Should all cars be designed to be remotely shut off?

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

How about no.

You evidently have never been to the US if you think it’s flat

Well. Ohio is.

Only the western and northwestern half close to Indiana and Lake Erie, the rest is hills and forests.

[Greater Kamilistan]

No bruh , imagine you shut it off and the tyres is still rolling and if they tried to stop , they probally be sliding around and crash into something or worst

[Purpelia]

Your objection comes down to "people won't know what to do if their engine seems to be malfunctioning"
How many people do die that way?

Your further point seems to imply that someone committing a crime cares less about dying unnecessarily, than the average driver. This kinda grants my point doesn't it?

It just seems to me that the purpose of these laws is to protect people from their own stupidity. Making them more likely to die, especially as a result of police action just seems counterproductive.

[Galloism]

Throttle control then *shrug*

When the engine dies, the power steering and power brakes go out. The handling characteristics change dramatically.

That depends how fast you’re going. A lot of cars the power steering unit actually disengages at 45-55 anyway, as it’s no longer necessary.

Power brakes remains a problem.

[Ifreann]

*Sigh.*

Look, regardless of the flaws with "shut it off," all you have to do is replace "shut it off" with "remotely activate the brakes" and all the other points still apply. (Before anyone mentions the "cars behind them" thing, remember that other drivers are required to leave a safe following distance, so that'd leave them just as guilty if they failed to stop to avoid hitting a car that suddenly stopped.) Please stop obsessing over this "shut it off" point and move on to the tradeoffs between law enforcement's ability to control a car remotely and the lack thereof.

Whatever kind of remote control you propose to give the police over other people's cars, people who are into modifying their cars, like street racers, will probably be able to turn it off. These are the people who are already spending probably hundreds of hours poking around the inside of their cars, they're going to be willing to put in the time to beat any tamper-proofing that's involved and to share the solutions when they find them. This course of action just isn't going to solve the problem you are trying to solve.

There is one more issue with the "legalized drag strips" option I neglected to mention; doesn't that send a message that, if you break the law enough, the law just surrenders? What incentive might that be to commit other crimes?

In the course of human history, many things have been decriminalised. If decriminalisation causes other crimes because people will see the law as having surrendered then I'm sure you'll be able to show us instances of that happening.

[Ethel mermania]

When the engine dies, the power steering and power brakes go out. The handling characteristics change dramatically.

That depends how fast you’re going. A lot of cars the power steering unit actually disengages at 45-55 anyway, as it’s no longer necessary.

Power brakes remains a problem.

Doesn't Your car already has a remote cut off programmed in?

[-Astoria-]

Yeah, fuck no.

[Galloism]

That depends how fast you’re going. A lot of cars the power steering unit actually disengages at 45-55 anyway, as it’s no longer necessary.

Power brakes remains a problem.

Doesn't Your car already has a remote cut off programmed in?

No, but I can track it.

[Ethel mermania]

Doesn't Your car already has a remote cut off programmed in?

No, but I can track it.

So GM is the only one who has it now?

[Galloism]

No, but I can track it.

So GM is the only one who has it now?

I believe so.

I can dial in a maximum speed on the car remotely, but I think it only takes effect after the car is put in park and back to drive.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

*Sigh.*

Look, regardless of the flaws with "shut it off," all you have to do is replace "shut it off" with "remotely activate the brakes" and all the other points still apply. (Before anyone mentions the "cars behind them" thing, remember that other drivers are required to leave a safe following distance, so that'd leave them just as guilty if they failed to stop to avoid hitting a car that suddenly stopped.) Please stop obsessing over this "shut it off" point and move on to the tradeoffs between law enforcement's ability to control a car remotely and the lack thereof.

There is one more issue with the "legalized drag strips" option I neglected to mention; doesn't that send a message that, if you break the law enough, the law just surrenders? What incentive might that be to commit other crimes?

I mean, in the first case, this has been a fact for thousands of years. If breaking a law is common and accepted as normal, eventually society starts asking if a law should be a law at all.

Hence you get movements to legalize or decriminalize things like homosexuality, cross dressing, alcohol, weed, protesting, speaking against the current social order, etc. all these things were illegal at some point, and in some places still are. But in better places we’ve decided being against the law no longer serves the public good.

However, giving people a safe location to do for free the thing they want to do would give them an outlet to do it that’s not in the street in traffic. This is preferable.

In each of those cases, the law was morally wrong and violations thereof morally justified.

Street racing is not morally justified and should not be surrendered to.

[Galloism]

I mean, in the first case, this has been a fact for thousands of years. If breaking a law is common and accepted as normal, eventually society starts asking if a law should be a law at all.

Hence you get movements to legalize or decriminalize things like homosexuality, cross dressing, alcohol, weed, protesting, speaking against the current social order, etc. all these things were illegal at some point, and in some places still are. But in better places we’ve decided being against the law no longer serves the public good.

However, giving people a safe location to do for free the thing they want to do would give them an outlet to do it that’s not in the street in traffic. This is preferable.

In each of those cases, the law was morally wrong and violations thereof morally justified.

Street racing is not morally justified and should not be surrendered to.

Let’s think a little more broadly.

Smoking weed while driving: morally wrong
Smoking weed while posting on Nationstates: morally ok

Street racing: morally wrong
Racing at a drag strip: morally ok

So do we want people who like to race to have the opportunity to do the morally ok thing, or leave them only the option of doing the morally wrong thing?

[Grinning Dragon]

I mean, in the first case, this has been a fact for thousands of years. If breaking a law is common and accepted as normal, eventually society starts asking if a law should be a law at all.

Hence you get movements to legalize or decriminalize things like homosexuality, cross dressing, alcohol, weed, protesting, speaking against the current social order, etc. all these things were illegal at some point, and in some places still are. But in better places we’ve decided being against the law no longer serves the public good.

However, giving people a safe location to do for free the thing they want to do would give them an outlet to do it that’s not in the street in traffic. This is preferable.

In each of those cases, the law was morally wrong and violations thereof morally justified.

Street racing is not morally justified and should not be surrendered to.

So basically anything that some people find enjoyable should be illegal.
You must be a ball of fun at parties.

[Dogmeat]

While you're at it, you should make them explode at the slightest impact.

[Galloism]

While you're at it, you should make them explode at the slightest impact.

Ford has a patent on that.

[Andsed]

I mean, in the first case, this has been a fact for thousands of years. If breaking a law is common and accepted as normal, eventually society starts asking if a law should be a law at all.

Hence you get movements to legalize or decriminalize things like homosexuality, cross dressing, alcohol, weed, protesting, speaking against the current social order, etc. all these things were illegal at some point, and in some places still are. But in better places we’ve decided being against the law no longer serves the public good.

However, giving people a safe location to do for free the thing they want to do would give them an outlet to do it that’s not in the street in traffic. This is preferable.

In each of those cases, the law was morally wrong and violations thereof morally justified.

Street racing is not morally justified and should not be surrendered to.

Creating legal drap strips is not ¨surrendering¨ to street racing though. Just providing a legal and moral alternative to it.

[Ethel mermania]

In each of those cases, the law was morally wrong and violations thereof morally justified.

Street racing is not morally justified and should not be surrendered to.

Let’s think a little more broadly.

Smoking weed while driving: morally wrong
Smoking weed while posting on Nationstates: morally ok

Street racing: morally wrong
Racing at a drag strip: morally ok

So do we want people who like to race to have the opportunity to do the morally ok thing, or leave them only the option of doing the morally wrong thing?

The thing is though, that no one on this site seems to get, you can rent track time. Here In the city it's not convenient, but within an 2 hours drive you can get to a rentable track. Kids still dont go there. Track time isnt cheap, and when you go to a track you have to be insured up your ass to get on the track.

Your going to have the government provide tracks so today's economically disadvantaged kids can race safely?

[Galloism]

Let’s think a little more broadly.

Smoking weed while driving: morally wrong
Smoking weed while posting on Nationstates: morally ok

Street racing: morally wrong
Racing at a drag strip: morally ok

So do we want people who like to race to have the opportunity to do the morally ok thing, or leave them only the option of doing the morally wrong thing?

The thing is though, that no one on this site seems to get, you can rent track time. Here In the city it's not convenient, but within an 2 hours drive you can get to a rentable track. Kids still dont go there. Track time isnt cheap, and when you go to a track you have to be insured up your ass to get on the track.

Your going to have the government provide tracks so today's economically disadvantaged kids can race safely?

Yes.

[Ethel mermania]

In each of those cases, the law was morally wrong and violations thereof morally justified.

Street racing is not morally justified and should not be surrendered to.

Let’s think a little more broadly.

Smoking weed while driving: morally wrong
Smoking weed while posting on Nationstates: morally ok

Street racing: morally wrong
Racing at a drag strip: morally ok

So do we want people who like to race to have the opportunity to do the morally ok thing, or leave them only the option of doing the morally wrong thing?

The thing is though, that no one on this site seems to get, you can rent track time. Here In the city it's not convenient, but within an 2 hours drive you can get to a rentable track. Kids still dont go there. Track time isnt cheap, and when you go to a track you have to be insured up your ass to get on the track.

Your going to have the government provide tracks so today's economically disadvantaged kids can race safely?

[Grinning Dragon]

Let’s think a little more broadly.

Smoking weed while driving: morally wrong
Smoking weed while posting on Nationstates: morally ok

Street racing: morally wrong
Racing at a drag strip: morally ok

So do we want people who like to race to have the opportunity to do the morally ok thing, or leave them only the option of doing the morally wrong thing?

The thing is though, that no one on this site seems to get, you can rent track time. Here In the city it's not convenient, but within an 2 hours drive you can get to a rentable track. Kids still dont go there. Track time isnt cheap, and when you go to a track you have to be insured up your ass to get on the track.

Your going to have the government provide tracks so today's economically disadvantaged kids can race safely?

You didn't like Gallo's first answer? HAHA.

Back in the day, we use to race our bikes out on this stretch of flat hardly used road, and one cop would even sit at the end and radar us and let us know our 1/4 mile speed.

[Galloism]

The thing is though, that no one on this site seems to get, you can rent track time. Here In the city it's not convenient, but within an 2 hours drive you can get to a rentable track. Kids still dont go there. Track time isnt cheap, and when you go to a track you have to be insured up your ass to get on the track.

Your going to have the government provide tracks so today's economically disadvantaged kids can race safely?

You didn't like Gallo's first answer? HAHA.

Back in the day, we use to race our bikes out on this stretch of flat hardly used road, and one cop would even sit at the end and radar us and let us know our 1/4 mile speed.

When I was a kid, there was a dam with an unfinished road on the other side, so it dead ended a few hundred yards past the dam.

The kids would race the police across the dam, and an officer would sit at the end and give approximate speed crossing the end.

[Ethel mermania]

The thing is though, that no one on this site seems to get, you can rent track time. Here In the city it's not convenient, but within an 2 hours drive you can get to a rentable track. Kids still dont go there. Track time isnt cheap, and when you go to a track you have to be insured up your ass to get on the track.

Your going to have the government provide tracks so today's economically disadvantaged kids can race safely?

You didn't like Gallo's first answer? HAHA.

Back in the day, we use to race our bikes out on this stretch of flat hardly used road, and one cop would even sit at the end and radar us and let us know our 1/4 mile speed.

the same, but he was out there as a speed trap for cars, he was being friendly giving us our speeds.

[Novus America]

*Sigh.*

Look, regardless of the flaws with "shut it off," all you have to do is replace "shut it off" with "remotely activate the brakes" and all the other points still apply. (Before anyone mentions the "cars behind them" thing, remember that other drivers are required to leave a safe following distance, so that'd leave them just as guilty if they failed to stop to avoid hitting a car that suddenly stopped.) Please stop obsessing over this "shut it off" point and move on to the tradeoffs between law enforcement's ability to control a car remotely and the lack thereof.

Well after thinking about it, I've come to the conclusion that turning the engine completely off would be dangerous in some situations. Even throttling it down would only really be safe with car telemetrics (in particular current speed).

Suddenly jamming on the brakes would be as bad or worse. Putting them on slowly would cause a loss of speed but probably increased throttle to make up for that. I think throttling it down slowly would still be best, because it would be noticeable before being dangerous, giving the driver time to pull over.

There is one more issue with the "legalized drag strips" option I neglected to mention; doesn't that send a message that, if you break the law enough, the law just surrenders? What incentive might that be to commit other crimes?

I'm fine with that. People broke the marijuana law enough the government had no choice but to change it. And good, it was a bad law.

I do think that if drag racing is going to be legalized, it should also be regulated. It should be at designated tracks ... preferably not far from a hospital. If it's dangerous, it should only be dangerous to the actual drivers.

It is already generally legal to race on dedicated privately owned tracks/strips. Road laws usually only apply to publicly owned roads, on your private property you can usually drive whatever however you want.

But the private tracks/strips are few in number, often expensive and heavily restricted, which causes people to use public roads.

Increasing access might reduce the number of people doing it illegally.

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

Yeah, fuck no.

Basically this. I’d rather cars not have a hackable backdoor to go all Fast and Furious 9 on some important person/location or something that can be manipulated to cause bad traffic.

[Novus America]

Do you know what a drag strip is?

Who gives a shit about a drag strip? Let them lose on winding back country roads, togue style.

But then again, this is America: a country as flat as the beer it makes.

Also: this isn't the 1960's anymore.

Actually the US has extremely varied and complex topography, you seem to have limited knowledge of the US. Some parts have flat plains, but you ever heard of the Grand Canyon? Sierra Nevada, Appalachian and Rocky Mountains? Actual a significant portion of the US is quite hilly or mountainous. All of the US is not South Florida.

Also Bud Light is not representative of all American beer, but that is another thread.

And other people, who are not racers use back country roads. I guess at certain times you could possibly close off a barely used road but the danger comes from the risk to non racers.