• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should school buses be required to stop at all railroad crossings? (1 Viewer)

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Should school buses be required to stop at all railroad crossings?

Many, if not all, states have laws that require school buses to stop at all railroad crossing. For example, in my state, it doesn't matter if the gates are down or up, the lights are on or off, or even if the bus has kids in it or is empty (except the driver, of course).

Is this a reasonable requirement?

If kids are so precious, why don't we require that cars with kids in them stop at all crossings? If it's the number of kids, we could require that SUVs with 3 or more kids stop, and everyone else go. And why make an empty bus with no kids stop?

If kids are so precious, why do we require ever increasing restraints such as car seats and/or seat belts up to the almost teen years (in some states), but not require at least seat belts on school buses (again, in some states)?
 
Should school buses be required to stop at all railroad crossings?

Many, if not all, states have laws that require school buses to stop at all railroad crossing. For example, in my state, it doesn't matter if the gates are down or up, the lights are on or off, or even if the bus has kids in it or is empty (except the driver, of course).

Is this a reasonable requirement?

If kids are so precious, why don't we require that cars with kids in them stop at all crossings? If it's the number of kids, we could require that SUVs with 3 or more kids stop, and everyone else go. And why make an empty bus with no kids stop?

If kids are so precious, why do we require ever increasing restraints such as car seats and/or seat belts up to the almost teen years (in some states), but not require at least seat belts on school buses (again, in some states)?

It is a ridiculous rule.
 
Should school buses be required to stop at all railroad crossings?

Many, if not all, states have laws that require school buses to stop at all railroad crossing. For example, in my state, it doesn't matter if the gates are down or up, the lights are on or off, or even if the bus has kids in it or is empty (except the driver, of course).

Is this a reasonable requirement?

If kids are so precious, why don't we require that cars with kids in them stop at all crossings? If it's the number of kids, we could require that SUVs with 3 or more kids stop, and everyone else go. And why make an empty bus with no kids stop?

If kids are so precious, why do we require ever increasing restraints such as car seats and/or seat belts up to the almost teen years (in some states), but not require at least seat belts on school buses (again, in some states)?
Memorial to mark 1938 crash that killed 23 students - The Salt Lake Tribune
 
I seen a school bus get rear ended stopping at a RR crossing for no reason. Seems silly to me.
 
i don't know how i feel about the stop at all crossings thing. for one thing, it puts the vehicle and its occupants at risk, because busses take off from a stop very slowly, and most of that time is spent right in the line of fire. plus, i remember from my bus riding kid days that they sometimes would sit right on the track with the door open, listening for a train. that seems like a really poor plan. as for seat belts on busses, i have no idea why that hasn't become a ubiquitous thing.
 

BusAccident.jpg


also:
evansbus.jpg


and:
650x366


so yeah, I support school busses stopping at RR crossings.
 
Last edited:
Should school buses be required to stop at all railroad crossings?

Many, if not all, states have laws that require school buses to stop at all railroad crossing. For example, in my state, it doesn't matter if the gates are down or up, the lights are on or off, or even if the bus has kids in it or is empty (except the driver, of course).

Is this a reasonable requirement?

If kids are so precious, why don't we require that cars with kids in them stop at all crossings? If it's the number of kids, we could require that SUVs with 3 or more kids stop, and everyone else go. And why make an empty bus with no kids stop?

If kids are so precious, why do we require ever increasing restraints such as car seats and/or seat belts up to the almost teen years (in some states), but not require at least seat belts on school buses (again, in some states)?

This is the law here where I live and I never thought much about it.

What's the downside?
 
Should school buses be required to stop at all railroad crossings?

Many, if not all, states have laws that require school buses to stop at all railroad crossing. For example, in my state, it doesn't matter if the gates are down or up, the lights are on or off, or even if the bus has kids in it or is empty (except the driver, of course).

Is this a reasonable requirement?

If kids are so precious, why don't we require that cars with kids in them stop at all crossings? If it's the number of kids, we could require that SUVs with 3 or more kids stop, and everyone else go. And why make an empty bus with no kids stop?

If kids are so precious, why do we require ever increasing restraints such as car seats and/or seat belts up to the almost teen years (in some states), but not require at least seat belts on school buses (again, in some states)?

Probably not necessary where there are automatic crossing guards, but believe it or not there are quite a few rural routes where such things don't exist. I suppose they should just put up a stop sign at such intersections.
 
Should school buses be required to stop at all railroad crossings?

Many, if not all, states have laws that require school buses to stop at all railroad crossing. For example, in my state, it doesn't matter if the gates are down or up, the lights are on or off, or even if the bus has kids in it or is empty (except the driver, of course).

Is this a reasonable requirement?

If kids are so precious, why don't we require that cars with kids in them stop at all crossings? If it's the number of kids, we could require that SUVs with 3 or more kids stop, and everyone else go. And why make an empty bus with no kids stop?

If kids are so precious, why do we require ever increasing restraints such as car seats and/or seat belts up to the almost teen years (in some states), but not require at least seat belts on school buses (again, in some states)?

YEs I agree with it.
In my state I believe ALL multiple passenger public transportation vehicles have to do so and so do some vehicles transportating certain materials. (flammable chemicals etc) but don't quote me on that I could be wrong or the law has changed.

What I base that on is all the vehicles i have seen stop for railroad crossings.
 
Annoy drivers behind school buses.

That is very true near my rural high school, the buses had to stop at a train corssing just a few metres past the main intersection to access the school, it caused a massive traffic jam after school. I would understand if it was a live track, but the track they had to cross is derelict and was shutdown years ago.
 
i don't know how i feel about the stop at all crossings thing. for one thing, it puts the vehicle and its occupants at risk, because busses take off from a stop very slowly, and most of that time is spent right in the line of fire. plus, i remember from my bus riding kid days that they sometimes would sit right on the track with the door open, listening for a train. that seems like a really poor plan. as for seat belts on busses, i have no idea why that hasn't become a ubiquitous thing.

Ever seen a crash where a car or van or bus catches fire? I have. I've also been unfortunate enough to see people die that way. Want to watch as 50 young elementary kids are torched because a school bus driver has no hope of unlocking 50 seatbelts before the bus burns to the ground?
 
I seen a school bus get rear ended stopping at a RR crossing for no reason. Seems silly to me.
Caused by tailgating, being in a hurry, inattentiveness ..NOT by the rule .

Not just anyone can be a bus driver .. and we need to work harder on weeding out poor drivers .. Driving well is an attitude .. a good attitude ..and a bad one .. no license ..
As to stopping .. I am not a SB driver .. they should decide .. Some crossings are very dangerous , and may not even have the barriers ... poor conservative states ...
 
At least now I understand why they have the law. Don't need it now days though.

I added another picture after you quoted me, from the Chicago area that was very recently (1995), where a school bus driver failed to clear the crossing due to a stop light on the other side of the tracks, and seven kids were killed, with 24 injured.

I found that one with just a very simple and quick Google search. There was one long ago near where I live, although thank God, no kids were killed.
 
Ever seen a crash where a car or van or bus catches fire? I have. I've also been unfortunate enough to see people die that way. Want to watch as 50 young elementary kids are torched because a school bus driver has no hope of unlocking 50 seatbelts before the bus burns to the ground?

Kids cant unbuckle their own seat belts?
 
Probably not necessary where there are automatic crossing guards, but believe it or not there are quite a few rural routes where such things don't exist. I suppose they should just put up a stop sign at such intersections.
I could see it for rural crossings with no gates or lights. On major roads with well-maintained equipment I don't see it as being necessary anymore.


That is very true near my rural high school, the buses had to stop at a train corssing just a few metres past the main intersection to access the school, it caused a massive traffic jam after school. I would understand if it was a live track, but the track they had to cross is derelict and was shutdown years ago.
The laws generally don't allow for such circumstances. A track is a track is a track. I cannot fault a driver for not wanting to lose his job just because the law can't keep up.
 
Ever seen a crash where a car or van or bus catches fire? I have. I've also been unfortunate enough to see people die that way. Want to watch as 50 young elementary kids are torched because a school bus driver has no hope of unlocking 50 seatbelts before the bus burns to the ground?
Unbelievable .. NO sane man will strap and buckle kids in a seat if they, the child, cannot unbuckle .. I am against strapping and buckling the kids in a seat ..Keep the status quo ..and have nothing but Diesel powered busses ..much safer , much more economical ..
 
Ever seen a crash where a car or van or bus catches fire? I have. I've also been unfortunate enough to see people die that way. Want to watch as 50 young elementary kids are torched because a school bus driver has no hope of unlocking 50 seatbelts before the bus burns to the ground?

in most accidents, the bus doesn't catch fire, but it usually does cause the passengers to fly around. as for unlocking all of the seatbelts, i'm sure that someone can innovate a device that trips them all at once after the bus comes to a stop. i don't really see an upside to exempting school busses from seatbelt laws.
 
It is a ridiculous rule.

It is required for all hazardous cargo transporters. Passengers are hazardous cargo. Personally I think the rule makes sense, because the driver needs to check for train traffic before crossing.
 
YEs I agree with it.
In my state I believe ALL multiple passenger public transportation vehicles have to do so and so do some vehicles transportating certain materials. (flammable chemicals etc) but don't quote me on that I could be wrong or the law has changed.

What I base that on is all the vehicles i have seen stop for railroad crossings.
My state has the same regulations for some tanker trucks, as well. Must depend on what they're hauling, as not all tanker trucks stop. Only some do.

I do not believe city buses have the same requirement.

Like you, based on observation.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom