They’re opposing the bills because the things they suggest won’t do anything their existing safety procedures don’t do, and reading the companies security/safety protocols and the proposed new ones it’s pretty clear that they are not needed.
In her lawsuit filed against Lyft in January, Willford alleges she was “subjected to unwelcome, nonconsensual sexual contact, touching” and lewd comments during the ride.
Willford was picked up by a different driver than the person identified in the Lyft app, according to the suit.
How would these new bills have prevented this? How would they prevent a Lyft driver from letting someone else drive their car to pick up passengers? How would they prevent lewd comments during the ride? Riders can already record their entire trip on their phone if they want. These companies already do background checks. They already suspend drivers if complaints are made and deemed serious/real. They already ban drivers who assault people or who let other people drive for them.
What exactly do they think these new bills would solve and how?
In the US? I’m gonna need to see some statutes there bud. Last I checked there are no federal requirements and as far as I can tell there are only insurance requirements in Colorado at the moment.
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has passed laws for the operation of a TNC within the state. These laws involve the following:
Licensing, permit and certification requirements
Mandatory Lyft and/or Uber decals on a vehicle’s front and back passenger-side windshields
Insurance requirements, including vehicle liability and workers’ compensation insurance
Minimum TNC driver age requirement of 21 years old, with at least one year of driving history
Department of Motor Vehicle record checks required for all TNC drivers
Annual background checks required for all TNC drivers
Mandatory driver training programs to ensure drivers are safely operating their vehicles
Accessibility plans for individuals with disabilities
A Zero Tolerance Policy for drivers under the influence of drugs or alcohol
Required vehicle inspections once per year or every 50,000 miles, whichever comes first
Prohibition against TNC drivers accepting street hails from potential passengers
Prohibition against TNC drivers transporting more than seven passengers per ride
If Uber, Lyft or another ridesharing company is found to be delinquent in following any of these laws, it could face penalties. The CPUC accepts complaints from the public regarding ridesharing services or drivers who are in violation of any of the state’s TNC laws.
California is not Colorado nor is it federal. I don’t think you understand the things you’re saying since you don’t seem to grasp, as you put it, the regulations are “often state-specific.” You linked California, not Colorado, which this article is in reference to. Even in the beginning, you didn’t seem to grasp why regulation and some level of understanding about what people should or shouldn’t do is reasonable to have defined. Good luck!
Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate.
People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No.
Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014:
So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.
I don’t know if these bills would help, but there is a need for something to be done. The daughter of a friend of mine was raped by a Lyft driver a few years ago. Going home from a party, she didn’t want to drive because she had been drinking. She thought Lyft was the safer option. It wasn’t.
That’s terrible, but you can’t just say “something needs to be done” because a bad thing happened, when the thing wasn’t preventable. Bad people exist, and bad people do bad things.
What do you think could be signed into law that would have prevented that from happening? Would those laws have prevented a taxi driver from doing it? A “friend” giving her a lift?
They’re opposing the bills because the things they suggest won’t do anything their existing safety procedures don’t do, and reading the companies security/safety protocols and the proposed new ones it’s pretty clear that they are not needed.
How would these new bills have prevented this? How would they prevent a Lyft driver from letting someone else drive their car to pick up passengers? How would they prevent lewd comments during the ride? Riders can already record their entire trip on their phone if they want. These companies already do background checks. They already suspend drivers if complaints are made and deemed serious/real. They already ban drivers who assault people or who let other people drive for them.
What exactly do they think these new bills would solve and how?
Laws and regulations already exist that all ride share companies have to follow around things like vetting their drivers.
In the US? I’m gonna need to see some statutes there bud. Last I checked there are no federal requirements and as far as I can tell there are only insurance requirements in Colorado at the moment.
Yeah in the US. There are too many different laws and regulations for me to list since they’re often state specific. Take California for example:
https://www.rkmlaw.net/ridesharing-regulations-in-california/
California is not Colorado nor is it federal. I don’t think you understand the things you’re saying since you don’t seem to grasp, as you put it, the regulations are “often state-specific.” You linked California, not Colorado, which this article is in reference to. Even in the beginning, you didn’t seem to grasp why regulation and some level of understanding about what people should or shouldn’t do is reasonable to have defined. Good luck!
No shit, did you even read my comment?
Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate.
People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No.
Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014:
https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-40/article-10-1/part-6/section-40-10-1-605/#%3A~%3Atext=§+40-10.1-605.+Operational+Requirements+A+driver+shall+not%2Ca+ride%2C+otherwise+known+as+a+“street+hail”.
Here’s just one little but relevant section:
So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.
I don’t know if these bills would help, but there is a need for something to be done. The daughter of a friend of mine was raped by a Lyft driver a few years ago. Going home from a party, she didn’t want to drive because she had been drinking. She thought Lyft was the safer option. It wasn’t.
That’s terrible, but you can’t just say “something needs to be done” because a bad thing happened, when the thing wasn’t preventable. Bad people exist, and bad people do bad things.
What do you think could be signed into law that would have prevented that from happening? Would those laws have prevented a taxi driver from doing it? A “friend” giving her a lift?