Buried deep within the massive infrastructure legislation recently signed by President Joe Biden is a little-noticed “safety” measure that will take effect in five years. Marketed to Congress as a benign tool to help prevent drunk driving, the measure will mandate that automobile manufacturers build into every car what amounts to a “vehicle kill switch.”...
The lack of ultimate control over one’s vehicle presents numerous and extremely serious safety issues; issues that should have been obvious to Members of Congress before they voted on the measure...
Adding what amounts to a mandatory, backdoor government “kill switch” to cars is not only a violation of our constitutional rights, but an affront to what is — or used to be — an essential element of our national character. Unless this regulatory mandate is not quickly removed or defanged by way of an appropriations rider preventing its implementation, the freedom of the open road that individual car ownership brought to the American Dream, will be but another vague memory of an era no longer to be enjoyed by future generations.
Originally Posted by NinerDoug:
It's ok for a cop to end a high speed chase by making the fleeing suspect crash, but it's not ok for a cop to end a high speed chase with a device that shuts the car's engine off.
Why?
You didn’t answer my question. Where is the line? How far do we go to shut off someone’s property or body? Why does every minor issue in today’s world through the eyes of a dem have to have some compounded solution which disrupts the lives of millions. How many car crashes end in fatalities of others during high speed chases? Is it enough to offset taking away moveable freedom in a vehicle?
Originally Posted by NinerDoug:
At the end of the day:
If you can trust a cop with a gun, which obviously can be misused in devastating ways, then you can trust a cop with a kill switch for cars.
If you're worried about misuse, then misuse can be a crime, just like shooting someone can be a crime.
A cop with a gun would have a hard time stopping 100,000 people from assembling. A cop at a computer in a nation in which the means of people transportation can be disabled with the flick of switch can. You cannot compare the two. Its like saying, if you can trust a cop with a gun...you can trust him with a thermonuclear weapon. The car kill switch technology and side arm technology are not the same kind of things. [Reply]
Originally Posted by GloucesterChief:
The state has already proven itself to be unwanting or incapable of not abusing the powers it already has, including cops with guns. Why do you want to give them another one that will be abused?
Even Patteeu eventually came around to the powers granted to the government through the patriot act were a bad idea due to government abuse of them.
"Powers"?
We're talking about tech that can be used to safely end a high speed chase.
Is there some reason its use can't be limited to ending high speed chases when the individual won't pull over?
Are you ok with cops carrying guns? That gun gives the cop the "power" to shoot you, right?
Are you ok with cops having the "power" to end your life? [Reply]
Originally Posted by El Lobo Gordo:
A cop with a gun would have a hard time stopping 100,000 people from assembling. A cop at a computer in a nation in which the means of people transportation can be disabled with the flick of switch can. You cannot compare the two. Its like saying, if you can trust a cop with a gun...you can trust him with a thermonuclear weapon. The car kill switch technology and side arm technology are not the same kind of things.
Is there some reason this tech needs to include the ability to just randomly disable thousands of vehicles, willy nilly?
Is there some reason severe penalties cannot attach to the misuse of which you are afraid? [Reply]
We're talking about tech that can be used to safely end a high speed chase.
Is there some reason its use can't be limited to ending high speed chases when the individual won't pull over?
Are you ok with cops carrying guns? That gun gives the cop the "power" to shoot you, right?
Are you ok with cops having the "power" to end your life?
I don't completely trust cops with guns but the utility of giving cops guns outweighs my distrust(at least right now). How much additional utility is gained by letting the state have the power of kill switch technology? You, yourself pointed out the cops are already good at stopping drunk drivers with the tools they currently have. Is the additional improvement in that metric worth the additional risk of the new tool being abused? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Boxer_Chief:
You didn’t answer my question. Where is the line? How far do we go to shut off someone’s property or body? Why does every minor issue in today’s world through the eyes of a dem have to have some compounded solution which disrupts the lives of millions. How many car crashes end in fatalities of others during high speed chases? Is it enough to offset taking away moveable freedom in a vehicle?
According to this 2000 deaths in a from 2014-2018 from a high speed chase. So is that worth this initiative based on your argument?
I haven’t seen you make one compelling argument as to how this is an issue that needs solved.
Why is this "taking away movable freedom in a vehicle"?
When a cop turns on his emergency lights to pull you over, and you take off instead, and then the cop physically disables your car, is the cop not "taking away movable freedom in [your] vehicle"?
Is there some reason that this cannot be limited to ending chases, just like use of fire arms is limited to self defense?
Christ, the paranoia around here is amazing. [Reply]
Originally Posted by El Lobo Gordo:
I don't completely trust cops with guns but the utility of giving cops guns outweighs my distrust(at least right now). How much additional utility is gained by letting the state have the power of kill switch technology? You, yourself pointed out the cops are already good at stopping drunk drivers with the tools they currently have. Is the additional improvement in that metric worth the additional risk of the new tool being abused?
Is there some reason the abuse you fear cannot be a crime? [Reply]
Originally Posted by :
We're talking about tech that can be used to safely end a high speed chase.
Lots of things sound noble until you see the results or the unintended consequences.
Originally Posted by :
Is there some reason its use can't be limited to ending high speed chases when the individual won't pull over?
Do you actually think it will be limited to that? Even if it was limited to that by law, do you think the government won't find ways around it?
Thinking limiting it will work is either incredibly ignorant of history or incredibly foolish.
Originally Posted by :
Are you ok with cops carrying guns? That gun gives the cop the "power" to shoot you, right?
A very dangerous power and one that needs much more oversight from the populace. You won't find me arguing that the police don't need more de-escalation training and a shift from law enforcement to peace officers.
Originally Posted by :
Are you ok with cops having the "power" to end your life?
Not particularly but I don't see how giving them additional powers makes things better. [Reply]
Originally Posted by NinerDoug:
Why is this "taking away movable freedom in a vehicle"?
When a cop turns on his emergency lights to pull you over, and you take off instead, and then the cop physically disables your car, is the cop not "taking away movable freedom in [your] vehicle"?
Is there some reason that this cannot be limited to ending chases, just like use of fire arms is limited to self defense?
Christ, the paranoia around here is amazing.
It has nothing to do with paranoia. It’s spending billions of dollars and effort to solve a problem that doesn’t need solving jfc. Let’s try and put effort towards preventing prevailing crime, theft, murder, trafficking and drug trade before installing a irrelevant kill switch on a personal auto.
The liability issues alone make it completely not worth while. You’re just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. [Reply]
Amazing that the left who hates cops and such is ok with the "cops" having this kind of power. Welcome again to clown world, tell me more about Antifa and how they're not an arm of big corporations. [Reply]
Originally Posted by NinerDoug:
Is there some reason this tech needs to include the ability to just randomly disable thousands of vehicles, willy nilly?
Sure....to set up a virtual fences to keep black supremacists from mowing down parades.
Originally Posted by NinerDoug:
Is there some reason severe penalties cannot attach to the misuse of which you are afraid?
"We don't have to worry about Stalin killing us", said the Kulak...."Stalin will surely fear his legal obligation to have to punish himself for such a crime". [Reply]
Originally Posted by Imon Yourside:
Amazing that the left who hates cops and such is ok with the "cops" having this kind of power. Welcome again to clown world, tell me more about Antifa and how they're not an arm of big corporations.
Also amazing that the right, who loves cops, would rather they risk their lives in high speed chases than activate a simple kill switch. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Imon Yourside:
Amazing that the left who hates cops and such is ok with the "cops" having this kind of power. Welcome again to clown world, tell me more about Antifa and how they're not an arm of big corporations.