As long as nobody checks the pockets, bags and briefcases, the ban is toothless and cosmetic.
Not sure how a company with no drivers in their employ, and who just act as an introduction service between people, can make workplace or customer rules.
^^^ In that case, if I found that, I’d be like, “I’m not even mad. That’s amazing.”
An Uber driver with a carry permit saves a bunch of people from a gunman who is shooting at people in the street. Uber’s response is to ban their drivers from carrying firearms so that such acts of heroism can never happen again. Good job. Well at least no one will have to be “uncomfortable” ever again.
OTOH - Uber driver with carry permit shoots up school can’t happen?
I’m not altogether sure how that works with licensed concealed carry guns. From what I remember when Texas minted their concealed carry law (in the 90s), Metro (local buses) and a couple cab companies tried to invoke the 30.06 exemption. Basically, that’s the law that lets a place of business forbid licensed concealed carry - provided there is a clearly placed and specifically worded notice on the door (there are even specifications for text height and color- a picture of a gun with a “no” symbol over it doesn’t cut it). Long story short, the courts ruled that a bus isn’t private property or a “place of business” for these purposes, so couldn’t claim the exemption. Further, they couldn’t try to use other methods (company policies, etc.) to prevent legal carry anyway.
As an aside, parking lots/garages aren’t covered even if the business itself forbids concealed carry. Schools (K-12) have their own specific laws- no guns even in the parking lot. Maybe all Uber routes should therefore cut through the nearest school parking lot? “Hey, we’re cutting through Spring Branch Elementary on the way, man. You legal?”
Of course, they can do whatever they want with their employees (or whatever they call them- contractors, etc.). They can have an employee policy that forbids even licensed guns carried by employees (my office does, too). But I don’t think they can make it a term of use for the customers, at least given the precedent above.
Oh, oh, I know! They should start selling cheap beer out of the trunk! Then they can claim the 51% exemption (no concealed carry if the business makes 51% or more of income from booze sales). That’d solve everything!
Patting down the fares will be part of the driver’s job, next…
Once the cars become driverless, Uber’s “security associate” will ride shotgun with you, so you feel safe, and have someone to chat with during the ride…
I’m skeptical that this ban will have any meaningful effect but this idea that having lots of good guys with guns around is the best way to prevent mass shootings has yet to pan out in real life.
Many of the worst mass shootings in living memory took place in locales where there were armed police and/or security on hand, including Columbine High School. The only place I can think of which saw two mass shootings in the span of five years is Fort Hood, which is a freakin’ military base where almost everyone was trained in the use of firearms.
Keep living out those fantasies in your head, be sure to see lots of movies, that will help train you.
If you hope, hope against hope and always stay ready maybe the fantasy gods will bless you and send someone to kill strangers in your immediate vicinity.
…so that Uber cannot be held financially liable for their employees vigilantism.
Come on dude. Carrying a gun is not some act of nobility that has been outlawed.
One of my big takeaways from that horrible ordeal was “thank goodness the Tsarnaev brothers decided to go with homemade pressure-cooker bombs instead of handguns or semi-automatic rifles.” Very few well-planned mass shootings end with just two fatalities.
Thank God greater Boston was locked inside their houses under penalty of arrest!!
And just think of the glut of Uber drivers that would have been on the roads ‘looking for a fare’ !
Not exactly a fantasy, this case…
Everyone saw that, but that is a terrible link for it. There’s no evidence that the hooligan intended a mass shooting, the reason that your link says that without qualifiers is because it’s a paid placement piece by the Cato Institute, not a Business Insider article.
My point was that such “evidence” is often harped by people salivating in just the manner I suggest, and the fact that the Cato Institute finds it worthy of paid fake editorial placement suggest I’m right.
Live up the fantasies (not you @shaddack) , because it’s gonna be just like the movies when we go full bore Old West up in here.
Uber did the right thing, if only for liability issues it remains the right thing. I don’t want service personnel packing, service jobs suck, I know, and I’d rather the far-more-common aggrieved worker shooter had to go home and get their firearm first.
it could have been him nobly putting the vermin down, was the fantasy alluded to. not the abberation from reality where an armed civillian helped anyone.
sure it happens. not usually.
I don’t know how you missed it, but it’s been pointed out here and in many other forums where that point has been raised that military bases have very tight controls on firearms, far more so than most civilian establishments. Just because bases are full of soldiers doesn’t mean they’re all walking around armed to the teeth.
Not all, but certainly many were. MPs and base guards for sure.