EU wants to give police the power to remotely disable any car

[Shawn Knight]

The European Union police are reportedly developing a system that would allow officers to remotely kill the engine of any can from a central control facility. The technology for such a system already exists and is even baked into select vehicles as part of their navigation system but the EU is looking to make it a mandated system according to a report from The Telegraph.

The idea is that a remote kill switch could help stop deadly high-speed car chases and put an end to current techniques like spiking a vehicle’s tires.

As you can likely imagine, reaction to the news has been extremely negative. One member of the British parliament questioned what might happen if the system was triggered accidentally, say, on a vehicle that was traveling on the highway. What if it caused a fatal crash? Who would be liable? Or even worse, what if the system was hacked or a rogue employee decided to kill every car at once?

Safety aside, concerns about invasion of privacy and personal freedom also persist. Another member of parliament said the price citizens pay for surrendering their democratic sovereignty is that they are governed by an unaccountable secretive clique.

Documents show the technology for police use hasn’t yet been developed but considering that auto makers already have the capability, it likely wouldn’t be hard to law enforcement to build their own system or even license systems from vehicle manufacturers.

If successful, a standardized system could be required within the next six years.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/55540-eu-wants-to-give-police-the-power-to-remotely-disable-any-car.html

 

[Jad Chaar]

Great idea. What if the technology gets abused though?

 

[wastedkill]

Lets do it we will see car "Accidents" increase tenfold, Plus who wouldnt mind police having control over who dies and who doesnt.

 

[stansfield]

The EU commisars are a bunch of unelected, corrupt *****s with their snouts heavily in the trough!!
The majority of people in the UK want out but our own elected representatives( also with their snouts in the trough) in the true spirit of democracy, refuse to give us a referendum on the subject.
This is just another of the crackpot ideas that the EU periodically come up with and no doubt our own parliament, in spite of saying there is no way it could happen, will eventually agree and even embellish the idea!!!

 

[Raoul Duke]

As with so many things, used properly would be fantastic, except human nature and governments being as they are it will end up being abused, hacked into by 'the bad guys' (when that isn't your government). It's a shame

 

[Seventh Reign]

It really depends on how it works. If they can make it kill the engine without disabling Power Steering or Braking, then its a great idea. If they did it on MY car It would kill someone. When I lose power I lose Steering and Braking completely. I'm not sure how it would work on a newer car with electronic steering.

 

[treetops]

Probably costs to much.

 

[madboyv1]

Not to comment on the disservice this would cause to every driver in the EU (as everyone else will), but if this is a killswitch for the engine, does that basically means the car is coasting after the engine is shut down? There would be no sudden reduction of speed or sudden swerve, as the cars steering and braking potential would still be under the driver's control. I'd think the driver would then be liable as it would be no different than the engine dying (for various other reasons) or running out of gas while on the road. Now if currently available systems apply break power and what have you I can see the safety concern more clearly.

The argument of the potential of the system being compromised by a malicious entity is still valid of course, as are the questions of privacy and freedoms (whatever they spectfically may be).

 

[davislane1]

This is, in fact, a system expressly designed to give law enforcement control over privately owned property. They can gift wrap it in whatever pretty rhetoric they feel the public will accept, but it is what it is. Glad I don't live in the EU.

 

[Guest]

Enjoy this taste of our future:

 

[cliffordcooley]

This is not a good idea. But if we are too chicken **** to fight back, this is our future.

 

[Guest]

While they're at it they can lock up my private bits and unlock it when appropriate.

 

[Guest]

Why not remotely kill the driver?

 

[BlueDrake]

This is not a good idea. But if we are too chicken **** to fight back, this is our future.

It honestly will be our future, despite our attempts to say otherwise. The mass is easily swayed by simple terms, since they don't have to think. Even if you make it otherwise complex, they will explain part of what it does. Not it in it's full scale because if you do that, people might actually speak out about what's going on.

Doesn't matter what goes on in the EU, other places will happily adopt it of course. As we have seen across the globe, be it through artificial or real means of enforcing it. Something happens and suddenly next day, things will be put in place, that could be sitting on shelves for months or years ahead of time. This is just one step in handing over power, to keep civilians in line be there an actual issue.


Just take a look at the past, and use it for your future.

 

[captaincranky]

This just makes me wish people weren't stupid enough to buy digital cars in the first place.

Since half of you seem to think "driver-less cars", are a good idea, then get used to the idea this bull s*** comes right along with it.

Ooooo, "but we'll be safer in a driver-less car". Here's another news flash, the "human herd" needs a bit of "thinning out". Let the highways take care of it for us. "Survival of the fittest", always has a place, in driver training class, and in my cold black heart.

Crap, bizarre, "legal" strategies like this, makes me wish I had my '57 "analog" Chevy back, big time.

A quick question, do you people in the EU vote these self pleasing, inbred fools into office, or are they holdovers from feudal monarchies?

Anyway, I don't think they should p*ssy foot around by disabling cars, just go "all in", and legalize drone strikes on speeders and fleeing vehicles.....(y)

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

This is, in fact, a system expressly designed to give law enforcement control over privately owned property. They can gift wrap it in whatever pretty rhetoric they feel the public will accept, but it is what it is. Glad I don't live in the EU.

True, but put on your lawyer hat for a moment. If you are driving a car at a police officer with the threat to run him down and the cop shoots you, he's not guilty of shooting an unarmed assailant. In that case the car was a deadly weapon. if you're driving crazy drunk at 100mph down the freeway that's a terrible risk to public safety. Does that mean this is ok? I don't think so, but I can understand the argument for it.

Not a big deal anyway, it would never fly in the US. Any politician who brings this up would get auto industry lobbyists camped out on the front lawn. New car sales will nose dive if they come pre-installed with cop shutoffs.

But.... for the convicted felon recently released, perhaps it's not a bad idea. Just like the in-car breathalyzer, maybe this tech can only be used to restrict those who've proven they need some restriction.

 

[p51d007]

You know it will get hacked, then someone will shut down a vehicle, or worse, over ride the brakes or something stupid.
Next, they will want the ability to have a warning buzzer go off if you are over the speed limit, and if you continue it will shut down the system, and automatically send you a ticket.
I don't TRUST law enforcement or governments to do the responsible thing, since they haven't demonstrated it yet.

 

[Darth Shiv]

Probably costs to much.

Relative to the cost of production of cars, it wouldn't cost much at all. We've already seen this scale of IT infrastructure is childs play for a government, let alone the EU.

I think it is inevitable that it or something similar will happen anyway despite public fallout. Minority Report style - automated vehicle navigation and police controlled killswitches.

 

[cliffordcooley]

True, but put on your lawyer hat for a moment. If you are driving a car at a police officer with the threat to run him down and the cop shoots you, he's not guilty of shooting an unarmed assailant. In that case the car was a deadly weapon.

As an American where we supposedly have the "right to bear arms", I object to people only giving police the power to protect themselves and pass judgment on who lives or dies.

I would rather see this topic go forward than see more headlines with cops making kill decision that no one else is allowed to make. If this system is put in place, I can guarantee there will be a black market for systems that are not effected.

On a downside:
I can picture headlines as they say "Death while driving to hospital, results of vehicle being remotely shutdown by authorities".

 

[Guest]

It is not the first and certainly not the stupidest eu idea. What worries me the most is the fact that I don't see each and every person angry at this idea and that even some people start to speculate if it would be possible and/or in any way good.
Wake up people! Effectively if someone OTHER THAN YOU can legally gain control over your own car, it means that you DO NOT OWN A CAR! If you are not making decisions regarding yourself (For example in your car) - YOU ARE A SLAVE. That is the reality of the situation.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Wake up people! Effectively if someone OTHER THAN YOU can legally gain control over your own car, it means that you DO NOT OWN A CAR! If you are not making decisions regarding yourself (For example in your car) - YOU ARE A SLAVE. That is the reality of the situation.

I'm not sure where you are from but here in the US, we do own the vehicle. But driving it is where we are given the privilege. Driving is considered a privilege, because we don't own the highway. It is a privilege that can be revoked if misused. The privilege is usually revoked by a judge, but if you are caught showing your *** on the highway, I have no problem with your privilege being revoked on the spot. Your comment about being a "SLAVE", get used to the fact that you are a "SLAVE" to your own self control. If you fail at controlling yourself, others will step in and help you along the way. Even if that means taking away your right, to live as a free person. We are already being told what we can and can not do in public, how is this any worse.

 

[Guest]

Shutting the engine down is problematic. Most power-assisted braking systems utilize engine vacuum to lessen the effort required to depress the brake pedal and stop the vehicle, with the majority of those that don't use a vacuum booster being of the "hydro-boost" variety. Those use power-steering fluid pressure to reduce braking effort, and thus also require a running engine to function at peak efficiency. There is a resevoir/accumulator built into both systems, but they only allow for two, possibly as many as three brake applications before being depleted.
Power steering of the conventional, hydraulic type requires a running engine to function while EPAS (Electronic Power Assist Steering) may or may not shut down when the engine does, depending on the make and model.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

As an American where we supposedly have the "right to bear arms", I object to people only giving police the power to protect themselves and pass judgment on who lives or dies.

I would rather see this topic go forward than see more headlines with cops making kill decision that no one else is allowed to make. If this system is put in place, I can guarantee there will be a black market for systems that are not effected.

On a downside:
I can picture headlines as they say "Death while driving to hospital, results of vehicle being remotely shutdown by authorities".

You must not have read the rest of my post. So you would be against a remote shutdown device being installed in the car of a say a 4 time convicted drunk driver? They have a habit of going the wrong way on the freeway, and I wouldn't care at all if his car could be remotely turned off.

Why do you assume because something exists (like remote shutoff) it must be used in the most extreme way possible?

 

[cliffordcooley]

You must not have read the rest of my post. So you would be against a remote shutdown device being installed in the car of a say a 4 time convicted drunk driver? They have a habit of going the wrong way on the freeway, and I wouldn't care at all if his car could be remotely turned off.

Why do you assume because something exists (like remote shutoff) it must be used in the most extreme way possible?

Thats not my assumption. My assumption is that it will be misused, like everything else is. It was the reference you made about the cop killing that sparked a controversy on my part. But then we have already been here, I don't want to dredge up an old thread. I still maintain the notion that cars can be shut down without resorting to killing the driver. If this is what it takes to save lives, I am all for it. I just can't help but think of how it will be misused.

 

[captaincranky]

You must not have read the rest of my post. So you would be against a remote shutdown device being installed in the car of a say a 4 time convicted drunk driver? They have a habit of going the wrong way on the freeway, and I wouldn't care at all if his car could be remotely turned off....[ ]...

This presents the same conundrum as using "chemical castration" on prior sex offenders. In either case, it is akin to, "locking the barn after the horse is stolen". Even at that being said, it is paramount for a free society to maintain an individual's right to choose, whatever the risks may be, before any crime has been committed. So no, please don't put this power in the hands of the police before I've done anything wrong.

Mick Jagger said, "just as every cop is a criminal", (and some stuff after that). Therefore people need to be acutely aware, that the police are loaded with ego, power, and control issues, and many of them are simply dying to inflict them on you. Perhaps more so, than a majority of the population. Otherwise, they might have become nurses or teachers instead.

So, if "Officer MulGoon" didn't get it wet the night before, and you come "blasting through at 5 over", you might just find yourself piloting dead stick in the middle of the freeway.