🚀 go-pugleaf

In ca.general Dick <tjdick@my-deja.com> wrote:

: Am I over-reacting here, or what is your take on this?  I want to know
: what you all think.  Merlin, you still out there?  Etaoin Shrdlu?
: Elric?

     I'm still here.  I didn't see the original report so I'm at
somewhat of a handicap.  Who is pushing for this device--the cops
or DAs or who?  
     I don't think you can use Second Amendment arguments here--
the constitution does not protect the right to drive, though
many Americans seem to regard it as a God-given right.  But the
Search and Seizure provision might apply.  The cops can do
almost anything if they are in "hot pursuit" and have "probable
cause" to believe you have committed a crime--they can pull you
over, make you open your trunk, search you--all without a
warrant if they have probable cause.  This device does not seem
to violate any (or any more) constituitional provisions than
such searches.  
     So if we grant that it is constitutional--or no more
unconstitutional than many things that happen every day--we
still have the question of whether or not it is a good idea.
At this point I would have to be convinced that the dangers
you cite carry less weight than the "benefits" of being able
to stop cars at the push of a button.  It would certainly
eliminate the high-speed chase, which endangers innocent
bystanders daily.  Other than that, what is the benefit to the
public?