The technology, which can be installed while a car is manufactured or afterward, uses GPS to identify the speed limit on a road segment and then deter drivers from going more than a programmed amount beyond it.
Nothing about remote controls here. They might still be doing it, but it wouldnt be necessary to implement this at all. All that is necessary is that the ISA module has up to date map data which it then uses in combination with GNSS to figure out the speed limit of the road that the car is currently on.
A federally funded study found that 75% of people with suspended licenses continued to drive.
If people drive despite not having a license then they should get their car taken away.
If people drive despite not having a license then they should get their car taken away.
Yeah I mean it’s simple and it’s complicated. Like in theory if you senselessly endanger people’s lives, we keep you off the roads. Easy peasy.
But in the US driving is simply not optional in many places. It may be the only way you can get to work or medical appointments, and most places don’t have public transit set up to handle that reliably.
In fact most (all?) US states have a system in place that allows unlicensed people to drive when they absolutely need to, in some cases even young teenagers below normal driving age. It’s often personally tailored: for example, a repeat OUI offender may get documents stating they are only allowed to drive at certain times of day, to certain predefined locations, and only in a specific car that requires a breathalyzer to start.
But even in that most extreme and egregious case, after everything and even after jail time and a permanent license suspension, they still end up on the roads regularly. So in the current legal framework there really isn’t a viable mechanism to take away their car
Re: remote tracking; Based on quickly looking up the actual devices being used they do appear to collect and report telemetry, but it’s a bit muddy as they appear to be more commonly used in commercial fleets. So sure, there may be room for some doubt on the matter. Modern cars in general are more likely than not actively equipped to report your information directly to the police, so who knows, maybe the personal ISA systems themselves are designed not to bother with it after all
If driving is essential for you, then you shouldn’t drive like an asshole, go over the speed limit multiple times or drive recklessly, endangering others.
If you’re putting people in danger because you can’t understand the implications of driving a multi-ton metal box at insane speeds, you shouldn’t be allowed to do it.
Well, they aren’t allowed to do it while they are in prison, right? Are you proposing people should be barred from car ownership forever after, even with a heavily limited provisional license? Are you equally motivated to extend that logic to any other type of crime?
Not to take the side of serial speeders and the like, not at all. But there’s a lot of legal and ethical context to unpack, not to mention the practicality of actually “taking away” driving from someone. We just don’t have a magic wand that solves the problem
Per the article, it is in fact a remote tracker, which uses GPS to determine the speed limit of whatever road you’re on.
Also per the article:
Nothing about remote controls here. They might still be doing it, but it wouldnt be necessary to implement this at all. All that is necessary is that the ISA module has up to date map data which it then uses in combination with GNSS to figure out the speed limit of the road that the car is currently on.
If people drive despite not having a license then they should get their car taken away.
Yeah I mean it’s simple and it’s complicated. Like in theory if you senselessly endanger people’s lives, we keep you off the roads. Easy peasy.
But in the US driving is simply not optional in many places. It may be the only way you can get to work or medical appointments, and most places don’t have public transit set up to handle that reliably.
In fact most (all?) US states have a system in place that allows unlicensed people to drive when they absolutely need to, in some cases even young teenagers below normal driving age. It’s often personally tailored: for example, a repeat OUI offender may get documents stating they are only allowed to drive at certain times of day, to certain predefined locations, and only in a specific car that requires a breathalyzer to start.
But even in that most extreme and egregious case, after everything and even after jail time and a permanent license suspension, they still end up on the roads regularly. So in the current legal framework there really isn’t a viable mechanism to take away their car
Re: remote tracking; Based on quickly looking up the actual devices being used they do appear to collect and report telemetry, but it’s a bit muddy as they appear to be more commonly used in commercial fleets. So sure, there may be room for some doubt on the matter. Modern cars in general are more likely than not actively equipped to report your information directly to the police, so who knows, maybe the personal ISA systems themselves are designed not to bother with it after all
If driving is essential for you, then you shouldn’t drive like an asshole, go over the speed limit multiple times or drive recklessly, endangering others.
If you’re putting people in danger because you can’t understand the implications of driving a multi-ton metal box at insane speeds, you shouldn’t be allowed to do it.
Well, they aren’t allowed to do it while they are in prison, right? Are you proposing people should be barred from car ownership forever after, even with a heavily limited provisional license? Are you equally motivated to extend that logic to any other type of crime?
Not to take the side of serial speeders and the like, not at all. But there’s a lot of legal and ethical context to unpack, not to mention the practicality of actually “taking away” driving from someone. We just don’t have a magic wand that solves the problem