A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
As the article says, "kill switch" imply that someone could remotely turn off your car.
A local computer deciding that you're driving dangerously or is not supposed to drive because of alcohol is different than someone shutting down a car remotely.
Honestly, fuck people that drive with alcohol in their blood
That’s called a killswitch.
Your ignoring the original claim:
"Beginning 2026, a kill switch will be a mandatory feature on vehicles," reads the tweet. "The device allows the government, the police, and car makers to disable your car from the comfort of their offices. Reminder - 18 GOP voted for this bill."
And USAToday's response:
Automobile experts told USA TODAY the bill does not direct a kill switch to be implemented in cars, nor does it give any third parties, including law enforcement or government officials, access to the in-vehicle technology. Rather, the bill in question directs a federal agency to require technology that would detect driver impairment and disable the vehicle in that scenario.
Specifically, Section 24220 of the bill directs the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to develop rules that would require new cars to be equipped with technology that "passively monitors the performance of a driver," identifies whether they may be impaired and prevents or limits motor vehicle operation "if an impairment is detected."
None of this requires a connection to some government office.
But the claim by “Jailbait” singer Ted Nugent being refuted is:
The device allows the government, the police, and car makers to disable your car from the comfort of their offices.
That’s different than an impairment-detection system. The section you cited doesn’t allow Leslie Knope to disable your car remotely.
This doesn't really make sense. How will the people in the government office know if I am drunk?