Your government wants to track EVERY car ALL the time

[manyolcars]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40795

[40StudeDude]

Doesn't surprise me...I'm thinkin' new cars with OBD III use a lot of this technology already.

R-

[NoSurf]

That's fucked up.

[briggs&strattonChev]

I dont believe it will happen any time soon, nor am I worried at all about it

[daign]

[ QUOTE ]
I've probably muddled some of the details, but essentially someone got in an accident and killed someone. The case revolved around whether or not the guy driving did anything to avoid the accident. The cops believed he was driving too fast, and didn't stop. The black box in the car recorded the guys speed to be way over the limit, and the fact the guy never hit the brake pedal before the accident.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
In the story referred to above, the car was a Corvette (I think '95 Corvettes were the first car to have this technology). The police used data from the car's computer to get the driver convicted of vehicular homocide or manslaughter. It was big news in the car magazines at the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

My new Chrysler has a black box that records speed, braking and various other reactions before the airbags deploy. This technology is nothing new and inevitable. The technology has been around since 1995. Satellite and GPS tracking would take the whole thing to the next level.

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist nor do I care too much. I have no intention of killing anyone or myself with my vehicles any time soon... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

For more info click here.. (http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7386)

[DrJ]

Damnit Manyol!
Don't get me started.... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif
Government = The biggest GANG in town.

If they have the technology to follow the cars and "prevent accidents"? then they have the technology and responsibility to have their fucking surveilance system send a governing signal to the car so it won't speed in the first place rather than just a ticket after the fact.

I hate fucking governments.....FUCK fuck fuck fu

[daign]

Now now Doc J, they haven't kept me from doing 30 foot burnouts quite yet. I don't think theyd be too keen on 130mph trips to vegas either. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[DrJ]

It suggests in the article that the authorities could "read" the car's "black box" and issue citations based on the speed history it has recorded...
Are you going to try and tell me you don't "flow with traffic" at the 75-85 mph most people do on So. Cal. freeways ALL THE TIME? Can you imagine what a day in day out multiplication of speeding tickets would cost if they decided to check it once a year? They would fucking OWN YOUR ASSand paycheck for the rest of your life!!

[GomezGarage]

Is it 1984 or 2004... Orwell was just about 20 years off...

[FrameDragger]

The figure they settled on for deployment is quite interesting...

"$666 Million", wonder how they came up with that one?

(If you have Power Point):

http://www.its.dot.gov/speeches/its-prg[1].ppt

[smittyshotrods]

Roger you are right the technology has been used in some form or fashion for awhile now,ie.....postal service,UPS,FedEx and various trucking companies. However I don't think we have to worry about this happening any time soon. I'm with the rest of you---I don't like it and it scares me a little to think government is digging deeper into our private and personal lives. This is directed more toward new cars so what do we have to worry about? http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Tinbender]

Then again, when some asshole in an H2 takes out your wife and kids at 70 in a school zone, maybe you won't mind having a little information about what happened.

[praisethelowered]

No doubt man

[ QUOTE ]
Is it 1984 or 2004... Orwell was just about 20 years off...

[/ QUOTE ]

Continuous war without an enemy that can ever surrender or be beaten = phony war on terror.

Pre-crime = arrests and people held without charges for years under the patriot act

news speak = everything that is reported on ABC, CBS, and esp. Fox.

Big brother = well. . . Big Brother. Except instead of force people actually WANT 24hr. "reality" t.v. surveilance.

I used to think that book was funny . . .until Florida 2000.

We could fight back but most of us are too fat to move.

[TP]

Tinbender , I agree with you.All it did was find the guilty party.

[FrameDragger]

Giving the info to the cops looks pretty much like it's on the radar too. Check the last 2 paragraphs... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif

I dug this out of one of their sites...

Dave Davis on:
Big Brother's Private Life

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the June, 1998 issue of Car and Driver magazine, columnist Brock Yates rants about the use of E-ZPass, the electronic toll collection system in use by TRANSCOM in the New York area. According to Mr. Yates, the E-ZPass system is intended, "To track the speed and location of E-ZPass holders in a grand leap into the nightmare world of Big Brother-ism." In Mr. Yates fevered view, assurances that systems such as EZ-Pass are intended to aid in congestion relief and to increase motorist convenience on tollways are brushed aside as just another big government lie. Such seemingly innocent intentions are merely irrelevant sidelines. In reality, Mr. Yates asserts, such high-tech vehicle identification systems are linked philosophically to (gasp) photographic enforcement technology as tools of slavering and sleepless social engineers intent on (gasp, gasp) improving law enforcement, and otherwise over-regulating all aspects of mobility in our previously free society. He envisions a system that is not content with tracking people, it begins to control them. He warns of a future, "when the car might become a symbol not of freedom but of civil bondage."

Ironically, at the same time, our friends in Washington, D.C. believe that too much data now being collected in real-time at traffic control centers is being irretrievably lost. (See ITS as a Data Resource.) It is argued that much of this data should be archived for use by researchers. Presumably, the use of this mountain of information when properly sifted by armies of researchers using the most modern supercomputers can unlock secrets to traffic flow the likes of which we have never seen.

Meanwhile, privacy issues are being raised with increasing frequency as conspicuously mounted video cameras sprout like technological weed stems along roadways. With sufficient camera density in an area, it is possible to track a person from their office, across the parking lot to their car, out the driveway, onto the street, down the freeway to their exit, through their neighborhood and all the way home. A nefarious traffic management peeper could thereby learn a lot about certain individuals, a lot more than he should.

The point is that all of this automated vehicle identification and video technology makes the invasion of privacy possible. Unless someone can come up with a sure-fire way to make it impossible—and I am pessimistic about this—we ITS practitioners have to admit that it is possible for us to invade people's privacy. We have a real problem here. We have this problem even if we never really invade anyone's privacy. We have the problem because we have the power. Once you have the power, you are automatically suspected of using it. Once you are suspected, you can never prove your innocence. The ITS community is defenseless on the privacy issue.

The fact that ITS-enabled privacy invasion is not actually happening on any widespread scale is no defense. The fact that most people's private driving behavior is uninteresting is beside the point. The fact that the people minding the traffic operation center are too busy to track people in their mundane meanderings is irrelevant. The observation that most people who spend a lot of time worrying about having their privacy invaded are so boring as to make invading their privacy a waste of time is a waste of time. The only thing that matters is that ITS technology has given us power that can be misused. Any group with that kind of power is impossible for some people to trust.

On this privacy issue, ITS is in trouble, except in one area: law enforcement. It appears that Mr. Yates has picked the one area out of the privacy morass where ITS has clean intellectual hands. We actually do participate in a form of civil traffic bondage. We are required to be obedient, respectful servants to the traffic laws. Each of us is expected to slavishly obey speed limits, stop signs and red lights. When we disobey, we can get punished. Who besides Mr. Yates does not know this?

Traffic is not a sport. Despite the desires of some motorists (many of whom may be Mr. Yates readers), traffic is not a game that can be won by repeatedly evading the detection of law enforcement. Authorities have every right to use technology to identify and gather evidence of unlawful activity. It is indisputably true that it will become a lot less fun to speed if the police have means of detecting and citing everyone who speeds. As a matter of fact, such a system would take ALL the joy out of driving too fast. That is the point of law enforcement, Mr. Yates, taking the fun out of breaking the law.

Mr. Yates merely picked the wrong example to use in his anti-ITS rant. If he had only known that, in the midst of the unsavory regions he habituates, ITS privacy invaders had been tracking his movements, gathering mounds of damaging information about his intimate motoring practices, he might have been more careful about raising the privacy issue. He might have learned the lesson all ITS practitioners should know: "Keep privacy issues to yourself!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave Davis' Day Job is Traffic Engineer for the City of Farmer's Branch, TX (a suburb of Dallas)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[manyolcars]

[ QUOTE ]
Roger you are right the technology has been used in some form or fashion for awhile now,ie.....postal service,UPS,FedEx and various trucking companies. However I don't think we have to worry about this happening any time soon. I'm with the rest of you---I don't like it and it scares me a little to think government is digging deeper into our private and personal lives. This is directed more toward new cars so what do we have to worry about? http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

This is directed more toward new cars so what do we have to worry about? Do you REALLY think they will let us drive our old cars without the new technology? They will make it mandatory for us to install it.

[manyolcars]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont believe it will happen any time soon, nor am I worried at all about it

[/ QUOTE ]
You dont believe it, therefore its not gonna happen?

[willowbilly3]

Ah, yes more laws and we don't have enforcement for the ones we already have.
It really doesn't matter to me because I will never own anything that new in my life. And what about the Onstar system. Mecedes has had a version of that for 12 years or so. They can tell where you are and disable the car at any time.
And you see those 18 wheelers with a little round thingy on top of the cab? Same thing, there are hauling some nasty shit and if hijacked can be shut down on the spot and tracked.

[Nads]

Don't get me started, if I say too much I'm done.

[manyolcars]

[ QUOTE ]
Damnit Manyol!
Don't get me started.... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif
Government = The biggest GANG in town.

If they have the technology to follow the cars and "prevent accidents"? then they have the technology and responsibility to have their fucking surveilance system send a governing signal to the car so it won't speed in the first place rather than just a ticket after the fact.



[/ QUOTE ]
We have the technology available NOW to prevent cars from running into things. Onboard Radar can apply the brakes and steer the car. I read that GPS is in new cars because the Insurance companies want to know where you go and how many miles you drive. The insurance companies are not wasting any time about their costs for the recent Florida storms either. The insurance costs creep up all the time, but on my one of my houses, I just got my new premium notice. It was $420 last year, now they want me to pay $660!!! That is a helluva increase!
A wise fella told me, Insurance companies are NOT in the insurance business----They are in the Money-Making business.
Now Dr J you know theres no money to be Forced out of us by using technology to govern our speed--the money is in allowing us to speed, then Forcing us to pay.
Speed is not the factor causing wrecks anyway.

[DrJ]

[ QUOTE ]
... I just got my new premium notice. It was $420 last year, now they want me to pay $660!!! That is a helluva increase!
A wise fella told me, Insurance companies are NOT in the insurance business----They are in the Money-Making business.

[/ QUOTE ]

My homeowner's went up about that same percentage last year, it's the "gotcha factor" if you have a mortgage, ya gotta carry the insurance, so they gotcha!
They decided they needed to raise the levee on the Los ANgeles river because it might overflow in a "500 year rain" so they made everyone in the river's hypothetical flood plain take out flood insurance at about $400 a wack to one govt' flood insurance front company. well they took about three years to "fix" the levee at a cost of about two thirds of what they took in from the insurance, and kept the rest for profit.
Government = GANG

[PEDDRO]

[ QUOTE ]
They will make it mandatory for us to install it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Over here, that'd cause a change of Government.

I can't imagine a country with America's reputation for protecting their own civil rights going for that. I know I'd be pisssed if someone used such a piss poor argument to invade my privacy with that technology.

[drgnwgn289]

They'll have to do it after they disarm us...

[smittyshotrods]

I can see government forcing it down auto manufacturers throats just like they did with ABS brakes,seat belts and airbags. There selling point is that its all in the name of safety and that gets the masses to buy into it. Granted I'm all for safety don't get me wrong and the before items have definitely proved to save lives. However where does it end? There has to be a line drawn somewhere. I just believe government has no place in our personal lives. There are plenty of other ways to make cars safer without tracking our whereabouts. I don't think it would ever be implemented on older vehicles. Hell we drive around now with plates that are good for five years, we are exempt from inspection stickers and emmisions testing so I think it's safe to say our hot rods and customs are gonna be ok. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[BigDdy31]

[ QUOTE ]
No doubt man

[ QUOTE ]
Is it 1984 or 2004... Orwell was just about 20 years off...

[/ QUOTE ]

Continuous war without an enemy that can ever surrender or be beaten = phony war on terror.

Pre-crime = arrests and people held without charges for years under the patriot act

news speak = everything that is reported on ABC, CBS, and esp. Fox.

Big brother = well. . . Big Brother. Except instead of force people actually WANT 24hr. "reality" t.v. surveilance.

I used to think that book was funny . . .until Florida 2000.

We could fight back but most of us are too fat to move.



[/ QUOTE ]

Amen my brother. People are using this 9/11 mentality just like I thought they would. To enact every oppressive law they can.

And to the guy who said the thing about the H2 and my family, ya know, I'm actually willing to sacrifice some things for my freedom. If I have to pay through personal loss in order to retain my rights, then I will do so.

Regards,

BDE

[Jer]

This technology is already being used on passenger cars, it's just not as widespread as they want it or public-known. OBDII was mandatory from 1996-up and it has the ability, and in some instances, the "Black box" has been used to save people from a guilty verdict. I don't believe OBDIII is out yet, mainly because it has the ability to shut your vehicle down, lock you in, etc and the government supposedly wouldn't pass it into effect. That article confuses me with what I have been told for the last 2 years, unless the government thinks it's inadequate and theirs is better. And I've known you've all seen the commercials about OnStar unlocking people's doors for them...It's not GONNA happen in 2010, it's already out there.
-jeremy

[fab32]

To all of you that think we are going to be exempt because we drive old cars, SURPRISE!!!!! With the stroke of a pen our cars could be outlawed and forever parked in the garage. Yea, I'm saying only to be used as yard art and then just as long as the neighbors don't complain.
We forget that everyone in Washington holds each others hand and slaps each other on the back regardless of party affiliation). Don't think for a second that if one (or a key few) of our "elected officials" gets it in his head that the country would be better off without 'ALL OF THOSE DANGEROUS OLD CARS' that the "buddy system" could get such a law passed. It's the only sure way to curb the rising cost of origional '32 Ford parts and cars.

Frank

[Blownolds]

[ QUOTE ]

A wise fella told me, Insurance companies are NOT in the insurance business----They are in the Money-Making business.
Now Dr J you know theres no money to be Forced out of us by using technology to govern our speed--the money is in allowing us to speed, then Forcing us to pay.


[/ QUOTE ]

DING DING DING DING throw that man a bone.

As for conspiracy theory, I do not feel I am being paranoid in the least when I say these things will all be GRAVELY used later to completely control our lives. You can WATCH IT HAPPEN, slowly but surely. Here in the Los Angeles area they have cameras at many, many intersetions. Don't you think this will all add up later? I do. And it will happen, besides the fact that American citizens are too lazy or too busy to do much about it, the federal and state governments already have too much control. Therefore, they have the upper hand. And besides all that, there are passages in the Bible that speak of things like this in the last days. Since this is a Hot Rod board, I won't go into that, but some of you will know what I'm talkin' about.

[manyolcars]

[ QUOTE ]
I can see government forcing it down auto manufacturers throats just like they did with ABS brakes,seat belts and airbags. There selling point is that its all in the name of safety and that gets the masses to buy into it. Granted I'm all for safety don't get me wrong and the before items have definitely proved to save lives. However where does it end? There has to be a line drawn somewhere. I just believe government has no place in our personal lives. There are plenty of other ways to make cars safer without tracking our whereabouts. I don't think it would ever be implemented on older vehicles. Hell we drive around now with plates that are good for five years, we are exempt from inspection stickers and emmisions testing so I think it's safe to say our hot rods and customs are gonna be ok. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont want to cause any hard feelings--this is only opinions--but go read RFs post-Big Brother Rules>>>>>>>California has finally decided to come down on hot rodders. After successfully raiding the Kit Car manufacturers, the Law (attorney general, local and DMV police, SCAQMD) has begun its target on rod shops. Their goal is to seek out "misrepresented" cars, namely fiberglass hot rods. The main reason is simple: tax money. Cars built and subsequently sold in CA (and that's key that the sale is in CA) are being picked to the bone to not only verify its identity (ie '32 Ford roadster), but to prove that "adequate" taxes were paid.

Bottom line, the days of the $500 roadster are history. The State wants its money, and they're going after pretty much every hot rodder with a hot rod registered in CA.

One "major" shop has been "visited" so far (FBI-style!), and it will only escalate from here. Word has it they've already been taking plate numbers at car shows...joy is in the air!

[fab32]

Blownolds, You've got it nailed. That's the way they work, just introduce the idea, expand it slowly and before you know it WHAM, gotcha. If you've been paying attention, that's exactly what has been happening to our right to keep and bear arms. If Hillary is ever elected President we'll see the last nail in that coffin unless we wake up. Don't mean to be getting political, just being aware of a small thing called REALITY.
And yes, I'm aware of the Bible passages that you refer to.

Frank

[manyolcars]

Ryan doesnt want politics here and I understand why. I agree with him. This thread IS about old cars!

[fab32]

I just read the post about us having spcial license plates and some other SPECIAL considerations, so we will be safe. Guess again, those special HOT ROD plates just makes it easier to find you when the time comes to CRACK DOWN.

Frank

[JamesG]

Two things never to never discuss on a message board= Religion or polictics.


But our government is still a group of lying SOB's even though I won't discuss that here.....

[FrameDragger]

Outlaw old cars?

I wonder how many Auto Enthusiests are in the U.S..

<ul type="square"> We (HAMBers) are a very small amount of the whole Collector Car Community We (types interested in the auto hobby) tend to be more physically agressive, and more likely to not take this sitting down than most groups. Hmmm... (How many of us are also gun owners?) We have a good representing body (SEMA), which could become a SERIOUS political factor if we really get fucked with (Everyone should actively support them) Inline 6 degrees of separation... Even if somone is not into cars, they know and probably care about someone who is... I would bet that at least a few of our officials have been into cars at some point or another... [/list]

Won't Happen...

But if it does, DR J will be right about "The Revolution" beginning.

[____]

why bother,the GOVERMENT already knows where you're at ,,and at all times..you carry a cell phone ,right? http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif(i dont) they can track you with GPS with them....(been that way for a while)done deal

[smittyshotrods]

No hard feelings. I'm just expressing my opinion. Many have made good points on this subject and I am open minded.

[fab32]

Framedragger, I hear what you are saying about us being a small segment of the auto hobby scene. But guess what, the whole auto hobby scene isn't a pimple on an elephants ass when it comes to the total amount of cars in use in this country. Better do some research before you think WE are safe from Government intervention because of our numbers.
Yes, SEMA is looking out for us and they should be supported but BIG BROTHER would/could roll over them like a steamroller.

Frank

[daign]

[ QUOTE ]
They'll have to do it after they disarm us...


[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. You guys are all paranoid over nothing. Keep driving and enjoy yourselves. If I believed everything I heard on the radio, tv, and internet I'd be one seriously paranoid person.

Who cares? If it comes down to fighting for my rights I will. Until then you're just raising your blood pressure because some NO NAME magazine wrote an article.

[slammed]

Word search: FEMA work camp's... And Exective Order's of FEMA.

[willowbilly3]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Roger you are right the technology has been used in some form or fashion for awhile now,ie.....postal service,UPS,FedEx and various trucking companies. However I don't think we have to worry about this happening any time soon. I'm with the rest of you---I don't like it and it scares me a little to think government is digging deeper into our private and personal lives. This is directed more toward new cars so what do we have to worry about? http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

This is directed more toward new cars so what do we have to worry about? Do you REALLY think they will let us drive our old cars without the new technology? They will make it mandatory for us to install it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's just not going to happen in our lives. The logistics of retrofitting all old cars with the system just isn't feasable. If is does get to be a mandated thing they will exempt old cars just like California does on emissions, and that's a big IF. Usually impementing new designs they allow that in 10 or 15 years most of the old stuff will be gone and the new will be in place. Kind of like brainwashing a society. You don't even try to change old peoples minds, you just work on the kids and in 20 or 30 years you have your programmed adults.

[magoo]

if they told us that we had to fit these features to our cars in order to use them we would do so reluctantly. Unfortunately their approach seems to be that they gradually force our cars off the road by removing leaded fuel,removing supplies of cheap parts and anything else they can do to make it very difficult to continue our lifestyle. Finally the only source of transport available to us will be newer boring cars with features only they want us to have

[Flat Ernie]

FIRST - I apologize for the length - I got a little carried away &amp; this is a subject I'm somewhat passionate about.


[ QUOTE ]
That's the way they work, just introduce the idea, expand it slowly and before you know it WHAM, gotcha.

[/ QUOTE ]

The term in the criminal justice system is "net widening". Our legal system works on precedent. If something has been decided a particular way, future judges are virtually duty bound to rule that way unless they can forcefully argue against &amp; retain a majority. It doesn't happen often.

A precedent is nothing more than a "line in the sand" where everything on one side is deemed good &amp; everything on the other side is deemed bad. The biggest battle (should) comes when establishing the line - once that battle is lost, the "slippery slope" becomes a potential reality. The war is lost when that battle is lost because you &amp; I don't usually get to decide what falls into which category!

However, once that initial battle is lost, it is much, much easier to then move the line, than to establish it in the first place. This is the line of thinking that says, "miliary weapons are bad &amp; have no place in civilized society because they're designed to kill people - so if those guns are bad, guns that are like them are bad - first semi-automatics, then large caliber weapons, high-capacity magazines, etc. The line keeps shifting. That's why groups such as the NRA are viewed as radical - they're trying to protect our right to have military weapons! What lunatics! (exaggerated rhetoric for effect)

Free speech is a good example here. We must protect the KKK's right to assemble &amp; freely speak their views. If we can guarantee protection to the lowest scum of our society, the rest of us can sleep easy our rights are safe. This is true.

In this day &amp; age, safety is the biggest club on the market to beat folks into submission with. "If it saves just one life, it will be worth it." Well, Spock said it best, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." This is precisely the scaremongering that says, "you'd think differently if it happened to your family." Truth is, loss of life is always tragic - there's no getting around it. But our over litigious society has turned a corner &amp; is accellerating towards a police state. That is not scaremongering, that is reality. As long as we continue to go along with this "safety first" mentality (foisted on us originally by the insurance companies, BTW - staying slightly on-topic), we will be just as guilty and we'll know it when our children ask us to tell them about the good old days when the US was a free and great nation. This violates the precept that rules in a democracy (or a republic such as ours) should be utilitarian - that is, the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Notice there is no "if it saves one life" in there anywhere.

I'm a vociferous privacy &amp; personal rights advocate. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or a radical though. And to believe that we should have 100% privacy is both unreasonable &amp; unrealistic. We give up certain "law of the jungle" rights to "join" a society in return for certain expectations. Where there is a right, there is typically a corresponding duty. We have a right to protection, the society has a duty to protect us. Sometimes it's a negative duty - we have a right to privacy, the society has a duty to leave us alone.

Rights come from different areas - natural rights, civil rights (law), and conferred rights.

However, rights can be violated. The supreme court uses a standard called "strict scrutiny" - the short version is to answer 2 questions: is this the 'necessary means' to a 'compelling interest' AND does it accomplish the stated objective. Both questions must be answered in the affirmative for your rights to be violated legally. ( http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif )

As an oversimplified example, we all believe that we have the civil right to free speech (witness the forum). Gov't then, has a duty to not restrict speech. However, there are exceptions to this right. For example, you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater (how 'bout a crowded forum? http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif ) Most reasonable people accept this limitation.

Using the "strict scrutiny" evaluation, here's how the legal thought process works:

If you yell "fire" in a crowded theater, there is a very high risk of injury to people. If you do this and there is no fire, you have endangered people unnecessarily. The compelling interest is the safety of the people inside the theater. The necessary means to ensure they are not trampled due to someone yelling "fire" for no reason is to not allow people to yell "fire" for no reason. It DOES meet it's stated objective. (this is a very simplistic approach to "strict scrutiny")

To sum up, rights can be violated legally, but they must meet strict legal requirements. That doesn't mean they always do, it just means no one has taken it to the courts - yet.

You often hear about one's "reasonable expectation of privacy" - this is where the Orwellians are chipping away at our rights. They've created the caveat "reasonable expectation" &amp; now are using our open society to argue that, in effect, there is no right to privacy. (this is an extreme oversimplification used for dramatic effect http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif )

Law/Philosophy/Ethics class is over - getting back to topic:
They have been selling these &amp; similar systems for years as has been mentioned (On-Star &amp; similar). Couple this with technology such as cell-phones, blackberry, blue-tooth &amp; the host of automated PDAs &amp; Big Brother hasn't quite grown up yet, but he's that grade-school aged kid already showing signs of becoming a bully later in life.

For those that think it won't happen to us because we drive old cars - that's naive. When the majority of the cars have this technology &amp; the safety nazis determine vehicles w/o this "life saving" technology are true hazards, we will be forced to comply or take our vehicles off the road. It will be simple &amp; innocent at first, but over time, will become more &amp; more intrusive.

True, it may not happen in our lifetimes (for those older HAMBers), but if you're truly selfish enough not to care about the greater menace this poses to our progeny, please hurry up &amp; die. (sarcasm) http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Again, I apologize for the length &amp; appearing to be "teach-y". I'm not a lawyer (although I was a crim/pre-law major) nor a philosopher. But I am a student of our constitution &amp; democracy.

If you think this was bad, don't get me started on drug testing!! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[OutLaw]

OutLaw old cars...Then only OutLaw will have them http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

They already track me by my gas reciepts.

[C9]

Gov't makes laws requiring improved gas mileage.
Mfg's comply.

Gov't then gets less in taxes than it did.
(The law of unintended consequences.)

Gov't passes law requiring tracking devices.
Gov't tracks your travels and bills you for roadway use.
The gasoline taxes will remain in place.

The beauracracy required to do the tracking - even if super computers do most of the work - will be tremendous.

Gov't no longer exists to serve the people.
It has a vested self-interest in serving itself.

We'll do ok, but I feel sorry for our grandchildren....

[Tinbender]

Wow, some of you guys scare me more than the government!
Good thing I'm wearing my tin foil helmet! Not even the aliens can track me! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[modernbeat]

If you have any doubts about Government monitoring all automobiles, you only need to take a glance across the pond to see it in action.

In the UK commercial trucks are forced to run a speed limiter. A fairly LOW speed limiter – something like 60mph if I remember right.

I don’t remember if it’s a UK thing or an EU thing or both. I think it’s an EU law. Trucks run a continuous log. Not a logbook like USA trucks have, but a disc that tracks time and speed. This shows how many miles they’ve driven (for tax purposes) and at what speeds they’ve driven (for enforcement purposes). I can’t remember if it was a Germany only thing, or if it was more widespread, but a recent attempt to make all commercial trucks carry a GPS position re-transmitter in a huge taxing scheme failed because of poor technology use. Too bad.

In both the UK and the EU automated cameras are used to prosecute speeders. In Europe they are usually camouflaged. Some are even hidden in dummy trashcans by the side of the road! At least in the UK they paint them bright yellow and sometimes even give you prior warning by placing a “speed camera ahead” sign.

As bothersome as all this use of technology is, it’s really just a way of maximizing labor. All this data could easily be generated (at huge cost) by an army of police, one for each motorist, that followed their mark around all day, every day, without a break.

But, it still bothers me. Like a continuous tap on my phone.

I’d accept it though. Under one condition. That the technological advances in observation and recording information could be used as long as the same level of technology was used in building roads, building cars, and setting sensible driving laws based on that high level of technology.

[manyolcars]

FlatErnie, I sent you email.

[Hot Rod To Hell]

I carry (and probably always will! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif) a 5 yr old cell phone, that DOES NOT have GPS in it, cuz sometimes it's nice to be where NOBODY can find you! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

I AM a conspiracy theorist, and I think the Government already has too much control over my life.

Next thing you know they'll be giving me rules to build a car by, so I can be accepted on certain internet message boards! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Big A]

<font color="#666666"> sshhh... they're listening </font>

[Flat Ernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I carry (and probably always will! ) a 5 yr old cell phone, that DOES NOT have GPS in it, cuz sometimes it's nice to be where NOBODY can find you!

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're using ANY mobile telephone, no matter the age, they can track you. Your phone continuously sends a signal to the cellular network which is made up of, get this, cells. These cells vary in size based on the number of towers, antennas, &amp; repeaters in the local area. If they didn't track you, you wouldn't be able to receive your calls!

[ QUOTE ]
At least in the UK they paint them bright yellow and sometimes even give you prior warning by placing a “speed camera ahead” sign.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is done under the "it's for safety" purposes. The gov't over here says that they put the speed cameras only in places where there are a lot of accidents. After a while, there were too many to effectively manage &amp; many had not film or were not turned on. Then, about two years ago, the gov't agreed to allow the local jurisdictions to retain some of the money from the fines if they maintained them - guess what happened? More went up &amp; almost all have film now! They still are supposed to be visible &amp; signposted, but not all of them are and many are in places where the speed limit does not make sense. Consequently, they are as much about revenue generation as anywhere else...


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Hot Rod To Hell]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I carry (and probably always will! ) a 5 yr old cell phone, that DOES NOT have GPS in it, cuz sometimes it's nice to be where NOBODY can find you!

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're using ANY mobile telephone, no matter the age, they can track you. Your phone continuously sends a signal to the cellular network which is made up of, get this, cells. These cells vary in size based on the number of towers, antennas, &amp; repeaters in the local area. If they didn't track you, you wouldn't be able to receive your calls!



[/ QUOTE ]

That's alright... my phone turns itself off all the time, so they can't find me til I need to make a call! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[ray]

onstar: not too many people know they can listen in on you! of course right now the legal boundaries are kind of fuzzy, but the technology is TEHRE right now ready to use, (and HAS been used). onstar is basically just a cell phone, they can just as easily turn it on at the dispatch place as you can by pushing a button. people just don't think about it.

and newer cell phones, DO compromise your privacy more than old ones, they can pin point your location more accurately, read the fine print that came with it about the technology that is required to be in all new mobile phones, the police HAVE used cell phones to bust people for drug offences, by listening in on the phones, while they were not in use, just on the "criminal's" body.

more on the tracking, the new phones trace you down to 100 feet or so, and they are starting to use this for "marketing" your cell phone provider sends advertisements to you, based on where you currently are! so as you pull into the NAPA parts store, you get flashed with an ad for AutoZone.

now HERE'S something for hot rodders to think about. REAL traditional rodders(at least their cars) are more immune to nuclear attack, as well as one of the governments new toys, EMF weapons. they use a high powered directional electro magnetic field, which basically kills all electronic circuitry in a device. what does that mean? the guys who still run points ignition won't be affected by the EMF.

[Flat Ernie]

Without getting into classified information, I can tell you that cell phones are horrible from a security standpoint. Anyone with a modicum of equipment can listen in on your conversation, but more importantly, they can be turned on from elesewhere &amp; effectively turned into an area microphone! So if you're really interested in privacy, I'd keep the battery out of the thing unless you're using it! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Artiki]

I've not really got anything to add to this thread, I just want to bring it back to the top for anyone who missed it to read.
My 'signature' has not changed in the 280-or-so posts I've made on this board. Orwell was not just a very good author, he was a visionary.
Considering the state of the world at the moment, his work is more relevant than ever.

[Nads]

Flat Ernie for president.

I feel as if we have too much freedom, I think we need martial law....now!

[Flat Ernie]

Nads, you can be my campaign manager! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[briggs&strattonChev]

maybe im thinking too linearly, but why arent (domestic) new cars goverened in some form so they do not do over 75 mph anyway? Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt 75 around the fastest you can go in North America? If it isnt legal to go that fast, why is it legal to enable the vehicles to do so?

And I plan on being a good and law abiding citizen for the rest of my life, so I dont care if the govt knows where I am, I have nothing to hide

I know it seems like losing freedoms, but I think that being able to track down people that have committed crimes or something to that extent, is a GOOD thing

I cant even speed hardly anymore, I got pulled over for 59 in a 55, its getting strict. Its getting to the point that people speed for the sake of speeding, if the limit is 55, they do at least 60 cause they usually get by with it. Laws are laws, the govt made it 55 for a reason, safety. I know for a fact some drivers are alot better than others and can easily handle higher speeds, but some drivers are gawd awful and shouldnt even have a license.

Cell phones. Again, I dont plan on running from the law or being a criminal, so I can only see benefits in the govt knowing where I am. I dont have onstar, but if I was on a desolate gravel road (which is often for me) and I roll my truck, id really APPRECIATE to be able to be located.

I dont know what im trying to say anymore, but it seems like there is either a little too much drama in this, or everyone is a paranoid criminal that is hiding and doesnt wanna be found.

If you so are worried that the government knows where you are, why dont you just leave the USA and go inhabit some 3rd world country with an unstructured government. Hell, im almost POSITIVE youd be begging to come back to the USA after realizing all the freedoms you took for granted.

Correct me if I said anything that isnt true, by no means am I an expert nor have I even thought about most of these things.

Briggs

[KustomSkylark]

If the government installs a gizmo in my car, I'll take it out. If they outlaw old cars, they will have to come physically take it from me.........and I will probably cry like a little girl and it will make them feel bad for doing it.

[Artiki]

Well Briggs, as an outsider looking in, I'd say you were advocating exactly what was happening in the USSR post 1945. Remember the communism that gave you guys nightmares for 50 years? http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
Let's put one of your ideas into practise.
Let's just say that some guy cuts you up on the freeway and you honk your horn in protest. This guy,in his alcoholic or drug fueled stupor takes offence at your honking and begins to tailgate you. When you check your rearview mirror, you see that he's holding a gun (possibly legally owned) and is about to wave it in your direction. You put your foot down to get the hell out of there, but you can't because your car is limited to.......
BTW, your govt made it 55 not for safety but because of the oil crisis. Money, not safety. Ring any bells?
And as for claiming that it's "third-world" countries that have unstructured governments.... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif ...

[Zeke]

I always wonder if the Goverment reads messageboards just to get new ideas......... http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Flat Ernie]

[ QUOTE ]
why arent (domestic) new cars goverened in some form so they do not do over 75 mph anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know, but I do know I don't want it. It's one more way for the gov't to control individual actions. It takes away decision making &amp; imposes blind &amp; arbitrary "safety" over sound judgement &amp; common sense. Whenever common sense is legislated, you lose rights.

[ QUOTE ]
And I plan on being a good and law abiding citizen for the rest of my life, so I dont care if the govt knows where I am, I have nothing to hide

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but this is fallacious reasoning. We don't have a bill of rights to protect the criminals (though it certainly seems that way!), we have it to protect the law-abiding citizens from the gov't. We do not allow gov't to go on "fishing expeditions" to see what they can find - using your reasoning: if you don't mind if they listen in on your cell phone or see where you are in your car, surely you don't mind if they stop by your house in the middle of the night to check &amp; make sure you're not doing anything illegal. It's the same thing - an invasion of your privacy and possibly constitutes a search which is governed under the 4th, 5th, &amp; 7th amendments of our constitution.

[ QUOTE ]
Laws are laws, the govt made it 55 for a reason, safety.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give up the safety line. You are suffering from 30 years of propaganda. Speed does not kill despite the national campaigns by both the insurance lobby &amp; the gov't (at the behest of said insurance lobby). Speed merely reduces the time for you to make a decision or react to a given set of circumstances. If perchance you are in an accident, damage increases with speed. Speed too fast for conditions is another matter entirely &amp; your Onstar or other Orwellian speed governer of choice wouldn't help prevent that.

Besides, the 55mph was instituted as much for the oil crisis as anything else. The accident statistics don't bear out the safety line - there is good reason we went back to 70/75 - we proved safety wasn't a factor - if it was, we'd still be driving 55.

[ QUOTE ]
I know it seems like losing freedoms, but I think that being able to track down people that have committed crimes or something to that extent, is a GOOD thing


[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't "seem like" we're losing freedoms, we ARE losing freedoms - every day. And we have to protect the rights &amp; freedoms of everyone even if they do commit a crime - that's what that silly Constitution thing is all about in the first place. (sarcasm http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif) If you can guarantee the rights of the lowliest scum in your society, you will have forcefully guaranteed the rights of the law-abiding citizens. Innocent until proven guilty - ring a bell?

[ QUOTE ]
I dont know what im trying to say anymore, but it seems like there is either a little too much drama in this, or everyone is a paranoid criminal that is hiding and doesnt wanna be found.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif Seriously, it's about erosion of your freedom. It is dramatic because it's important. I'm not a paranoid criminal, but those Montana militia-men may be on to something http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I said anything that isnt true, by no means am I an expert nor have I even thought about most of these things.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not trying to correct you, but you hit the nail on the head with the "not thought about most of these things" remark. Most of us haven't given it very much thought &amp; we accept the "feel-good" facade that special interest groups &amp; gov't spin tells us to accept. The talking heads on our numerous 24-hr news &amp; propaganda machines are constantly telling us WHAT to think &amp; we've forgotten HOW to think. People need to realize that it doesn't matter how small or insignificant a right may be, it is important even if only in principle. But we've become a nation of lemmings who are slaves to the fashion &amp; entertainment industry and have lost all our principles. We are detached and apathetic; worse, we've raised a generation or two of "not my fault" irresponsible people who think they are owed something.

OK - now I'm rambling again...must...get...back....on....topic.. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif

New cars already have some of these technologies and as technology expands, more will be incorporated. If you think you're just going to rip it out, there will likely be a huge fine for tampering with it - eventually.

The future is now...


http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Artiki]

Top post, Ernie.

[marq]

time for everyone to go 6 volt then........Marq

[Artiki]

[ QUOTE ]
time for everyone to go 6 volt then........Marq

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Flat Ernie]

[ QUOTE ]
time for everyone to go 6 volt then........Marq

[/ QUOTE ]

And positive ground/earth! That'll really confuse the buggers! http://www.jalopyjournal.com/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif