This article is barebones. I was expecting new news about this, not a restatement of the facts and a note about one legislator who's not making progress.
> “While owning a boot key is not illegal, here is what the public needs to know,” reads the department’s Facebook page. “If you use a Boot Key to modify, tamper, or disengage a booting device from a vehicle, you can be charged with: Criminal Trespass, and/or Theft of Services, and/orTheft by Taking, and/or Damage to Property 2nd Degree.”
What's the penalty for immobilizing someone's car? If they're free to put a boot on my car because it's on their property, why am I not free to remove a boot from my property?
At risk of having no idea what I'm talking about, they helpfully quote the Georgia Codes to which they are referring, and the only one that looks like it actually applies might be the first, Criminal Trespass (GA Code § 16-7-21), depending on one's definition of "maliciously".
"A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person."
That sentence isn't the best, but I think it could be argued that it can be parsed as:
"A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she <does this thing> or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person"
Unlocking it is arguably interfering with the use of the property of another person without consent; but is it malicious? Can't find a clear definition of "malicious" in Georgia law. I guess this is why lawyers get paid so much.
Well locking it is certainly interfering with the use of the property.
But taking a programmer’s look at paws like this is ill advised. These laws are there to smooth the process of the state enforcing whatever the most powerful lawyers involved in a particular matter want. No more no less.
Well locking it is certainly interfering with the use of the property.
Much as someone could interfere with use a car by locking something to it rendering it immobile, perhaps. If locking the boot to it isn't a crime under the very same law, unlocking it surely also isn't.
I do agree that the law is whatever a lawyer can successfully argue; I bet there are lawyers who can successfully argue that unlocking the boot isn't criminal trespass.
Entrapment with regard to that on instance, perhaps. But if you’re just looking to gather evidence related to the many other instances of boot unlocking, there’s no problem. Now you’ve got their names and cell phones and can track to see if they happened to be right where prior instances happened, according to video evidence.
They seem to be doing it for a fee, which is just stupid.
When cars are 'booted' in US, is there no ticket to go along with it to bring further repercussions if it is illegally removed?
Atlanta is one of the few places in America that allow booting.
It’s done by private orgs, not the city. There is no ticket. Just a boot and a fine to pay to remove the boot.
These boot girls are charging $50 or something. The fee to remove the boot is usually 85-200+.
Personally, I’m happy to pay these people any amount over paying the super jerk boot people.
I had a guy put a boot on my car while I was walking over to pay the parking box. He wouldn’t remove it until I paid $85.
I had another boot put on my car from a bank’s parking lot. The bank was closed, the lot was open, there were no signs or attendants. Just an open lot. The boot operator claimed he had the right to boot but would not produce any documents. I paid $160 to remove my boot. I contacted the bank the next day and they said they don’t contract with anyone for parking enforcement when they are closed.
Atlanta booters can all go bankrupt for what I care. These ladies are heroes.
If you arrived at a store and the self-checkout was broken, would you just walk out without paying for your items? Since parking is their business I would never do something which look like stealing without some kind of protection like a recording from someone at the parking when I called. It’s just not worth the risk, otherwise, and you can always park somewhere else where you don’t have to worry.
But there are no items here. The payment is just for time, and if payment isn't working then parking there doesn't cost them anything or cause them any inconvenience.
The good for sale is the parking space. If your vehicle is there without a receipt, using it without paying looks exactly like stealing unless you can show that the property owner allowed it. You can say that the payment system was broken but they’re just going to say that’s an excuse and you just didn’t want to pay, etc. – life is way too short to spend trying to argue things like that versus just going somewhere else. Most of the possible outcome involve you paying considerably more, and the ones which don’t are only cheaper if your time is free.
Yes, but if you want to compare it to a store then everything in the cart has to be something that will expire in an hour, and the shelves restock whether or not anyone buys them. And there's nobody around that can fix the self-checkout or check you out themselves.
> life is way too short
I'm only here to talk about the analogy you made, not give advice on parking.
None of which changes the fact that you can’t use property which doesn’t belong to you except on the owner’s terms unless there’s some kind of legal right such as the “right to roam” laws in many European countries. There is no right to store your car without paying for it so there’s no gray area here.
It’s theft of service, which is definitely not identical to theft of property but I think the analogy is useful because more people understand that a business screwing up doesn’t mean you get their products for free - it means you go somewhere else.
It especially doesn’t mean you have any expectation not to be treated poorly by that business the way you would if you’d complied with your side of the legal agreement. If you’d paid and the business failed to track that payment properly, you’d be getting serious compensation because there would be a legal contract they weren’t honoring.
If I walked into a store (meaning it was open, not locked), and the self checkout was broken, and there was no other checkout, no staff member there to collect money or explain how to pay, no jar saying “honor system”, nothing…
Then yea, I would probably walk out with my stuff, knowing I had made a good faith effort to pay.
That’s called stealing, even if you have a rationalization. Until money changes hands, you don’t have a right to someone else’s property and their permission is conditional on payment.
No one is arguing that they don’t have some right to recourse. Just that booting and charging a ton of money to remove is excessive and an invasion of that person property.
If it was the city, sure, but it’s private property so this feels like complaining that a hotel charges a hefty cancellation fee for no-shows. Yes, it’s eye-watering but short of passing a law capping this I don’t think there are options other than not accepting the terms for use of someone’s private property.
These aren’t big corporations. This was literally just a guy in a pickup truck and a few boots.
I paid because I wanted to get the boot off my car. I also then warned someone else away before they got a boot and the boot operator started screaming at me. All pretty shady.
If things work this way the solution seems to be relatively simple in that you put a boot on the booter's car and demand at least as much to take it off as the booter demands from you. When the booter approaches you to get his pound of flesh you take your pound of steel out of the boot (pun intended) and lock it to his truck. If he starts getting physical you call the cops and/or defend yourself. Given that this seems to be a form of legalised extortion it should be fought, not rewarded. Also, next time there is something to vote for vote for the politico who promises to do away with these practices.
People underestimate how many locks/doors a 3" grinder and some time can open.
The beauty of it is that it's an economic argument... in order to make something impervious to grinding, you'd generally have to make the thing too expensive for its primary purpose.
I had a cop help me try to cut an unlabeled bike lock off my bike.
The business had double-locked it to a rail I'd locked it to, because apparently that was forbidden. Unfortunately, there was no sign, so I had no idea.
Cop and I worked on it for awhile, then he gave the security guard an earful for not leaving a message.
Side note: of all the bike locks, braided are by far the most annoying to cut, because they're impervious to bolt cutters.
I am specifically assuming that the corporations in Atlanta that put boots on cars are permitted to do so via a public private partnership, and the officer would tell you to contact the corporation to deal with it. I doubt any similar situation exists with bike locks, so I don’t see that as comparable.
> It’s done by private orgs, not the city. There is no ticket. Just a boot and a fine to pay to remove the boot.
So you can expect that "thanks" to these girls, the city will give authority to these third party companies to put a boot on the car and make it illegal to remove it? I don't foresee any other pro-people action: the easiest is to make it illegal to remove a boot.
> “While owning a boot key is not illegal, here is what the public needs to know,” reads the department’s Facebook page. “If you use a Boot Key to modify, tamper, or disengage a booting device from a vehicle, you can be charged with: Criminal Trespass, and/or Theft of Services, and/orTheft by Taking, and/or Damage to Property 2nd Degree.”
There’s a bill in the state assembly to make booting illegal. It didn’t pass this year, but the representative claims they will reintroduce it again. It’s already only legal in a few small areas.
It’s more likely that booting will stop altogether than new, pro-boot legislation will pass.
I often wondered how boots are even legal, particularly when used on private lots. Like, they just took control of your property. If that's ok, would the same principle allow them to take your wallet and put it in a safe until you paid a fine?
What is “excessive booting” in this context? IIUC here in NYC, booting is usually a response to thousands of dollars in unpaid fines (unpaid fines are public record here, so you can even look them up.)
I realize it's always an unpopular opinion to be pro-parking-enforcement, but to be honest, I'm always glad to see a car booted. Some people think they have a god-given right to leave their car wherever is convenient to them, it's nice to see at least some of them face consequences.
About 8 years ago in Atlanta, I got booted on my first offence, by overstaying in the nearly empty parking lot in midtown by 15 mins (I paid for the hour of parking before that, but the restaurant took their time with the checks). I think "first time offense of being late on your parking by 15 mins - you get a boot" is pretty excessive.
Don't get me wrong, I am totally in favor of parking enforcement, and wouldnt have even been that upset to take the hit and pay the fine. Instead, I had to both pay the fine and wait an hour in that parking lot until someone (working for the boot company) came to unlock the boot on my car (and i was lucky they weren't busy that night).
I think the problem here is the state (or city) offloading its basic enforcement functions to private corporations. And then most worryingly financially incentivizing over enforcement. This also happens with excessive towing [1]
The city should have these folks on payroll instead of constantly contracting this stuff out.
Yes, even on private property because it’s adjudication between two private properties (the car and the parking lot)
I think cities do this because it’s cheaper. Parking enforcement costs the same whether it’s private or public but you can extract more money out of it by being dirty. It’s a bad look for the city if they’re dirty but if the private company they contract out does it, the city gets to wash their hands of it. Also pensions and stuff.
Parking enforcement in just about any city costs nothing, it's profit making. Surely a private company can only be cheaper if it's literally paying the city?
I’d add greater oversight, too: you can’t FOIA the internal policies or records of a private company, and if there’s some policy change you have to rebid or do a painful contract amendment.
I think the appeal to privatization is sometimes corruption – when we lived in New Haven, at least two of the city’s tow contracts always went to cousins of council members – but mostly it’s the hope that magic pixie dust will avoid the need for competent oversight. As you noted that only works out when the incentives align, and I don’t see that here.
Yea Atlanta parking enforcement sucks. At least as of a few years ago it was outsourced to a private company(/companies) and they are very trigger happy. Had two tickets assessed incorrectly
Not sure, but it was this[0] parking lot. It was behind a place that is currently marked as Sebastian Pintxos Bar on google maps. At the time, it was a korean-mexican fusion restaurant, forgot the name, it closed down permanently not that long ago.
My problem with it is when private entities are allowed to boot your car.
One time in Berkeley I parked in a parking lot and walked across the street to pick up some food. I was gone 5 minutes and when I returned there was a boot on my car. There was an attendant in the parking lot who informed me it was private property and only for the businesses next to the parking lot. They wanted $150 to remove the boot. This wasn't city parking enforcement, it was a private party.
It's basically extortion. I get that they're trying to discourage non customers from using the lot, but it wasn't obvious it was restricted and clearly if they have someone in the lot full time, they could have warned me instead of immediately holding my car for ransom. Especially since I'm not from that area and I'm not familiar with local parking rules. It's purely an expensive trap.
This isn’t police boots, these are private lots. Personally, I think it should be illegal in any civil instances to boot a car, it should only be used by cops for major offenders.
There is nothing immoral about what these girls are doing, IMO. There are a LOT of boot lickers in this thread today.
Maybe, but their time to drive to your car and unlock it is worth something. And if you've gotten booted, your ticket fines greatly exceed $50, possibly by an order of magnitude. A Boot Girl's gotta eat, y'know?
Paper ticket. Eligible for tow X hours after the ticket.
Immobilizing the car is a ludicrous solution. Someone left something on your property you want them to remove- and the solution is to prevent them from removing it?
To cover the common case where someone is slightly late to move their vehicle in a way that is less disruptive to both the vehicle owner and road users than a large tow vehicle loading the vehicle to haul away. And to provide an evidence trail to combat fraudulent tow companies.
Were there large signs, fences and gates to suggest it was private?
I used to live across the street from a park with public parking, and a business with a private lot. I saw people park in the private lot all of the time because there was no signage indicating it was private. It never became a problem for anyone, but the point is people make honest mistakes.
It's not, lol. I've been on this site 16 years (user #590), if I'm astroturfing at least you have to give me credit for my long game :).
I immigrated to the US, I know the pain of dealing with Kafkaesque institutions.
But I've also seen an ambulance with its sirens on delayed by several minutes because of a double-parked minivan. At some point, we need to acknowledge that owning a motor vehicle is not a blank check for putting other people in danger.
> But I've also seen an ambulance with its sirens on delayed by several minutes because of a double-parked minivan.
So you're #3 then; there's not a single doubt in my mind that this is exceptional and the converse (people being booted unjustly/indiscriminately) is the norm.
The HN guidelines ask commenters to assume good faith. This is for several reasons. One is that "bad faith" has to do with the other person's intention, which is not something one really has access to; as a result, internet commenters are far too quick to jump to this explanation. Another reason is the effect such accusations have on discussion quality, which is to make it shallower, more predictable and nastier. It's simply not curious conversation.
Also from https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: "Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine." Your comments are noticeably breaking that guideline by (as I mentioned above) arguing so aggressively. Can you please take the intended spirit of this site, as expressed in the guidelines, more to heart? We'd appreciate it, and you'll find yourself getting flagged (by users) and moderated (by mods) much less.
Lol. You'll be mugged for the drill before you make a dent in it. An angle grinder will slice through it like warm butter. That's what those damn bicycle thieves use.
One works for the individual, the other against the individual.
One works for the collective, the other against the collective.
As a "citizen" who is pretty firmly anti-car within urban areas, my views on who is working for and against me are going to differ from yours.
I don't necessarily agree with the actions the Tyre Extinguishers are taking, but I definitely sympathize and appreciate the end-goal.
On the other hand, as a "citizen" who wants parking within urban areas to be less subsidized, I don't agree with skirting enforcement for fines around illegal parking.
I would be cautious in assuming that the parking enforcement fines and conditions are justified, especially when examined from the angle of class and how they might disproportionately affect certain groups.
Yeah. If it's going to be a Robin Hood thing, charging money is sure to invite a visit to the Fulton County Jail. Free = cool. Charging money = criminal enterprise, where Georgia has liberal RICO statutes.
The economics are irrelevant. I'm pointing out that replacing shitty behavior with slightly less shitty behavior is still shitty. Do you have an issue with people posting their observations on a web forum?
> “While owning a boot key is not illegal, here is what the public needs to know,” reads the department’s Facebook page. “If you use a Boot Key to modify, tamper, or disengage a booting device from a vehicle, you can be charged with: Criminal Trespass, and/or Theft of Services, and/orTheft by Taking, and/or Damage to Property 2nd Degree.”
These are private booters. No one has ever been charged. Atlanta police barely respond to real crime, much less this.
It would be interesting to see what happens if the booter hires an off duty cop to charge the boot girls or write them a ticket. I expect it would not result in conviction, much less even prosecution.
And the ticket would be on the boot girls, not the person who hires them.
I think the risk would be if the cops were in on the racket or got some kind of bribe “dukes of hazard” style. But the boot industry doesn’t make enough money to pull local cops and politicians in.
The first article linked is more informative for those who are hearing about this for the first time. https://abcnews.go.com/US/atlantas-rise-car-booting-prompts-...