Think Freely Media presents Common Sense with Paul Jacob

Drive Free or Die

Uber, taxi, sharing, free uber, Common Sense

Ever told your kids to share? That’s aiding and abetting, you know.

Sharing is illegal.

At least, it is in Portsmouth, New Hampshire . . . regarding Uber.

The popular ride-sharing company may be widely heralded as the flagship of the new sharing economy, but a Portsmouth city ordinance effectively blocks the service, requiring that the company provide background checks on all drivers, which Uber calls “draconian.”

While the company is trying to get the city to alter that mandate, several Uber drivers have ignored the ban, continuing to pick up passengers. In October, police stopped Stephanie Franz, who now faces a $500 fine.

Chris David has also continued to drive for Uber. After he recorded a verbal altercation with a cabbie on a city street and posted it to YouTube, David was charged with wiretapping — a felony.

Taxi companies are upset, too, claiming the ordinance creates “a free-for-all.” A Portsmouth Taxi executive bemoaned, “Anybody can come in.”

Before the ordinance took effect in September, only 28 cabs were allowed to operate. “That’s like limiting the number of restaurants and bars in Portsmouth to 28 to keep them full day and night,” argued Assistant Mayor Jim Spilane.

In the “Live Free or Die” state, barriers to earning a living and heavy-handed criminal charges have led to the pro-Uber slogan, “Drive Free or Die.”

Tonight at 6:30 pm, there’s a #FreeUber rally at the Portsmouth City Hall. If you’re nearby, please go help explain that government regulations ought to accommodate economic advances, not frustrate them.

That is, if you can find a legal ride.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

Uber, taxi, sharing, free uber, Common Sense


By: CS Admin


  1. JFB says:

    And the real purpose of regulation is?  God forbid that any enterprise should have to be in free and unhindered competition. 

  2. RNF says:

    They allow carpooling, and in fact encourage it. That’s sharing, isn’t it?

    What about consenting adults making there own choices doesn’t the government like? Never mind……

  3. Pat says:

    Ask the presidential candidates what they think.
    (and how is recording something on a public street ‘wiretapping’?) Exactly whose ‘wres’ were tapped?

    • John F. Brennan says:

      Pat, I cannot speak for New Hampshire, but in Michigan one person being aware the conversation is being recorded is sufficient (as this was not over a wire at all). The charge is an accommodation made to protect the entrenched. Persons having an altercation in public have NO expectation of privacy.

  4. drrik says:

    Sharing without government involvement means that the government does not get credit;  means that the government does not get to collect it’s percentage;  means that the molopoly that the government is in bed with gets threatened.
    There are no circumstances that would make this a good thing or to be tolerated by the government. 

  5. JdL says:

    This is government as highway robber, as enforcer of illegitimate monopolies, as enemy of enterprise.  This kind of crime must be opposed until it stops.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2020 Common Sense with Paul Jacob, All Rights Reserved. Back to top