# Another Uber shooting.



## Noentry

With a very low entry barrier on joining Uber and the gig economy generally, it’s not surprising Uber’s continues to create negative news from around the world.
The one thing worse than regulation, is no regulation.








Uber driver shoots pregnant woman and forces her to give birth prematurely


‘What made him jump out of the car and shoot her knowing she’s pregnant?’




www.independent.co.uk


----------



## elelegido

Noentry said:


> With a very low entry barrier on joining Uber and the gig economy generally, it’s not surprising Uber’s continues to create negative news from around the world.
> The one thing worse than regulation, is no regulation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uber driver shoots pregnant woman and forces her to give birth prematurely
> 
> 
> ‘What made him jump out of the car and shoot her knowing she’s pregnant?’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


It would be an error to zoom in on rideshare in particular in the context of gun violence in the USA and try to hold it up as a specific example of a failure of Uber or of regulation in general. 

The United States is plagued by gun violence that affects huge swathes of its society and, if regulation were the answer, then the Americans would simply have regulated themselves out of gun violence. But they have not.

No... shoot-'em-ups, hold ups and mass killings etc are a still as much a part of American culture now as they were in the early frontier/pioneer days of the Wild West. It's got little to do with regulation and all to do with a culture where life clearly is held my so many to simply have less value.


----------



## Noentry

elelegido said:


> It would be an error to zoom in on rideshare in particular in the context of gun violence in the USA and try to hold it up as a specific example of a failure of Uber or of regulation in general.
> 
> The United States is plagued by gun violence that affects huge swathes of its society and, if regulation were the answer, then the Americans would simply have regulated themselves out of gun violence. But they have not.
> 
> No... shoot-'em-ups, hold ups and mass killings etc are a still as much a part of American culture now as they were in the early frontier/pioneer days of the Wild West. It's got little to do with regulation and all to do with a culture where life clearly is held my so many to simply have less value.


Who mentioned gun regulation.

Global evidence dictates Uber Toxic culture from the men in high places to its drivers workforce.
London alone statistics show rape and assault gone through the roof and guess what company stands out alone, Uber.
I’m not talking gun crime as here in London it rarely exists.
If you are trying to deny the statistics on crime and the low entry barrier to become an Uber driver are not linked more fool you.
You have only to look at the London cabbies who are heavily regulated and then compare those crime statistics to those of UberUK drivers.
Sure culture has it’s irregular anomalies and that to shows in statistics.


----------



## elelegido

Noentry said:


> Who mentioned gun regulation.


It looks like you just did.

Have a re-read of my post; you'll see that I did not mention gun regulation, but regulation in general. The point I made, and which you missed, was that excessive regulation in general, including employment regulation, is not an effective means of preventing violence. Police officers in the USA, for example, are heavily regulated and must pass comprehensive regulatory pre-employment checks, but this does not prevent them from unlawfully killing members of the public by, say, kneeling on their necks. It is from these clear observations that I can state that your allusion that more regulation, in general, would solve such issues. I have no idea why you mentioned gun regulation above as this has nothing to do with the topic in question. Looks like you got a little sidetracked.


> Global evidence dictates Uber Toxic culture from the men in high places to its drivers workforce.


No, evidence informs, it does not dictate.


> London alone statistics show rape and assault gone through the roof and guess what company stands out alone, Uber.


You'd need to produce some statistics first if you would like to discuss them.


> I’m not talking gun crime as here in London it rarely exists.


And yet you post a thread using a gun crime article as your talking point. Interesting.

It might be better for you to post an article that _is_ illustrative of the point you are trying to make. Just a thought.


> If you are trying to deny the statistics on crime and the low entry barrier to become an Uber driver are not linked more fool you.


Again, you have not produced any statistics for me to either accept or reject. It might be a good idea for you to go and find some statistics, bring them back here and then we can discuss them. But calling someone a fool because you say if they don't agree with some unidentified claimed numbers is silly.


> You have only to look at the London cabbies who are heavily regulated and then compare those crime statistics to those of UberUK drivers.


Again, you would need to provide here the statistics you are referring to. No meaningful discussion of them can be had unless you post some.


----------



## Noentry

elelegido said:


> It looks like you just did.
> 
> Have a re-read of my post; you'll see that I did not mention gun regulation, but regulation in general. The point I made, and which you missed, was that excessive regulation in general, including employment regulation, is not an effective means of preventing violence. Police officers in the USA, for example, are heavily regulated and must pass comprehensive regulatory pre-employment checks, but this does not prevent them from unlawfully killing members of the public by, say, kneeling on their necks. It is from these clear observations that I can state that your allusion that more regulation, in general, would solve such issues. I have no idea why you mentioned gun regulation above as this has nothing to do with the topic in question. Looks like you got a little sidetracked.
> No, evidence informs, it does not dictate.
> You'd need to produce some statistics first if you would like to discuss them.
> And yet you post a thread using a gun crime article as your talking point. Interesting.
> 
> It might be better for you to post an article that _is_ illustrative of the point you are trying to make. Just a thought.
> Again, you have not produced any statistics for me to either accept or reject. It might be a good idea for you to go and find some statistics, bring them back here and then we can discuss them. But calling someone a fool because you say if they don't agree with some unidentified claimed numbers is silly.
> Again, you would need to provide here the statistics you are referring to. No meaningful discussion of them can be had unless you post some.


Quality over quantity.
When one talks about regulation it’s not just about throwing rules randomly it has to be focused properly in the right direction.
American police may have a standard of regulation that is not up to scratch unlike that of certain countries.

If a London Taxi driver spends around four years of intense studies to become the world best Taxis drivers with the safest record from around the major cities. His skill and his character have been challenged by an examiner over 20 separate appearances spread over those four or more years.

An Uber driver can work in London within two weeks of a basic topography of London.

These statistics attached have dramatically increased since the arrival of ride sharing and I can send you similar statistics for the past 12 years or more and they will show you the current trend.









81% increase of sexual offences by drivers of private-hire vehicles in London







morningstaronline.co.uk


----------



## elelegido

Noentry said:


> If a London Taxi driver spends around four years of intense studies to become the world best Taxis drivers with the safest record from around the major cities. His skill and his character have been challenged by an examiner over 20 separate appearances spread over those four or more years.


No, a driving examiner assesses the standard of one's driving and driving-related matters such as navigation. It is obviously possible for an applicant to be both a very skilled driver / navigator as well as being a sexual predator, for example. The two are not mutually exclusive. The job description of a TFL examiner does not include the detection of sexual predators or violent criminals.


> An Uber driver can work in London within two weeks of a basic topography of London.


I agree that an Uber driver with only basic knowledge of London is likely to not know the city as well as a black cab driver. However, not being sure how to get from Aldgate to King's Cross does not make a driver a sexual or violent criminal. It simply means that the drive there will likely take a little longer.


> These statistics attached have dramatically increased since the arrival of ride sharing and I can send you similar statistics for the past 12 years or more and they will show you the current trend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 81% increase of sexual offences by drivers of private-hire vehicles in London
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> morningstaronline.co.uk


It's hard to try to piece together the exact argument you are tying to make, given all the sidetracks you include such as your reference to an American gun assault as well as drivers' geographical knowledge, but a basic framework of what I _think_ you are trying to say is:

Uber drivers commit more crime against passengers than black cab drivers
Uber drivers are less regulated than black cab drivers
Uber drivers' alleged increased criminality over black cab drivers is due to allegedly lower regulation of Uber drivers.

If this is indeed what you are trying to say, then your first step would be to demonstrate that Uber drivers commit more crime against passengers than black cab drivers. However, the article you posted above simply states that 294 "offences by drivers of private-hire vehicles in London were recorded by police in 2018". The article makes no mention of how many of these offences were committed by Uber drivers. In fact, the article makes no mention of Uber whatsoever. We have no idea whether 293 of the offences were committed by local minicab office drivers, and 1 by an Uber driver. So, this article does nothing to make your case against Uber. Additionally, the report makes no mention of the number of offences committed by black cab drivers, therefore we can't possible know which group commits more crime.

If you are able to find evidence that Uber drivers commit more criminal acts than black cabbies then feel free to post it. As mentioned above, this would be your first step. Then you would need to state how Uber drivers are less regulated than black cab drivers. Then, if you manage these first two points, you would need to prove that the alleged increased criminality of Uber drivers was due to regulation and nothing else. So you've got your work cut out for you!

At the moment, all you have is personal opinion, which is fine, but it is not convincing.


----------

