The Truth About Mandatory “Safety Device” Biden signed into law
Many Americans are unaware that buried in the Democrats’ 2021 infrastructure bill is a measure to take just a little more of our freedom away from us that liberals have been trying to force on car manufacturers for years.
With President Biden’s signature on bill in November of 2021, they finally got it.
The Democrats sold the measure to be a “safety device” They will make every vehicle in the new 2026 model year mandatory to have a drunk driver-restraint device. It is a remote kill button that could be used by the government and police to disable the device. car makers To disable your car, they will do it from their office so that you can’t use it.
Alarmingly the language in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act It is a little vague. It doesn’t fully explain what this device is capable of, or if it doubles up as a surveillance device outside the legislation. And when it can be used to harm citizens.
The bill page 135 states that the device must be functional. “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired” “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected.”
They are mandatory.
This is a limitation on freedom and a privacy nightmare.
The bill language means that the system will be “passive,” This means that it cannot be switched off and is always on. The device can also shut down private vehicles without your permission.
This sounds like something that will take your life to a whole new level state-sponsored surveillance.
Do you think you could ever drive a car equipped with a remote kill button?
Yes: 1% (30 Votes)
No: 99% (2398 Votes)
Former Rep. Bill Barr stated at the The Daily Caller Biden signed this bill. But, the details are not clear. What if a driver is not drunk but drowsy?
Computer algorithms will manage the car’s operation. We have already seen this with how badly How can algorithms be used on social media to give anyone confidence?
It has not been reviewed for any other reasons. constitutionality. This intrusion in our lives and the curtailing of freedom will it pass with the Fifth or Sixth Amendments? The former assures the right not to self-incriminate and the latter is the right to face one’s accuser.
This legislation has another problem. Definitions “impairment” State laws can differ. Can these devices distinguish between states or locations? What does it tell us? “impairment” even mean? Legally drunk? Or is it? “passive” What are the standards for device?
This legislation does not specify exactly who will be collecting the data. It will include the locations drivers drove through. Will this data be used against you if your car was shut down more than once? If the shut-off was used more than a certain amount of times, will you be denied a license or prevented from purchasing another car?
And if not now, how can we be assured this won’t be added to the capabilities later? Similar to the problems with Big TechThis legislation is complicated and leaves many unanswered questions.
Will this data also be sold to advertisers or other entities that could use the data for their own benefit? This is just another example of an “anonymous”? invasion Our privacy like Google Or Facebook?
This is just to mention the fact that this legislation restricts our freedom to move and can lead to us being subject to possible punishment, without any trial or accusations.
Another problem is this: “law.” It doesn’t even tell us what sort of technology will be employed in these switches. The law does not specify the technology that will be used in these switches. This is up to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), who will decide over the next few decades. The actual technology is not yet available.
Participants in the new law tried to ignore criticism.
Jeffrey Michael, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Injury Research and Policy, told the AP in a March report that the devices won’t be able to be accessed by the police. He was one of the people who developed the tech and claims that the devices were not meant to be used by law enforcement.
“I’ve been associated with this technology since the beginning of its development and it has always been viewed as a prevention device rather than an enforcement device,” Michael stated that the new legislation had been adopted. “nothing to do with giving law enforcement access to a kill switch.”
According to the AP Robert Strassburger is the president and CEO at the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety. He claimed that the NHTSA is pursuing rules to prevent third parties from gaining entry to the devices.
But neither Michael’s nor Strassburger’s assurances are reflected in the law itself because it does not preclude law enforcement or third parties from having access to the mandated devices. The law itself is silent on these issues. This means that anything can happen and everything could change after implementation.
There is also the issue of hackers, and software bugs. If hackers have access to your car, will they be able brick it? Future software updates will contain bugs that can shut down your car while you drive and cause serious accidents like the ones described in the “Dangerous” article. self-driving technology That has been so difficult?
Since there was never any debate in Congress about these issues, there won’t be any answers to them until we are already suffering the ill effects of the law. This was a very poor design. This is another example of how regulations that restrict our freedoms get slid into massive laws over and over without any debate on their merits.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
