By Eric Peters on 10.27.08 @ 6:06AM
Style, sex appeal, and power used to sell cars. Not anymore.
Yesterday's tyrannies came to us in the name of the people -- or
the race or the nation. We may get ours in the name of the
children.
At least, when it comes to our cars and what we're allowed to do
with them.
Ford has just revealed a new system it will include as standard
equipment on many of its 2010 model vehicles -- and eventually,
all of them. The new system -- called "MyKey" -- is described as
a tool for parents of teenaged drivers. It lets Mom or Dad
electronically limit the vehicle's speed via a programmable key
fob to no more than 80 mph. But that's not all folks.
The system can be set up to trigger an annoying buzzer if the
teen doesn't buckle up for safety -- or exceeds any
preset speed -- and even limits the volume of the stereo (okay,
maybe this last item's not such a bad idea).
"Our message to parents is, hey, we are providing you some
conditions to give your new drivers that may allow you to feel a
little more comfortable in giving them the car more often," said
Jim Buczkowski, Ford's director of electronic and electrical
systems engineering.
But the speed limiter thing is creepy, because you just know it
will not end with "the children." It may start with them
-- just as mandatory seat belt laws began with them. But
eventually, the same inexorable logic will be applied to
everyone.
Who, after all, needs to drive faster than 80 mph? It's illegal
speeding! And speeding, as we all have been taught to pretend to
agree, is unsafe. Why, therefore, should the possibility of
speeding be permitted when technology can keep us safe?
If Ford does it, bet your bippie GM will, too. Automakers have
fully embraced what you might call Mom Culture -- each trying to
outdo the others as providers of the "safest" cars on the road.
Style, sex appeal and power used to sell cars. Not so much today.
The most popular cars on the road are S-moo-Vees and family
friendly "crossovers" that are just minivans in drag. Most new
cars come standard with at least four air bags; some six or even
eight. It adds thousands of dollars to the bottom line price, but
all those moms out there demand it.
How long before the moms in the state and federal Politburo seize
upon this new technology and make it mandatory? Not just that
your next new car come equipped with it -- but that either the
automakers or the government pre-program the car so that it can
never be driven faster than the posted limit?
With GPS technology, it is now possible to do this in "real time"
-- as the car travels. Leaving your driveway/neighborhood, a
roadside transmitter sends a signal to your car's computer,
limiting the speed to the 25 mph maximum; once you turn onto the
secondary road that leads to the highway -- where the limit is 45
mph -- the car receives new instructions and allows you to go
that fast. But no faster. Enter the highway, and you're allowed
55. That's it. Wherever you go -- and no matter how much
horsepower you're packing -- you'll go only as fast as The Man
(or more accurately, Mom) says you may.
IRONICALLY, THE ONLY HOPE this darkness may not descend is that
it would cause a major cash-flow problem for the local and state
governments that depend so much on the "revenue" generated from
our system of routine non-compliance with purposely under-posted
speed limits. We're talking hundreds of millions of dollars; a
bonanza not just for the various governments involved but also
for the insurance cartels, who profit handsomely from the
almost-unavoidable premium "surcharges" that come with a blotch
on your DMV record for "speeding."
But if speeding becomes impossible, radar traps -- both manned
and automated -- become pointless. No money in it.
And that we cannot have.
So, it's even money how this will come out. There's a battle
brewing between the safety fetish of millions of moms, the
automakers who are desperate to please them -- and the edifice of
organized highway robbery that makes it possible to keep the
money flowing into the government's pockets from ours without the
politically less palatable need to impose an overt tax.
Who will come out the victor? It's a tough call. But either way,
you and I will lose.
