains and this policy has been accepted by our riders. When New York and Connecticut were debating whether to enact laws requiring the use of seatbelts and child restraint devices, much of the opposition came from those who said that such laws would not be enforceable in private automobiles. Now more than 80 percent of all drivers and passengers wear their seat belts. And infants in automobiles are almost always secured in child seats, not because a police officer is there but because it is the right thing to do.
People adapt their actions based on public policy, and I am sure that the same would happen in this instance -- commuters would come to accept and even applaud a ban on alcohol.
The sale and consumption of alcohol is not related in any way to the basic responsibility of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which is to get riders to their destinations safely and on time. Instead of serving alcohol, the authority should simply do what it does best: move people from one place to another.
Op-Ed Contributor Mitchell H. Pally, a lawyer, is the Suffolk County representative to the board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority."