A 74-year-old Uber driver ignored the Uber executives’ “NO GUNS” policy and had his Gat handy when he picked up a surly 60-year-old Gregory Mermel.
For whatever reason, Mermel was unhappy and ended up choking the (armed) driver.
The 74-year-old wasn’t up for getting strangled, so he shot his attacker after they wrestled for the gun.
Good shoot, Mr. Driver. You probably won’t be driving for Uber any longer, but if you hadn’t had that gun, the outcome would likely have been the same, only your family would be without you.
Clearwater, Florida (WTSP) — Clearwater Police are investigating a shooting at Clearwater Beach Sunday night.
Police say an Uber driver picked up a customer around 10 p.m. in the 400 block of Mandalay Avenue and the two got into an argument which turned physical. At one point, the passenger, 60-year-old Marc Gregory Mermel, reportedly started choking the driver, 74-year-old Steven Rayow
Mermel, who has a concealed weapons permit, then pulled a gun from his waist area. As the struggle continued, the gun went off, hitting Rayow in the foot. Rayow was taken to St. Joseph’s Hospital in Tampa and treated for the gunshot wound.
Found this article a bit confusing… You say Uber driver had concealed carry permit but in the article you cited it clearly states “Mermel, who has a concealed weapons permit, then pulled a gun from his waist area…” Mermel was the passenger and, after I did some checking on my own, he was also the one shot in the foot. Did you read the article before you posted it? The second paragraph is way off base!
THe newspaper seems to have gotten it all messed up. I was writing from what the newspaper had. What a mess.
Here’s an article with much more information, including witness reports:
http://wfla.com/2015/06/29/man-shot-during-uber-ride-in-clearwater/
The article notes that Uber has banned Rayow for violating the no guns policy. Also quoted is a transportation commissioner who says this is an example of why Uber needs to be regulated.
I’m not sure how regulating Uber drivers would have protected the driver from the criminal customer. As for Uber’s policy, I guess if the driver would have allowed himself to be choked to death his account would still be active on the Uber platform. Doesn’t seem like a good trade-off in my mind though.