Uber bans far-right activist who complained about Muslim Uber drivers

So the famous independent reporter Laura Loomer goes on Twitter complaining about Uber drivers.

She was on the scene last night in NYC trying to report on the Terrorist incident.

Laura is generally considered an "alt-right" reporter and often bashes Liberals and lately, Muslims.

She has been known to trigger many people she doen't agree with.


Uber bans far-right activist who complained about Muslim Uber drivers

Ride-hailing service Uber banned a far-right activist who complained about Muslim Uber drivers in the wake of a terrorist attack in New York City that was allegedly committed by a former Uber driver.

Uber told Business Insider in a brief email on Wednesday that Laura Loomer — a former Project Veritas activist with over 100,000 Twitter followers — had been banned for violating the platform's community guidelines.

Loomer posted a series of tweets complaining about Muslims following Tuesday's attack in which a former driver, who was Muslim, rammed into a bike lane, killing eight people and injuring 12.

@-LauraLoomer

a reply to: xuenchen

I used to drive for them. We can totally ban racists. Why shouldn't we? If somebody poses a threat to a driver (e.i. overt racism, homophobia, etc), the drivers report them and they are banned. Riders are also rated by the drivers so most people who are jerks will get skipped over by most drivers.

a reply to: Abysha

I wonder how somebody knew it was Laura Loomer?

a reply to: xuenchen

Cause and effect.

If you complain about a product or service, don't be surprised when that product or service is refused in the future.

Reminds me of a sign I once saw in a bar:

"We maintain the right to refuse service to assholes like you".

Be an asshole, get treated like one.

a reply to: xuenchen

Glad Uber doesn't control grocery stores, or this lady would starve. Isn't the all knowing tech giants a great idea?

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Abysha

I wonder how somebody knew it was Laura Loomer?

Have you ever taken an Uber? All of your identification and payment info is known ahead of time. You can't just jump in one and pay with cash.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: xuenchen

Glad Uber doesn't control grocery stores, or this lady would starve. Isn't the all knowing tech giants a great idea?

Let her hateful ass walk. I hope Lyft follows up and bans her too. Maybe she can wait for an bigot-based ride-sharing company to start up like "Racing Racists" or something like that and she can ride all she wants.

a reply to: xuenchen

So businesses can ban people if they don't agree with the customers ideology.

Let's celebrate with a cake!

Anyone know any bakers?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: xuenchen

So businesses can ban people if they don't agree with the customers ideology.

Let's celebrate with a cake!

Anyone know any bakers?

Nice false equivalence you have there.

a reply to: introvert



I'm going to enjoy the hypocrisy on this thread.

Please. . . . continue.

I'll get the yoga mat so you won't hurt yourself twisting!

a reply to: DBCowboy

No need to twist.

Refusing to serve someone based on the person's conduct towards a companies employees is not the same as refusing to serve a customer because of their sexual orientation.

Look at her twitter feed. She actually has idiots asking for her advice based on the name of their Uber driver.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: xuenchen

So businesses can ban people if they don't agree with the customers ideology.

Let's celebrate with a cake!

Anyone know any bakers?

Nice false equivalence you have there.

Please explain to us all why you see this as a false equivalency situation. I honestly want to know your thought process in coming to that conclusion.

Thanks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: xuenchen

So businesses can ban people if they don't agree with the customers ideology.

Let's celebrate with a cake!

Anyone know any bakers?

The baker refused to bake a cake because of their own bigotry. Uber banned this rider because of her bigotry.

Again, the people wanting the cake didn't walk into the bakery disparaging Christians or white people; they just wanted a cake. The activist in the OP, however, did say things like that against a large population of their employees. Uber did not ban her for being white, straight, Christian, etc. She was banned for being an asshole and Uber bans those every single day.

I know you can see the difference.

a reply to: DBCowboy

That was the first thing that came to my mind . Life is a see saw it seems .

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: DBCowboy

No need to twist.

Refusing to serve someone based on the person's conduct towards a companie's employees is not the same as refusing to serve a customer because of their sexual orientation.

Look at her twitter feed. She actually has idiots asking for her advice based on the name of their Uber driver.

But, what if it has nothing to do with the sexual orientation but the conduct involved in that situation (i.e. sexual conduct) they do not agree with? After all for some people, sex is only supposed to occur for the purpose or procreation and not personal gratification. If a business disagrees with that gratification conduct, then is it not the same as this Uber situation?

a reply to: xuenchen So now you will resist to further your agenda. You never go down without a fight. I respect that but damn dude!

a reply to: Abysha

Public accommodation.

Even assholes are people.

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: xuenchen

Glad Uber doesn't control grocery stores, or this lady would starve. Isn't the all knowing tech giants a great idea?

Let her hateful ass walk. I hope Lyft follows up and bans her too. Maybe she can wait for an bigot-based ride-sharing company to start up like "Racing Racists" or something like that and she can ride all she wants.

Freedom of speech is absolute. And dabbling in this issue os dangerous and I think is a civil rights law suit waiting to happen.

This loud mouth may have just won the lottery.

a reply to: Krakatoa

But, what if it has nothing to do with the sexual orientation but the conduct involved in that situation (i.e. sexual conduct) they do not agree with? After all for some people, sex is only supposed to occur for the purpose or procreation and not personal gratification.

What the hell are you talking about?

If a business disagrees with that gratification conduct, then is it not the same as this Uber situation?

Unless they were gratifying themselves inside the business and involving the employees, I fail to see how it is similar at all.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Abysha

Public accommodation.

Even assholes are people.

Nobody has ever been expected to serve a customer that is abusive. Not until it's racism, anyway... that kind of abuse is protected in your eyes? Why?