Hey, there! Log in / Register
If they ever do a sequel to Repo Man, they could call it Tow Man
By adamg on Tue, 06/07/2011 - 7:21am
Michael Nusbaum introduces us to Two-Ten, who prowls the streets of Allston/Brighton and Brookline at night (NSFW - language):
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
"brookline police let us get away with murder"
is anyone else concerned about how high this guy is? driving around A/B smoking blunts behind the wheel with his milkshakes? jesus h christ.
is anyone else concerned
His boss was... Word on the street is he has already been fired...
perfect match
I hope not. I'm glad this guy has a somewhat socially-useful job. Most people who have their cars towed deserve it - including me when I've got caught.
No, most of these guys are
No, most of these guys are tyrants and could use some mellowing out. My experiences in Allston with them was never good and always expensive and frustrating.
What an unbelievable asshole.
What an unbelievable asshole. It makes me sad that people can be so inconsiderate an unintelligent in a position of power. He gets joy out of messing people's cars up, what a great type of person to put behind the wheel of a tow truck. This is what scares me about predatory towing.
Pretty simple solution, though:
Don't want to deal with him? Park legally.
I've been towed while parked
I've been towed while parked legally.
And we as a society should get to decide what the consequences are for intentional (or unintentional) parking without permission on private property. I think the current system doesn't work well.
Unfortunately
it seems like the rest of society thinks it works just fine.
Speak for yourself.
Speak for yourself.
Should be an easy case for you
If you are "legally" parked on private property. That means the same owners who hire the tow truck company gave you permission to be there. It isn't rocket science.
Well, I did get my car back
Well, I did get my car back eventually, without having to pay the tow fee. But I wasted a day in the process.
That cemented my opposition to patrol towing. I'll never have anyone towed from any parking spaces of mine. And if I can avoid it, I won't park anywhere that tows, not even if I'm parking legally.
Just don't be that guy ...
When I lived in an MIT residence on Bay State Road, some jerk decided that our lot would be fine for his Red Sox outing parking. We asked the surrounding neighbors if it was one of their guests, then had the sucker towed.
Guy comes back, screams at people that "he knows John Silber and we're going to pay for this ...". BWAHAHAHAH! Never mind that there was only one BU building for quite a stretch ...
Obey the law!
Yeah, you dumb jackasses, just obey the law. It's not like the State Code of Massachusetts is tens of thousands of pages long. You should have it memorized. If you step out of line once, death is too good for you. You're lucky to get off with a smashed up car and hundreds of dollars in extortion.
Yes, park legally. But there
Yes, park legally. But there is no reason for this guy to damage and break in cars and be a predator.
There was a sequel, of sorts,
There was a sequel, of sorts, to Repo Man. It's called Repo Chick.
He's B&E on on film
Why isn't this individual arrested for breaking and entering? You've got it ON FILM. He's completely breaking the law and the cops won't do a thing about this? Unbelievable.
Why isn't this individual arrested for breaking and entering?
The "breaking into cars" isn't actually illegal. The car owner is tresspassing and opening the car up is the only way to lower the parking brake.
They are not really breaking the law.
Since their intent is not to steal the car, or steal anything in the car. They slimjim into the car so they can release the emergency brake and put the vehicle in neutral so they don't have to drag the car out on with the emergency brake on, or ruin the 4WD or wheels by dragging it in park.
You are trying to justify why
You are trying to justify why he did by what his intent was which has no bearing whatsoever. He broke into the car without the owner's permission. It does not matter where the car was - the property owner can not grant rights to trespass on the private property of the car's owner simply because the car is sitting on someone else's property. A police officer would have to get a warrant to gain access to this vehicle, yet this individual somehow has higher powers that allows him to break into a car? Yeah. Not.
The man broke the law. He must be arrested. It's that simple. It's amazing how the Boston PD is ignoring this. Guess they have better things to do like see how may donuts they can stuff in their mouth while on duty.
You are a moron.
These vehicles are on PRIVATE PROPERTY. The LAW allows them to open these vehicles and remove them at THE OWNERS expense. The statute for larceny of a motor vehicle, or breaking into a motor vehicle requires several elements, one of which is THE INTENT to either steal the car, or commit a felony while breaking into it. So yes, the INTENT is always a legal factor in larceny crimes, but I'm not surpised you didn't know that.
What would you do if you went home and found a car parked in your driveway? Leave it there? Have a towtruck drag it out and damage the wheels because the emergency brake is on?
Stop making up laws and produce some actual statutes or case laws on the subject.
The property owner (or the
The property owner (or the city when it's on the street) has the legal right to remove the car from their property. They do not have legal rights to enter the vehicle. It's. That. Simple.
I have had vehicles towed before from my property and I've insisted and watched over the tow truck operators to make sure they do not attempt to enter the car. Doing so would put me at risk.
If you're going to resort to name calling because you don't understand the facts I would suggest you stop posting.
Show. Me. The. Law.
You have failed to show me the facts, or give me specific laws, statues, CMVI, case laws, or anything that would back up your claim. They open the vehicle because THEY DON'T WANT TO DAMAGE THE CAR.
The crimes of larceny of a motor vehicle, and breaking and entering, both have the element of INTENT to either permanently deprive the owner of the vehicle (Comm. v. McArthur, 55 Mass. App. Ct. 596 (2002), or in the case of breaking and entering, must have the INTENT of stealing something MGL 266 s.20, Comm. v. Soares, 51 Mass App. Ct. 273 (2001).
If you are going to say cops have nothing better to do than stuff their mouths with donuts, it is ok for me to call you a jerk face.
So I guess we will wait for you to present some "facts" of the law you think you know?
Wow, you can search in a
Wow, you can search in a legal database. Good for you. It's a shame you don't understand what you're reading. As I've said repeatedly and since you clearly can't grasp the fundamentals involved I'll say it again: the tow truck driver should be arrested. He had no legal authority whatsoever to break into that car. There was no imminent danger to himself or anyone else to provide any compelling interest to break into the car. Trying to claiming he was doing so as to not damage the car is completely irrelevant. He's not a repo man who has actual claim to the vehicle. He is only contracted with the property owner to remove the vehicle. He is not allowed to do so by 'any means' as you wrongly suggest.
FYI? Perhaps you should call the police. I did, and they are looking into this. They told me "it happens all the time no big deal" but after pressing, admitted the driver didn't have any legal authority to break into the vehicle.
I find it amusing how you have to resort to continued name calling to 'make your case'. Unless you're a cop (which is highly doubtful) I haven't made any statements to disparage you. Next time stick to the facts - assuming you understand them.
Now, since you clearly need the last word, go flame all you want. I have better things to do with my life than argue with someone who doesn't understand the law.
If you know the law, wouldn't it be easy to cite a source?
And yes, I am a police officer and I have arrested tow truck drivers for violating private tow laws (Ma general laws Ch. 266 s.120D). I've also arrested dozens of people who have stolen cars, broken into cars and houses, caused damage to cars and houses, etc. You name it, I have seen it. I know the elements of these laws (I've cited them for you), and I know what tow truck drivers can and cannot do.
And yes, you have disparaged every cop by saying they should be doing something about it instead of stuffing their faces with donuts. So I called you a moron and a jerkface for saying those things, and for making up your own laws.
[img]http://api.ning.com/file
Pete Nice 1, some donut-mentioning anon 0
.
Devil's advocate, Pete
Devil's advocate, Pete Nice.
(I know I need an acct.)
I appreciate your posts but I'm just curious.
If I only broke into cars during the daytime and my intent to steal the car or its contents couldn't be proven would that only be a vandalism charge? Or what charge?
I'm not looking for a side gig or trying to argue with you but it's an interesting (to me at least) question?
Prolly get you on burglary tools, though, right? And there's the felony.
Sorry for the stream of consciousness.
It would depend on your intent
Tow truck drivers have a very clear intent to open a door so they can unlock an emergency brake or put the car in neutral so they don't have to drag the car and further damage towing the vehicle. If there was a law which said tow truck drivers could not open the vehicles, you would basically have a lot of AWD and 4WD cars with a lot of damage from tow truck drivers.
Now they can also damage a vehicle by opening it, so they have to be careful.
So basically if you have a tow truck driver that tows 500 cars a month, and only 0-1 person(s) per month complains about damage/stolen property etc, then it kind of shows that the tow truck driver doesn't have the intent to steal the car, steal items in the car, or maliciously damage the car.
The slimjim itself could in fact be considered a bulglarious tool, but as in most cases I have seen anyway, the judge would want to know the intent of the person who has the tool.
I guarantee you
that this moron spent many hours in front of a mirror learning to talk like that. I feel bad for the three kids, all born with "fucked for life" tattooed on their heads.
At least you can say....
...he loves his job. ;-)
That, and he's very lucky
With his attitude, its a good bet that he's going to love it until he dies. Violently.