Lyft President Says Patchwork Regulations Are Bad for Business
"The dangerous thing is to have a patchwork set of regulations," says John Zimmer, co-founder and president of the ridesharing app Lyft. "It can make it really difficult for a company to operate."
After starting the popular peer-to-peer transportation company in 2012, Lyft is now valued at $700 million dollars and present in over 60 cities across the U.S. Zimmer states that having services like Lyft is essential to city growth as it provides residents with affordable transportation and jobs.
Lyft's popularity and success has made it a target for state regulators who are struggling to deal with the new sharing economy. Right after launch, the California Public Utilities Commission served Lyft—along with Uber and Sidecar—cease and desist letters and fined the company $20,000 over safety concerns. Though the company worked an agreement out with the state, it still faces similar opposition in others cities where they are disrupting entrenched businesses like taxi companies.
"What we've realized is that there are many agencies at a state and local level and there are many interests and existing industries," says Zimmer, who sat down with Reason TV at the Atlantic CityLab conference in Los Angeles. "So often when we work really hard to solve a problem with the state agency, then the legislature comes out with something that's being supported by trial lawyers or insurance companies or city attorneys have separate issues that they're concerned about. It's really challenging."
Though Zimmer states that the overlap of government agencies is a major problem in navigating regulatory hurdles, his solution is to create another agency that will encompass innovation and streamline the process similar to the Office of Civic Innovation established by San Francisco mayor Edwin Lee in 2012.
But Zimmer adds: "I haven't seen yet a model within that innovation group where they start looking at regulations and they think forward five years, 10 years to think through 'how can we maintain the things that are important to us, but still allow for this type of innovation?'"
Produced by Alexis Garcia. Shot by Paul Detrick. Music by Podington Bear.
Scroll down for downloadable versions of this video, and subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel for daily content like this.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A paid driver will kill you just as soon as look at you, left unregulated. That's what's bad for business, and the bureaucracy protects owners from that. Why don't they see that?
Residents create the weather, then cry when it's raining:
Let's pretend, for a moment, that I found myself living in my own personal Libertopia. Let's pretend that 98% of everything I believed in and wanted won at that ballot box. No minimum wages, minimal regulations and licensing to start a business, extremely relaxed zoning laws, public health department mission is to control disease etc. Now imagine at the end of this road, I found myself living in a third world shithole, or there was seriously high crime or life expectancy was dropping through the floor, maybe a combination of all three. I might be tempted to sort of... step back and assess the things I believed in. You know, do some soul searching.
You got your $15 minimum wage, high regulation, progressive fantasy land, Seattle Times journalists... now choke on it.
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/.....-and-poor/
And of course, the people who complain about the "income gap" are usually the people who not only want more welfare to "help" the poor (and keep them poor), but also want to import millions of poor Third Worlders.
Is it physically painful for you to go more than two posts without bleating about immigration? Because your monomania is impressive. Tell us about Ebola and immigrants now!
It's on-topic, dude. It's not like I'm trying to hijack a thread.
But now that you've mentioned Ebola, here's a funny and prescient 2001 Holiday Inn commercial with Ebola.
It's brutal, Paul. We have to go to West Seattle just to find a happy hour that isn't minimum $60 (at least) for two people.
More seriously, I don't think their $15 minimum wage, high regulation, or progressive fantasy land gave us this boom we're experiencing. We're having it in spite of those moronic things, in fact the boom probably allowed those moronic things to happen because all moronic progressive ideas require prosperity to piggyback off of and sponge from.
I'm also curious to see what will happen to real estate prices when all the construction happening right now finishes and there are a ton more places on the market. I have a feeling that a lot of latecomers to the party are lagging right now.
I don't think their $15 minimum wage, high regulation, or progressive fantasy land gave us this boom we're experiencing. We're having it in spite of those moronic things
Exactly. This is at the core of the leftist world view. They think that (e.g.) because wealthy Scandinavian countries have welfare states, that it's the welfare state that made them wealthy. If our food is pretty healthy and we have an FDA, it must be because of the FDA. There are endless examples of that sort of thinking.
Social engineers see money in places and want it for their agenda.
Simple as that.
But it's more than that. They believe their agenda creates wealth.
Booooooop. Paul's not here right now cause he made that comment 11 days ago. Please leave a message and he'll get back to you in a couple weeks.
And please support your lazy weekend interns. Have a nice day.
Oops. I shouldn't have let your mom distract me from the date stamps.
Well, she's good at that, so I'll cut you some slack.
I'm here. I'm here. And that comment is now 11 days MORE relevant. Not only do we have a $15 minimum wage, we now have Indigenous Peoples Day.
Hey Epi, what do you think of the new Borderlands? I have to say I'm a little disappointed so far. I'm only a few hours in, so hopefully things pick up a bit. I'll venture a guess that you're not running a claptrap character.
I'm running Nisha. Her action skill Showdown is fucking cool; you automatically lock on to any enemies nearby and just start pulling the trigger. It reminds me of the gun kata from Equilibrium. I have a Ghostbusters laser and a PEW-PEW laser at this point and I fucking love the PEW-PEW laser. Going into Showdown mode with it is fucking retarded, I just mow fuckers down.
I'm not a fan of the low gravity because 1) it seems to inspire them to make jumping puzzles which I hate, and 2) it seems to take away from run-and-gun a bit because of the loping, bounding nature of the movement. But it's at least different. As for the O2 situation, I'm not a big fan of the fact that it time limits you, but it hasn't proven to be a big issue so far and if the Oz units keep getting larger capacity as levels increase, it will probably almost completely cease to be an issue.
Overall it's Borderlands with a few new bits, so I'm going to like it. Is it remarkably better than B2? No, just a bit different. But I've also only gotten to level 8 or 9 so far so there is a lot more to see and find.
Holy fucking shit, you guys are gamers?
Yay! I'm not alone!
They hate women and love porn. Of course they're gamers!
-SJW
He said that most of the outdated regulations were about safety.
BZZZZT! Thanks for playing.
Hmm, @ 3:40 he seems to suggest that the government needs to create "an agency" that looks at 'innovation'. I can't think of anything more horrifying than to create a ministry of innovation that will pick winners and losers based on some set of criteria on a bureaucrat's clipboard.
Seems to me they'd probably just ADD to the innovations.
Spy Camera - Check
Listening Device - Check
GPS Tracker - Check
You may now patent your idea, citizen.
Though Zimmer states that the overlap of government agencies is a major problem in navigating regulatory hurdles, his solution is to create another agency that will encompass innovation and streamline the process
Just one more department of idiots with guns making up rules to run peoples lives and everything will work perfect.
See also.
Would that be a...
Uber-Agency?
You know if it was actually an agency that went around shooting the other ones and blowing up their regulatory hurdles the idea might have some merit.
Of course it wouldn't be anything like that.
Patchwork Regulations Are Bad for Business
But good for politicians, bureaucrats, cronies.
Like the taxi drivers/buggy whip makers.
And lawyers.
So he wants to use the massive power of government to harmonize laws across a wide are in order to make his business easier, even if its at the expense of areas which have little regulation? Never trust a car with a mustache.
Am I the only person who sees that and thinks "Mustache Ride"?
One track mind.
Fortunately it's the main track.
I don't see anything "dangerous" about it. It may be inconvenient for Lyft, but being inconvenient for Lyft isn't a "dangerous" thing.
I think ride sharing services like Lyft should be legal everywhere; they are a good thing. However, that doesn't mean that using federal power to force cities and states to "harmonize" laws is a good thing.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....enge-uber/
So we need a Federal Limousine Board? No thanks.
I watched the episode. Using a pair of retards in Nathan and Timmy as the antagonist and protagonist was hilarious. Moreover and equally funny was Mimsy getting slapped out for saying sensible things about the free market because it challenged Nathan's and the taxi union's evil designs.
I assume the whole thing was primarily a platform for their poop joke obsession.
I think you might be dismissing this show too quickly because of the scatology. Their incisive satire can be incredible, as it was in this episode -- and I don't think there was a fart or poo joke in the whole thing, BTW.
The South Park guys are the most hilarious of all libertarians, which is saying something; for example, I think the vast majority of commenters on this site are hysterical, with senses of humor unseen on other political boards.
You missed the woman who powered her handicar with farts.
Though the company worked an agreement out with paid tribute to the state..
Speaking of Ebola, has anyone noticed how perfectly, amazingly self-sabotaging the Democrats have been on this? After years of the War on Women and how evil Republicans don't care about minorities and union members and so on, we have Ebola. First we have the fact that women are more worried about Ebola than men, but the crowning irony is the first two infections in the US are single, 20-something nurses, both female ethnic minorities! Talk about "likely Obama voters"! Aren't most nurses union members as well?
Can you imagine the shitstorm from the left if we had a GOP President right now?
So Obama's refusal to consider travel restrictions and overall incompetence on this is hitting at the core of his support. The party that worships government is visibly failing at core tasks, with deadly results hitting individuals in their core demographic. In the weeks before an election, he isn't just shooting himself in the foot, he's cutting off his own leg with a chainsaw.
Needs more Gohmert talking points.
Adding your typically helpful insight again, I see.
It's just noting your (by coincidence I'm sure) parroting the same Gohmert line that even Fox and Friends seemed a bit incredulous about
I know who Gohmert and Fox and Friends are, but I haven't heard them talk about this, so I have no idea what "line" I am supposedly "parroting." Did he point out what I did, that the American Ebola victims are smack dab in the center of an important Obama-supporting demographic? That's just an observation about the politics of this. I hadn't seen it elsewhere, but I'm not surprised that other people have noticed.
If this is true, the President is insane and Congress has no choice but to impeach him
Obama planning to bring victims to the U.S. for treatment.
http://m.washingtonexaminer.co.....le/2554956
Just after the election, I presume. How many unionized, Obama-voting health care workers will die so that he can establish a "legacy"? But of course Obama" and "Ebola" are going to be linked from now on. I hope he enjoys that legacy.
Only about 15% are unionized.
http://capitalresearch.org/201.....-the-sick/
Judicial Watch?
John, is there any source on the right you'd consider not credible?
Limbaugh?
Bo, do you know what the ad hominem fallacy is?
Do you think that fallacy vitiates all issues about credibility?
No, but Judicial Watch isn't the Alex Jones Show.
It's not an ad hominem when the hominem in question doesn't have any evidence.
I'll admit "sources say" is weak, but I don't recall JW often making claims that are later disproven. Maybe they have, but my impression is that they are partisan but respectable.
But let's see what happens. I would not put it past Obama to want to do that.
Except it's impossible to disprove this claim. If it doesn't happen they can just say Obama changed his mind.
Rush (King of the Rednecks) has spoken!
I'm no Rush fan, but I think it would be hilarious (and an absolute certainty) to see the King of the Rednecks thoroughly destroy you in a debate. I really don't think it would last long, despite your self-perceived genius.
But not if they belong to the 101st or the National Guard deployed to the hot zone.
Phil Collins is the only cab driver anyone ever needs. He doesn't retaliate when not paid for his services and can be used as a human shield in a pinch.
84-Year-Old Man Surprises 'America's Got Talent' Judges with Naughty Original Song
Old school humor.
Remember party records?
GLAAD complained about the mocking of trans women in the song, motivating NBC to remove some videos of Ray's audition from the Internet.
The whole trans rights thing is really getting bizarre. Lots of hardcore feminists are pissed that the new PC rule seems to be that anyone can call simply themselves a woman. E.g.: Transgender Censorship of Feminism: A Day In The Life.
There's also a raging war of words going on between gays and bisexuals. The bisexuals are upset that gays aren't taking them seriously, and gays are upset that bisexuals are diluting the gay rights agenda or something.
Apparently, it's really really mean to call a bisexual a "tourist."
-jcr
Ooooh, burn!
When the Revolution eats its own....
The bull dyke running Houston is about to get hers -- in the form of a splintery pine dildo covered in Tiger Balm.
Odd that the new post's comment link goes to the comments on an older, different post.
I watched the South Park episode. It was aggressively unfunny. Of course I agreed with the points they were making, but it was like a political/economic blog post in cartoon form. Great job explaining, terrible job entertaining. I think I laughed maybe once.
It wasn't as good as the Gluten-Free Ebola episode.
well,that's hard to beat,although the smug show was great
Wen I saw Timmy pulling the cart I almost spit out my beer.I thought it was a hoot.
the only funny part was mathew mchona whatever.
Oh c'mon - the subtle dig at subsidizing disability welfare claims (everyone has a Handi-Cap - now that its lucrative)?
The way it ends 'He doesn't want to go to summer camp but I'm not going to allow him to fuck up our trip to Paris'?
The way it ends 'He doesn't want to go to summer camp but I'm not going to allow him to fuck up our trip to Paris'?
That was the thing I laughed at. It was like the whole show was a 20 minute deadpan misdirection setup for one punchline at the end of the show. I admired that much about it.
Uber is nice but I am not seeing why it deserves the coverage Reason gives it.
The coverage is fine. It's the perfect small business vs. government red tape story. It's the sort of thing Postrel was big on. And at least it's not yet another puppycide story.
Well if you have a million dollars for a cab medallion you wouldn't
Did you see my comment from yesterday's PM links, John?
Its a good story on how businesses love them some regulation - as long as they can twist those regs to benefit themselves.
You see how this guy is all for harmonizing regs because the 'patchwork' is making things difficult for him. Not *reducing* regs, just making sure they are equally beneficial to his business model all over the country.
God bless Murika! And the great state of Montana!
I assumed Tester lost his fingers in a firearm accident, but it turns out it was a meat grinder.
I see Massachusetts, Illinois, Maryland, California, Conn., NJ and NY are all well tamed.
Uh yeah, because if Montana had the same FFL rate per 10k people as PA, they'd be 100 miles apart. What a silly statistic.
Huh?
*scratches head*
I think density has a lot to do with it much of the time. For instance, in Maine, I don't want to have to drive to the flagship LL Bean store in Freeport to buy a gun, especially if I live in Northern Maine. That's hours and hours of driving. So there are going to be more FFLs scattered around the state just because of that. In Connecticut, though, I can drive to the massive Cabela's in East Hartford in about 45 minutes from just about anywhere in the state. There are still gun dealers scattered all around, but there's less need for it in terms of travel time. You'll note that many of the high FFL states are low-density, very large states.
I'll buy that.
Low population density corresponds to all goodness in the world. 😉
This. I was raised in Have, MT. Now I live in NYC. Can't wait to return.
Uh, make that Havre goddamit
Sorry to hear about the NYC thing. I feel your pain.
That was exactly the point I was making, asshole.
Ah! The FFLs would be a hundred miles apart, not MT and PA (metaphorically?). Epi was much more clear. C- for composition.
And I'm sure you're a nice person despite the unprovoked ad hom. Have a nice day.
my friend's mother makes $69 /hour on the laptop . She has been laid off for nine months but last month her paycheck was $21013 just working on the laptop for a few hours. look at here now.............
http://www.Works6.com
Ah...the 76 hour work week. Keep that old bitch clickin!
Fantastic NYT article attempts to explain how capitalist enterprise can actually help people
"Ordinary people, especially vulnerable people without power and privilege, find Airbnb empowering and useful. It lifts Americans up with zero cost to the taxpayer. And people like it. Shouldn't we encourage this?
Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story
Instead, state and local governments have met the service with antagonism, seeking to limit Airbnb's operations or shut it down. Just this week, the attorney general of New York issued a new report insisting that a majority of Airbnb's operations in New York City are illegal, and says it is planning a major regulatory crackdown. Uber, Lyft and similar services that enliven dead capital have met with similar treatment from government officials.
Nobody wants zero regulation, and every company should follow the law. But policy should begin with admiration for new ways that citizens can build their lives, not with hostility to profits or the impulse to protect entrenched industries. Governments have their own golden opportunity to exercise creativity in service of the common good, whether that entails rethinking anachronistic zoning laws or adjusting tax policies that treat someone's spare bedroom the same as a Marriott suite."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10.....inion&_r=0
Evidence comes out that Michael Brown attacked Wilson and wrestled him for his gun in the cruiser, so Reason runs an article on an episode of South Park. This site is a complete joke.
So, when you suck off the pigs, do you get a boner as soon as you get on your knees, or do you have to work the shaft for a little while first? Inquiring minds want to know.
Maybe going forward criminals and cops can have a wrestling match for a gun. Like hang the gun on a cable above a ring, and thrown in a bunch of tables, ladders, and chairs laying around. PPV. I'd watch.
Hey, you evolved from typing in all caps and exclamation points to just being a complete and total retard. Good job!
I think one fact is indisputable. Both men would still be alive had the pig not been armed. (And many dogs.)
Disarm the pigs!
Oh, I don't know. It's quite possible for a 6' 4" 292 lb. young man to kill someone without a gun.
292lbs? Even at 6ft 4in that's a lot of fat.
At 76" the military would consider him at risk for being overweight at 221lb - even tacking on 20lbs of extra muscle he'd be packing another 50lbs of fat.
Also - why does this dude's height and weight keep increasing everytime its brought up.
Pretty soon people will be talking about the dangers posed by his big blue ox.
"He looked bigger when I couldn't see him."
What "increasing" are you talking about? I heard 292 and 6' 4" early on, and that seems well established.
This guy started off at 6'1" and in the low 220's - now he's the fething Jolley Green Giant.
I've never heard anything but 6'4" and about 290 lbs.
Come on, it's Saturday and Reason isn't a 24-hour breaking news channel.
It is notable that the word on this was leaked on a Friday, the traditional day to drop bad news. I think the administration has found themselves in yet another hole of their own making: after supporting the Ferguson protestors, they now discover it was likely a good shoot, so they have to try to cool everyone off slowly, to avoid riots. Not that that will likely work, of course.
I wonder if this has anything to do with Holder leaving? Maybe saner minds are making decisions.
hey now discover it was likely a good shoot,
Brown was not attacking the cop when the cop shot him. That fact is absolutely not in dispute. The cop is just trying to throw in red herrings.
That is in dispute. From what I've read, a likely scenario is: Brown attacks Wilson in the car, two shots are fired, one of which wounds Brown in the hand. Brown takes off, Wilson gets out of the car and pursues. Brown stops, turns, and then charges Wilson. That scenario does not conflict with any of the established evidence AFAIK.
Now, it's possible that Brown simply stopped, turned and taunted Wilson, and Wilson shot him. But one witness reported a charge, and it's hard for me to imagine Wilson just emptying his gun at that point, for no good reason, with a shot pattern like that. It's possible, but the "not attacking Wilson" thing is certainly in dispute.
Tell me, what happens to a civilian who puts 5 rounds (one entering the TOP of the head) into an unarmed person from a distance, who he had already shot? "Charging" or otherwise.
It depends on the distance, and it depends on what happened immediately prior. If it was self-defense, the civilian would get off (I hope).
No, you're not allowed to assume it was self-defense.
I'm asking with the evidence we have now about this (eyewitnesses and autopsies), what would happen to a civilian.
No, you're not allowed to assume it was self-defense.
Why not? Is this not the USA any more? Wilson is innocent until proven guilty. In any case I am not "assuming" self-defense, I'm saying the evidence and common sense is causing me to lean that way.
Because the civillain doesn't have a badge to hide behind.
Does that scenario match up to that audio that captured the gunshots? The audio has like 5 shots going off in rapid succession at first, then 2-3 seconds, then 3 or 4 more shots. Did Wilson shoot 5 times in the car?
I don't know about the audio. The recent news seems to say that only two shots happened in the car.
Irrelevant. What Brown was doing in the cruiser doesn't justify the shooting which happened outside the cruiser with his hands up.
The autopsies determined that Brown was shot from the front, on the top side of his arm. That means he was facing forward, arms down.
Link?
Everything I've seen says he was shot 6 times in the head and chest, nothing about arms. He was shot from the front, that's not disputed.
Here's one of many. You never saw the autopsy diagram that shows the arm wounds?
No I hadn't. Those arm wounds appear to be on the front of the arm though, consistent with having the hands up.
No, look at the bullet entry at the top of the right arm, about nipple level. If his hands were up and he was facing Wilson, that would not be there.
Huh? That's the palm side of the arm. It would be facing forward if he had his hands up with palms forward.
Well, we can't say "palm side" when referring to an upper arm, because hands can rotate. But look at the front and back diagrams: that bullet went into the front of his arm. If his hands had been up, the shot would have had to come from the back, which the autopsy determined was not the case.
I don't know what to say, you're just wrong. The same part of the arm that naturally faces forward with hands down and palms forward is going to face forward with them up and palms forward.
Well, I am talking about a complete, straight-arm, elbows-up, "hands up" position. In that position, that upper arm wound is not possible.
However, if you are talking about what might be called an elbows-down, hands-up position, which I hadn't thought of... maybe you're right. I think the only way to know is with those dowels they stick into bullet wounds to determine the path of the bullets. And, of course, a lot depends on how close they were when the last group of shots happened. If they were 50 feet away, yeah, that doesn't look good for Wilson.
From your link:
He was wearing short sleeves. There was no gunpowder residue on the arms.
Depends on the order of the shots doesn't it?
Couple of torso shots and then, as he's collapsing, arms drop and top of head is exposed.
People aren't bulls - we don't put our heads down low when rushing someone.
People often put their heads down when rushing. In this case, I think the head shot was simply the last shot, that Wilson kept firing as Brown was dropping.
I have never seen someone outside of the front line of a football team put their heads down so law that the top of the head of a 6'3" dude was in LOS of a sub-6' shooter.
Now - I'm not saying that Brown *didn't* rush Wilson (well, at least not using *this* as evidence). I'm saying that a hit on the top of the head is not good evidence that he did (or evidence that he didn't).
Its far more likely (in my 'not a forensic examiner' opinion) that the shot to the top of the head came at the end as Brown was collapsing.
The same can be said for the shots to the front of the arm. Could mean that he was shot from behind, could mean he was shot as charging, could mean he was shot from the front with hands up and got those wounds as he dropped his arms.
In that case, the officer should have just gotten out of the way so Brown (who could not see where he was going) would have just run into the police car.
Would have ended like that story form yesterday where the fugitive ran his car into the MRAP the local police had stopped using because its cost was far greater than its utility.
Brown charges, Wilson moves, BONK! Fuck, why couldn't we have the 'COPS' filmcrew here?!
Instead of stupidly tragic, it'd have been a candidate for "America's Stupidest Criminals".
And of course the "evidence" is that the cop says so.
If a "civilian" had done something like this, he'd be in a cage, no federal investigation necessary.
Actually, the evidence is a forensic analysis of the police cruiser and the officer's shirt, both of which have Wilson's blood on them from the initial gunshot to Brown's arm inside the cruiser.
that should be Brown's blood*
Which proves nothing about whether the officer was attacked. And even if he was, that has nothing to do with the shots fired when they were outside the cruiser.
Really? Brown climbed in the window of the cruiser to get Wilson's gun - strapped to the *right* side of his body?
Sure.
Do we know he was carrying in that fashion? Inside a vehicle it's common for a right handed person to have the holster on the left, to avoid getting tangled in the seat belt and center console.
Its not common for *police*, who carry their sidearm on the belt while on duty to switch sides everytime they get in and out of the car.
And I;ve never seen a cop who wears cross-draw - really never seen anyone outside of movies wear cross-draw. Its really only good if your wearing a heavy coat.
There *may* have been a place for the gun on the center console - but that still requires the guy to shove his head and upper torso into the window, past the officer, to get at the weapon.
Yes, it would have been stupid for Brown to do that, but as I wrote above, we know he did lots of stupid things. It's easier for me to believe that Brown reached into the car than that Wilson tried to pull him in through the window. What policeman (or anyone) ever does that?
Er, I always wear crossdraw when driving.
Do you always switch back when you get in and out?
How does it work for you, do you wear *two* holsters? Switch holsters on your belt? Or do you put the gun in a door holster?
Me? I take the gun out and put it in the center console - and I'm left-handed.
Sometimes I don't bother switching if I'm just getting out for a short time and then getting back in. Which is probably not good b/c my practice is all drawing from strong side.
but otherwise I do switch (or put it in the trunk if I'm at work, arrggh).
A horde of stinking, rotting, ebola-spurting zombies swarming over the landscape and turning everything they touch to shit is a bad thing? ...Even when their intentions are only to steal everything you have?
No, I don't believe it.
I'd like it if Libertarians got over the kindergarten-level observations that omnipresent theft and destruction of freedom are "bad," or "harmful to life," and began seriously considering FIGHTING BACK.
Very true. It's happened in San Francisco, too.
The witnesses heard shots fired while he had his back turned. That doesn't necessarily mean he was hit by them.
Where's the toxicology report on the officer?
Last I heard, the guy *might* have been high on marijuana - you're not one of those 'all drugs are equal and make you do crazy things' people are you?
'Cause MJ doesn't make you aggressive.
Because the police are the people and the people are the police; police are just "civilians" with extra duties, no extra privileges. At least that's how police were supposed to operate in the original Pealeian conception.
Its a bad thing when the cop didn't know the guy was a criminal when he initiated the encounter - jaywalking isn't actually a crime.
Get back under the bridge.
Sure I can.
I can also blame him for unnecessarily escalating an encounter over jaywalking - that's *not* his job.
Not when he shot Wilson.
And even when rushing a car you don't put your head down low. Do you think Brown thought he was the Juggernaut (bitch:))?
Except AFAIK, it wasn't Wilson who "escalated the encounter." He just told Brown to stop walking down the middle of the street.
Which I think is a significant detail. Brown was stupid and violent enough to strong-arm a neighborhood clerk for some cigars, on camera. He was then stupid enough to walk down the middle of the street holding the loot. He then was stupid and violent enough to get into a fight with a cop who told him to move to the sidewalk. So why is it hard to imagine that the last stupid decision he ever made was to charge an armed cop?
Because I've seen enough evidence of *equal* stupidity on the part of the police.
I can imagine that Brown did as you say - I can also imagine (and consider it far more likely - especially after evidence of Ferguson's normal policing tactics) that the officer got pissed because after telling the yoot's to get out of the street they told him to fuck off and he couldn't let that go.
And quite frankly - when it comes to a conflict between the stories of an agent of the government and the stories of a plain old citizen, I'm going to demand greater scrutiny of the government's story and give more latitude to the citizen.
If he had his head down charging, then his shoulder would be in the way of his upper arm, too. There goes your autopsy evidence again.
He's a cop, he doesn't have to. And he forgot to bring his extra cellphone.
1. I never said I couldn't believe a 'black criminal' wouldn't do what Brown's accused of.
2. Yep, that's me, self-hating whitey.
3. I think you just don't like Black people.
Vibrants can't afford to pay for taxis in the first place.
WTF is a vibrant? I honestly don't know.
It's Tulpa.
Well, you'd know.
I was thinking its American again. Way too much openly 'I hate black people' for classic Tulpa.
He usually hides that under a facade of 'government programs *help* minorities and you libertarians are big meanies for saying that they can stand on their own'.
No way man, I've been assured I'm Tulpa.
No one does. No one does.
Its 'merkin. And smash is tulpa.
You may be right. Can we agree on asshole?
Tulpa has better taste than to insult Belinda.
Yeah, but Ken is a moron so you can completely discount that.
No, I don't think Smash is Tulpa. Smash was being anti-cop:
Tulpa would never say an unkind word about an officer of the law.
My initial impression was that Smash was legit.
His foreign and black blood meant he could do no wrong in libertarian eyes. Trayvon Martin was considered an honorary white, and therefore deserving of death.
Yeah. Might have something to do with their ability to infringe upon peoples rights without any accountability.
Crazy ain't it?
Its good that we can reach across the aisle and come to a bipartisan agreement that Dipshit Mandolin Jr is an arsehole.
There is totally an alternative to having a police force that is unaccountable to the citizenry and allowed to run roughshod over people.
Having a police force means accepting it's unaccountability?
You really are a fucking moron, aren't you?
Just perhaps, the alternative to what we have now is a police force with accountability, rather than no police force at all?
Think maybe?
Well, now we know whose daddy was a cop.
Last I heard he had just committed a strong arm robbery not an hour before his death. I don't think he would need drugs to be a complete moron.
What is the law?/Know you heard this before./We find contraband in your car,/ We breakin' your jaw.
Violent shit? No.
You're posting high, aren't you?
Naw, I think we're done with you.
Do your own research.
I want them held to the same standards as the citizenry. When they fuck up, I want them fired. When they commit crimes, I want them punished to the fullest extent of the law. When they use force, it is only to defend themselves and only as much as required to eliminate the threat. I demand they live by the exact laws they are to enforce. No special dispensations that put them above the average citizen or the law.
I was checking twerk videos HM. There's this whole sub set with what are referred to as Donkey Asses/butts. I laughed.
IT'S DONKEY TIME!
That why I laughed. What I love about those book covers is the idea that someone took the time and effort to illustrate the awesome covers. Check out the creepy beatnik type with the specs smirking out at the reader.
According to this, "Mexican donkey shows" are a relatively recent gringo invention, and don't actually exist.
It belongs in a museum.
What I love about those book covers is the idea that someone took the time and effort to illustrate the awesome covers.
Shouldn't be that hard to illustrate, weren't they working from an actual picture?
Correct. It's a sarcastic reference to the MSM euphemism for "black and Hispanic."
Wow. That's quite a leap, even for a racist fucking retard.
Since it is impossible to argue with batshit insane...we're done.
It's okay, they've found a new poster boy for whites killing blacks.
Lennon Lacy
He was found hanging from a playground swings.
Police ruled it suicide, but lefties are sure it's a lynching. Because it's the south. And some guy in a trailer park had confederate flags. And this kid was dating a 31 year old white woman.
Odds are that eventually one of these "innocent black youth murdered by whites" stories is going to pan out.
Obviously unaware of the origins of the modern constabulary. Let me enlighten you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Peel
Oops, I mispelt Peel.