The City is forcing us to GO GREEN and its crap. I WILL not buy a hybrid. Besides, NOW there is an alternative to hybrids that is MUCH less $$$$. When doing some research on alternative fuel & less expensive fuel, I came across an Illinois Based company. They are the only Company in the United States with a legal, EPA certified Ethanol/Flex Fuel (E85) conversion system that works. The system is a flex Fuel system meaning it allows for either E85 or regular gasoline to be used in our tanks or even mixed. This system is proven to be much more efficient than OEM flex fuel cars.
This system counts as a green system and saves us the $$$ of buying a new hybrid which is smaller, less safe, more expensive to have serviced and parts are impossible to find outside the dealer.
You're right. Its a bunch of crap. Just the other crap we are forced to put up with. Mike seems to think a camera image from an onboard camera can lead to a positive ID. Lets ask R. Kelly if it led to a positive Id in his case. How is a fuzzy picture of an unknown assailant going to help. Well at least we know if he's balck or white, like that is really going to narrow down the id of someone.
It's going to take a few slashings/shootings of cab drivers for the city to reconsider the camera. See the video link I posted a few days back. The driver got mauled and his attacker is still free. It looks to be an African American that attacked him.The guy even had a rag tied around his head. Now that we have it down to say 20 million suspects I'm sure the police can solve this one from the fuzzy camera image. Am I the only jerk that gets the idea here? We're going to get forced to use cameras that WE will end up paying for as drivers that don't protect us. The shields will be gone as King Richie Rich requires us to use hybrids. By the way I like to work at O'Hare. It has come to my attention that all hybrid vehicles run entirely off of gasoline while at speeds of 30/35 ands higher. In fact the gas mileage of a hybrid on the highway is less that a regular gasoline equipped model.
The right thing here is to make the customers pay fair rates of fare. That way they can get the service they deserve and we can get what we deserve, a safe work enviornment. And yes, while I am not a convicted felon, I want to be safe on my job. I also don't want to live against the steering wheel in my cab 12 hours a day. I am 6 ft. 190 lbs. I don't like driving an econo box. We need to stand for our rights.
Mike F. asks who am I to try to rally others to our cause, I'm a concerned cabbie, no more or less. Mike, I also have one other thing going for me, I'm not delusional, I know who are the real enemies here and also know of the problems.
When one is need of psychiatric help he/she is often the last to know it. This rings true for you as well Mr. Foulks Ex-Con.
A shield keeps a guy off of me. I once had a noose dropped around my neck and my money removed from my pocket. I really thought they were going to slash me too as a knife was put to my skin. Will the camera keep the guy off of me as well. Unless its magic I think we all know the answer. Who wants to be the first guy attacked in Chicago and possible killed on camera. How 'bout you Mike F.?
The itme I was robbed at knifepoint was in an 87 Chevy without shield. We didn't get shields until the mid 90's. Hope this helps the newbies understand. Some of the real old timers say shields were in cabs in the 60's-70's as well.
Cabs had shields and floor mounted safes and signs that said something like "Safe-equipped. Driver has no more than $20 in change" in the early 1970s.
The garage manager used to threaten the drivers who dared to drop their fares in the safe out of fear of being robbed and assign the clunkers to any driver who put money in the safe!
The shields were mandated by State law, which was struck down by the Appellate Court as unconstitutional. I think one of the big fleets brought the suit.
The State, said the court, could not dictate to the city that the cabs had to be equipped with shields.
This is where the "maxim" that it is is cheaper to replace a dead or injured driver than to buy and install all those safety shields came from.
Besides, drivers had no rights in the first place, such as on-the-job safety.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The itme I was robbed at knifepoint was in an 87 Chevy without shield. We didn't get shields until the mid 90's. Hope this helps the newbies understand. Some of the real old timers say shields were in cabs in the 60's-70's as well.
Wow Wolf! You're right on! I remember first meeting you at Dart Cab about 15 years ago. I only have 26 years on this job and are surprised that you were driving in the 70's. I thought I was driving before you!
You are also right about us not having the right to safety. I wear a camera around my neck once in awhile while on vacation or at a party. I don't think it helps me safety wise. The only excuse for fuzzy camera images in place of a real safety device is making this city look green. Do you remember when I was a fat guy?
"Fatlu Hall",
A camera image from an onboard camera can lead to a positive ID.
You are assuming that the video in the R. Kelly case was of the girl he is alleged to have had sex with.
The jurors concluded that the tape didn't positively identify the girl or R. Kelly.
This is why video images are more powerful than eyewitnesses; R. Kelly won his case because the tape wasn't an image of him and the alleged victim.
Thousands if not millions of people have been "positively identified" with video imaging.
I think that you have no objection to the camera...it's the removal of the shield that you are concerned about. I don't disagree with your concern.
However, I drove a Chevy Lumina without a shield for some time and I preferred it. So did many other cabdrivers. Many owner/operators also choose to drive without a shield.
Also, a hybrid gasoline engine isn't less efficient on the highway than a regular gasoline equipped model.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
You're right. Its a bunch of crap. Just the other crap we are forced to put up with. Mike seems to think a camera image from an onboard camera can lead to a positive ID. Lets ask R. Kelly if it led to a positive Id in his case. How is a fuzzy picture of an unknown assailant going to help. Well at least we know if he's balck or white, like that is really going to narrow down the id of someone.
It's going to take a few slashings/shootings of cab drivers for the city to reconsider the camera. See the video link I posted a few days back. The driver got mauled and his attacker is still free. It looks to be an African American that attacked him.The guy even had a rag tied around his head. Now that we have it down to say 20 million suspects I'm sure the police can solve this one from the fuzzy camera image. Am I the only jerk that gets the idea here? We're going to get forced to use cameras that WE will end up paying for as drivers that don't protect us. The shields will be gone as King Richie Rich requires us to use hybrids. By the way I like to work at O'Hare. It has come to my attention that all hybrid vehicles run entirely off of gasoline while at speeds of 30/35 ands higher. In fact the gas mileage of a hybrid on the highway is less that a regular gasoline equipped model.
The right thing here is to make the customers pay fair rates of fare. That way they can get the service they deserve and we can get what we deserve, a safe work enviornment. And yes, while I am not a convicted felon, I want to be safe on my job. I also don't want to live against the steering wheel in my cab 12 hours a day. I am 6 ft. 190 lbs. I don't like driving an econo box. We need to stand for our rights.
Mike F. asks who am I to try to rally others to our cause, I'm a concerned cabbie, no more or less. Mike, I also have one other thing going for me, I'm not delusional, I know who are the real enemies here and also know of the problems.
When one is need of psychiatric help he/she is often the last to know it. This rings true for you as well Mr. Foulks Ex-Con.
A shield keeps a guy off of me. I once had a noose dropped around my neck and my money removed from my pocket. I really thought they were going to slash me too as a knife was put to my skin. Will the camera keep the guy off of me as well. Unless its magic I think we all know the answer. Who wants to be the first guy attacked in Chicago and possible killed on camera. How 'bout you Mike F.?
This is why video images are more powerful than eyewitnesses; R. Kelly won his case because the tape wasn't an image of him and the alleged victim.
Should I post the e-mails?
As usual, the only thin Mr. Xong Xars is behind, is the times.
There is more and more "evidence" surfacing that most video surveillance is useless in court.
The recent case sited here is bound to become a benchmark in criminal defense and a hallmark in creating reasonable doubt.
Like the guy said, if you know how to use the camera as a weapon to beat your ass-ailant down, then it has some real potential use.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
This is why video images are more powerful than eyewitnesses; R. Kelly won his case because the tape wasn't an image of him and the alleged victim.
Should I post the e-mails?
The difference between shields and cameras:
The shields have been proven to diminish crimes agaisnt drivers in EVERY community where they are used.
There is NO evidence that cameras help prevent crimes. Most of the video "evidence" has been found to be useless in court, except for traffic enforcement cases, of course!
The City wants to go green and leave drivers with nothing but solid waste to protect them.
This is another example of how the City is too ignorant and reckless to manage the cab business.
They may be the greatest civic leaders in history, but they totally suck at managing the taxi industry, taxi business and driver safety and security.
Is that insulting our civic leaders when you point out evidence of their mismanagement and incompetence at the expense of and vastly increased danger to drivers?
Too bad. Down with the bums that would sacrifice our safety, security, well-being and our blood for their political good looks!
In analogy, how would they like it if the State or Federal Government tried to impose a law on them requiring anyone who goes to City Council meetings be armed?
Absurd you say! So are cameras in cabs.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
As usual, the only thin Mr. Xong Xars is behind, is the times.
There is more and more "evidence" surfacing that most video surveillance is useless in court.
The recent case sited here is bound to become a benchmark in criminal defense and a hallmark in creating reasonable doubt.
Like the guy said, if you know how to use the camera as a weapon to beat your ass-ailant down, then it has some real potential use.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
This is why video images are more powerful than eyewitnesses; R. Kelly won his case because the tape wasn't an image of him and the alleged victim.
Should I post the e-mails?
Where is Jone Doe now?
Watch this for the exact day and time.
http://tinyurl.com/5o62wd
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The difference between shields and cameras:
The shields have been proven to diminish crimes agaisnt drivers in EVERY community where they are used.
There is NO evidence that cameras help prevent crimes. Most of the video "evidence" has been found to be useless in court, except for traffic enforcement cases, of course!
The City wants to go green and leave drivers with nothing but solid waste to protect them.
This is another example of how the City is too ignorant and reckless to manage the cab business.
They may be the greatest civic leaders in history, but they totally suck at managing the taxi industry, taxi business and driver safety and security.
Is that insulting our civic leaders when you point out evidence of their mismanagement and incompetence at the expense of and vastly increased danger to drivers?
Too bad. Down with the bums that would sacrifice our safety, security, well-being and our blood for their political good looks!
In analogy, how would they like it if the State or Federal Government tried to impose a law on them requiring anyone who goes to City Council meetings be armed?
Absurd you say! So are cameras in cabs.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
As usual, the only thin Mr. Xong Xars is behind, is the times.
There is more and more "evidence" surfacing that most video surveillance is useless in court.
The recent case sited here is bound to become a benchmark in criminal defense and a hallmark in creating reasonable doubt.
Like the guy said, if you know how to use the camera as a weapon to beat your ass-ailant down, then it has some real potential use.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
This is why video images are more powerful than eyewitnesses; R. Kelly won his case because the tape wasn't an image of him and the alleged victim.
Should I post the e-mails?
The tapes showed a fuzzy image and were even worse when they were transferred to DVD for viewing. Why don't you Mike F. look at the video link I provided last week. Go ahead and tell me that you can identify this guy positively from this footage. You can't do it. And you also refuse to admit you can't identify your assailant once you're murdered on tape. What if the tape actually gets the guy. What does it matter to Mike once he's dead? Get the idea? I should charge you for this therapy!
The victim in the R Kelly case was a pro at a young age. She and her family were paid off. All that have some sort of common sense know this. The jurors knew this too, but the image quality was so bad they couldn't convict without good testimony. Half that testified were paid off and lied , the other half probably told the truth and that made the case die. The funny thing here is that the family of the young girl probably could have won millions in a civil suit with the tape. The rules of evidence are different there. Ask Orenthal James.
Mike, I'm sorry to say it, but I will. You're the one that isn't dealing with a full deck. I have known W. Weiss as a driver for the last 15 years or so. I once consulted with him about renters rights, his main business. The Wolfgang Weiss I know is a very together guy. Nice and pleasant. I do not see you to be this way here on this forum or in your public appearance. There is a reason I haven't been banned from this forum, I have told the truth. It might hurt, but it is what it is. George knows this and just stays away. He avoids my postings. Here's a question: What's almost an army of none? The CCO army of one. Mike Foulks presiding.
Proof of an army of one is the current brave toast site Mike has started. Not yet one that has posted there mentions he's a member. In fact all but two or three of the posts look to have made by Mike himself. George is the other verifiable person to post there. Gee what a surprise.
