Originally published July 28 2015
Uber would rather see its own drivers choked to death, carjacked and killed than let Americans see guns used for self-defense
by J. D. Heyes
(NaturalNews) It is getting more and more difficult to be an American who cherishes constitutional rights in an age where pop culture and the media dismiss them - well, at least some of them - in such cavalier fashion.
The First Amendment is "okay" as long as you're saying something or expressing something that has been "approved" by the PC Police. The Fourth Amendment's privacy and search warrant rights are not supposed to be any big deal because, after all, if you're not hiding anything you've got nothing to worry about.
The Fifth Amendment's due process requirements only applies to property owners and businesses who aren't claiming a religious objection, and the Tenth Amendment "state's rights" provisions don't matter if certain states are viewed as being haters.
So it shouldn't come as any surprise that today's pop culture-led business climate would embrace, say, the Second Amendment, because you know, guns are bad and so are the people who use them, even if they are just trying to stay alive.
At least, that's what executives of ride-share company Uber believe; the company recently instituted a "no guns" policy for its drivers, though luckily for one, he ignored the directive.
A 'no guns' policy is a 'pro-death' policyAs reported by NBC affiliate WFLA, in Clearwater, Florida, police are currently investigating after a passenger in an Uber vehicle was allegedly shot during an "altercation" with the driver. The "altercation," it turns out, was the passenger allegdly attempting to choke the driver, who just happened to be a retired New York City police officer who possessed a concealed carry permit.
The local affiliate reported further:
Justin Smith's job at "Union Burger" on Mandalay Avenue in Clearwater Beach involves cooking all kinds of food for the hungry crowd. But [on a recent evening] around 10 p.m., a commotion near the front door caught his attention so he went out to investigate.
"There was a gentleman sitting in his car and there was like blood dripping out of the car so I was concerned what was going on," Smith said about the shooting. "I came back inside to get a couple of rags to just to make sure he wasn't bleeding out or anything but it wasn't nothing like vital."
Police told the local affiliate that 74-year-old Uber driver Steven Rayow stopped to pick up a rider near the Union Burger but before the ride even began an argument broke out.
"The driver basically told us that the passenger started choking him. He had his hands around his neck, and in fear of losing consciousness, that's when the driver of the car pulled out a gun, and in the ensuing struggle, that gun went off," police spokesman Rob Shaw said.
The passenger, Marc Memel, 60, was wounded in the foot; he was treated at a local hospital and released.
In addition to driving for Uber, Rayow runs a charter boat service, police said.
Those who were asked to comment on the fracas were more concerned about the fact that Rayow had a firearm than the fact that he was in danger of being killed.
"As a company, we would rather you die than defend yourself""It's a little crazy to think about that because, from what I believe, taxi drivers aren't allowed to have firearms. So I don't know if Uber drivers should really have firearms," resident Anthony Miller, who shot video on his cell phone as he walked nearby with his girlfriend, told WFLA.
Public Transportation Commissioner Kyle Cockream, in typical bureaucratese, said the incident was a glaring example of why Uber needs to be regulated, with drivers getting a background check.
But not everyone was convinced that Rayow was in the wrong, thankfully.
"If he was choking him then, I guess, what else are you gonna do?" Christa Zammit, a witness, said.
No matter to Uber execs, however. After the incident, the company removed Rayow's access to the Uber platform, even as it admitted it was helping police try to determine if the use of the weapon was somehow against the law.
If he's not going to be permitted to defend himself, Rayow - indeed, all Uber drivers - would be better off getting out now, while they're still alive. It's obvious the company won't protect them and will even work against them if they are assaulted and dare to presume a protective stance.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml