New York wants to ban stretch limos

Yep this seems to be the answer for everything that liberals dont like . BAN IT BAN BAN IT.

So New York is looking to ban stretch limos after the deadly crash that killed 20.

Governor Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday. "New York should ban stretch limousines and take a series of other regulatory steps after a horrific crash in October that killed 20 people"

What about all of the limo companies that have never killed anyone ? Why should they be banned?

Wrecks with taxis have killed so many more people in NY why not ban Taxis?

This is just stupid IMO, banning something that has been around forever because of 1 wreck.

BAN IT BAN IT BAN it.

www.democratandchronicle.com...

New York should ban stretch limousines and take a series of other regulatory steps after a horrific crash in October that killed 20 people in upstate New York, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday.

Cuomo said he will include a series of safety reforms —including requiring seat belts to be worn in limos — in his state budget proposal that would hopefully prevent another deadly crash.

a reply to: notsure1

That is dumb.

I will say though, I never understood why seatbelts weren't required in vehicles such as limos and school buses.

originally posted by: headorheart
a reply to: notsure1

That is dumb.

I will say though, I never understood why seatbelts weren't required in vehicles such as limos and school buses.

Me either . They should absolutely be required.

How will those wall street executives get from the coc aine parlor back to their apartment with their harem of escorts if this passes?

this is another great example of modern liberalism that the democrats are subscribing to. having laws in place, but things still happen, so we'll just make new laws that won't actually change anything. all they do is give the appearance of doing something. the same modern liberalism that is turning liberals and democrats into even more extreme right wingers than they even accuse those on the right such as Republicans of being. with tyranny and oppression from heavy handed laws.

Twenty people were killed Oct. 6 on a rural road in Schoharie outside Albany when the converted 2001 Ford Excursion crashed after the state repeatedly tried to take the aging vehicle with a history of mechanical problems off the road.

www.democratandchronicle.com...

so because the laws are not propperly enforced. or the laws do not work because of people ignoring them. we will just make new laws to simply prohibit such vehicles in their entirety. (gee sounds like the whole gun debate).

It also raised new questions about whether seat belts should be required to be worn in limos.
And Cuomo's plan would, in fact, eliminate the exception to seatbelt requirements for limousines, buses, taxis, liveries, and school buses.

now just how are they planning on enforcing this? are they planning on somehow making the drivers responsible for their passengers? that would make apsolutely no sense, especially with limmos that are set up so that the driver has no way to even tell if their passengers are wearing seatbelts or not. since in many cases they can not even see into the passenger compartment. as for buses, yeah good luck with that. transit drivers get beat up just for fare disputes, can you imagine a driver trying to force someone to wear a seatbelt. or again, how can they even know if people are wearing them or not? and at the same time will they also be prohibbiting anyone standing on a bus because their are no seats? since standing is far, far more dangerous than someone in an actual seat not wearing a seatbelt. as for school buses. drivers even going back over 40 years ago have had issues with just trying to make the kids sit down. forget about making them wear a seatbelt. and that was before kids became so aout of control as they are now. and yet again how can the driver even know if they are wearing them or not? heck when i was a kid they tried to make kids wear seatbelts on school buses in just the first two rows. and guess what it was pretty much impossible to enforce in just those two rows.

Stretch limos? Who cares?

You guys are getting desperate for things to whine about, aren't you?

Boo liberals blah blah blah.

a reply to: notsure1

why dont they just seize them like the mayor proposed earlier?

Limos represent a different in ‘class’. They denote a separation between ‘rich’ and ‘poor’.

If libs had their way all limos would be destroyed and their owners put in prison camps.

originally posted by: headorheart
I will say though, I never understood why seatbelts weren't required in vehicles such as limos and school buses.

New York is one of the states that requires them.

New York can't be bothered to maintain their crumbling infrastructure (one of AOC's legitimate gripes), but at least they're laser-focused on what really matters: BANNING STRETCHED LIMOS.
[/sarc]

a reply to: Breakthestreak

Well, except for their own limos. It's everyone else's limos (and their occupants) that are the problem.

originally posted by: NthOther
a reply to: Breakthestreak

Well, except for their own limos. It's everyone else's limos (and their occupants) that are the problem.

they will "repurpose" them for the transportation-ally disenfranchised
level the road if you will

originally posted by: NthOther
a reply to: Breakthestreak

Well, except for their own limos. It's everyone else's limos (and their occupants) that are the problem.

I almost want to see them try, just to see what kind of absurd loophole they create so they can keep their own limos.

originally posted by: Ohanka
How will those wall street executives get from the coc aine parlor back to their apartment with their harem of escorts if this passes?

Rich people don't ride in limos anymore. That is a played out 80s thing. Wall Street and rich folks ride in black Escalades in NYC. Only people in limos these days are bachelorette parties.

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
Limos represent a different in ‘class’. They denote a separation between ‘rich’ and ‘poor’.

If libs had their way all limos would be destroyed and their owners put in prison camps.

So how would we have limousine liberals then?

It’s not the companies that operate the limos, it’s the limos themselves, that pose the risk.

From an engineering standpoint, many of the stretch limos you see on the road are no more safe to operate than those “Frankensteined” salvage cars welded together from multiple total wrecks by unscrupulous dealers.

Automakers spend millions to ensure the structural integrity of their vehicles. Those vehicles were not designed to be simply cut up and put back together with an added section.

If banning gets your dander up, how do feel about adding regulations regarding whether, and exactly how a particular vehicle may be “stretched”, and how often, and thoroughly stretched limos must be inspected?

Or would you rather assume that every customer is just fine with playing “limo roulette”?

a reply to: Bhadhidar

A limo must go through safety inspections to be licensed and insured.
The limousine involved in this story failed two inspections and was ordered out of service by the state of New York.
The driver was not licensed for that many passengers either.

So yes, it's the companies that operate the limos.

Does New York not have school busses?


Have school busses added restraints? Last I checked it was 45 or more kids riding to school every day on a bench with a plastic/foam wall in front of them should the bus stop unexpectedly

Is a limo any different?

I'll say it is... You choose to get into a limo. Your parents choose when you get into a bus.


"But what about the children?" They cry...

originally posted by: Jefferton
Stretch limos? Who cares?

You guys are getting desperate for things to whine about, aren't you?

Boo liberals blah blah blah.

The innocent industry of limo drivers in NY.

In addition to banning stretch limos, here are the other proposals: (from the linked article)

• Require drivers to hold a commercial driver license with a special passenger endorsement to operate a for-hire vehicle with 8 or more passengers.
  
• Make it a felony to remove an out-of-service sticker placed by a state Department of Transportation inspector.
  
• Increase the civil penalty to a maximum fine of $25,000 per violation for any person found operating with suspended DOT license.
  
• Establish stronger registration suspension and vehicle impoundment powers, including letting DOT and the Department of Motor vehicles seize suspended license plates.
  
• Create new criminal penalties for any DMV-regulated inspection station that illegally issues an inspection sticker.
  
• Prohibit U-turns for larger vehicles on all roads within the state.