STM defends response to pepper spray incident
I don’t know why the STM has to defend its response to Wednesday morning’s metro incident: there’s a protocol when noxious substances are noticed in the metro, which was properly followed as it should be.
Update: It was a fight between two people at Champ-de-Mars, in which someone used pepper spray, that created the problem.
Blork 22:07 on 2019-01-09 Permalink
I guess it’s normal that they would *explain* the response; it’s unfortunate that it’s seen as *defending* the response.
Sadly, there is a small army of dumbasses who simply don’t get it. Anything that inconveniences them is immediately thought (by them) to be caused by some one or some thing they don’t like. You already see people blaming Valerie Plante for Pete’s sake, which is maximum dumbass.
These are among the people who don’t want to be inconvenienced when there is a noxious substance on the Metro, but if such a substance proved dangerous and the protocol was not there, the same people would complain about the lack of protocols and how they shouldn’t take chances.
EmilyG 23:02 on 2019-01-09 Permalink
Yeah, and this time it wasn’t the fault of equipment breaking down, so not even the STM’s fault.
Kevin 23:22 on 2019-01-09 Permalink
I get the frustration: shutting down the metro for half an hour means thousands were late.
And you have to play it safe when half a dozen people start screaming and crying when someone sprays something noxious and you have no idea what that substance is.
But it is kind of ridiculous that a fight involving two people at one station shuts down three lines. It shows the massive flaws in the system and how there is no workaround. There are no alternate lines, no backups, no redundancy.
All the STM can do is shut it down, and all a passenger can do is wait or walk, and that is, in the 21st, exceedingly primitive.
Kate 07:37 on 2019-01-10 Permalink
Kevin, do other metro systems have fancy systems for slamming barriers to isolate different parts of their tunnels?
Kevin 08:40 on 2019-01-10 Permalink
Kate,
I have no idea, and really, I’m not concerned about what other cities have. I’m concerned with my city and an obvious weak point in critical infrastructure.
If Berri-UQAM is so vulnerable that something happening in a station a kilometre away can shut it down, and shut down every train running through that crossroad, we need to do more to protect Berri-UQAM.
Maybe it’s a faster response time. Maybe it’s better ventilation systems. Maybe instead of letting the affected train pull into Berri, they should have sent the train back to Champ de Mars.
DavidH 09:29 on 2019-01-10 Permalink
I’m surprised I did not see more of Plante stating the obvious: we need more lines going around Berri-UQAM (rather than always through it) to go around these problems when they arise. What we need is the pink line (and others like it) as another way to get downtown and not rely on Berri-UQAM’s connections alone. Other cities don’t have magical ways of making problems disappear, they have more options for moving around inside their subway system. We have two lines parallel to one another when we want to move inside the downtown core. For everything else, we have no redundancy whatsoever. No matter where you’re coming from, it’s one fragile line only.
Ephraim 10:12 on 2019-01-10 Permalink
The STM was the victim in this case. But what, if anything is being done about the two people involved. It’s illegal to carry pepper spray in Canada, subject to up to 10 years prison? But, I assume that from a legal standpoint anyone who was affected and was docked pay would also have a civil case (small claims) against this person.
Hamza 11:20 on 2019-01-10 Permalink
Berri-UQAM being what it is is protected by federal authourities, most of them invisible to the average user. Unless we’re talking about metal detectors or armed guards in every station, which nobody wants, I don’t think a 30 minute delay for something like this (a serious but rare incident) warrants calling the metro a seriously flawed system.
JP 22:06 on 2019-01-10 Permalink
What or who are these federal authorities that are invisible to the average user at Berri-UQAM?
Bill Binns 00:07 on 2019-01-11 Permalink
Everybody should calm down. We don’t even know yet whether the people who caused the Metro shutdown are “young and impressionable”. This may have been a completely acceptable expression of political butthurt for which no consequences are warranted.
SMD 02:02 on 2019-01-11 Permalink
@DavidH: The mayor made the link in several interviews (notably to La Presse and The Gazette, whose headline is “Emergency métro shutdown shows need for Pink Line, says Plante”).
ant6n 04:48 on 2019-01-11 Permalink
I also tend to think we should invest into more capacity for the system, rather than infrastructure that deals with certain rare incidents but is unused the rest of the time. The mtl metro already has a very powerful ventilation system.
The question regarding barriers is pretty reasonable, as is asking whether cities have it — as it provides an indication of technical feasibility and cost. I know the Barcelona line 9 has big doors on the ramps connecting the two levels of tracks. Presumably this used only for fires. I feel I’ve heard of other barrier systems that are really more like single use, and would really only be used for big fires. Note also that the Barcelona system has platform screen doors.
So maybe its feasible to put movable doors on the tunnel connections between the various metro lines, bit to make it effective it would also require platform screen doors at Berri, Lionel groulx, Snowdon, jeantalon (and possible changes to the ventilation systems to separate the lines.)
Hamza 16:51 on 2019-01-11 Permalink
RCMP at the least. In the heady days of summer 2012 they were rather visible