The Crime Of Giving Somebody A Discount Ride To SF International Airport
Okay, let's forget about the fact that I hate flying now thanks to the government gropers checking my nipples for C-4 every time I take a plane. I used to love to fly places, and would love to go to San Francisco to visit my sister and her husband if I could do it for an affordable price.
Well, there are rideshare services that make it cheaper to get to and from the airport but of course, airport officials have to screw that up by making yes -- love this -- "citizen's arrests" and issuing citations to ride-share drivers who pick up or drop off passengers at SFO. From The Tech Chronicles at SFGate:
Eleven drivers have been arrested on suspicion of unlawful trespassing, a misdemeanor, since the airport began making citizen's arrests July 10, said airport spokesman Doug Yakel.The airport has long maintained that several ride-share services, including UberX, Lyft, Sidecar and InstantCab, do not have the authority to operate at SFO. (Limos and taxis hailed through the Uber app are still allowed, Yakel said, because the vehicles have the proper transportation permits with the state.)
SFO sent the companies cease-and-desist letters in April and have given drivers verbal warnings since. Yakel said the airport also told the companies that they would begin arresting drivers starting July 10.
Ten UberX drivers and one Lyft driver were arrested, Yakel said. A citizen's arrest is initiated by an airport employee, and the driver is cited and released for a misdemeanor and given notice to appear in court, though Yakel said to his knowledge none of the drivers have yet had a court date.
Police officers who patrol the terminals are "monitoring the curbside areas for signs of arranged ride for pay," Yakel said, though he wouldn't specify what officers look for. They alert airport employees, who make the citizen's arrest of the driver.
Okay, so we have adults consentingly engaging in an exchange of money for services but we're going to stop this?
This is not what government in America was supposed to be for.
via @declanm
I must have missed something. Do these businesses have licenses or not?
Should Uncle Fred be able to carry anyone to the airport for money - regardless of insurance or licensing?
Because - although I find it interesting how this is being prosecuted - that's all this is about.
Radwaste at July 31, 2013 3:25 AM
Meanwhile...
Radwaste at July 31, 2013 3:26 AM
I saw that on ABC, too, Raddy. Time for the TSA to be disbanded. Past time, actually.
Flynne at July 31, 2013 5:16 AM
Uh, what are "trackbacks?"
Fayd at July 31, 2013 7:47 AM
Radwaste - read this from the article:
"The companies are still allowed to operate in San Francisco."
If it was about safety they would/should shut down the entire ride-share company. But, they only seem to be going after the rideshare companies when they operate to/from the airport.
That makes it seem like the "regular" taxi and limo companies are pissed that someone else is cutting into their market share and are getting others to help them "eliminate" the competition.
Sorry, I'm just too cynical to see it any other way.
Charles at July 31, 2013 8:20 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2013/07/31/the_crime_of_gi.html#comment-3829367">comment from RadwasteAbout a quarter involved screening and security failures -- including sleeping on the job -- or neglect of duty offenses that resulted in losses or careless inspections.
From Raddy's "Meanwhile..." link.
Of course, I'm not worried, as I understand that the TSA is only pretend security. Security for show.
The waste of our tax dollars on that, combined with the yanking of our Fourth Amendment rights, is what irks me to the core.
Amy Alkon
at July 31, 2013 10:03 AM
I think every airport I have been to has some sign and/or announcement warning against using cabs outside the "official cab zone" or whatnot. They are NOT affiliated/endorsed/licensed with the airport. From some of these you'd think that there was a major kidnapping problem from people using a cab that had just dropped off somebody else. Really, what it is, is that the airports want money from the cabs, who need to pay to get access to the cab zone, where they are basically guaranteed a passenger.
Shannon M. Howell at July 31, 2013 10:48 AM
Cab drivers and peanut farmers are the classic examples of the ability of small groups with big payouts to get laws and regulations passed that restrict competition.
For peanuts import restrictions increase the price of peanut butter per family by about $3.00 a year. That translates to MILLIONS of dollars per peanut farmer in increased profits. For consumers, the $3.00 is not worth fighting because we'd spend more changing it than we lose by ignoring it.
For cabs at airports it raises the cost of cabs delivering or picking up at the airport by a few dollars per trip. Again it's not worth fighting over.
It's great to see cab drivers fighting the system.
Terr at July 31, 2013 12:28 PM
"Should Uncle Fred be able to carry anyone to the airport for money - regardless of insurance or licensing?"
Yes. Next question.
Jordan at July 31, 2013 8:39 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2013/07/31/the_crime_of_gi.html#comment-3830703">comment from Jordan"Should Uncle Fred be able to carry anyone to the airport for money - regardless of insurance or licensing?" Yes. Next question.
Absofuckinglutely.
He should have a driver's license -- as we all need to to be on public roads. And we're all required to have automobile insurance on public roads.
If you want to take GOVERNMENT REGULATED CAB™, feel free.
Amy Alkon
at July 31, 2013 8:42 PM
Leave a comment