Posted on 12/06/2021 6:37:43 AM PST by george76
Buried deep within the massive infrastructure legislation recently signed by resident 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.”
As has become standard for legislative mandates passed by Congress, this measure is disturbingly short on details. What we do know is that the “safety” device must “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired.”
Everything about this mandatory measure should set off red flares.
First, use of the word “passively” suggests the system will always be on and constantly monitoring the vehicle. Secondly, the system must connect to the vehicle’s operational controls, so as to disable the vehicle either before driving or during, when impairment is detected. Thirdly, it will be an “open” system, or at least one with a backdoor, meaning authorized (or unauthorized) third-parties can remotely access the system’s data at any time.
This is a privacy disaster in the making, and the fact that the provision made it through the Congress reveals — yet again — how little its members care about the privacy of their constituents.
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.
For example, what if a driver is not drunk, but sleepy, and the car forces itself to the side of the road before the driver can find a safe place to pull over and rest? Considering that there are no realistic mechanisms to immediately challenge or stop the car from being disabled, drivers will be forced into dangerous situations without their consent or control.
The choice as to whether a vehicle can or cannot be driven — for vehicles built after 2026 — will rest in the hands of an algorithm over which the car’s owner or driver have neither knowledge nor control.
If that is not reason enough for concern, there are serious legal issues with this mandate. Other vehicle-related enforcement methods used by the Nanny State, such as traffic cameras and license plate readers, have long presented constitutional problems; notably with the 5th Amendment’s right to not self-incriminate, and the 6th Amendment’s right to face one’s accuser.
The same constitutional issues abound with this new technology, but with the added confusion surrounding what Congress even means by “impaired driving.” Does it mean legally drunk, or perhaps under the limit but still “impaired” to a degree? Would police be summoned automatically by the system in order to make that determination? These are questions that should have been addressed openly and thoroughly during the legislative process, not left to later, back-room negotiations between interested parties other than individual car buyers – manufacturers, regulators, insurance companies and law enforcement.
Ironically, or perhaps intentionally, there also is no detail in the legislation about who would have access to the data collected and stored by the system. Could it be used by police, and could they access this information without a warrant? What about insurance companies, eager to know with what frequency their customers drove after drinking alcohol, even if it was below the legal limit? Such a trove of data presents a lucrative prize to all manner of public and private entities (including hackers), none of which have our best interests at heart.
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.
From 2007;
“General Motors plans to equip 1.7 million of its 2009 models with a system that allows OnStar operators to cut engine power in the car if the police request it. The system was demonstrated in Washington, D.C. today.”
https://www.livescience.com/1938-police-disable-cars-demand.html
Here’s what I mean. If Resistance #3 is the Big Brother kill switch, just short it out.
Please read my tagline. Welcome to the new Reich.
There needs to be some kind of “kill switch” on this runaway, out-of-control government...SHUT IT DOWN!!!
I thought such kill switch already existed.
They just keep on fascisting.
I predict a brisk market in kill-switch killing.
We need a law putting kill switches on ballot scanning machines that kick in at a minute past midnight
* * *
Absolutely, but the GOPe will not tamper with election machines, only personal driving machines. Hypocrites!
I guess I’ll be keeping my 2005 Yukon Denali for a while yet. Over a quarter million miles and it still runs great, all you have to do is keep up with the running gear.
My 15 year old grandson is turning into a motor head. He bought a 1974 Ford 250 recently, still can’t drive yet, but he is rebuilding it. He learned to rebuild a carburetor, bought another junker truck for the axle and scrubbed and rebuilt the motor. He is home schooled so has time everyday to work on his project.
He loves to tell us all, that when the “EMP” hits and we are all dead in the water with our new cars, he will be coming over to pick us up.
a “vehicle kill switch.”
I see an after market business springing up of disconnecting this “kill switch”, much like there was when the government mandated seat belts had to be fastened to start your car.
YES
How about skidding on a slippery road & trying to avoid a crash-—And your vehicle SHUTS DOWN????
Gee, and to think I was annoyed over third brake lights and seat belt buzzers.
Why does no one discuss the violations of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th amendments? Yess, the third; who cares if the soldier stationed in your home is an electronic one or a real one?
Our 2018 Rav4 will tell me to take a break and shows a cup of coffee if I am perceived by the car’s computer and sensors to be tired, drunk or whatever. Heck, navigating narrow Maine roads requires dodging all sorts of stuff, trash, construction, bicycles, joggers, etc.
Incredibly dangerous traveling down a three line highway at 65 MPH when your engine suddenly just stops and all you have is momentum to let you desperately fight your way to a shoulder.
It was random. Hard to reproduce. My mechanic would keep the car for a couple of days, drive it around, never see it. I kept telling him 'it started right after you replaced the distributor' but he would say it couldn't be that. This went on for months. After the catalytic converter got destroyed by misfires he said 'you know what, there was a fault in the distributor wiring, who would have imagined? I'll replace that for free. I'll be super careful this time. And the catalytic converter I destroyed will be charged at regular price for parts and labor'.
The car got traded in the next day. He's not my mechanic anymore.
The government should be euthanized.
I predicted this. I know these people like I know the back of my hand. They want total control. If they can stop your car “for your own safety” they can control your every movement.
Good idea.
Let’s mandate that all executive branch officials have this kill switch in their vehicles first.
Then move to the legislative branch and the judiciary.
(although I would like to see it used in the State Dept first)
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.