Your government wants to track EVERY car ALL the time

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

 

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

 

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.....

 

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 ****ed 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? (i dont) they can track you with GPS with them....(been that way for a while)done deal

 

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

 

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 *** 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

 

[ 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.

 

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

 

[ 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?

[/ 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.

 

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

 

FIRST - I apologize for the length - I got a little carried away &amp; this is a subject I'm somewhat p***ionate 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 ***emble &amp; freely speak their views. If we can guarantee protection to the lowest s*** 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 scare****ering 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 scare****ering, 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. ( )

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? ) 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 )

Law/Philosophy/Ethics cl*** 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)

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 cons***ution &amp; democracy.

If you think this was bad, don't get me started on drug testing!!

 

OutLaw old cars...Then only OutLaw will have them

They already track me by my gas reciepts.

 

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 p***es 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....

 

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!

 

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.

 

FlatErnie, I sent you email.

 

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!

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!

 

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

 

[ 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...

 

[ 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!

 

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 ****on. 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 adverti*****ts 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.

 

Without getting into cl***ified information, I can tell you that cell phones are horrible from a security standpoint. Anyone with a modi*** 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!

 

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.

 

Flat Ernie for president.

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

 

Nads, you can be my campaign manager!

 

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

 

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.

 

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?
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.... ...

 

I always wonder if the Goverment reads messageboards just to get new ideas.........