Posted on 01/16/2010 2:47:27 PM PST by Dubya
Sorry FRiend, but if you own a GM vehicle with OnStar, the equipment to do this is already installed in your car. Not only that, there is a “disable” feature that the powers that be can use to stop your car without any input from the owner, driver, or passenger of the vehicle.
Of course, they try to use this as an “anti-theft” selling point, but I see much more nefarious uses for such technology.
Of course, there will be the FR cop brigade who will try to tell us how this benefits us by eliminating high-speed chases, but that is beside the point: The Govvie should NOT be able to track anywhere ANY citizen goes, at any time unless the citizen in question is under a warranted search/surveillance order or other NORMAL (pre 1975) suspicion, and the ability to shut off someone’s car simply because you want to is abuse even if never used!
Anything else is FISHING for fascism!
As we all know, government institutions are highly inefficient and waste money. So if they were to replace their DOT highway crews with private companies, they oughtta be able to stretch what money they have.
A good example of this theory is with privatized prisons.
We have no constitution. It’s whatever they say it is. There is always a judge waiting to screw us.
Get a rope...
The word “fewer” is apparently banished from English.
We might as all just speak engrish
Hey, do they get a double plus good discount if they drive double plus unmiles?
And when you're in another state, driving on their roads, you fill up at their gas stations, and that state gets the tax. AND owners of heavier vehicles, which do more damage per mile, pay more per mile. The system as is actually works so well, I can't believe the government came up with it.
That might offset if all the states went to this (revenue lost by the other states to Texans driving there would wash with revenue collected by those states from their residents after driving in Texas), but as is it's double taxation. He paid those other states in the form of taxes embedded in the gas, and now Texas wants him to pay them too.
It's like when you move to a new state. The new state wants you to register your car immediately, but the old state won't refund the money you already paid them. There's no logical way you can owe registration to two states on the same vehicle at the same time. You can only drive in one state at a time. I say nuts to that. I just wait till my old registration is about to expire before registering in the new state.
A guy t-boned my wife one time, totaling our car (no one was hurt). I'd had the new registration for something like two days, and the state wouldn't refund it. It worked out OK for me, because the insurance company paid me for the registration over and above blue book, but why should the insurance company have to fork out so the state can get registration on a car that isn't on the road?
I don’t want the government to monitor my driving but having Insurance companies charging based on miles driven is a good idea to me.
As long as the miles is the only information they get. What the heck is up with this thing that Progressive has that plugs into your car computer?? Many cars have this innovative new thing that records cumulative miles traveled, called an “odometer”.
Odometers are not new.
Well, the speaker is a Progressive Insurance agent ...
>>Well, the speaker is a Progressive Insurance agent ...<<
But clearly he didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express...
Yes, I know.
How about contract out to private enterprise to maintain the state’s roads and bridges.
___________________
Agreed!
If they really want me, they can get out the helicopters.
Good for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.