The federal government has mandated that all vehicles sold after 2026 must have a kill switch that can disable your vehicle based on your driving performance.
My amendment to defund that unconstitutional mandate failed tonight.
Here is the roll call:https://t.co/YWufj9BuMv
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) November 8, 2023
“The federal government has mandated that all vehicles sold after 2026 must have a kill switch that can disable your vehicle based on your driving performance,” Rep. Thomas Massie “tweeted” Wednesday. “My amendment to defund that unconstitutional mandate failed tonight.”
“Here is the roll call,” Massie added, linking to the House Clerk’s “Final Vote Results” for his Part B Amendment No. 60 to H R 4820, the “Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024.” 19 Republicans joined 210 Democrats to defeat Massie’s amendment:
Gus Bilirakis (FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Mike Carey (OH), Chuck Fleischmann (TN), Andrew Garbarino (NY), Mike Garcia (CA), Garret Graves (LA), John Joyce (PA), Thomas Kean, Jr. (NJ), Kevin Kiley (CA), Young Kim (CA), David Kustoff (TN), Mike Lawler (NY), Nancy Mace (SC), Michael McCaul (TX), Zach Nunn (IA), María Elvira Salazar (FL), Chris Smith (NJ), and Glenn Thompson (PA).
Still, this must be a tempest in a teapot, right? After all, didn’t a January USA Today Fact Check conclude, “No, there’s no vehicle ‘kill switch’ in Biden’s 2021 infrastructure bill”? And it then followed up that headline with denial after denial until buried near the end of the piece came a curious admission:
“Whether or not the technology will become a part of the infrastructure bill’s final rule remains to be seen…”
Where Gannett Publications are concerned, it might not hurt to ask, “Who will fact-check the fact-checkers?”
Massie followed up his tweet by addressing the USA Today denials with a copy of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act with an entry in the “Definitions” section circled:
The term “advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology means a system that … can … passively monitor the performance of the driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired; and… prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected…”
The wording implies that starting the car requires more than just a breathalyzer ignition interlock.
Besides, the technology to remotely disable cars has been in development for years. From a 2010 report:
“If you’re crawling through traffic in 2025 and approach a traffic light, IBM hopes it will be able to take control of your car. And according to the patent, you won’t be able to go again until it lets you. …With a laptop and customised software called CarShark, the researchers disabled the brakes of a regular family car and switched its engine off – while it was moving.”
And to show the incremental moves in development:
“In 2008, it became mandatory for all American cars to be fitted with CAN (Controller Area Network), a standard protocol for enabling all the car’s electronics to talk to each other, so there’s one part of the puzzle in place.”
OK, fine, but what does any of this have to do with guns?
Some of us have been raising this warning flag for as long as we’ve been warning people about so-called “smart guns.” From “Things to Come,” a Guns and Ammo article I wrote in 2002:
But perhaps the most immediate and insidious threat we face from technology comes under the guise of “safety— for the children,” so-called “smart guns” under development and soon to be required in a state near you. Because…they’re also lobbying for another technology they developed to be required on cars— a “shutoff switch” that police can activate by remote control, making the rest of us pay for the infinitesimal fraction of drivers who lead them on car chases.
As writer Vin Suprynowicz warns (and I and some others independently predicted), this technology could be used by the police as “an `electronic master key’ to `disable’ any `smart guns’ in the house,” and be used as a pretext to “ban the manufacture of any gun that ISN’T a `smart gun’.”
So police can turn guns fitted with one “off” and incapable of firing—and that could be mandated. Anybody doubt it will be if remote shutoff technology becomes widespread?
But the legal landscape has changed, some may argue. Such a move would surely fail under the Heller and Bruen tests. No?
First, look at the “rules” that ATF and edicts Democrat strongholds have passed that are obviously nothing more than in-your-face challenges to the Supreme Court on devices, semi-autos, magazines, “sensitive areas,” prior restraints and denials of due process—look at how they have virtually unlimited war chests of tax plunder to drag complaints on for years. Then pray the Republicans don’t blow it in ’24 and enable a Democrat president and majority to alter the composition of the court and achieve whatever reversals and outcomes they desire.
Back to the list of Republicans who voted against Massie’s amendment, and there are enough that they could have turned it: We see some familiar names, like Brian Fitzpatrick, Giffords’ poster Vichycon who never saw a gun he didn’t want to grab. We see others, like Gus Bilirakis, assigned an A-rating by NRA-PVF along with the assurance that he’s “a staunch defender of the Second Amendment and has earned your vote by protecting your fundamental right to self-defense from those who attempt to eradicate it!” Then there are the “moderates” from states like New York and California whose endless “compromises in the spirit of bipartisanship” exemplify the reason why so many refer to the GOP as “the Stupid Party.”
If you see your representative siding with the Democrats (or is one of the five Republicans who did not vote), what would it hurt to take the amount of time it takes to post a comment here and contact them to ask, “What the hell?”
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
We can talk about politicians putting kill switches on citizen’s cars so the car dies if the driver breaks the law a few decades after we first put kill switches on politicians so they die if they violate the law or try writing a law which violates the Constitution.
Soylent Green
Already there.
Please god, give me a chance to put that guy in a pig pen so they can get indigestion eating his ugly ass face.
SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!
Yeah, so?
That kill switch can be accomplished from a distance with a boom stick.
50 with api
The larger issue is that THE GOVERNMENT SHOULDN’T BE ALLOWED TO HAVE ANY KIND OF KILL-SWITCH!! It’s bad enough that they have slipped this into the vehicles of law-abiding citizens (taking away the security of being able to flee tyranny, if fighting it isn’t an option) but the very premise of ‘smart guns’ is an ABOMINATION. “Smartphones” are government spying devices, after all, why not “kill” your ability to travel? Why not “kill” your ability to resist…. SO THEY CAN KILL YOU!
But we do have video cameras that can take great pictures to be sent out to their compadres all over the country.
Right! They snuck that one in on us, didn’t they?
This reminds me of when the Congress mandated every cell phone to have a GPS tracking system in it. They could have easily required a physical switch to turn the GPS on and off. They did not. They claimed the whole thing was for “safety”. Now nearly everyone is tracked and recorded just about everywhere they go by the tracker they voluntarily carry on their person.
That’s what faraday bags are for. Keep your phone in one unless you need to make a call.
That doesn’t matter as the second you take your electronics out of the protective bag it is immediately exposed to the digital snooper world.
Ham radio is all that is left
But to operate any of them you’re SUPPOSED to have a permission slip.
It is the physical capability that is there. The permission slip can be cancelled by the radio man at any time.
HLB
Your glass is half-full. As long as the phone is in the bag you can’t be tracked. Taking it out of the bag is a conscious acceptance of risk, otherwise why have a phone? Is your solution to keep it in the bag forever?
But they won’t know where you stopped between your start point and ending point
“Velvet Tyranny”!
Little lead box keeps them guessing where I’m at between trips!
my android samsung phone allows me to switch off GPS at will. of course in doing so, most apps wont function but i can still make calls/texts. cell tower triangular action limits location accuracy to one half mile radius.
any phone other than kios based can have the tracker remotely turned on, and if you have a fixed battery they can turn on your phone to track and listen in. better look up more about that “smart” phone
That’s enough to put you in jail on 1/6.
my settings include a feature to disable location features except when a specific app that uses it, is in use.
I’ve been advised that the GPS comes on automatically if you call 911.
would be nice if this worked without government oversight and control, keeping a$$h01e drivers off the road, but i don’t trust anything about government.
do you think the government uses this “can” to track your location and where you have been, especially if you have a vehicular gps?
nothing is beyond imagination for any government, except possibly freedom for its citizens.
Everyone is being treated like multi-convicted drunk drivers, with a breathalyzer to start the car, and the huge expense for monthly calibrations, even though we are innocent. Cars will become more and more expensive, and mandated to be electric, so only very wealthy will be able to afford private transport.
The globalist plan for the last 35 years has been to slowly cram everyone into the cities. Control, control, control. If we wait much longer, it will be too late. We’re the frogs in the pot, and the government is the hand on the burner turning up the heat!
The “Big Wet Dream” is civilian disarmament.
The plan in action.
All of this seems to me to be a blatant violation of the 4th amendment. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, But hey, what’s another violation of the Constitution piled on top of the thousands that already exist.
License plate readers are everywhere, now. Privacy? Fuhgettaboutit!
The law requires a kill switch police can access, as well as screening for intoxication, and an auto shutdown for idling too long … to save the planet.
Totally unconstitutional, unacceptable and another mandate we won’t comply with.
As long as it keeps soldiero=ing on, I will continue to use my 1998 van. Sill runs perfectly after 400K miles. <y backup is a 1985 litle diesel pickup truck.
I had a 1981 Toyota (Hilux) diesel pickup tjar was like that. There was nothing on it to break.
All it lacked was a Ma. Deuce mounted in the back.
This is just the beginning. Already they have control of your homes thermostat and can shut off your heating and air-conditioning. These tyrants have no restrictions, your bank accounts are in their sights. It’s no wonder, that they want you disarmed, they used to tar and feather those who stole from the public.
I’ve been saving feathers from a local chicken farm. And buying stock in tar production facilities. I have a feeling both are going to take off in the near future.
My woodstove has no kill switch.
speak for yourself, our thermostats have no such connections.
I think it’s time to slap the shit out of these idiots
REALLY slap the shit out of them. Hard.
Boot to the head.
Massie is one of the very few good people in government.
This is a horrible law. If the cops have a disabler so will criminals. I can see the headline now “Child molester follows teenage girls on a deserted road” or “Cop disables impaired drivers car, ramming family of four head on” l can believe the number of dumbasses we have in our government.
A substantial segment of progressive public policy is based upon the false premise that government can impose material limitations which will address and restrict spiritual and moral problems. Rather than focus on evil intent they focus their efforts on amoral means. Rather than focus on the intent to murder they attempt to eliminate or severely restrict the means to murder. So, when one has evil intent progressives assume they can short circuit that attempt by eliminating common means. So much for the Texas Chainsaw Massacre parts 1 through 19. Focus on evil. Focus public policy on restraining. evil. That may… Read more »
ABSOLUTELY. Well stated. It’s like the “drug war”…
Forget cars and guns we need to install these switches into DC politicians and when we get tired of thier bullshit just turn thier ignorant asses off
Install them so that they can be used remotely like this…
I am currently in the process of changing Congressmen, albeit I am having to swap Texas for Indiana, but I truly believe my guy up here has his shit together. If not, I will have all the time in the world to sit at his side and watch him evolve into a REAL Representative OF THE PEOPLE.
I’m a native Hoosier from Evansville. Left Indiana in 1978. Haven’t been back since 1982. You moving there is a good thing, like you said, it’s nice to have a “guy” you can trust and have the time to be his principles advisor.
How are you going to manage that? By actually working for him?
Reality check: some ten years ago my friends wife was travelling in a remote area, ran out of fuel, car had enough to roll ono he shoulder. She called auto club, they were going to take a few hours.Called her husband, he hopped into his truck with a full bowner of fuel and went to rescue her. I being a sunny warm day, she and their daughter were outside the car enjoying the time together. When HE got there she realised she had left the keys in the ignition then closed the auso-locking door (anohter stupid idea, right?). they called… Read more »
I often think I’m going to get pulled over for the suspicion of driving while intoxicated, just because of the way the vehicle handles the road (and having to avoid potholes that never get fixed) or because of things like snow and ice… is the AI powered vehicle going to turn off while I’m mid correction and make it so I can’t complete the input and wreck me? That’s my concern. I feel like this is the attempted answers to “blame the car for drunk drivers”, or “the spoon for Rosie being fat” argument about blaming guns… just the preface… Read more »
My reason, logic and common sense tell the that the whole concept is flawed with automobiles in a major way. So they want to have a device that will kill the car while you are driving if the AI that runs it decides you’re impaired. A device that will CAUSE accidents to prevent them. I mean, is it going to tell exactly where you are and the situation you’re driving in or is it going to wait until you’re safely pulled over somewhere to disable the car? As for having it for the cops to stop you…a EMP “gun” can… Read more »
This betrayal by Nancy Mace is not surprising.
But the betrayal by Gus Bilirakis is. I’m no longer in Florida, but this still disappoints me greatly.
Hopefully, Florida primaries this lost soul. 13 years has been too long for him to be in that cesspool. Florida is much more conservative today than when this guy got elected, finding a good replacement should not be very difficult.
Something tells me she’s not going to be in Congress much longer.
Seems that someone is forgetting something here.
Owning a firearm is a Constitutionally Protected Right.
Owning and driving a car,
is not.
Really? How is it NOT a protected right? Explain. Just because the founding fathers didn’t have cars? Read the 10th amendment SLOWLY. I think it covers cars no matter what some psychopathic control freak PARASITE may claim.
Yup.
you dont have to have a state’s driver license but ill bet you do. you don’t have to have updated plates on your vehicles but i bet you do. you dont have to have common sense but i bet you….. never mind, you dont!
The government is only there to do their very limited and boring duties. That is all.
HLB
We all have tthe right to travel. If I happen to be doing that in a two tonne steel contraption I don’t have to pedal, I am still travelling. Thus they cannot turn me off without due process.
I don’t know about that: U.S. SUPREME COURT SAYS NO LICENSE NECESSARY TO DRIVE AUTOMOBILE ON PUBLIC ROADS Posted by Jeffrey Phillips | Jul 21, 2015 | file:///C:/Users/Pat/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image001.jpg U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.… Read more »
Looks like someone forgot to read the 9th Amendment. The Constitution is a limit on government powers. Not a permission slip for the citizens. Can you show where the Constitution gives government the power to implement anything like this?
You are quite right. Just because the founders did not write down all of our Rights, does not mean that Rights, due to new technology, do not exist. The founders knew that they had the Right to own and use a horse and carriage Just because that carriage was replace by the horseless carriage does not mean that the Right to own and use the horseless carriage does not exist. Good for you!!
I haven’t seen much “Consent of the Governed” with this bunch.
Cars already have an on/off switch. It’s part of systems like GM’S Onstar and it’s on all cars since CAN networks came out. A warrant is currently required for the government to access it. Codify this into law through Congress and the abuses will follow. Yes, it’s unconstitutional, but why would that stop the Socialeftists. It’ll happen until it gets to the Supreme Court.
Take this to the extreme and there’s nothing to stop the government from mandating everyone gets a pacemaker with an on/off switch.
Scary article, Mr. Codrea, but thank you anyway.
You know, we are trying really hard to avoid the Left provoking us to violence; but the more we duck and dodge through litigation, legislation and voting, the more determined the seem to be to engage us in violence.
When the bloody conflict breaks out, ot will not be our fault.
And would one of Michael McCauls constituents please call him and ask him WTF?
From what I understand, this is also why the phone companies started getting rid of the lower levels of Cell Coverage that causes older devices to become worthless. My Dodge Ram Truck, 2011, had the navigation system and hands free capability to link with my phone(s) at the 3G level. Two years ago, all 2G and 3G towers in the US of A were shut down and everyone went to 4G and now, 5G. It also affected all the “disposable” phones like Trac Phones. Now, you cannot have a phone with anonymous activation. Of course, it was to combat “criminals”… Read more »
I wonder if these idiots considered the facts and liabilities in that once the state takes control of the vehicle(s), WE, The Drivers are no longer liable under the automobile insurance as the state has absorbed full control of the vehicles at this point. That’s up to and including any deaths, maiming’s and damages that may occur.