Guy Offers Free Rides to Keep Drunk Drivers Off the Streets, Is Arrested

[silversurfer]

Guy Offers Free Rides to Keep Drunk Drivers Off the Streets, Is Arrested

http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/05/guy-offer-free-rides-to-keep-d#commentcontainer

Katherine Mangu-Ward | August 5, 2010

unlicensedSome guy's friend gets killed by a drunk driver and he decides to do something about it. He starts a service to keep drunks off the road by offering free rides home. It turns out that Quincy, Illinois, is well stocked with semi-responsible drunks, so "business" booms. He adds another car to the service, and eventually a bus. Local taxi companies are not amused.

http://reason.com/assets/mc/kmw/2010_08/rides.jpg

The cab company complained loud enough that the Quincy City Council changed its taxi and limousine ordinance to remove the words "for hire" from its definitions and thus eliminate the loophole Schoenakase was operating under. Following the change, Jonathan applied for a license and the Chief of Police was supposedly about to approve it, but withdrew and said Schoenakase needed to clear up some legal issues.

When you're charging for something and someone else figures out a way to offer it for free, normally you're SOL. Unless, of course, you happen to be operating in a regulated industry with licensing requirements—and you happen to have the ear of the city council and/or the chief of police. Then there's another, more appealing alternative: You can make the competition illegal.

Hero guy Jonathon Schoenakase has been arrested twice in "sting operations," all for the want of a $10 license.

from the comments

John|8.5.10 @ 2:17PM|#

It is not just the cabbies. Think of all of the money in lost DUI revenue he was costing the city. And not only the city but also the associated chronies in the rehab and alcohol education rackets. This guy made a lot of enemies.

More importantly, he set the dangerous precedent of people dealing with their own problems without the government. And we can never had that. It is a wonder they didn't shoot him.

[k-os]

No good deed . . . say it with me . . . goes unpunished.

[silversurfer]

Courtesy Ride Sting Operation
Courtesy Rides driver arrested again for violating taxi ordinance

by Bob Gough, editor, QuincyNews.org

http://quincynews.org/local-news/courtesy-rides-driver-arrested-again-for-violating-taxi-ordinance.html

The operator of the Courtesy Rides service which picks up people who choose not to drink and drive has been arrested again for violating the city ordinance which was created to stop him.

http://quincynews.org/assets/images/phpThumb/phpThumb.php?w=300&h=300&src=/assets/images/courtesyrides(1).jpg

Jonathon Schoenakase, 1711 Melview Road, was arrested at 1:30 Saturday morning after he picked up a plain clothes Quincy Police officer from the Phoenix night club. The arrest was made after Schoenakase drove to the 48th and Harrison area and he was released on a notice to appear.

Lt. Jason Simmons says the sting was conducted following complaints about Schoenakase's continuing operations from "other licensed operators". Simmons declined to identify the business owner that made the complaint.

Schoenakase is already facing charges of violating the taxi ordinance from a previous sting in February. He has an appearance with counsel set for August 16 and a jury trail scheduled to begin in October.

Schoenakase began his operation on Jan. 31, 2008, saying he was inspired by the loss of a friend who died in a crash involving a drunk driver. He added a second car in the Spring of 2009 and began to draw the interest of the operators of Diamond Cab, who complained to city officials that Schoenakase was running a de facto taxi service.

In September 2009, the Quincy City Council altered the definition of its taxi and limousine ordiinance to include the words "for hire" since Schoenakase was attempting to use a loophole by saying he didn't charge for his service and only operated on donations.

In June, Schoenkase and two other businessmen sought to obtain a license from the city and Quincy Police Chief Rob Copley was on the verge of recommending approval, but said Schoenakase needed to clear up some outstanding legal issues. The three men withdrew their request following a meeting with Copley.

[StackerKen]

friggin ridiculous

[I am me, I am free]

If you stand between the greedy and a buck, you're gonna get hurt.

[Joe King]

See? This is the type of situation where the people of that town should stand up for what's right.

But they won't because too many of them are zombies and feel that it's ok because it doesn't affect them.



You know, it's too bad the average American doesn't take a "no compromise" stance on our Rights.
i.e. like the way the Muslims do when it comes to their religion.



EDIT: I've altered my position on this matter. See 2 posts below.

[Phoenix]

Man interferes with Crapitalism, man gets crapped on.

[Joe King]

The idea of what he was doing is a very good thing.

But after further review....

Where he ran into trouble was by openly accepting tips for the service.

I mean, look at the pic of the van. He had 4 more of them. Those things don't buy themselves and, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's impossible for that one guy to drive four vans at one time.

Can you say, "employees"?
Or possibly contractors.

However, due to his own actions, he can't even get licensed to give "free" rides for tips.

What actions might those be, you ask?

Actually in-action, as he seems to have forgotten about fines and restitution he was supposed to pay back in 1997 after being convicted on charges of forgery.


:conf:


In this case, he could've just used his own private car and not openly encouraged tipping and he could've still been doing his "good deed".

Edited to add link
http://www.connecttristates.com/news/story.aspx?id=491087

[Apparition]

Crony capitalism at its finest.

Isn't freedom of choice great when others are capable of deciding what competition they'll accept? :sarc:

[Glass]

Can you say, "employees"?
Or possibly contractors.


Can you say "volunteer"?

[Spectrism]

The idea of what he was doing is a very good thing.

But after further review....

Where he ran into trouble was by openly accepting tips for the service.

I mean, look at the pic of the van. He had 4 more of them. Those things don't buy themselves and, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's impossible for that one guy to drive four vans at one time.

Can you say, "employees"?
Or possibly contractors.

However, due to his own actions, he can't even get licensed to give "free" rides for tips.

What actions might those be, you ask?

Actually in-action, as he seems to have forgotten about fines and restitution he was supposed to pay back in 1997 after being convicted on charges of forgery.


:conf:


In this case, he could've just used his own private car and not openly encouraged tipping and he could've still been doing his "good deed".

Edited to add link
http://www.connecttristates.com/news/story.aspx?id=491087




If your whole argument here is that "tips" makes this a regulatable business, then you fell for the government BS line. He gives a gift and accepts a gift in return. Government is there to replace charity. Government wants to apply a commercial name to anything involving money. Give too much and you pay a gift tax. In this case, it seems that a dollar is too much of a gift.

[Joe King]

The idea of what he was doing is a very good thing.

But after further review....

Where he ran into trouble was by openly accepting tips for the service.

I mean, look at the pic of the van. He had 4 more of them. Those things don't buy themselves and, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's impossible for that one guy to drive four vans at one time.

Can you say, "employees"?
Or possibly contractors.

However, due to his own actions, he can't even get licensed to give "free" rides for tips.

What actions might those be, you ask?

Actually in-action, as he seems to have forgotten about fines and restitution he was supposed to pay back in 1997 after being convicted on charges of forgery.


:conf:


In this case, he could've just used his own private car and not openly encouraged tipping and he could've still been doing his "good deed".

Edited to add link
http://www.connecttristates.com/news/story.aspx?id=491087




If your whole argument here is that "tips" makes this a regulatable business, then you fell for the government BS line. He gives a gift and accepts a gift in return. Government is there to replace charity. Government wants to apply a commercial name to anything involving money. Give too much and you pay a gift tax. In this case, it seems that a dollar is too much of a gift.
It doesn't appear it was for "free" as the original article stated, but rather just cheaper than the alternative. He obviously made enough in "tips" to make it worth his while to afford 4 vehicles for the endeavor. {there must be a bunch of bars in Quincey Ill}

I wouldn't see anything wrong with it if it was strictly about giving rides.
If all he was worried about was gas money, they could stop for a couple bucks worth of gas on the way to their house. {same as you or I might if giving a ride to someone}

After reading more about this, it just seems as though he was using this as a money making venture that side-stepped the regs while trying to claim he was acting strictly out of pure charity.

He wanted it both ways. It's either chairty, or money making. Pick one.