LAist: $30 Million? $80 Million? Is there a difference?

subwayray

Sun, 02 Mar 2008 18:08:26 -0800

Because it's a waste of money. And most cities that implement such gates did so before terrorism was ever a concern. Even New York considered removing them after 9/11. They become human barriers in an emergency and it's more effective to have security patrol the stations and trains, might as well have them checking fares at the same time. I'd MUCH rather see all this money spent on more security personnel; sheriffs and fare inspectors.

marc22386

Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:31:35 -0800

I don't understand why there's even an outcry against turnstiles... Every major metro/subway system in the world has them and — in the end — they will make more money for the system here (in the long run) and will increase safety. What's 'overly optimistic' is assuming that people will still pay when they're not forced to.

Emoney

Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:32:34 -0800

I thought the money was going to go to building gates for the Blue Line. I recently moved from Long Beach and took the Blue Line 5 days a week for 6 months. I have been using the Red Line for 2 months and can't believe the difference. I feel 100% safer. When riding the Blue Line, everyday brought crazy stories and dangerous situations. The Blue Line needs this so much more than the Red Line. I have witnessed (on several occasions) Blue Line passengers evading fare and then lieing right to the Sheriffs faces about how they lost their tickets. I don't care if they don't pay the $1.25. What I care about is safety for myself and other passengers and I've noticed that the fare evaders are almost always the ones who cause problems a board the train.