Alleged Kalamazoo Shooter Picked Up Uber Fares During, After Killing Spree

theodp writes: Police allege that Uber driver Jason Dalton shot 8 people in three different locations, killing six people. But the story gets even crazier, Gizmodo reports, as Dalton allegedly not only picked up Uber passengers between shootings, he continued to drive people around after his last shooting at 10:24pm at a Cracker Barrel restaurant. One of his last passengers before Dalton was arrested even joked, "You're not the shooter, are you?" Uber Chief Security Officer Joe Sullivan issued the following Statement on Kalamazoo: "We are horrified and heartbroken at the senseless violence in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Our hearts and prayers are with the families of the victims of this devastating crime and those recovering from injuries. We have reached out to the police to help with their investigation in any way that we can."

Comments

how is that relevant?

[ooloorie]

If he had been a regular cab driver, he might have done the same, and an official taxi would have been even better camouflage. If he had been a stock trader, he might have continued to do trades. If he was selling crap on Ebay, he might have continued doing that too. How is his driving for Uber at all relevant?

Re: how is that relevant?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's relevant because Uber maintains they need not abide by any regulations to keep their customers safe. They flout laws, and if it should be found out that this person had something in his past that would have disqualified him from a regular taxi job it's going to be VERY relevant.

Granted, some people can snap without warning and without history, but basically Uber opened itself up to this based on public corporate behavior. Nobody would care if they didn't constantly make a spectacle of themselves ignoring laws.

Re:how is that relevant?

[fluffernutter]

Because someone who is a psychotic killer is far less likely to engage in a profession where they know who you are, and have all kinds of information on you including fingerprints. There is something to be said for using an industry where people know who the others are. Uber is next to anonymous, which is a perfect job for freaks. If the Uber rating system is so great, why did the riders feel the need to go to facebook about this guy? They should have given him a poor rating and been absolutely satisfied that the rating system would do its job.

Re:how is that relevant?

[Junta]

Hey, it's not jush shilling. I myself have personally been murdered 3 or 4 times riding in a conventional taxi.

Re: how is that relevant?

[silentcoder]

This is the company who bragged about how their revenue spiked during the Sydney shooting - all the people calling Uber because they are desperate to get the hell out of the crossfire...

I get the feelingthat "giving a shit about people's lives" is even lower on their priority list than most corporations - which takes some doing.

Re:Here we go!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure we need to ban anything, but it would be wise for Uber to implement a "No Shooting People While Working For Us" policy.

Re:Here we go!

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't work for Uber, they are simply contractors. Uber bears no responsibility for this massacre that was committed by their employee ... err .. associate ... umm ... acquaintance.

Re:Uber does not seem to be involved...

[tehcyder]

Agreed, this story needed at least one of: 3D printed guns, Elon Musk or bitcoins to tick the required number of slashdot boxes.

Re:Uber does not seem to be involved...

[rmdingler]

Oh, they're involved all right... the victims' families have someone to sue.

Ask Tracy Morgan if Walmart was involved.

Re:Here we go!

[14erCleaner]

Not sure we need to ban anything, but it would be wise for Uber to implement a "No Shooting People While Working For Us" policy.

I'm sure Lyft already has this policy.

Rating

[puddingebola]

One star. Decent aim, but poor customer service.

Irony

[PvtVoid]

The irony is that he had to have a license to drive his car, but to buy the handgun? Not so much.

Re:Irony

[Kohath]

There's no explicitly enumerated Constitutional right to drive a car. The right to bear arms is enumerated clearly.

But here's something to think about:. What problems were solved by requiring him to have a license to drive a car?

What problems do drivers licenses solve for anyone? Do they ensure that all licensed drivers are good drivers? Do they keep unlicensed drivers off the roads? Do criminals and other lawless people obey drivers license laws? If you lost your drivers license would you drive without one if a dire emergency required it?

We would be better off without the licensing requirement for drivers over 21. A court could still issue an order to prohibit a bad driver, or a drunk driver, or whomever else from driving. The only difference would be that courts provide a person with due process.

Licensing requirements for driving mostly provide the government with an excuse and a mechanism to bully and control and tax ordinary citizens.

And also note: there would be a lot fewer "driving while black" police stops without this excuse to bully people.

Re:Uber does not seem to be involved...

[fluffernutter]

I saw these kinds of comments coming, and I googled on 'taxi driver shooters'. I found many Taxi drivers getting shot in the US but none actually doing any shootings. The taxi industry knows who they are, so it is far less likely someone who is on the edge will engage in an industry that takes their fingerprints before they can participate.

slashdot mangled the heavy metal umlat

[Thud457]

The shooter snapped because, driving for Uber, he couldn't make a living wage in a high-rent city like Kalamazoo.

Re:Uber does not seem to be involved...

[idontgno]

Does Uber uses systemd in their technological infrastructure? That might explain it.

Re:Uber does not seem to be involved...

[Zocalo]

systemd uber alles?

Re:where were you?

[Zocalo]

I think you missed the sarcasm in the OP's post. One of the NRA's arguments against gun control is that if everyone had guns this kind of thing wouldn't happen because the good guys with the guns would either bring down the shooter almost immediately, or the knowledge of this would deter the shooter from drawing their gun(s) in the first place. The counter argument by those pro-gun control is that this never actually happens, even in states like Michigan where the gun laws are loose enough to make it possible that it might. The counter-counter argument is that shooters in such states tend to target places with restrictions on carrying guns... and round and round it goes with no progress in any direction.

Re:Uber does not seem to be involved...

[Locke2005]

Right... that's the same kind of reasoning that makes me always carry a bomb when I take an airplane, because the odds against their being 2 bombs on the same aircraft are phenomenal!

Re:Uber does not seem to be involved...

[SethJohnson]

I found many Taxi drivers getting shot in the US but none actually doing any shootings.

In addition to the famous documentary starring Robert Deniro and Jody Foster, I can also attest that a taxi driver in Austin, TX killed two of my coworkers in the year 2000. They had gone to a nearby bar after work to see a boxing match on PPV and took a taxi back to pick up their cars at the office. Midway back to the office, the driver got into an argument with his two passengers and pulled to the side of the road.They attempted to flee and he shot them in the back. He told police they had tried to rob him.

He worked for an independent, local cab company at the time of the murders.

Re:Here we go!

[Flea of Pain]

If that doesn't work, how about: "Uber: Ride Shotgun"

Too soon?