Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Uber announces gun ban

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Dave Workman, Jun 20, 2015.

  1. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    2,386
    Well, time to just call a cab.



    Did Uber just announce ‘victimize me’ policy for drivers, passengers?

    Two months after one of its drivers in Chicago became a hero by stopping a gunman in his tracks during a random shooting incident, ride-sharing Uber has announced a ban on guns for drivers and passengers, as reported yesterday by several news agencies including Seattle’s KIRO, the local CBS affiliate.


    http://www.examiner.com/article/did-uber-just-announce-victimize-me-policy-for-drivers-passengers
     
    coyotecaller likes this.
  2. Classic

    Classic Federal Way WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    899
    Guess who WON'T be using Uber? I refuse to patronize businesses who don't shiv a git about their customers!
     
  3. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    2,386
    Please cut and paste THIS over to the Exam comments section! Thx for reading!
     
    ZA_Survivalist likes this.
  4. JamesRL

    JamesRL Beaverton Active Member

    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    114
    Pretty common cowardly approach by a business - they worry about the liability they face if one of their drivers (who they don't actually employ) shoots somebody, so they make it a "policy" that their drivers (and passengers) can't carry guns. That way, if a driver (or passenger) shoots somebody and a lawsuit happens, they can claim that they're NOT liable under respondeat superior (Google it) because the driver (or passenger) was violating company policy.


    Jim
     
  5. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,769
    Likes Received:
    6,998
    That's pretty lame. Will they be able to be sued by those killed because they were following this rule?
    lol
     
    Caveman Jim likes this.
  6. Heywood

    Heywood Prineville Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    345
    Exactly. But I wouldn't worry about it. What are they going to do? Trespass you from property they do not own?. This is simply a CYA situation for them.
    Dutch bros has that same policy as a cover but they did not fire an employee that had one anyway and used it to protect themselves.
     
  7. edison bulb

    edison bulb Portland, OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    457
    Likes Received:
    573
    Write Uber and tell them what you think!
     
    coyotecaller likes this.
  8. JamesRL

    JamesRL Beaverton Active Member

    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    114

    Short answer: Nope.

    A business can't be held liable for the illegal actions of a customer or employee. That's why so many businesses have "gun-free zone" policies - that way, if someone gets shot on their premises, they can argue that "our policy does not allow guns on the property, so we have done all we could do to prevent this tragedy".

    It's BS, of course, but so is a lot of tort law.


    Jim
     
    coyotecaller and soberups like this.
  9. U201494

    U201494 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    492
    Who will know if you're carrying a concealed firearm? I guess maybe if you're one of those open carry imbeciles it would be obvious....might as well walk around with your wang dangling in the open air, you get the same attention.
     
    CHLChris likes this.
  10. edslhead

    edslhead Vanc Gold Supporter Gold Supporter Silver Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    2,168
    Likes Received:
    4,246
    Uber shouldn't even exist.
     
    wired likes this.
  11. Certaindeaf

    Certaindeaf SE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,769
    Likes Received:
    6,998
    The company seems like a great huge dodge/Dodge city.
    I guess we'll have to see where the liability falls (self employed/employee) when something truly diabolical or catastrophic happens.
     
  12. soberups

    soberups Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,334
    Likes Received:
    1,397
    If I owned a small business, I would also have a "no guns allowed" policy for employees simply to protect myself and my assets from BS lawsuits. Any law-abiding employee who used a gun for legitimate self-defense would receive an official warning letter for violating that policy that would remain in his/her file (for one day), and have his/her pay for that week docked (by one nickel). The following week, they would then receive a "performance bonus" of $100 for every hole they put in the bad guy, including exit wounds, as well as a letter of commendation to be posted in their permanent file. Gotta follow the rules!
     
    jmh119, U201491, solv3nt and 3 others like this.
  13. Classic

    Classic Federal Way WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    899
    Done deal! It's there now
     
  14. CHLChris

    CHLChris Portland Metro East Love me some guns! Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    1,818
    Likes Received:
    1,328
    Almost all pizza joints who deliver have this same policy. Drivers need only make a decision for themselves: Do I carry concealed and risk my job, or follow the rules and risk my life?

    As a customer, concealed is concealed. Same rules apply here as for any private property: Uber's pronouncement does not carry the weight of law and if they don't ask you to exit the car then you're good. If they notice your (concealed) gun, ask you to exit, and you don't comply, then you're in trouble.

    I think all around, this pronouncement from Uber is like so many other pronouncements we hear about. It won't make any difference. I'd still use Uber...but I don't ever have a need.
     
    Joe13 likes this.
  15. wired

    wired Yakima Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,689
    Likes Received:
    1,366
    If you run a cab company, like Uber does, you should have to follow all the local statutes that pertain to cab companies. Uber does not do this. The "Ride Sharing" thing is a bunch of BS. In any case its their company and if they want their drivers to be unprotected thats their call. If I'm a passenger on an uber car, which will NEVER happen , the driver will have to frisk me to determine if I am carrying or not. Not going to happen.
     
  16. Joe13

    Joe13 NW of Vancouver Opinionated & Blunt Bronze Supporter 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    6,704
    Likes Received:
    10,864
    I have a buddy that drives for them - I know he would rather not drive for them then leave his gun at home...

    Same with any other company that has these "rules" about firearms. Be a sheep and follow them or be a wolf and ask for forgiveness after the fact if you ever have to use it.
     
    Caveman Jim and 40calruler like this.
  17. 40calruler

    40calruler Lake Oswego Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,900
    Likes Received:
    1,335
    I find forgiveness is much easier to seek than permission. If I drove strangers around you can bet your a$$ I would have likely 2 guns on me. Ankle and IWB so I can get to one or the other with ease driving or out of the car. Suck it Uber!
    I have used them in San Diego, LA, and a few other places over the last couple years. It is much cheaper than a cab but if they said "no guns" as a passenger I would just ignore it. As a driver I would happily ignore it. Who knows what some drunk idiot you pick up from a bar is capable of.
     
    Joe13 likes this.
  18. 3MTA3

    3MTA3 DMZ between Liberty and Tyranny Behind Enemy Lines Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    2,533
    Likes Received:
    5,609
    Sorry, Uber is not going to risk my life by placing me into a gun free zone. Eff them.
     
    U201491 and Caveman Jim like this.
  19. soberups

    soberups Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,334
    Likes Received:
    1,397
    Agreed, to a point at least. The problem (in Portland, anyway) is that the "regulations" that are in place are there for the sole purpose of supporting a city bureaucracy. They don't benefit customers and they don't create job opportunities for cab drivers. I like the idea of Uber, but if they are going to be allowed to operate in Portland then the existing taxi companies who have been forced to pay thousands of dollars in annual "licensing fees" to the City of Portland need to have those fees refunded to them so that they can compete with Uber on a level playing field. Of course, that will never happen.
     
    edslhead likes this.
  20. Deebow

    Deebow Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    462
    Likes Received:
    815
    I have a car, so I don't have this problem.

    And even if I needed a ride, and I had my gun, and I used the Uber app., it is exactly none of their business if do or do not have a gun. It is also exactly none of my business if they do.
     
    etrain16 and Joe13 like this.