Police remote operated vehicle immobiliser?
Discussion
I was wondering about the feasibility of remote operated devices being fitted to cars / bikes which kill the ignition.
I imagined police involved in a chase of a stolen car getting close enough to (when safe) activate a remote control which would stop the vehicle.
Maybe it's been thought of before and dismissed for some obvious reason I'm not seeing.
Would it be straight forward and fairly cheap?
Possibly funded or part funded by insurance companies? Perhps discounted insurance if owners fit the units?
I imagined police involved in a chase of a stolen car getting close enough to (when safe) activate a remote control which would stop the vehicle.
Maybe it's been thought of before and dismissed for some obvious reason I'm not seeing.
Would it be straight forward and fairly cheap?
Possibly funded or part funded by insurance companies? Perhps discounted insurance if owners fit the units?
saaby93 said:
1) operate it at the wrong time and it's more than the ignition that may end up being killed
Only used by trained officers? (so they don't operate when the chased car is cornering / at speed).saaby93 said:
2) how easy would it be for scrotes to learn how to bypass it?
I reckoned it could be made as difficult as a tracker.saaby93 said:
3) how easy for scrotes to get hold of the remote code?
I thought multiple codes. Database obviously not public and linked to ANPR.Remote immobilization already exists in the US, via GM's OnStar system.
Most US police agencies can request access to OnStar equipped vehicles in order to slow, then stop them (and even lock the doors to prevent foot-bail).
I was on a ride-along with my daughter, who is a US Sheriffs Deputy, when they initiated a felony stop on a stolen GMC Yukon, using OnStar to bring the vehicle to a controlled stop - and then locked the dirt-bags in the car. It was great!
Most US police agencies can request access to OnStar equipped vehicles in order to slow, then stop them (and even lock the doors to prevent foot-bail).
I was on a ride-along with my daughter, who is a US Sheriffs Deputy, when they initiated a felony stop on a stolen GMC Yukon, using OnStar to bring the vehicle to a controlled stop - and then locked the dirt-bags in the car. It was great!
If the system exists, then it can be compromised. Take the spate of BMWs that were stolen when the remote locking was compromised.
So whilst you can argue that only the police will use it, the reality is that eventually it will be used for nefarious reasons.
Do we need a built-in system that's implemented on all cars? No. Would it be useful if the police had a tool that allowed them to get the same end result? Yeah probably.
So whilst you can argue that only the police will use it, the reality is that eventually it will be used for nefarious reasons.
Do we need a built-in system that's implemented on all cars? No. Would it be useful if the police had a tool that allowed them to get the same end result? Yeah probably.
What they need is some way to gradually reduce the fuel slow so the car doesn't come to an abrupt halt. You'd need something in the EMS that could be accessed remotely, but as with any electronic system it would need to be extremely secure to stop someone hacking in to it.
I reckon what they need is a harpoon on the police car - get close behind, fire it into the boot, then reel them in :-)
I reckon what they need is a harpoon on the police car - get close behind, fire it into the boot, then reel them in :-)
Durzel said:
WinstonWolf said:
Bye bye PAS and servo?
This.Can't see anything like this coming to pass simply because it (or similar EMP tech) would nuke most modern vehicles, and potentially make them uneconomically viable to repair.
GC8 said:
To the OP: with a world full of people like you, a dystopian future is assured. You have nothing to worry about though, as I am sure that you will not be doing anything wrong.
All that prompted me was a rising trend of cars and bikes being stolen in my city and ending in unfortunate (sometimes tragic) circumstances.I just wondered if there might be a straightforward way of making it more difficult / less attractive for the people who get dragged in to doing it.
I'm not on some sort of crusade or anything. Just asking what people reckon.
Then again, I don't object to the notion of carrying identity cards. I suppose that'll be at odds with your moral principles as well.
Impasse said:
Clifford Blackjax is an anti-hijack system which disables the car in the controlled manner required for a safe stop. Just need to be able to remotely activate similar protocols from the comfort of a police car.
Blackjax voids Thatcham classification as far as I know. Not strictly the point, but pertinent to owners.SuperVM said:
You could have a system that allowed the engine to not rev much past idle and/or force an auto-box into neutral only. You'd keep your PAS and servo assisted brakes.
I was assuming a device similar to that posted in the OP, ala Fast & Furious spiky disabler thing. Something like that would probably permanently damage ECUs, etc. Something that manufacturers added could be bypassed/removed.Kiltie said:
GC8 said:
To the OP: with a world full of people like you, a dystopian future is assured. You have nothing to worry about though, as I am sure that you will not be doing anything wrong.
All that prompted me was a rising trend of cars and bikes being stolen in my city and ending in unfortunate (sometimes tragic) circumstances.I just wondered if there might be a straightforward way of making it more difficult / less attractive for the people who get dragged in to doing it.
I'm not on some sort of crusade or anything. Just asking what people reckon.
Then again, I don't object to the notion of carrying identity cards. I suppose that'll be at odds with your moral principles as well.
It was the people that werent doing anything wrong but the system thought they were
You could sign up for a voluntary ID card a few years ago if you really wanted one, but I think its been quietly dropped. Any system like that you have to make it so difficult to get one, that soem of the people who wnat one are excluded, meanwhile the scrotes can still find ways of getting one if they want
Remember when everyone had the brilliant idea of using mothers maiden name as security?. It's on so many databases now it's useless
They've started asking for NatInsurance number in some places, so pretty soon if youre not careful that will be available to anyone that wants one.
No rather than having a record or everyone and see what theyre doing, it's more straightforward to look at misbehaviour and tackle that. You also need a proecess to review who decides what is misbehaviour. Hence separation of judges from politicians.
Where were we
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff