On 18 Jul 2006 13:38:50 -0700, "Neil Williams"
wrote:

The point was more that bus companies wouldn't do such a thing if there
wasn't a good reason for it, even as a failed trial. Thus, like the
anti-assault screens, it gives the impression that the bus is perhaps a
less safe (from attack) means of transport than it actually is.

In a bus I went on in Chicago once, the protection for the driver was
even more extreme. You spoke to him through a microphone, and you
couldn't pass him cash for your fare - you had to insert your $1 bill
or whatever into a motorised slot a bit like on train ticket machines
here, then your ticket was printed. The plastic between me and the
driver was also pretty thick, and looked like it might have been
bulletproof.

--
to respond via email, visit:
http://tinyurl.com/e48z9