The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: CG6468 on September 22, 2011, 09:03:02 AM
-
Uh-oh: Government Motors wants to track you
Wednesday, Sep 21, 2011 at 3:16 PM EDT
Several years ago Glenn broke ties with GM as a sponsor, in large part because he was worried about their interactions with government. All that technology and access at the fingertips of the federal government just didn’t sit well with Glenn. At the time, they said they wouldn’t be doing any sort of tracking or anything like that. That was then, this is now. OnStar is now notifying it’s 6 million account holders that it will keep a complete accounting of the speed and location of OnStar-equipped vehicles even for drivers who discontinue the monthly service. Why?
LINK. Watch the video! (http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/09/21/uh-oh-government-motors-wants-to-track-you/)
-
Long before any possible totalitarian police-state problems, On-Star or similar systems will become the means by which to impose a mileage tax on every driver.
-
Long before any possible totalitarian police-state problems, On-Star or similar systems will become the means by which to impose a mileage tax on every driver.
It's merely a question of when, not if.
-
Sorry, but the Fourth Amendment is still in effect.
-
Sorry, but the Fourth Amendment is still in effect.
Sorry, but the Ninth Circus Court ruled that a hidden GPS unit on a suspects vehicle is legal. I would guess that getting a subpoena for the Onstar records would be done with little trouble. Link (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2015765,00.html)
-
Sorry, but the Fourth Amendment is still in effect.
Wouldn't even apply to a non-investigative tracking of every vehicle for taxation purposes. Might or might not need a warrant to get the info out of the system in an actual criminal investigation, that would depend on terms of use on the service (Which you might not be allowed to decline and still drive, like DUI implied consent law), the Circuit, and any 4th Amendment exceptions such as exigent circumstances that might apply.
-
Okay. Guess I'll be driving a 1974 Chevy Nova until I drop then. Let them try to put a GPS tracker on that ****er.
"But sir, he hasn't gone anywhere in over a year?"
"Where is he?"
"A ditch on the side of Route 125 outside of Barrington. More specifically, a swamp."
-
Okay. Guess I'll be driving a 1974 Chevy Nova until I drop then. Let them try to put a GPS tracker on that ****er.
"But sir, he hasn't gone anywhere in over a year?"
"Where is he?"
"A ditch on the side of Route 125 outside of Barrington. More specifically, a swamp."
Locate GPS tracker on vehicle. (forcefully) Insert screwdriver. Stir vigorously. :stirpot:
So long as it's my private property, I'll do what I like.
-
Yeah, same here. The hand of the King lies light on the land out here in the rural Ozarks.
-
What's the difference between making a law that says you can't mess with your odometer and making a law that says you can't mess with your On-Star Personal Rape Device?
I can see the bastards trying this shit, claiming that having the OSPRD "is for your own protection and safety." Just like the bullshit device that Progressive ( :censored:) Insurance wants you to voluntarily plant on your car -- it's all designed to reveal information that the gubmint/underwriters wants.
-
Sorry, but the Ninth Circus Court ruled that a hidden GPS unit on a suspects vehicle is legal. I would guess that getting a subpoena for the Onstar records would be done with little trouble. Link (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2015765,00.html)
And the Ninth is overturned over 80 percent of the time. I'm gonna venture to guess that this will fall into that 80 percent.
And no, without probable cause, OnStar isn't going to risk having every single customer filing a class-action lawsuit against them.
-
And the Ninth is overturned over 80 percent of the time. I'm gonna venture to guess that this will fall into that 80 percent.
And no, without probable cause, OnStar isn't going to risk having every single customer filing a class-action lawsuit against them.
The way that courts have been ruling against privacy, I'm not so sure this will get overturned. I hope so.
-
What's the difference between making a law that says you can't mess with your odometer and making a law that says you can't mess with your On-Star Personal Rape Device?
I can see the bastards trying this shit, claiming that having the OSPRD "is for your own protection and safety." Just like the bullshit device that Progressive ( :censored:) Insurance wants you to voluntarily plant on your car -- it's all designed to reveal information that the gubmint/underwriters wants.
State Farm has one too, "...only for Illinois."
-
This is what I've been telling people with On-Star for YEARS! You can now buy On-Star for other vehicles at Best Buy.
-
This is what I've been telling people with On-Star for YEARS! You can now buy On-Star for other vehicles at Best Buy.
I don't want it.
-
I don't want it.
Neither do I.
-
I don't want it.
Me either, that's why I won't buy it.
-
Me either, that's why I won't buy it.
I've gotten along without it for over 55 years, and I see no benefits to it. Now there's REALLY no benefit.
-
What's the difference between making a law that says you can't mess with your odometer and making a law that says you can't mess with your On-Star Personal Rape Device?
I can see the bastards trying this shit, claiming that having the OSPRD "is for your own protection and safety." Just like the bullshit device that Progressive ( :censored:) Insurance wants you to voluntarily plant on your car -- it's all designed to reveal information that the gubmint/underwriters wants.
All the more reason not to go with Progressive, "voluntary" Snapshot device or not.
-
I've heard it both ways: Is Progressive Insurance owned by Soros? :???:
-
I've heard it both ways: Is Progressive Insurance owned by Soros? :???:
No, Peter Lewis is the CEO of Progressive, but he is a huge lib--donated literally tens of millions to liberal causes such as the ACLU, MoveOn.org (with stipulation that Soros would match), and the Marijuana Policy Project.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2003
-
Thanks, Sparks.
-
No, Peter Lewis is the CEO of Progressive, but he is a huge lib--donated literally tens of millions to liberal causes such as the ACLU, MoveOn.org (with stipulation that Soros would match), and the Marijuana Policy Project.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2003
Yep, I was aware of this. He and Soros are butt-buddies and as long as they're calling the shots for the proletariat on behalf of the government, everything is peachy-keen.
Good research, though. I was not aware of this site.
ETA: If the 9 or so bitchslaps that have come my way are the result of my having mentioned Progressive Insurance, what makes you shitheels think I have that insurance? Simply because I mentioned it? Turkey twits, the lot of ya. :whatever:
Now, go ahead and bitchslap some more -- but I want 'em because I called ya a ****in' shitheel, not because you think I have Progressive Insurance.
-
No, Peter Lewis is the CEO of Progressive, but he is a huge lib--donated literally tens of millions to liberal causes such as the ACLU, MoveOn.org (with stipulation that Soros would match), and the Marijuana Policy Project.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2003
The word Progressive gives it away. I have seen their commercials with Flo remind me of THX1138.
-
I wouldn't even consider them BECAUSE of "Flo" and the infantile commercials.
-
I wouldn't even consider them BECAUSE of "Flo" and the infantile commercials.
I had Progressive until 2008. I bought a Nissan Versa hatchback and they jacked my rates really high. I was going from a sports car to a "slow" car. It pissed me off. So I went over to State Farm.
-
I have been thinking about switching insurance. With my driving record, I feel 98.00 per month is excessive....
I normally wouldn't ask a personal question, but a block of you paying that much??
-
I've gotten along without it for over 55 years, and I see no benefits to it. Now there's REALLY no benefit.
Only benefit I see is when some druggie plows into you and claims YOU caused the accident. Insurance can and will get the black boxes from both cars to determine the speed each was going, time of breaking speed and , speed and breaking prior to the accident. Then there is Low Jack that can track where a thief has taken your car.
What about these EZ passes that let you go through a toll booth and bill you later. I had no idea that a picture of the plate was taken when this was used until we had a sensational case here with a on the rise politician caused a big search an recovery and was found sitting under a tree dry as a bone a claiming he had in fact swam a river the night before. His EZ Pass told another story.
I object to being tracked today, but if in the future if I need an alibi, this can come in very handy.
-
I have been thinking about switching insurance. With my driving record, I feel 98.00 per month is excessive....
I normally wouldn't ask a personal question, but a block of you paying that much??
I've got a 3 1/2 year old car with full coverage and a $250 deductible and the liability is 100/300K, that I drive 25K miles a year.
If my company tried to charge me $1200/year I'd tell them to shove it up their asses, which is what I did to State Farm after a year here and went back to GEICO. I pay a little over half that.
-
Mainly because we live so close to obamaville, with its assorted car thefts and other vehicular problems, for my 2007 Honda Ridgeline State Farm charges:
361.99 twice a year.
That's discounted by 88.73 for multiple line, 79.63 for multicar, , 3.33 for anti-theft, 3.43 vehicle safety, and 94.90 for accident-free.
The total would be 361.99 + 270.02 = 632.01 each 6 months. And yes, I have shopped around, and we get the best deal from State Farm.
We hate this damned state and cannot WAIT to get the hell outta here. My wife retired in November, then it'll be some serious searching, maybe in Wyoming, with no taxes on ANY retirement income, i.e. pensions, SS, IRAs, etc.
-
I have been thinking about switching insurance. With my driving record, I feel 98.00 per month is excessive....
I normally wouldn't ask a personal question, but a block of you paying that much??
More by a good bit, not quite twice that, but that covers serveral vehicles and four drivers, one of whom is a 19-year-old male. I have USAA and have had them for a long time.
-
I have been thinking about switching insurance. With my driving record, I feel 98.00 per month is excessive....
I normally wouldn't ask a personal question, but a block of you paying that much??
We pay $120/mo for two cars and renters insurance. We are with All State now.
State Farm was charging us a lot of money and we switched to Geico in 2008. Then switched to All State in 2009. All State has been really good to us.
-
Thanks all, I am definitely going to call around....
-
Welcome to the ant farm.
Ain't no way in hell I am ever going to tolerate that on my vehicles.
If ever I were to find one which someone has affixed to my vehicle it is immediately going to be removed and shipped to North Korea. They can scratch their heads in wonder as they watch that little blip on their screen touching down in the People's Republik.
-
If my company tried to charge me $1200/year I'd tell them to shove it up their asses, which is what I did to State Farm after a year here and went back to GEICO. I pay a little over half that.
Geico has been really fair to me and my wife for many years. Other places can't beat what I pay with them.
-
Long before any possible totalitarian police-state problems, On-Star or similar systems will become the means by which to impose a mileage tax on every driver.
I talked to a guy during a PCS move in 2003 who had an Onstar equipped minivan. He told me it was great, except when they denied warranty service because he went off-road with it. If they keep records for that, you can bet those records will be available to any LEO who asks.
-
This article is a month old, but it's still interesting. It would appear the kid is of interest to the feds.
As the Supreme Court gets ready to hear oral arguments in a case Tuesday that could determine if authorities can track U.S. citizens with GPS vehicle trackers without a warrant, a young man in California has come forward to Wired to reveal that he found not one but two different devices on his vehicle recently.
The 25-year-old resident of San Jose, California, says he found the first one about three weeks ago on his Volvo SUV while visiting his mother in Modesto, about 80 miles northeast of San Jose. After contacting Wired and allowing a photographer to snap pictures of the device, it was swapped out and replaced with a second tracking device. A witness also reported seeing a strange man looking beneath the vehicle of the young man’s girlfriend while her car was parked at work, suggesting that a tracking device may have been retrieved from her car.
Then things got really weird when police showed up during a Wired interview with the man.
The young man, who asked to be identified only as Greg, is one among an increasing number of U.S. citizens who are finding themselves tracked with the high-tech devices.
The Justice Department has said that law enforcement agents employ GPS as a crime-fighting tool with “great frequency,†and GPS retailers have told Wired that they’ve sold thousands of the devices to the feds.
Wired (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/gps-tracker-times-two/?mbid=ob_ppc_threat)