Uh-oh: Government Motors wants to track you

[CG6468]

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!

[DumbAss Tanker]

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.

[CG6468]

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.

[NHSparky]

Sorry, but the Fourth Amendment is still in effect.

[thundley4]

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

[DumbAss Tanker]

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.

[NHSparky]

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."

[DefiantSix]

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.   

So long as it's my private property, I'll do what I like.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Yeah, same here.  The hand of the King lies light on the land out here in the rural Ozarks.

[Eupher]

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 ( ) Insurance wants you to voluntarily plant on your car -- it's all designed to reveal information that the gubmint/underwriters wants.

[NHSparky]

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

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.

[thundley4]

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.

[CG6468]

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 ( ) 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."

[Evil_Conservative]

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.

[CG6468]

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.

[Eupher]

I don't want it.

Neither do I.

[Evil_Conservative]

I don't want it.

Me either, that's why I won't buy it.

[CG6468]

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.

[NHSparky]

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 ( ) 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.

[CG6468]

I've heard it both ways: Is Progressive Insurance owned by Soros? 

[NHSparky]

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

[CG6468]

Thanks, Sparks.

[Eupher]

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. 

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.

[Ptarmigan]

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.

[CG6468]

I wouldn't even consider them BECAUSE of "Flo" and the infantile commercials.