51–60 of 81 posts
How about banning the sale of cars that don't use time of flight measurement in their keyless go system? The problem isn't thieves using easy to get standard equipment for car theft, the problem is car manufacturers making it pretty easy for them. Remember when you could open cars using an old coat hanger? Did they ban steel wire to prevent this?
Ah, those law abiding thieves will surely stop procuring themselves those devices now that they are illegal.
It will reduce supply, but it will also make it easier to prosecute those that have these devices. I frankly don't understand the sentiment. Should we not outlaw murder because "ha, surely criminals won't murder anymore now"?
Car manufacturers have been repeatedly caught with their pants down on the multiple security flaws in keyless ignition systems. These are multi-million dollar businesses choosing not do spend money on recalls or R&D to mitigate this. These corporations are effectively externalizing private costs with public over-reaching legislation and public law enforcement.
Secondly, and much more gravely, the criminalizing with 'unlimited fine', as most laws, will rely on non-technical people's interpretation. In practice this means (as prior history shows with regards to legislation and tech), that the step between banning Bulgarian RF repeater/jammers for key fobs, and charging a 16 year old with a several thousands Pounds fine just for using an SDR dongle becomes something very real.
For anyone with experience past or present in autocratic states it is also an obvious reduction of civil liberties in (what should be) a democratic society.
I'm always amused when law makers try to fight crime by making new laws. Because that affects exactly everybody except criminals who - by definition - don't care about laws. Like, I can really imagine the reaction of professional car thieves when they heard of this new ban: "Damn, Bobby, let's pack it in! I guess we're not allowed to use those jammers any more. Too bad, they served us well."
I'm always amused when law makers try to fight crime by making new laws. Because that affects exactly everybody except criminals who - by definition - don't care about laws. Like, I can really imagine the reaction of professional car thieves when they heard of this new ban: "Damn, Bobby, let's pack it in! I guess we're not allowed to use those jammers any more. Too bad, they served us well."
This is shoddy reasoning: you don’t have to care or not care about laws to not want to receive the deterring effect of incarceration. Laws, in their most basic form, exist to dangle that threat and others like it.
Will the new law lead to more car thieves getting caught? If not, it's just a symbolic gesture to the electorate: "We know you want us to do something about car theft; this is something."
This is a confusing article. I'm not sure what 'scrambling' means here: Keyless repeaters and signal amplifiers scramble the signal from remote key fobs inside people's homes, enabling criminals to unlock cars. And it talks about banning 'signal jammers'. How is a signal jammer useful for stealing a car? Wouldn't a signal jammer prevent someone from unlocking a car?
You can sit around a car park with a jammer and jam the signal as people walk away from their cars - some people don't notice that their attempt to lock the car just didn't do anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It will reduce supply, but it will also make it easier to prosecute those that have these devices. I frankly don't understand the sentiment. Should we not outlaw murder because "ha, surely criminals won't murder anymore now"?
Stealing is already outlawed, so banning the devices is not comparable to murder. What would be comparable if the government decided to ban knives and hammers? Those "devices" are used to commit murders, and anyone possessing them could be prosecuted for the crime of murder.
How about banning the sale of cars that don't use time of flight measurement in their keyless go system? The problem isn't thieves using easy to get standard equipment for car theft, the problem is car manufacturers making it pretty easy for them. Remember when you could open cars using an old coat hanger? Did they ban steel wire to prevent this?
"Making or selling a signal jammer could lead to up to five years in prison or an unlimited fine." I can understand you like to make some devices illegal. But really, five years prison, unlimited fine. Is everybody insane now.
A little context is necessary.
“Up to” is worth emphasis. Even if in an extreme scenario a 5 year sentence was disbursed only up to 2.5 years would be in prison (and likely far less), automatic release at 2 thirds in the worst case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can sit around a car park with a jammer and jam the signal as people walk away from their cars - some people don't notice that their attempt to lock the car just didn't do anything.
I don't know how that is still a problem. I drive a 2019 Renault, and it has both rolling codes and it locks automatically if it doesn't detect the key anymore.
I'm always amused when law makers try to fight crime by making new laws. Because that affects exactly everybody except criminals who - by definition - don't care about laws. Like, I can really imagine the reaction of professional car thieves when they heard of this new ban: "Damn, Bobby, let's pack it in! I guess we're not allowed to use those jammers any more. Too bad, they served us well."
First, a “throw the book at them” approach leads to easier convictions via plea deals and the ability to be guilty of one charge even if another doesn’t stick.
Second, if lawmakers did not adapt the criminal code in the face of new technology then we’d all be posting here about how out of touch and behind the times they are. Or we’d be bemoaning how law enforcement can’t go after this type of crime because it turns out not to be explicitly illegal to maliciously block RF signals used to lock doors.
And also, writing new policy is their job? Are you just suggesting that we pay lawmakers to never try to address things affecting their constituents, because we care about what the criminals think?