Teensurance Tracks Teens on the Road?

Link - tech.yahoo.com...

"With the GPS unit installed, parents and teens can set speed, distance, and time limitations and be notified via text message, email, and phone calls if and when any are crossed. "

I don't know If this has been posted already. Now I understand all the good in using this technology, but at the same time this kind of disturbs me.

A couple of my friends were telling me that the New 07 & 08 model of cars will have GPS already installed, with or without your permission.

I wonder if this technology can be used for alternative motives, is this the first step In the government tracking where we drive? How fast we drive, where we stop, or how much gas we put into our tank?

Or am I just overreacting?

This is a great idea for parents that care where their kids (Minors) are during all hours of the night. I don't know how many times I'm going home from a night out a 2 or 3 in the morning and see bands of teenagers wandering around.

The problem, though, is that I feel most parents don't really care anymore. maybe I shouldn't say most, but some just dont care. And when the kids get caught doing something they shouldn't, the parents blame someone else, or society in general.

As for these devices being used to track everyone, I really don't think "the man" cares where most of us are at any specific time.

Originally posted by sensfan
This is a great idea for parents that care where their kids (Minors) are during all hours of the night. I don't know how many times I'm going home from a night out a 2 or 3 in the morning and see bands of teenagers wandering around.

The problem, though, is that I feel most parents don't really care anymore. maybe I shouldn't say most, but some just dont care. And when the kids get caught doing something they shouldn't, the parents blame someone else, or society in general.

What you have to say here is so true. What are minors doing out at 2 or 3 a.m. to begin with? Where are the parents? What happened to kids getting into trouble for curfew from the police or their parents?

Instead of good old fashioned household rules, some parents might think this is very handy instead of actually knowing before their kids leave the house where they will be going and what they will be doing. Way too easy!
We never got the car keys handed to us when I was growing up, unless we made a promise to be home well within the legal curfew time. Mess up once and no car keys!

While I do agree this could also be used for other reasons, I don't think it's a bad idea if in the case of a high speed chase, the offenders engine might be switched off, or the speed of the vehicle reduced, to save the public from harm, and assist the police.

I agree with sensfan though, unless you are doing something wrong, I don't think anybody will care.

Can you imagine the expense to monitor every vehicle that has GPS installed? I can't see anyone having the funds to do it.

reply to post by Enthralled Fan

Can you imagine the expense to monitor every vehicle that has GPS installed? I can't see anyone having the funds to do it.

Not much at all. A bit of software. The hardware is what costs, and that's already in place.

I for one am completely against anyone knowing everything about my travel habits. It's no one else's business. And this isn't because I am doing anything wrong. It's because what I do today, might be illegal tomorrow. This is just another step toward fascism. "Papers please" wasn't even this bad. I am not a big fan of government right now as it is. But what happens if they really do start sending people off to death camps. You really want them to be able to track you when you try to make your escape?

If I get a car with GPS pre-installed without a choice . . . I am doing everything I can to diconnect it.

If I want GPS, I will get a Garmin or TomTom.

I have a little example to give here as well. I know of a person who was invloved in a fatal car wreck. They hit a woman riding a motorcyle broadside. The woman had come screaming into the intersection against a light. The driver who hit her was driving a brand new car with all the latest computer gadgetry, and came into the intersection with a green light in his favor.

During the course of the investigation, the computer in the car revealed that the driver had been travelling 47mph in a 40 and did not hit their brakes. Not only was that driver ticketed, and therefore found to be at fault in the crash, they were also charged with manslaughter because they didn't hit the brakes.

The driver simply never saw the bike coming. Witnesses agreed that the bike had blown the light. Those witnesses had been travelling with in the same direction as the car that hit the bike, and were therefore most acutely aware that the light was green. However, there were pedestrians in the area, that stated the light was green for the bike.

But in the end, the car's computer was what led to the driver being held accountable for the accident and the death. He was actually aquitted on the criminal charge, but was still battling lawsuits the last I heard.

Another note on car technology. I don't know why or how, but twice I have had my car drop the hammer all on its own. Luckily I happened to be on an interstate the one time, and a long country road at night the other. The gas revved, and my brake pedal did not funtion. I dropped it into neutral and killed the ignition. Everything reset when I restarted coasting along.

Originally posted by jackinthebox

Not much at all. A bit of software. The hardware is what costs, and that's already in place.

Wow, you make it sound so simple. So how would this hardware work though with the millions of cars on the road that have GPS? What I mean is, wouldn't somebody have to monitor it?

I could understand how it might be used to track criminal activity, but what about the little old lady who only drives to Church on Sunday?

I guess I am not paranoid enough, but I just don't see how everyone would be monitored for daily activity.

reply to post by Enthralled Fan

I guess I am not paranoid enough, but I just don't see how everyone would be monitored for daily activity.

I am surprised to find someone so naieve posting here. All the data is already there. It's just a matter of correlating that data. Like I said, a bit of software. All of the data is already in a computer. That's how they are able to actually give you your GPS coordinates. Just because you may not be asking for your location every second, doesn't mean the system isn't tracking you. How did you think GPS works?

Now all they have to do is install a bit of software that will correlate that data with things like manufacturer details, DMV data, even data from your on-board systems such as the speed you are travelling, and even wether or not your windows are rolled down.

reply to post by jackinthebox


To be honest, I have never been in a car that had a GPS system, so that is where my being naieve comes in. I don't have a desire to purchase a vehicle with one in it, either. If that means I have to purchase a used vehicle in the future that doesn't have one, I will.

It isn't that I am afraid of having one, I have just heard negative things about them, that more can go wrong with the car, as you pointed out with what happened to you.

I understand that the system is always working, or else how could you request a location when you need it?

I guess I am just blind to the fact that somebody would be concerned about the average Joe the whole time they are in their car. It just doesn't make sense to me to be paranoid about it.

I can understand how somebody driving a getaway car might be worried about it, or a person involved in a crime involving a vehicle, but not an average person on their way to the grocery store to shop.

I did see you example of the person who hit the person at the intersection, but I do think that the person was negligent by not applying their breaks. Also, even if the speed limit was 40 and they were clocked by way of the GPS going 47, through the intersection, in my opinion, they were in the wrong, even if they had a green light. I don't know about you, but when I was taking drivers ed, we were taught to slow down 5 to 10 miles per hour at an intersection, below the posted speed limit, even when the light is green. That might also have come into consideration with that persons conviction.

If you are following the rules of the road, you don't have to worry about it. However, accidents do happen.

I'm not trying to be facetious here, but I get the feeling from you that people who would normaly get out of a traffic incident by lying, without the GPS system will no longer be able to do so.

The other scenarios you paint are frightening to say the least. But honestly, if I was going to get away from people trying to find me to put in a death camp, I don't think I'd be in a vehicle on the road anyway, since I am sure that road blocks would be set up just about everywhere!

reply to post by Enthralled Fan

It isn't that I am afraid of having one, I have just heard negative things about them, that more can go wrong with the car, as you pointed out with what happened to you.

Well, to be fair, I don't have GPS either actually. The problem with my car must have been something with the onboard computer, that any car from probably '96 on has.

I guess I am just blind to the fact that somebody would be concerned about the average Joe the whole time they are in their car. It just doesn't make sense to me to be paranoid about it.

They don't need to be concerned the whole time, that's the point. The data can be called up at any point they so desire. You are making a big assumption that such data could not be abused by those who have it. What if, just what if now, an assasination were to happen, and they needed a patsy? There's Joe Family at the grocery store completely oblivious that he is about to become the next Oswold. And of course, "they" will have the data to "prove it."

You need to see the movie Enemy of the State.

I did see you example of the person who hit the person at the intersection, but I do think that the person was negligent by not applying their breaks.

They never had a chance to. They never even saw the bike. The driver saw something out of the corner of his eye for a split second, but slammed on the brakes after feeling and hearing the impact. He didn't even know it was a bike until after he had gotten out of the car.

Also, even if the speed limit was 40 and they were clocked by way of the GPS going 47, through the intersection, in my opinion, they were in the wrong, even if they had a green light.

I don't know where you are from, but around here the cops can't even pull you over for less than 9mph over the speed limit. And the road he was on was a three lane highway, where the speed limit drops suddenly from 55 to 40 at the intersection.

I'm not trying to be facetious here, but I get the feeling from you that people who would normaly get out of a traffic incident by lying, without the GPS system will no longer be able to do so.

The point here is that the biker caused the accident. Not the guy who was going a few miles an hour over the limit.

Again, I don't know where you are from, but around here, going below the speed limit can get you killed. We actually have signs that have a minimum speed limit in some areas.

Oh, and by the way, the toxicology report showed that the girl on the bike had coc aine in her system as well. But i guess they couldn't actually "prove" that she was high.

Originally posted by jackinthebox

They don't need to be concerned the whole time, that's the point. The data can be called up at any point they so desire. You are making a big assumption that such data could not be abused by those who have it. What if, just what if now, an assasination were to happen, and they needed a patsy? There's Joe Family at the grocery store completely oblivious that he is about to become the next Oswold. And of course, "they" will have the data to "prove it."

Yikes! I never would have thought of something like this. I can picture this happening, though. I'm going to have nightmares now!

I don't know where you are from, but around here the cops can't even pull you over for less than 9mph over the speed limit. And the road he was on was a three lane highway, where the speed limit drops suddenly from 55 to 40 at the intersection.

I live in Louisiana. I do know people that have gotten tickets for 5 miles over the limit in school speed zones, and other areas in this state. I took drivers education in Illinois. I have lived all over the country and have never had a problem with slowing down for intersections. I've never been honked at for it, or rear ended, and I have never had a ticket.

Again, I don't know where you are from, but around here, going below the speed limit can get you killed. We actually have signs that have a minimum speed limit in some areas.

We have minimum speed limit signs here in Louisiana as well on some roads. Those are highways that do not have intersections on them.

Oh, and by the way, the toxicology report showed that the girl on the bike had coc aine in her system as well. But i guess they couldn't actually "prove" that she was high.

This does seem odd, that they would find this in her system, dismiss it, but use the information from the GPS system as fact.

I can understand why you seem upset about it now, because this doesn't make sense to me, either.

reply to post by Enthralled Fan


Star for your post.

The main point I'm really trying to make with the accident, is that the "victim" was clearly in the wrong and had caused the accident. But they made an example of this guy, and all the technology at their disposal. Who knows, maybe the girl on the bike even knew someone who had some pull with law-enforcement. Either way, the driver of the car was not doing anything dangerous or abnormal to cause an accident, and probably wouldn't have been able to avoid it had he been going a tad bit slower.

And actually, now that I think about it. It was the insurance company who was out for blood in the civil case. All because the police were able to ticket the driver of the car, and not the motorcyclist, because they had no proof about the light one way or the other. But the fact that a ticket was issued left all the blame on the driver of the car.

I really should see if I can find out how that all turned out, or even if it is over yet. It had been going on for a few years already the last I heard.

Oh well, anyway, that's only one example. I'm sure there are others that aren't springing to mind.

But end all be all, I am against more government control. Just like I am against police having more and more power everyday. Wether or not you have an opinion on police in general, one has to admit that there are some pretty crooked cops out there. Giving them more power is worse than one might imagine.