OBD III: The Motor Law Realized

Print Friendly

You know that “check engine” light on your dashboard? What if instead of just telling you that the car’s computer has detected some fault with the emissions control system, it told the government – via roadside readers and satellite uplinks?

It’s called OBD III – and it’s right around the corner.

All new cars builtsince the mid-1990s have OBD II – or On Board Diagnostics II. This system standardized diagnostics by specifying that every new car come equipped with an OBD port (usually located somewhere near the driver’s side kick panel, on the underside of the dashboard) into which a technician (and your state’s emissions test station) can plug a scanner that downloads stored “trouble codes.” It is these trouble codes that also trigger the yellow “check engine” malfunction indicator light on your dash.

Mostly, these codes involve problems with the emissions control system rather than the engine itself. They’re often intermittent and minor. This is why it’s possible to continue driving the car with the “check engine” light on and everything still seems ok.

And it’s why the Power That Be want OBD III.

In the words of the Specialty Equipment Manufacturer’s Association (SEMA), the vast umbrella organization representing automotive industry parts and equipment suppliers, OBD III is “A program to minimize the delay between detection of an emissions malfunction by the OBD-II system and repair of the vehicle.”

And how will that be accomplished? Rather than merely store trouble codes, OBDII will immediately transmit those trouble codes to The Man – who will then proceed to first warn you (via letter or e-mail) to have the car repaired, stepping up to more aggressive enforcement if you fail to do so in the form of “citations… court and/or DMV penalty at next registration.”

It would also be possible to send the info directly to any nearby cop, who would then pull you over immediately – saving the government some time while making some more money off motorists.

This is not sci-fi. It’s impending reality. All the technical issues have been solved. Most new cars already come with GPS systems capable of receiving and sending data. It would be a simple matter to salt the roads with scanners capable of ID’ing every car that passes by, automatically establishing a communications link with your car’s computer. This would occur continuously and constantly, too – not just every once-in-a-while. OBD III as envisioned would literally make it possible to constantly monitor and record every vehicle so equipped, from the moment it left the driveway to the moment it returned at night.

Here it is, straight from the horse’s mouth – the California Air Resources Board (CARB) which sets the trend for what inevitably becomes national when it comes to emissions rigmarole:

“If the inspection process could be automated through the use of transponder-assisted on-board diagnostic systems (in what could become an OBD-III requirement or program), the process could be made less costly and time-consuming.. ” (Italics added.)

If it comes to pass, OBD III will be the keystone that assures the end of any expectation of privacy behind the wheel (in addition to everywhere else) and it will also obviate the quaint notion that it’s your car – and hence, private property. Hence, hands off. SEMA’s fact sheet about OBD III notes this directly, stating that OBD III would impose what amounts to “sanctions based on ‘suspicionless mass surveillance’ of private property” and would also be “random,” with the actual monitoring taking place before the computer throws any codes – and so, bereft of probable cause and thus a pretty clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.

But, the Fourth Amendment is already a dead letter. It has been trumped – trampled – numerous times, on the basis of generalized, potential “threats” – everything from potential drunks (which now means anyone who happens to be behind the wheel on a public road) to potential polluters, whose cars might be emitting more than the allowable maximum amount of fumes (or even just CO2).

That’s how it will shake out, rest assured.

And it gets better, too.

If it becomes The Law that all new cars must be equipped with scannable OBD III, then what about older cars without OBD at all?

Here is the backdoor that will be used to effectively outlaw older cars, including antique cars – but also just older late-model cars. They won’t be prohibited outright, probably. Rather, they will be prohibited from being used for everyday transportation. You’ll be allowed to keep your pre-OBD III car. You just won;t be allowed to drive it – except, perhaps, to the occasional old car show.

Or they may just require that all pre-OBD III cars be “retired” after a certain period – and then rendered inoperable by having their engines filled with silica or some such, a la Cash for Clunkers.

In this way, everyone will be forced into the system of mass control/mass surveillance. It has been a source of frustration in certain quarters that it’s still possible for the average citizen to drive a car built before catalytic converters and computers (and air bags and all the rest of it) became mandatory or de facto mandatory. There are dangerous asocial types out there who prefer such cars, which are paid-for, simpler and can often be kept running for years for next to nothing. That annoys both the TPTB – and probably also the car industry, which wants you in a new car, not a paid-for older car. The big combines will be among the most ardent proponents not merely of OBD III – but that cars without OBD III be “retired.”

The same arguments used to justify all the other gang bangs of the Fourth Amendment will be trotted out: We must protect the “safety” of the public – a public that increasingly becomes supine and moist at the mere mention of the Pavlovian cue word, safety.

And it will be impossible to argue against, because the essential argument has already been conceded. We have no individual rights worth discussing – and hence, no rights to either privacy or property that may not be set aside at any moment by some broadly asserted collective interest – as defined by the small minority that operates the collective.

When I was kid in the ’70s I liked the rock band, Rush. One song in particular, titled Red Barchetta – in honor of one of the first Ferrari street cars. The song was about a bleak future time, after a Motor Law banning private cars had been passed.

That future is just about here, unfortunately.

Throw it in the Woods?

 

Share Button

eric

Author of "Automotive Atrocities" and "Road Hogs" (MBI). Currently living amongst the Edentulites in rural SW Virginia. 

  67 comments for “OBD III: The Motor Law Realized

  1. Don
    January 30, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    The delusion of the masses is strong.

    I was having this conversation just last night with a friend. I told him he was a slave, by definition and in practice and he just rolled his eyes and shook his head. I told him if he thought he was free then to throw his driver’s license away (gov’t permission to drive) and toss his registration (gov’t permission to own a car), and to try and leave his own country w/o a passport (gov’t permission to leave), and to go drink that beer in his hand in front of the police station with a big, fat doob (gov’t owns your body) and see what happens, or put your kid in the car w/o a child seat (gov’t owns your kid) and see what happens.

    I know the illusion can be difficult for some to see. Especially for those that did well in public school, but once you see it, and realize how many things in your life were just out right lies perpetrated on you by the gov’t you can never go back.

    The photo above is no different than a German checkpoint during WWII. Same process: your papers please and if they are not in order than you can be arrested. Just because the gov’t agents are speaking english and have American flags on their uniforms doesn’t make it right. It’s the modern face of oppression all wrapped up nice and neat in a sophisticated package that seduces the sheeple into the chute and down the ramp to the slaughter, all the while feeling as if it’s for their own safety.

    • January 30, 2012 at 4:18 pm

      Indeed.

      I experienced a similar awakening – and you’re so right about not being able to go back once you are awake.

      All our “rights” are in practice conditional privileges (at best), revoked, constrained or otherwise qualified at whim by the Great Collective. The worst part,though, is not that our rights have been surrendered. It is that most people believe they still have rights.

      • clover
        February 3, 2012 at 1:28 am

        Eric if the government told you that you had to drive 100 mph then you would be driving 10 mph on the highway. Anyone that says they are all for options on cars and then say they want spare tires required?

        • dom
          February 3, 2012 at 1:32 am

          Hey Clover! Check out this site I just found..

          http://clovercam.com/

        • methylamine
          February 18, 2012 at 6:31 pm

          No, I’d keep right on doing what I do today–driving at the speed conditions permit, safely.

          That is, about 110-120, depending on the weather and traffic.

          Stick THAT in your pipe and smoke it, clover!

          Yeee–haw!

          P.S. Imagine the sound of 400 V-8 horsepower wailing off into the distance. I wish I could post a soundtrack.

        • Olaf Koenders
          December 17, 2012 at 2:02 am

          Clover, that blather of yours was barely literate, let alone readable. The only thing it actually WAS – is untrue.

  2. freedserf
    January 30, 2012 at 4:46 pm

    Eric, great find. It is amazing how eye opening the smallest thing can be when the premises are examined.

    Unfortunately, democracy is dictatorship by the majority. The tipping point where the majority of Americans prefer to be led and taken care of (they don’t understand that this is called “being controlled”, and they don’t know what a premise is) is upon us.

    Good work, perhaps the direction of this democracy can be reversed with continued shining of the light. But, I’m having a hard time seeing them accept the pain that will be required for change.

    Although, change is a’comin! It is going to be interesting.

    • gscody
      January 30, 2012 at 8:26 pm

      That’s precisely why the founding fathers were against democracy. We are not supposed to be and technically still are not a democracy. Democracy just means mob rule.

      • Don
        January 30, 2012 at 9:12 pm

        Democracy just means “of the people”, it says nothing about how the people rule. This majority vote thing is just something the U.S. gov’t has implemented but it’s not standard or required to be a democracy.

        For example amendments to the constitution takes a 100% vote, not just a simple majority.

        And yes: majority rule is just mob rule.

        • That One Guy
          January 31, 2012 at 5:08 am

          Very good points made, just nitpicking a little bit…amendment ratification only requires 75% of states.

          • BrentP
            January 31, 2012 at 5:14 am

            Anyone ever check on the claims that certain amendments, like the one that we are told authorizes the income tax, were never properly ratified by the minimum number of states?

          • That One Guy
            February 2, 2012 at 3:50 am

            I’ve read arguments to the effect that the Reconstruction amendments are not valid because the Southern states were forced to ratify them as a condition of rejoining the Union, which was not optional. Sorry I don’t recall who made them I think it was either Tom Woods or Tom DiLorenzo. I mix the two up quite a bit.

            Also West Virginia technically should not be a state because after seceding from Virginia it did not have to ratify the Constitution to be admitted to the Union. I’m not sure that it ever did.

  3. mithrandir
    January 30, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    This is sad. I am amazed (and should be thankful) that I am still able to walk around without being sent away in the middle of the night.

    It is disturbing as the noose gets tighter around the neck. Many if not most are unaware or do not care.

    I would like to be able to disable the gps or use some computer work around to prevent King John’s men from shaking me down.

    Some people would sell their soul for complete control of others.
    I prefer for me and everyone else to be left alone.

    • methylamine
      January 31, 2012 at 5:42 am

      We may have to emulate the Brits, who make a campaign of destroying speed cameras on their roads. The OBD-III reading stations could become targets of a similar campaign.

      That, or sabotage of your own car’s OBD-III…disconnect or jam the GPS, etc.

      However I’m sure they’ll implement tamper-monitors as well.

      Why aren’t people sick of this crap yet?

      • January 31, 2012 at 10:05 am

        “Why aren’t people sick of this crap yet?”

        Two reasons, I think:

        Conditioning (works on most people).
        Cloverism (there’s more of them now than ever before)

        Combine the two and you have a political bloc sufficient to establish and impose everything we talk about here. A relative few object, but their voices carry no weight – and so, their rights are trampled.

        • mikehell
          January 31, 2012 at 1:55 pm

          I have a friend who—can you believe this?—literally credited the state with *his own continuing survival*. He said, in effect, “I’m alive and we have a government so that’s cause and effect right there.”

          It all comes down to schooling and the indoctrination forced upon us. Where else would state worship come from?

          • January 31, 2012 at 1:58 pm

            Sheesh!

            You might try pointing out to him the tens of millions systematically slaughtered by governments in this century alone.

            One evil man can kill a few dozen – maybe a few hundred. Possibly,in extreme cases, a few thousand. But it takes a government to kill people in the millions.

          • John Illinois
            January 31, 2012 at 6:56 pm

            I believe that it was Stalin who said that if you kill 10 people, it is a tragedy, but if you kill millions, it just becomes a statistic.

      • BrentP
        January 31, 2012 at 2:50 pm

        The corporate media hasn’t really been reporting the attacks on cameras in the USA. But they are still fairly rare compared to the UK. The methods used can be rather creative. I find the flaming tire to be the most amusing of them.

        • methylamine
          January 31, 2012 at 10:31 pm

          Love the flaming tires! Reminds me of South Africa…where it’s used as a political punishment.

          Hmmmmmm….

      • Dave Webb
        February 3, 2012 at 5:24 pm

        The trick would be to make the OBD-III think everything is all right and continue to give the Big Brother outfits false reports that your engine has nothing wrong with it. Probably a little reprogramming would be in order by flashing the ram or some such thing. Most of these gadgets including your blue ray player have updates flashed into them by proper equipment such as plugging them into a computer terminal. I have never done this flashing the computer chip to update anything but I know it is there.
        They are depending on poor engineering or designed to fail after a certain amount of use to get the older vehicles off the road.
        They don’t need anything else as the repairs become more and more expensive as time and mileage add up. The average person does not have the skill to fix these vehicles and they know it.
        As for destroying cameras, I think most of them are economically being destroyed by people that do not have the money to pay the fines. After a while, the company goes broke.
        Also that nasty word, fraud, is out there. Yellow lights set and designed to make people run lights are a safety issue as well as fraud by our local gestapos. That is quickly becoming an issue. I haven’t heard of someone suing the companies for this little “fraud” setup yet, but it is only a matter of time before someone takes their “contract” with local government to court. Most contracts state the yellow light be set to a certain timing. Usually it is 3 or 3.5 seconds. Anyone with any engineering skill at all knows that is way too fast for someone to stop if you are near the light when it changes. The Fraud is that the government and the camera company are both aware of it and use it to steal from people.
        The only way the OBD-III will be changed is in the marketplace. The cars are too expensive to buy. That will bring the entire car market down like a house of cards.

  4. Boothe
    January 30, 2012 at 6:49 pm

    Just think, pretty soon the car itself will scan your implanted bio-chip and won’t start for anyone that you haven’t authorized to use your car. That’ll stop car theft (Clover’s breathing heavy just now). The car will also be able to determine what your blood alcohol level is from the chip and prevent you from starting the car if you’re “over the limit” (Clover’s starting to moan). And if you have a health problem, such as a heart attack, diabetic shock, seizure, etc., the car will pull to the side of the road, park itself, shut-down and notify OnStar to send first responders (Clover’s starting to shudder).

    Of course the cops will arrive first, see your Ron Paul 2012 and NRA-ILA bumper stickers and order you out of the vehicle. When you’re non-responsive (because you’re unconscious), they’ll have the OnStar operator unlock the door. Whereupon you’ll be tasered, dragged out of the vehicle, clubbed, cuffed and subsequently choke to death on your own puke. But it will save them the trouble of taking you to the state euthanasia center…err…I mean hospital. After all, your “condition” isn’t covered under Obamny Care anyway and being non-responsive is “resisting arrest”. I can see where all this is headed and must say I am sooooo proud to live in a “free” country…..

  5. dom
    January 30, 2012 at 10:12 pm

    I don’t see how any of this is possible legally. So if you remove the communication device do you get arrested?

    • January 30, 2012 at 10:33 pm

      It’s probably going to be treated like air bags. If you defeat/remove them (triggering SRS light) you fail state “safety” inspection – which means, you can’t get or renew your license plates. Or catalytic converters also illegal to remove.

    • mikehell
      January 30, 2012 at 10:47 pm

      Dom, it’ll be like when the pigs could put a tracking device on your car w/o a warrant (and probably will continue to do regardless of what the Supremes say). If you find it and remove it, they will knock on your door, looking for their stuff. In any case, they will find a way to make you pay for your claim of self-ownership.

      • January 30, 2012 at 10:55 pm

        And: Many new cars already come with Event Data Recorders (EDRs), the so-called “black boxes” that store info such as whether you were wearing a seat belt, how fast the car was going, throttle position, braking effort – and so on. I’ve read that cops have snatched black boxes during accident investigations and this has been ruled ok by the courts. I need to check to be sure, but that’s what I’ve read.

        I know for sure that (in the case of GM vehicles with OnStar) all these things can be monitored by GM in real time as well as recorded and stored.

        • Stephan
          February 3, 2012 at 11:50 pm

          Hey Eric, although I can see the safety nutbags loving the diea of implementing this nationally, I just don’t see how they could practically do it. Millions of older cars are still on the road everywhere and remember, they’re driven by voting taxpayers that will really get pissed off about their rep going ahead and fucking them economically. I know the politicos already do this daily, but usually not so overtly. I don’t think something like OBD III is going to be effectively used on a country wide scale for years to come. And who knows, by then the Federalgovenrment might just go flat stone bankrupt.

          • February 4, 2012 at 8:54 am

            Well, submitted for your approval: Crotch grabs at airports. Most people put up with that. Inconceivable 20 years ago. Just wait. They’ll put up with a lot more than just being told they can’t drive a car made prior to “x” year.

          • stephan
            February 7, 2012 at 6:49 am

            Hah, I suppose you got a point there. I guess I’m glad I live in a third world country then. The laws are corrupt as hell but this also makes them wonderfully hard to successfully implement. They’ve banned smoking three times in “public” places where I live, and everyone just keeps lighting up.

  6. BrentP
    January 31, 2012 at 12:36 am
    • January 31, 2012 at 10:30 am

      I remember that one – top drawer!

  7. That One Guy
    January 31, 2012 at 5:25 am

    People cowering in their beds at the prospect of the Islamobomb being carried through JFK in a suitcase for…well they don’t have a good reason why this would happen but they’re sure it will if Ron Paul is elected…they say we’re nuts for worrying about this kind of thing.

    Living in America is like being in the laughing academy. My dad told me last week that we have to vote to support the party no matter who they choose because if we don’t get rid of Obama we’re all dead. He’s refused to accept I haven’t considered myself a Republican for at least 10 years. I responded “party over country…how Soviet of you.” He really didn’t like that; the fascists always hate the communists the most. They’re too drunk on ideology to realize that few groups have as much in common.

    What can you do but laugh at this stuff? Anything else and you’ll end up belonging in the laughing academy for real.

    • January 31, 2012 at 10:08 am

      “People cowering in their beds at the prospect of the Islamobomb being carried through JFK in a suitcase …”

      So depressingly true.

      As far as I can tell, the “Islamofascists” haven’t taken away my fourth, fifth and first amendment rights (among others). The flag-wearing fascists in DC have.

      • Gail
        January 31, 2012 at 11:47 am

        I’ve wondered why the feds have pretty much left alone the freedom of religion clause in the 1A, when they’ve hardly been shy about pillaging the other Amendments. You could say that fiddling with religion is the one thing the people wouldn’t stand for, but I wonder how true that is. Where’s the evidence that the people would irresistibly rise up over religion when there hasn’t been the universal rebellion over 2A incursions that you would have expected, long since?

        Maybe the politicians fear the wrath of God. You know, since God blesses America more than He does other places.

        Nobody said politicans had to be smart. For which, God be thanked. If they were smart, we might really be in trouble.

        Or it could be that the pols are content to leave it alone in the belief that religion is the opiate of the masses and that’s a *good* thing. Why fix something that ain’t broke?

        Anyway, it looks like even the religion clause, that is, the separation of church and state, has sustained its first little nibble of the ratfascists. To wit, this from The Freeman: “This month the Obama administration, citing the medical case for birth control, made a politically charged decision that the new health care law requires insurance plans at Catholic institutions to cover birth control without co-payments for employees, and that may be extended to students. But Catholic organizations are resisting the rule, saying it would force them to violate their beliefs and finance behavior that betrays Catholic teachings.”

        The egregious effrontery of this was another jaw-dropper for me. (You’d think I’d be over that by now, wouldn’t you?) Not sure where the ‘medical case for birth control’ comes from, unless it’s the statistic that abortion is safer than giving birth, from a study cited by Reuters recently.

        At any rate, yet another lesson — as if we needed it — that nothing is sacred, or safe, from the evil predations of the State.

        And I’m not seeing an Islamofascist pawprint on that one, either.

        • January 31, 2012 at 12:18 pm

          My take on this:

          Religion – generally – does not threaten the authority of the state. Indeed, it often serves to enhance the authority of the state. It keeps the masses docile and accepting. Their reward will come to them in heaven. Submit. Obey.

          There have been exceptions, but for the most part, organized religion has been the handmaiden of organized government throughout the ages.

          Now, if say organized Christianity came out against any use of state power to “help” people – if it came out against unjust wars – then you’d have something.

          And then, you’d see a clampdown.

          • ThatOneGuy
            January 31, 2012 at 11:22 pm

            Organized religion basically = the state. The only difference is you have the freedom to not participate. But the Catholic Church especially, it IS government. It has a capitol city and a seat at the UN. In Europe it’s become largely a ward of the state, as the churches are mostly empty except on holy days of obligation. Most organized religions are just more rent-seeking organizations trying to curry favor with government.

            I was educated K-12 in Catholic schools and am a confirmed Catholic; take it from me, the similarities between that organization and the state are uncanny. The entire organization operates on fear, only instead of using the fear of incarceration or death to gain your obedience (and money) like government does, the church plays on fears of eternal damnation in a lake of fire. It’s just as effective. You can be the biggest piece of shit on the planet but if you go kneel, grovel and tithe every Sunday it washes it all away. You’re in good with God.

            Sunday Mass = Clover Convention.

        • BrentP
          January 31, 2012 at 2:56 pm

          The government has essentially brought organized religion under state control. Through tax code and other more manipulative methods we now have churches in the US preaching the gospels of war and the worship of military. It’s rather sick.

          Essentially 1A has been subverted by the churches becoming an arm of the state as Eric pointed out.

          • methylamine
            January 31, 2012 at 10:36 pm

            Absolutely–501c(3) classification renders the church and organ of the state. How can it not be? It has agreed to muzzle itself politically to participate in tax benefits.

            Reminds me of Stalin’s chicken. Stalin was asked how he effected such iron-fisted rule. In reply, he asked that a chicken be brought to him; he proceeded to pluck most of its feathers (a horribly painful operation). The frightened chicken at first ran from him, but soon returned and huddled against his leg for warmth.

            And THAT’S how it’s done, folks.

            The milder and funnier analogy: Government breaks both your legs, then offers you crutches and says “See? Without me you couldn’t walk!”

          • methylamine
            January 31, 2012 at 10:36 pm

            Whoops–meant to write:
            …renders the church AN organ of the state.

            Sorry…typo.

        • Marc
          February 1, 2012 at 3:54 am

          There are some real gems here. I like this one. “Nobody said politicians had to be smart. For which, God be thanked. If they were smart, we might really be in trouble.”

          After the repeal of prohibition they have pretty much left alcohol alone too. Although it isn’t specifically prohibited it isn’t really protected either. They could easily make it unaffordable with their infernal sin taxes which always go up and never down but they have pretty much left it unmolested – the rarest of all things for a political class.

          • That One Guy
            February 1, 2012 at 4:55 am

            There’s a group of folks in Appalachia who would vehemently disagree.

          • Boothe
            February 1, 2012 at 4:57 am

            Shhhh! They probably forgot about booze in their frenetic violence orgies to wipe out “drugs” (except those produced by big pharma) and “terrorism” (except when they’re committing it). Or maybe they’re distracted by their war on “poverty” (how come all the “impoverished” WIC / EBT recipients I see in line are fat?) and their efforts to protect us from “climate change” (if they could just figure out how to tax that damned solar cycle). But seriously folks, I think the “revenuers” are smart enough to realize that increasing the liquor tax will lead reduced sales, increased moon-shining and a net reduction in revenue. You can bet your arse they aren’t holding the tax down for the benefit of us mere “mundanes”. Maybe they’re taking a lesson in “liberty” from the last folks that occupied Afghanistan….care for another shot of vodka comrade?

          • Gail
            February 1, 2012 at 9:14 pm

            Marc sez: “They could easily make it [alcohol] unaffordable with their infernal sin taxes which always go up and never down but they have pretty much left it unmolested – the rarest of all things for a political class.”

            There’s an easy explanation for that. Congress drinks. A lot.

  8. Jesse Bogan
    February 1, 2012 at 7:35 pm

    First of all, they keep alcohol cheap to keep the masses numbed out, and unable to pay attention. For religon, there is a huge war on Christianity in this country. The tip of the spear is not the government per se, but it happens with tacit approval, and help from the Judiciary branch. AS for OBD 3, … There was a time when I would have said that even the Feral Government would not be so stupid as to shut down a multi billion dollar industry, but now I am not so sure. I make my living from restoring old cars. I drive old cars, my newest is a 93 Jag, OBD 1. When they take away my ability to make a living, by banning old cars, I might have to consider that crossing my line in the sand so to speak.I am sure it would come as a complete suprise to the dip shits in DC ( Where to get historic tags, the car has to pass inspection…I have had to get 2 Model As through over the last few years)There are hungreds of thousands of old car hobbiests, including a large group of “Hot Rodders” that actually believe in being able to use their multi thousand dollar “investments” on a regular basis. Like the gun guys say… MOLON LABE

    • That One Guy
      February 2, 2012 at 3:57 am

      I am blown away every time I hear about mandatory safety inspections. I didn’t realize so many states had them; Washington does not.

      Which I just cannot believe because this is one of the queen nanny states. We can carry openly, concealed carry is relatively easy compared to a number of other blue states, and we don’t have auto safety inspections. But the watermelons just banned plastic bags from Seattle and driving lanes continue to give their lives for cyclists at an ever-increasing pace. It’s a strange brand of eco-liberalism that prevails here….

      • February 2, 2012 at 11:14 am

        Reason?

        Washington was founded by non-Clovers but is being taken over by Clovers. Just like CA.

    • methylamine
      February 2, 2012 at 4:32 am

      It will be at that time I’ll start a lucrative business “passing” people’s cars.

      Watch; banning older cars will be about as successful as the War on (some) Drugs.

  9. February 3, 2012 at 11:30 am

    The High Priests calling themselves SOTU have determined that their costumed enforcers are not allowed to attach a GPS device without their permission:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/us/police-use-of-gps-is-ruled-unconstitutional.html?pagewanted=all

    • February 3, 2012 at 11:31 am

      Uh-oh, hope I don’t get in trouble with them. I meant SCOTUS.

  10. February 4, 2012 at 12:07 am

    Gun owners have been both acutely aware of this trend for decades, since even before the 68 Gun CONtrol Act. But we have been dismissed as ignorant paranoids “bitterly clinging on”. Most of the public didn’t care when our right to protect ourselves was trampled. Now that everyone else’s rights are being violated, only now are people waking up, and we’re laughing at you all now. Maybe some time soon Americans will care about EVERYONE’S rights. To get freedom for yourself, you have to protect it for someone else, even if you sometimes don’t like what they do with it.

    • Captain Obvious
      February 5, 2012 at 7:04 pm

      Don’t be too broad with your vitriol; remember that man gun owners were also worried about government control of other things. Seek out those who WERE for gun control and spit in their face (figuratively, of couse, Big Brother now considers that to be physical/sexual assault).

  11. MattyD
    February 4, 2012 at 1:57 am

    What an interesting coincidence, yesterday Wisconsin Public Radio had Paul Eisenstein, the publisher and editor of “The Detroit Bureau”– http://www.thedetroitbureau.com — as a guest on a one hour talk show. The topic was “What’s New and Interesting About the Latest Cars. It’s a call-in show so I called in to ask when cars would follow the larger trend that is the proliferation of technology that keeps us under surveillance every minute that we are out in the public spaces. The call screener refused to let me on the air, calling my question not pertinent to the discussion. I’m glad that epautos has the sense to air the topic.

    #$@%’n Police State!

    • February 4, 2012 at 8:51 am

      Hey Matty,

      Thanks – and, I know Paul. I used to write for TheCarConnection, which he edits. Paul’s ok,but TCC, like most if not all car publications, is disinclined to broach political topics, which always frustrated me. I tried for years (literally) to get them to run my political columns, not just the car reviews. No luck, not interested. They don’t get it – that while they may not be interested in politics, politics is interested in them. And cars, too.

      • BrentP
        February 4, 2012 at 5:17 pm

        The closest to politics I have ever seen an old-fashioned car publication get would be about fighting legislation against old cars in Hemmings or something about the speed limit or some other new revenue enhancement nonsense in C&D. Even then, it would be arguing the merits, not that government shouldn’t have the power.

  12. Todd
    February 5, 2012 at 4:03 pm

    Great article! Love RUSH and Red Barchetta! I wish that “my uncle had a country place that no one knows about”…keep up the good fight!

  13. Captain Obvious
    February 5, 2012 at 6:15 pm

    So, which wire do we clip?

    • February 5, 2012 at 6:43 pm

      I wish it were that simple. They have done a very good job of integrating these items into the car’s computer controls such that attempts to defeat them are not easy and risk creating problems if you try.

      • Captain Obvious
        February 5, 2012 at 6:56 pm

        So, can we clip the antenna (to Feds) without disrupting engine control?

      • Captain Obvious
        February 5, 2012 at 7:07 pm

        In addition, it would be wonderful if some hackers could make some software that would make the Feds think the car is driving where it is not!

        • methylamine
          February 5, 2012 at 10:22 pm

          Give’em a nasty fright–make it appear they’re all massed at 1600 Penn Ave!

  14. Sher Thompson
    February 6, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    What will happen when the “less fortunate” in our midst can’t afford a new car with this “technology”? Will we have to pony up for THEIR new cars as well as ours? This just gets scarier and scarier.

    • February 6, 2012 at 1:00 pm

      No – they’ll just be herded into public transport. That is the long-range agenda goal. Being able to travel freely and independently is one of the few real liberties still available to the average person. And hence, it must be stamped out.

    • BrentP
      February 6, 2012 at 2:48 pm

      The desire is for the automobile to be returned to the state of being a rich man’s toy. A luxury of the ruling class. If some of those with power have their way so will energy, food, and water.

      I believe the desire future is to turn the planet into a giant company town with a much lower population.

  15. Jim Agnew
    February 6, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    Eric,

    I have the words to Rush’s song, Red Barchetta, posted on my garage wall. None of my cars are red, but I enjoy the song and the future civil disobedience it envisions.
    I’ve enjoyed reading all your posts (on LewRockwell.com); keep up the good work!
    Your latest article on OBDIII makes me more determined to keep my non-OBD & OBDII cars running as long as possible…

    Jim Agnew
    Docent Trainee
    California Automotive Museum
    Sacramento, CA

    ’51 Kaiser Traveler Deluxe
    ’53 Kaiser Manhattans (3)
    ’71 Citroen DS21 Pallas
    ’79 Citroen CX 2500D Pallas
    ’97 Ford Mustang GT
    ’98 Infiniti QX4

    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers

  16. Jason Flarg
    February 7, 2012 at 3:31 pm

    A couple of notes for the sake of argument:

    1. You’ve thrown together OBDIII and wholesale monitoring of all your activities as though they’re one and the same. If this was going to be an article about traffic surveillance in general, then what was the point of singling out OBDIII?

    2. “If it comes to pass, OBD III will be the keystone that assures the end of any expectation of privacy behind the wheel (in addition to everywhere else) and it will also obviate the quaint notion that it’s your car – and hence, private property.” If a cop sees your car parked in the middle of a moving traffic lane and has it towed and fines you, are you going to cite your expectation of privacy and complain indignantly about how it’s *your car*? It’s *our air* that’s being fouled by *your car* when your car’s environmental controls are out of whack.

    3. “… with the actual monitoring taking place before the computer throws any codes”. When a cop sits on the side of the road watching traffic go by waiting for speeders, he is monitoring you if you pass him even when you aren’t speeding. With equipment, at least a person isn’t involved, and if compliant vehicles are ignored, then your car isn’t really being any more “monitored” by these devices than it is by the dumb mile markers and sign posts.

    • mithrandir
      February 7, 2012 at 4:53 pm

      1) If I understand, OBD-III will tell on you (to authorities) when your vehicle violates a rule (regardless of the merit) which will give the authorities the ability to administer penalties remotely.

      2) If your car is in the travel lanes, your car can be towed for obstructing traffic. Privacy is not involved in this case.

      3) It is just another excuse that can be used to pull a car to the side of the road. What is the reason for monitoring everyone in the first place? This is treating everyone as a violator of the law. Just because a few people may violate some rules (laws) does not mean we should treat everyone as a law breaker.

  17. ekrampitzjr
    February 18, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    Eric, I come a little late to this discussion, but I warned about OBD III in a piece for the late, great Loompanics back in 2000. Cut and past the link:

    http://www.loompanics.com/Articles/YourCar.html

    Such things are why I might have ended up on the no-fly list. Shame on me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*