Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Why President Bare is Wrong on Taxis

City Council President Charles Bare has proposed doing away with the entire taxi ordinance including background check provisions.  Besides the absurdity of a bidding war at the airport, mall or boardwalk for every passenger that walks to the taxi que, the provisions of the taxi ordinance are there for the protection of the public.

Getting into someone's car is the pinnacle of surrendering control of your person to someone else.

Don't you want to know if the person's car you are getting into:

  • is a child sexual offender
  • was acquitted because they were deemed insane by the court
  • is a child fondler
  • is a rapist
  • is a child abuser
  • had multiple DUI convictions
  • is a sexual offender
  • is a prostitute
  • had committed crimes in cabs before
  • had committed aggravated battery
  • had committed robbery with a firearm
  • was selling cocaine
  • exposed their sex organs
In the attached public record obtained from PPD, all of the above have been denied a taxi driver permit by the City due to the current ordinance in place.

Charles Bare wants Council to do away with the checks and regulating cabs at all.

I think that's a bad idea!  But that's just me.  You may want to roll the dice with potential murderers.


Anonymous said...

Sounds like a potential liability issue for the city. Pensacola already has a reputation for having some sketchy taxi drivers. Imagine if there was no regulation at all. It's one of those "its not my problem" until it is situations.

Anonymous said...

If this ordinance passes after a night of me pub crawling down America's coolest street, Palafox, and I get raped, murdered, and have my cocaine stolen from me, I'm suing Charles Bare, City Council, The City of Pensacola, The entire 7th floor, and Palafox Street itself. Yes, just the street.

See how absurd that was?

Just as absurd as thinking these drivers we put our lives in their hands don't need background checks.
Hell, you need a damn background check to work at Walmart. Don't these uppity folks know that?

Anonymous said...

I'm a big supporter of Councilman Bare, but NOT on this issue. You're dead wrong Charles. You may be doing this as a stunt to level the playing field on the Uber Issue but it's wrong. Uber drivers should be regulated with background and criminal history checks just like taxi drivers in our city for the public's protection. Also, as a supporter of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, we don't want to give young adults another reason why NOT to call a cab if they are impaired to drive. Single women might not feel safe calling a cab if you remove all the restrictions and let rapists become cab drivers. Please rethink this Charles Bare.

Anonymous said...

Seems like someone's trying out-"freemarket" someone else here. Large parts of the city's Taxi ordinances are an unnecessary encumbrance on a business operations, and little more than local government dipping their hands into the pockets of a captive industry. BUT, not ALL of it. This seems to be Bare's approach to making a "point". Is there a chance in hell that the rest of the council will just tear up section 7-10 of the city's laws? Probably not - so why not show some level of mature sobriety and discuss revamping the ordinances to clearly reflect the new reality of these service providers?

Anonymous said...

What's Bare been smokin?
Now he wants free downtown parking for ONLY City Council members?
Better yet, lets give them all parking spots with their names on it like they have at City Hall. They each can have spots in front of Jackson's, The Saenger, and World of Beer.
Screw you, DIB!!!

Anonymous said...

If the Council scraps 7-10 in its entirety, anyone can go park in front of the airport or mall and offer rides for a price. There will be no rules for ANYONE.
Pretty good gig for us retired folks!
Stupid idea #1 of 2016.