"Explaining the Car 'Kill Switch' Controversy

[orleans]

my daughter asked me if i heard of this, said she's been reading posts about it. i don't recall hearing of this so i googled and found this article from kelly blue book:

A growing social media frenzy suggests that the federal government will soon require a “kill switch” in new cars. In its most extreme form, the claim says it would let government officials deactivate all cars remotely.

The rumor spiraled last week as politicians got involved. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis posted to X (the social media site formerly known as Twitter) saying, “The idea that the federal government would require auto manufacturers to equip cars with a ‘kill switch’ that can be controlled by the government is something you’d expect in Orwell’s 1984.”

What is this controversy that pits Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) against the governor of Florida and some House Republicans?

snip

The law in question is known as the HALT Drunk Driving Act, and was passed as part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It passed both the Senate and House that year, with the support of all Democrats and 19 Republicans in the former, and 200 Democrats and 13 Republicans in the latter.
,
more

https://www.kbb.com/car-news/explaining-the-car-kill-switch-controversy/

and, along the same line, a multi state floral company (that bought out a chicagoland floral chain) put cameras in their delivery vans. a driver said the camera yelled at him "put down your phone! put down your phone!" when he was taking a bite of an apple. it will also yell "eyes on the road eyes on the road!"

i used to drive for a couple floral companies when i was in my early twenties. i loved that job, loved driving, and when i was delivering to people (and not flower shops) they were always so delighted to be getting flowers.

i don't think i'd care for it too much if i had some camera yelling at me or even just watching me.

[snowybirdie]

1. I always thought

Car credit firms could stop a car remotely if payment was in arrears.

[hlthe2b]

3. They can in cars manufactured fairly recently (after 2023, I think)...

But, they can't do so while the car is moving--something this Federal measure may not prevent--not to mention the fact this is the Federal Government doing it. Are you REALLY okay with THAT?!

[snowybirdie]

11. Hell No

[mwmisses4289]

6. Some could, but I don't think the practice was widespread, and there were some lawsuits about the practice.

Not sure if they ever made it all the way through the courts.

[hlthe2b]

2. Well, while MADD may be well-meaning, this is dangerous as hell (and I'm not even including the

total authoritarian nature of this action). Given how reckless LE can be with high speed chases, how, pray tell, will they ensure you vehicle is actually stopped before "killing" it? Electronic transmissions you say. Well goody for you. Dead cars in emergencies result in dead people-ever thought of that? Whether it be someone trying to escape a aggressive, armed driver, or a home intruder, a stalking violent boyfriend/husband, seek emergency medical care? And then please tell me that the intrusiveness (and theft of your expensive vehicle) may not be an issue? Oh, never happen to you, right? Just like American Citizens have never been scooped up by ICE in their violent and indiscriminate pogroms, right?

HELL NO!

[AZJonnie]

5. Thanks for saving me the typing!

Exactly this

[Jerry2144]

9. Also, any sensor used to determine drunk/sober will have false positives and false negatives

A false negative could allow a drunk to still drive and kill someone. That would open the door for liability on the manufacturer.

A false positive could prevent someone from driving somewhere vital even though the person is totally sober. Situations like dying family member in the hospital, court date, or other things that are vitally important to get to. There could be manufacturer liability for that, too.

Can it detect drugs other than alcohol?

Why drive the costs up for everyone and increase complexity? Drunk driving isn’t done by the vast majority of drivers. This technology should only be required if a person were convicted of drunk driving as part of supervised parole.

[Walleye]

4. Maga bitched endlessly about having to wear a mask to protect the public from virus

They said the requirement was only because Democrats wanted “control“. Say what?

[AZJonnie]

7. As I'm reading it, this was passed by Democrats and DeSantis is opposing it (nt)

[bucolic_frolic]

8. Hackers will see a prime target

and stop traffic cold.

[gay texan]

10. Glad i dont want a new car n/t