Gun Forums banner

GM Will Equip New Vehicles With a Device Allowing Police to Remotely Stop Them

4K views 23 replies 11 participants last post by  KingPerformance 
#1 ·
As reported by ABCNEws.com:


Device can remotely halt auto chases
GM Will Equip New Vehicles With a Device Allowing Police to Remotely Stop Them

By Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY
October 9, 2007 12:23:23 PM PDT

Police will be able to remotely halt some high-speed pursuits with technology being unveiled today that aims to cut chase-related deaths.

General Motors gm plans to equip 1.7 million of its 2009-model vehicles with the system that allows pursuing officers to request that engines of stolen cars be remotely slowed to idle speed through the OnStar mobile communications system.

The system, scheduled to be demonstrated today in Washington, D.C., is a big move toward reducing what GM says are as many as 30,000 pursuits around the country every year. Up to 400 people die in accidents involving chases, according to PursuitWatch.org, an activist group.

"Anytime you have the ability to shut down a dangerous pursuit, that's a win for everyone," says Geoffrey Alpert, criminology professor at the University of South Carolina.

Because of a built-in global-tracking device, OnStar already allows police to find stolen vehicles. Now, with permission of the owner, they'll have the ability to halt them. Police will be allowed to ask for OnStar intervention only if they have a stolen vehicle in sight. An OnStar operator will inform fleeing suspects that the engine is about to be slowed to idle speed, which can then occur in seconds. Brakes and power steering will still function, says OnStar President Chet Huber.

"This isn't a science project. We are broadly deploying this technology," he says.

OnStar will maintain its privacy policies. Among other things, the system isn't supposed to let police use the system on an OnStar owner's vehicle without the owner's permission.

OnStar is free for GM owners for the first year after they buy a new vehicle. Car owners then must pay for the service. OnStar says about 60% pay the fee to continue service.

Having enough vehicle owners participating could be a problem, says Sid Heal, a commander in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. "Until we get enough market saturation, it won't even occur to us to anticipate it," Heal says.

Such a system has been talked about for years, but law enforcement experts want all manufacturers to participate.

For years, some departments have caught car thieves using "bait" cars rigged with transmitters that allow them to be tracked and shut down remotely if they're stolen, says Maj. Tim Fitch of the St. Louis County, Mo., Police Department.

PursuitWatch.org President John Phillips says GM's system shows potential so "we don't have to play Russian roulette with police officers and the public."

The story can be found at; http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Autos/story?id=3706113&page=1

- Janq
 
See less See more
1
#3 ·
Don't forget OnStar has been used through the years to date to assist police by listening in on the driver as well as reporting the vehicles exact trajectory and speed and location from which it travelled.

As a child MommaJanq told me a lesson about life and it was this; "What's good for the gander is good for the goose".
For those who have vehicles that are OnStar enabled (Ford is reported to be working on their own similar version) one might wonder to themself are they a goose, or the gander, and if not then who is.

- Janq will not buy a vehicle offering such 'features' as OnStar
 
#6 ·
Nose Nuggets said:
This is a touchy one. whos to say GM wont install the tracking and engine kill portion on EVERY vehicle and just leave the user interactive portion (actual OnStar service) out?
Bingo!

As well I wonder what kind of reimbursement for services rendered 'fee' GM receives from law enforcement agencies when they work with them toward tracking down vehicles and sending various commands to the vehicle.
GM has no interest in helping law enforcement reduce stolen car numbers as the car is already sold and financed.
They do though gain by marketing this crap to consumers for increasing market share _and_ acuqiring long term residuals after the sale in OnStar monthly fees, and undocumented to the buying public kickbacks from LEO agencies and/or tax credit from Uncle Sam for every usage.

- Janq

"There is no free lunch." - William S. Burroughs
 
#9 ·
And that is why I have older muscle cars. Plus working on newer ones is a pain in the ass I try to avoid.
 
#11 ·
DJ 9iron said:
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight....


Yeah....and they said Agent Orange was safe, duck and cover would protect you from an A bomb, and now we wont shut down your car unless you run. Or unless we intimidate some idiot OnStar operator, or the company to do what we want. Its the Gov't, where there is a will there is a way more often than not.
 
#12 ·
if the NSA can get a private closet in the AT&T telco spine, they can jump on the OnStar network and do what ever the hell they want. guaron-fuckin-teed.

Janq: i dont think GM needs kick-backs from gvt for this. if anything they see it as positive marketing. I think the conspiracy theorists "The MAN is gana kill my engine whenever they please" crowd is slim. But, *raises hand* im part of that crowd. Like other questionable legislation it starts off benefiting the public. but it wont be long untill this "fantastic modernization of the vehicle" becomes a system used to do some heinous shit.

however, in hindsight its not that as bad as i had originally thought. considering i could just as easily be tracked through my cell phone and probably can have the speaker turned on remotely, im sort of in the boat already. That and the old methods of stopping a car in a high speed chase are still viable options. Although i am confident i could save a car from being pitted, and have quick enough hands to evade some spike strips, i have no chance against the posible numbers against me. Plus, i simply cant outrun the radio.
 
#14 ·
KingPerformance said:
Government turning off engines is not what worries me. What worries me are kids that clone garage door openers, bypass transponder keys, etc ... now they have a new tool in there hands.
Even better, just wait until serious Bad Guys start turning off peoples cars to jack them at their leisure. Imagine "terrrists" remotely shutting down ambulances and fire trucks, LEO or military vehicles. Epic lulz will ensue.
 
#15 ·
kartoffel said:
Even better, just wait until serious Bad Guys start turning off peoples cars to jack them at their leisure. Imagine "terrrists" remotely shutting down ambulances and fire trucks, LEO or military vehicles. Epic lulz will ensue.
Remotely shutting off cars or other vehicles won't be the problem, taking control of traffic signals will be the problem.
 
#18 ·
KingPerformance said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e_ZeYy3qjs

Youtube Video of cars being remotely shut down by on-star
watching high speed chases on camera serves only to scare the living shit out of me further, when i realize most people on the road are as horable as this poor sod, who managed to spin out at some 60mph.


as far as the 'hacking OnStar' goes, i dont think you will need to worry too much. From what i can gather almost all interaction with a vehicle from the OnStar center is via satellite. Im not saying satellite is invulnerable to attack, but you certainly dont have to worry about the neighborhood kids.
 
#19 ·
<--- This is me never buying a GM product again.

Its not that I don't see all the potential advantages to consumers and realize that some may genuinely want this. Its just that I think crap like this is worthless. If my car is stolen, I don't want the cops to find the stupid POS (especially if its a GM!;) ), I want the bastard to get away, or better yet die in a firey crash. Insurance check for me.

Its definately not worth loosing the peace of mind about the potential abuses that propagating a system like this could spell out. I don't mean to go tinfoil hat on everyone, its just not for me. Plus despite what it is now, the successes of such a system would only mean more mfgrs jumping on with similar programs. Taking choices out of consumer's hands, saving money for insurace companies, they lobby congress to mandate these things, and then they get regulated in like seatbelts, and in the best case scenario, I get a ticket sent in the mail for disabling it, just cause I don't what a crossed signal shuting down my engine mid-turn on my favorite backroad.

Over thinking this? Probably. But I stand by my descision on pure principle alone.
 
#20 ·
Nose Nuggets said:
watching high speed chases on camera serves only to scare the living shit out of me further, when i realize most people on the road are as horable as this poor sod, who managed to spin out at some 60mph.


as far as the 'hacking OnStar' goes, i dont think you will need to worry too much. From what i can gather almost all interaction with a vehicle from the OnStar center is via satellite. Im not saying satellite is invulnerable to attack, but you certainly dont have to worry about the neighborhood kids.

My neighborhood kids hacked Satelite TV ... yes, free satelite for them.

We see it every day. Hacked garage door openers, hacked cell phones, hacked gaming systems, hacked car ECU's etc etc etc etc ... to say that people will not find a way to exploit this for their own uses in car jackings etc is simply amazing to me.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top