> No RR exists without a charter from the state(s)where it operates. Those charters were
> given out by the government based on a promise to provide service for the public necessity
> and convenience. The government retains the power to insist on many aspects of what is or
> is not necessary or convenient. Thus a RR is not analogous to a private residence.
> And as to government "taking" of your property, go read Baron v Baltimore.


Not only that, but most every railroad in America, especially transcontinental and inter-regional lines, were built with massive federal subsidies - mostly in direct federal dollars paid by the mile. And then in addition, there were those federal land grants, some of which land had already been granted to homesteaders - a real nasty mess. Also, in many cases, railroad r.o.w. was acquired by blunt force (federal eminent domain - and armed federal marshals) in the guise of public purpose or the public good.

Moreover, the very existence of the railroad corporation, and its right to its so-called private property, could have never occurred, nor maintain; except as a publicly supported policy enforced by public law - and the public will (in other words - imposed by action of government. It is only by the will of the public that that corporate property rights of any sort could even exist. They are not endowed by their "Creator", nor could they ever have "unalienable rights"; as only a God could grant "Endow" those.

To suggest that the public has no legitimate claim and lawful interest in such property it has invested so much capital in - is profoundly specious indeed.


As for properly assigning liability, it is my view that "no-fault" is a legitimate way of dealing with most accidents; except when willful negligence or dereliction is involved. The guilty should then pay, and pay it all. And pay some more until all are made whole. Indeed, even jail time is warranted in really gross cases.