Talk:Wheel clamp

Automobiles Mid‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

British English

why is wikipedia becoming so decidedly british?

What is your complaint? Reginmund 19:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His complaint is that there is no reason to use Brit-English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.200.31 (talk) 23:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not use Indian English? Or Hong Kong English? Or Jamaican English? Personally I prefer the English I grew up with (Canadian), but surely the baseline of a language is to be found in its country of origin. Ever heard of England? Axel 16:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Invention contradiction

Please see the discussion at University of Denver. —HorsePunchKid 2007-10-03 13:44:37Z

So I'm not the only one to have doubts. I remember reading an item in my childhood (late 1940s or early 1950s) in Popular Mechanics or Mechanics Illustrated about the amazing new wheel clamp. It had been introduced in a strange city by the name of Paris (France, that is). Unfortunately I can't go back to check my vague memory. Axel 16:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Placemat citation

The placemat cited was probably seen at Gunter Toody's Diner, not Gunther Tootie's. I added a citation to Frank P. Marugg's patent, US Patent # 2,844,954, which was issued on 29-Jul-1958. Marugg applied for the patent on 7-Mar-1955 in Denver, more than a decade after the claimed invention year of 1944. Marugg is indeed the inventor of the Denver Boot, but the other details of the invention are unsupported. His Manliness (talk) 16:22, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Denver Boot"?

I'm from Oregon and I have never heard of a "Denver Boot." "Wheel clamp" yes, but nothing referring to Denver. I think the article should have a cite before saying that calling the clamp a Denver Boot is more common in American English. And I'll head off arguments about it being invented there: just because it may have started with an name like Denver boot doesn't mean that's commonly used now. Otherwise I should modify the article to state that it is used on horseless carriage wheels. 75.95.47.110 (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing referring to Denver Boot? Perhaps there are reasons why the Merriam-Webster Dictionary has it listed here, in addition to having the term described in a book on page 309 that is entitled "Origin of Everyday Things", as well as on page 255 of "The Transport Manager's and Operator's Handbook 2006", by David Lowe .... CZmarlin (talk) 22:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from Seattle and never heard of a "Denver Boot" either. Must be a Northwest thing. We use them here, but they are just referred to as "boot" or "wheel clamp". Even in newspapers and news broadcasts and the like. The Flying IP (talk) 17:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Constitutionality

I was just thinking, doesn't wheel booting, or even towing, violate the due process clause of the fith and fourteenth amendment of the us consititution? Additionally the seizure of property without warrant violates the fourth amendment, and wouldn't seizing a persons means of transportation by force restrict their freedom of movement enough to constitute arrest under the fourth amendment? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.105.228 (talk) 20:24, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When done by police, due process is followed. In most cities that allow property owners to boot violators and tresspassers, signs must be posted, the booting company must be registered and have a contract with the property owner, there is a cap on the fine, at least two method of payment must be accepted, the booting company must remain during certain hours to be able to remove the boot, and a vehicle cannot be booted unless it is unattended at the time. Legal booting of a vehicle you don't own is ALWAYS done for a provable law violation. The constitution doesn't prevent booting a car for a provable vehicular law violation. 198.153.92.254 (talk) 21:10, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (England)

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than myself could have a look at this article now that the new legislation has come into effect. (Elthamboy 5 Oct 2012)