Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

forum

The Feds' Vehicle 'Kill Switch' Mandate Is a Gross (and Dangerous) Violation of Privacy

//www.candyqueendesigns.co.uk/userfiles/image/products/1413972303.jpg)

https://fee.org/articles/the-feds-vehicle-kill-switch-mandate-is-a-gross-and-dangerous-violation-of-privacy/

Who wants a mandatory black box with kill switch to prevent drunk driving?

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

14 comments

Avatar
David9694 | 2 months ago
2 likes

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,” the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution reads.

I’m not a constitutional scholar, but it seems to me that the federal government’s requiring automobile manufacturers to install a system that spies on its driver — and disables his car if transgressions are suspected — hardly meets this constitutional standard. 
 

Well, me neither, Mr Author, but there's probably something in there about, oh I dunno, the right to life, the right not to have yours curtailed by a drunken maniac? Or does it not work that way in the States?

Avatar
levestane | 2 months ago
5 likes

My Peugeot has a kill switch, it operates at random and inconvenient times.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to levestane | 2 months ago
3 likes

levestane wrote:

My Peugeot has a kill switch, it operates at random and inconvenient times.

It's testing whether you have the required level of calmness to be a good driver

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 2 months ago
0 likes

I'm not in favour of kill-switches in cars as it provides too big a target once a flaw is found. It'd be easy for eco-protestors/terrorists to bring a city to a standstill by triggering all the kill-switches at once.

Also, it's a technological solution to a law enforcement issue with the tech gadget in possession of the suspect - that's generally a bad idea as it allows people to tinker with it and bypass it.

I do like the idea of mandatory black boxes in vehicles though, but the focus should be on detection of health issues if the driving standard starts to decline sharply, or providing incentives for careful, considerate driving.

Avatar
David9694 replied to hawkinspeter | 2 months ago
3 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'm not in favour of kill-switches in cars as it provides too big a target once a flaw is found. It'd be easy for eco-protestors/terrorists to bring a city to a standstill by triggering all the kill-switches at once.

stop threatening us with a good time!

It's November 1893 - "we can't invent this, someone might abuse it" as it applies to cars? 
 

PS maybe find a better phrase, like no-kill switch?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to David9694 | 2 months ago
0 likes

David9694 wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'm not in favour of kill-switches in cars as it provides too big a target once a flaw is found. It'd be easy for eco-protestors/terrorists to bring a city to a standstill by triggering all the kill-switches at once.

stop threatening us with a good time!

It's November 1893 - "we can't invent this, someone might abuse it" as it applies to cars? 
 

PS maybe find a better phrase, like no-kill switch?

It would most likely give me a chuckle to see a whole city in gridlock if someone did stop all the vehicles at once, but I'm not sure that the emergency services would be too happy about it (the roads would be impassable even if their vehicles had no such device).

It's not so much an invention as applying existing tech in a foolhardy manner - like installing a big on-off switch on the outside of power stations.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to David9694 | 2 months ago
0 likes

David9694 wrote:

PS maybe find a better phrase, like no-kill switch?

A less-kill switch?

Avatar
David9694 replied to hawkinspeter | 2 months ago
3 likes

Been saving this. 

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to David9694 | 2 months ago
2 likes

David9694 wrote:

Been saving this. 

I'm waiting for the road.cc round up of squirrel related xmas gifts

Avatar
Rendel Harris | 2 months ago
3 likes

Sure the usual libertarian loonies will find some clause in the constitution that they say proves the founding fathers were dedicated to the fundamental liberty of every American to drive whilst smashed out of their brains.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Rendel Harris | 2 months ago
4 likes

I believe the prevailing legal view is that the 2nd amendment is pretty expansive so as long as you point out your vehicle is a weapon you may have the authorities scratching their heads.

Avatar
David9694 replied to chrisonabike | 2 months ago
1 like

In the open carry states?

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to David9694 | 2 months ago
1 like

Concealed could be a bit uncomfy.

Or just drive a tank.  Why carry your weapon when your weapon can carry you?

Avatar
Wingguy replied to chrisonabike | 2 months ago
3 likes

chrisonatrike wrote:

I believe the prevailing legal view is that the 2nd amendment is pretty expansive so as long as you point out your vehicle is a weapon you may have the authorities scratching their heads.

Ironically it's a favourite refrain of the Second Amendment absolutists that driving is only a privilege but firearm ownership is a right.

Latest Comments