Just do it yourself

March 29th, 2011 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Tim Donoghue at the Dom Post reports:

A taxi driver stabbed seven times in a frenzied attack has called for all cabs to be fitted with protective screens around the drivers.

Shlemon Yako, 60, was stabbed three times in the stomach, once in his left side and three times in his arms, as he dropped off a front-seat passenger at the bottom of Shropshire Ave in the Wellington suburb of Wilton about 12.15am on Saturday.

The Kiwi Cabs driver picked the man up from the Bay Rd taxi stand in Kilbirnie and drove him across town to Wilton via Aro St.

He said the sustained attack, during which he fought with his assailant, had convinced him protective screens should be compulsory.

I feel very sorry for the driver. Sounds horrific what happened.

But I am bemused why people keep calling for certain things to be made compulsory in such as video cameras and safety screens.

There’s nothing stopping taxi firms or drivers doing so themselves, if they deem it desirable. But why call for it to be compulsory?

Tags:

23 Responses to “Just do it yourself”

  1. Grendel (1,013 comments) says:

    becuase he beleives that if he does it alone, customers will be put off and he will lose business. by forcing everyone to do it he avoids that risk.

    but yeah in the real world he could just do it himself.

    while joyce pussied out on the camera thing and made it compulsory, at least he has shown some balls on this and said they can do it themselves and wont make it compulsory.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Manolo (14,164 comments) says:

    There’s nothing stopping taxi firms or drivers doing so themselves, if they deem it desirable. But why call for it to be compulsory?

    Good on you, DPF. I can detect the libertarian streak in you. :D

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Deborah (120 comments) says:

    Or he is not an owner-operator i.e. he is driving for wages.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. thedavincimode (6,890 comments) says:

    Because then there would be no excuses at all for pregnant women to not take the intitiative of getting their own independent advice on risks surrounding abortion. Besides, this sort of stuff is the role of the gummint isn’t it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. CHFR (241 comments) says:

    I have a friend who is a taxi driver and this is the attitude of most drivers in his firm. They believe if they feel the need for it then they will do it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ben (2,279 comments) says:

    But I am bemused why people keep calling for certain things to be made compulsory in taxis such as video cameras and safety screens.

    There’s nothing stopping taxi firms or drivers doing so themselves, if they deem it desirable. But why call for it to be compulsory?

    Because it is a barrier to entry, especially for jitney cabs, reducing competition for those in the industry, raising returns to them, to the detriment of consumers.

    As if cabs in New Zealand aren’t expensive enough already.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. RRM (10,099 comments) says:

    But I am bemused why people keep calling for certain things to be made compulsory in taxis such as video cameras and safety screens.

    It should be pretty bloody obvious why. But then the question was rhetorical, wasn’t it?
    He is afraid of being stabbed in the guts again by another psycho killer, but he doesn’t want to lose his livelihood through being the only cab on the rank with a big ugly perspex shield in his car.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. RRM (10,099 comments) says:

    PS:
    I’m not sure where I stand on the issue, I don’t really want to get into a cab with a blast shield in the middle.

    But I suspect that the beauty of pure libertarian thought may well offer only limited comfort, to many people who have to try to earn a living out there in the big bad world where nutters and knives in the guts are less of a theoretical negative, and more real…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. wreck1080 (3,999 comments) says:

    Its all a cost thing – taxi firm X who doesn’t have protective screens will have lower fares than taxi firm Y who do install such screens.

    So, if it is mandatory then everyone must comply with the rules.

    It could cost up to $1000 to install such a screen I imagine.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. David Farrar (1,437 comments) says:

    I’d be more likely to get a cab with perspex shield – protects you from the driver also!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. unaha-closp (1,067 comments) says:

    “There’s nothing stopping taxi firms or drivers doing so themselves, if they deem it desirable.”

    Better yet he could get himself a taser or a gun or a knife.

    Of course those are totally unacceptable in our society, right?

    “But why call for it to be compulsory?”

    The same reason we have a compulsory ban on carrying offensive weapons.

    A society has a duty to provide reasonable security to its citizens (including taxi drivers), at least equivalent to the extent a society denies its citizens the means to protect themselves.

    A security camera is the most reasonable modern means of non-violent protection…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Grendel (1,013 comments) says:

    it would make no difference to me, as long as there is a cab and its one of the few companies i will go near then i could care less what fortress he sets up in there.

    If it was not for Joyce being a wuss though i would have gone for any cab that stated no cameras, just becuase i have no desire to be filmed ‘for safety’.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Brian Smaller (3,965 comments) says:

    I have used cabs with those perspex shields in Sydney. No big deal. The driver has to protect himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. peterwn (3,332 comments) says:

    DPF – I saw a TV doco years ago (in B&W) showing a couple of posh women going for an afternoon drive. There was a screen in their car sprarating them from the driver and they had a row of push buttons ‘turn left’ ‘stop’ etc to signal to the driver where to go. Class distinction was complete!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Kimble (3,955 comments) says:

    It might be worthwhile thinking of this like a safety equipment issue.

    Sort of like hard hats on a construction site, or protective glasses for metal work, or seatblets in a car.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Sonny Blount (1,809 comments) says:

    Why not make helmets, and stab proof vests compulsory for all citizens in the CBD between 11pm and 5am. This would protect all of us from the risk of being stabbed or violently mugged and not just taxi drivers (other people get stabbed too you know).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    But I am bemused why people keep calling for certain things to be made compulsory in taxis such as video cameras and safety screens.

    Likewise. My view was they think that if the Govt makes it compulsory, they have the (rather optimistic) hope that the Government would subsidise some or all of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. dime (10,208 comments) says:

    poor bastard.

    i guess he works for someone else. cant just do it himself.

    or should the tax payer pay for it :P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. MT_Tinman (3,315 comments) says:

    Poor bastard be fucked!

    Did you read all the article?

    He had to speak to reporters through an interpreter – despite NZ law insisting on conversational English as part of the driving test.

    I have no sympathy either for the driver who could not converse with his fare, no doubt creating the situation originally nor the call for cages to protect incompetent cabbies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. MT_Tinman (3,315 comments) says:

    Bullshit!

    When was the last time you heard of a European ethnic, a Samoan or a Maori taxi driver attacked and injured in the course of his/her duty?

    When was the last time you heard of a European ethnic, a Samoan or a Maori taxi driver ask the government to make cages (or bloody cameras for that matter) compulsory?

    What should be made compulsory is what is set down in law – that ALL cabbies have conversational English and a working knowledge of the areas they work.

    Add people skills and almost immediately these incidents will vanish.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. kowtow (8,932 comments) says:

    It should be compulsory for dangerous bastards and psycho knife weilders to be off our streets. Tell that to the judges and probation boards.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. immigant (950 comments) says:

    As much as I hate people who come to NZ and don’t speak English. Being a stupid peasant is not a reason to stab someone, and I remember ins CHCH an old white dude got hammered with a hammer in his Taxi by ruffians.
    Here’s a dude who paid for shield himself, without complaining. National voter I bet.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10646713

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Tauhei Notts (1,687 comments) says:

    I saw a piece in yesterday’s Waikato Times that reminded me of this carry on.
    In their 99 years ago column they reported that in the 1912 election, won by the Tories, that the defeated leftist leader called upon all motor cars to be banned on election day. Apparently the wealthy Tories had given rides to their friends to get to the polling booths and this had disadvantaged the leftist people.
    This old hoary chestnut of, if it is not solely for me; “ban it,” has been in our country for a long time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote