Posted on 10/09/2007 8:08:42 PM PDT by Eyes Unclouded
DETROIT (AP) — Say some clown steals your car from the parking deck at work. If it's equipped with General Motors' OnStar service, he could be in for a big surprise and you could get a little revenge — and even see your car again.
Starting with about 20 models for 2009, the service will be able to slowly halt a car that is reported stolen, and the radio may even speak up and tell the thief to pull over because police are watching.
OnStar already finds 700 to 800 cars per month using the global positioning system. With the new technology, which OnStar President Chet Huber said GM will apply to the rest of its lineup in future years, OnStar would call police and tell them a stolen car's whereabouts.
Then, if officers see the car in motion and judge it can be stopped safely, they can tell OnStar operators, who will send the car a signal via cell phone to slow it to a halt.
"This technology will basically remove the control of the horsepower from the thief," Huber said. "Everything else in the vehicle works. The steering works. The brakes work."
GM is still exploring the possibility of having the car give a recorded verbal warning before it stops moving. A voice would tell the driver through the radio speakers that police will stop the car, Huber said, and the car's emergency flashers would go on.
"If the thief does nothing else it will coast to a stop. But they can drive off to the side of the road," Huber said.
With the current version of OnStar, drivers can call operators for emergency help, and OnStar operators will contact a car if its sensors detect a crash. The service has about 5 million subscribers.
Those who want OnStar but don't like police having the ability to slow down their car can opt out of the service, Huber said. But he said their research shows that 95 percent of subscribers would like that feature.
OnStar, including the first year's subscription fee, is standard on most of GM's 2008 vehicles. After the first year, the subscription price is $16.95 a month or $199 annually for basic service, which is to include the stolen-vehicle slowdown feature when it's available.
GM would be willing to sell the technology to other automakers in an effort to cut police chases, Huber said.
The new technology likely gives OnStar and GM a leg-up on competitors that market vehicle tracking devices aimed at retrieving stolen vehicles, said Jack Nerad, executive market analyst for Kelley Blue Book in Irvine, Calif. He predicted being able to stop a stolen car would appeal to consumers.
"Once they hear it can be done, I think it will get considerable play," he said.
LoJack Corp., of Westwood, Mass., produces vehicle tracking devices that help authorities locate stolen vehicles but not communicate with them. And SPAL USA in Ankeny, Iowa, sells an anti-car-jacking system with a personal identification transmitter that prevents thieves from using the vehicle.
If it spreads, the technology could make dangerous police chases a thing of the past. Last year, 404 people were killed nationwide in crashes involving police pursuits, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
In California, for example, there were 7,633 police pursuits in 2006, leading to 27 deaths and 771 injuries, according to data from the California Highway Patrol. Those figures represented a decline from 2005, when California authorities were involved in 7,950 pursuits, which were linked to 32 deaths and 1,201 injuries.
Joe Farrow, deputy commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, said about 15 percent of the pursuits are at speeds of 90 miles per hour and greater. The OnStar system could help chases end safely, he said.
Farrow said his agency has sought public-private partnerships that could improve technologies used in police pursuits. The OnStar system was intriguing, he said.
"There are some high-speed chases that we have out here that we'd like to bring to a halt," he said.
Farrow said CHP officers are trained on pursuits every three months and the agency has worked to improve its chase policies.
OnStar's technology could evolve and perhaps make a stolen car impossible to start, Huber said.
"This isn't the last announcement you'll hear from us in this category," he said.
He called On Star and they said they had the vehicle located and it was parked about 20 miles from his place.
On Star would NOT tell him where the truck was located. He had to notify the police and they were instructed to call On Star to get the location information. There are more than a few good reasons why OnStar wants law enforcement involved to retrieve the car.
He got it back.
sw
Not that I think they'd actually be interested in anything going on in my car, but I don't think it's healthy to let them get into the habit of doing their jobs without crossing every t and dotting every i. Every little bit of empowerment the government gets in domestic law enforcement is a little less power in our hands. That can't be a good thing.
And then to add insult to injury, I think some of these LoJack type services will not tell the subscriber where the transmitter is but will only tell law enforcement. If I wanted to know at all times where my vehicle was, I think I'd get one of the cell phones whose location you can see on the internet and leave it in the car. Then I am in control of the information and can use it or release it as I see fit.
‘And then to add insult to injury, I think some of these LoJack type services will not tell the subscriber where the transmitter is but will only tell law enforcement. ‘
If they did tell its customers where the stolen vehicle could be found, within the first 30 days you’d have a vigilante justice situation, and a mega millions lawsuit against the provider of the lo jack system and the info used by the ‘vigilante’.
They’d be out of their minds to give the location to a customer.
...for the insurance companies. I've know insurance companies to do perfectly rational things that I wouldn't want them doing to me.
Exactly. Which is why we need to handle the situation without resorting to third parties who might be put in such a quandary. That was what I was saying. I trust that if the most prudent course was calling the cops, that’s what I would do, but after paying for a service it should be my call, not theirs. That was why I was thinking of alternative methods of accomplishing the same thing that empower me rather than the opposite.
There are GPS trackers available for you to purchase that will give you the option. Private Investigators use them all the time for domestic investigations.
I realize I probably sound paranoid, but I haven't gone out and bought anything to track my car. It's just that it seems like our privacy and our personal control over our lives is being relentlessly chipped away, and I feel like we should be alert to stop as many of those encroachments as we can in advance, and look for ways to keep as much control as we can to ourselves, as a principle, and defy and foil those who would do the chipping.
I know what you mean, its one of the many reasons we moved out of the city and into the rural area we live in today.
Out here in the Appalachian Zone, if you don’t shoot the intruder/car thief, they think your stupid....(chuckle)
Then what would become of all the TV station helicopter pilots in California. They would be out of a job. ;~))
It seems to be entirely voluntary. The purchaser would have to weigh these issues against the real possibility of significant insurance savings. Also the safety benefits of having and not having the system would have to be compared.
But again...its entirely voluntary.
Yea can imagine stalkers misusing the data
A radio changeout will not disable onstar for tracking purposes , it just disables the 2 way communication ,,, on most (if not all) OnStar equipped vehicles the microphone is located on the radio’s faceplate and when they talk back it is routed through the radios speakers ... replacing the radio eliminates the possibility of you being listened in on which would be a plus if you ran a waste disposal company (they can turn on the comm feature without lighting up the red led that indicates a conversation in progress)but the GPS tracking features remain (and remote door unlock etc. etc. etc.),,, when I said OnStar could be disabled in seconds I was referring to cutting the antenna cable that it uses to communicate with.
Why bother with all that rigamorole? Just assess fines, points against DL automagically to the registered owners’ DL, and shoot the info to the insurance company. Then send the ticket in the mail.
LOL! You are right about them wanting to pull us over. That gives them that power rush over us ordinary “citizens.”
“an illegal called me to tell me where it was located”
Wow... did he call you and say “hi, my name is xxxxx, and I’m an illegal alien. I found your car and it is behind the apartment building at 240 Race Street?”
i surmised he was illegal because he would not come forward to meet the police. he lived in an area populated by illegals.
from the beginning: he called me and spoke in broken english, difficult to understand, to say that he knew where my car was.
i thought he was trying to hit me up for money at first, but he persisted.
i telephoned the police because they said not to go near the car before they investigated.
a friend drove me over to the street that he’d mentioned. we found two police cars looking for my vehicle. all three of us struck out. i identified myself to a sargeant and he suggested that i call the telephone number of the informer.
since i didn’t understand the informer’s english, i handed my cell phone to the sargeant; he spoke spanish to him, identifying himself as “policia”. the guy gave more exact details.
it turned out my car was abandoned behind an apartment building. a junior officer finger printed my car with no results and after filling out a form, gave me access to my stuff—strewn out across the parking lot.
meanwhile, the sargeant ticketed and towed five vehicles in the apartment parking lot. the place was a dump. it looked like tj.
a crowd of illegals gathered to look on, peering around the end of the building. one middle aged guy caught my attention; he kept smiling at me. i surmised that he was the informant.
i gladly drove my car out. fortunately it was undamaged.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.