How’s That Gun Ban Working Out Uber?

Last week Uber decided to add itself to the list of anti-gun companies I won’t do business with. It didn’t take long for one of their drivers to get robbed at gunpoint. I guess the robber hadn’t heard that Uber made a new policy. Surely he’ll be disappointed he’ll be removed from Uber’s network. No stars for you! Then an Uber drive shot someone who was allegedly trying to choke him. I can’t blame him. My car, my life, I’ll take my chances. What’s worse? Ending up dead or ending up kicked off Uber? Uber’s new policy will be widely ignored, and it should be, because the criminals will be the first to ignore it.

11 Responses to “How’s That Gun Ban Working Out Uber?”

  1. Ian Argent says:

    Blame the insurance companies and the default expectation that Uber will be held responsible for a driver shooting someone.
    One thing I’d like to see pushed at both state and federal level is legislation explicitly immunizing employers and property owners for the use of firearms by empress and patrons (unless they post. If they post, then they ought to be legally liable for the life and well being of their employees and customers.) A protection of lawful carry act, as it were.

  2. RAH says:

    If I was allowed in my state then it would be ” My car , My rules.” Uber has no authority to say what I have in my car or not”

    • Archer says:

      Bingo. Especially since you wouldn’t be an “employee” of Uber; you’d be a “contractor” — Uber doesn’t have to give you medical coverage or benefits that way. They also don’t own your car — you do.

      In short, Uber has no right or authority to tell you that you can’t carry in your own car. They have no way to detect it (other than you having to use it), and other than cancelling your “contract”, they have no way to enforce the policy.

      • Ian Argent says:

        Well, it’s in the terms of service. If you possess a firearm while using their service (as a driver or as a rider), you’re in violation of the TOS; and thus Uber has a figleaf to hide behind when the plaintiff’s bar comes after them.

        Basically, they’re “posting” their app; you want to use the app, you may not possess a firearm while using their service. The app isn’t the parking lot, it’s the store.

  3. AaronW says:

    The Queens robbery should be blamed on NYC’s ridiculous and arbitrary pistol licensing scheme, not on Uber’s policy.

  4. Jay Hafemeister says:

    I wonder how the employee “parking lot” laws would effect this.

    • Ian Argent says:

      Can’t imagine it would, really. Uber’s drivers are independent contractors, and the passengers aren’t even that. All Uber is doing is revoking access to their “marketplace” to drivers and passengers who are reported to possess firearms.

      It’s a stupid, generally unenforceable, policy that can only come into effect if there’s a news report. Like the incident in Chicago a couple months bak. Like I said above, I would bet a cheap lunch that the incident came to the ears of Uber’s own insurers, who dropped by Uber and said “we’re going to charge you unimaginable premiums if you don’t change your policy to forbid firearms; because otherwise you’re looking at a massive civil suit if one of your contractors or clients shoots the wrong person.”

      Same reason chain pizza stores have these policies – they have the deep pockets, so they get the lawsuits. Which is why we need to change the presumption of liability for employers and property owners

  5. Braden Lynch says:

    Ignore and do not comply. Silly policies deserve no respect.

    Would you rather be “banned” from UBER or ambient temperature?

    • Ian Argent says:

      There ahd ought o be no way of knowing unless things go south. Which is why pizza delivery guys carry despite their employer’s policy

  6. Jake says:

    It’s a private business, they get to make the rules. If I had ever used them, I’d stop.

    As it is, though, governments are already killing off ride-sharing services as fast as they can (usually at the behest of cab companies). Virginia’s new law went into effect today, requiring an additional $1 million of liability coverage from the moment a driver accepts a trip request until the passenger leaves the vehicle, and liability insurance for drivers who are logged on to the companies’ software but not providing services, plus drivers have to register their participation with the DMV.

    Somehow, I doubt most drivers make enough for it to be worth the expense and hassle.


  1. SayUncle » Uber gun ban working as expected - […] One of their drivers was robbed at gun point […]