Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 2:40 PM ET, 02/15/2011

Late-night Metro: A life saver?

By Adam Wenner, Bethesda

The Feb. 14 Metro story on the proposal to close Metrorail at midnight on weekends [“For some, Metro’s idea to curb late-night service is a buzzkill”] quoted a rider who, while waiting for the last train, jokingly asked, “Are we gonna die?” It also quoted a young woman whose friend was killed in a drunken-driving incident. She noted that many Metro riders are inebriated.

I think it’s great to take Metro on weekends and avoid any alcohol-related driving risks, and I could afford a taxi if Metro were closed early. But unlike me, there are many, especially young people, who cannot or will choose not to pay for a taxi home. If Metro closes at midnight, some of those kids may end up dead or injured if they drive home after too many drinks. Or they may kill or injure someone else.

I urge the Metro board, as it calculates what it will save by closing early, to include the costs, both medical and in human tragedy, that ending late-night service may entail.

By Adam Wenner, Bethesda  | February 15, 2011; 2:40 PM ET
Categories:  D.C., HotTopic, Metro, traffic, transportation  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: HOT lanes myth and reality (part two)
Next: House Dems come to defense of Metro and D.C.

Comments

There are many good reasons to keep Metro open late. This is not one of them. It is not the government's job to be our chauffeur to make sure we get home safely.

Posted by: Nemo24601 | February 15, 2011 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Re Nemo24601 -- by your logic, there should be no FAA, since it's not government's job to make sure we fly safely. And no FDA, because government has no business protecting us from dangerous foods and medicines. And Metro should not operate at rush hour, since we are all free to drive or hire our own chauffer.

Posted by: BornInDC1 | February 16, 2011 5:35 AM | Report abuse

What else is the point of Metro, if not for this kind of thing? I'm sick of policies that cater soley to work commuters.

I live in the city. I don't necessarily need to take metro home from a bar, but I am EXTREMELY concerned about the drunk driving in my neighborhood. It may not be the gov's responsibility to get drunk people home, but it is their responsibility to make my neighborhood safe. And having the Metro option available makes my neighborhood a lot more safe than just telling people not to drink and drive

Posted by: jenms | February 18, 2011 2:39 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company