Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 81 posts

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#71

Post by nubinetwork »

Daviey wrote: post #57
karlkloss wrote: post #42

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?

Unlike the US, it was also illegal to listen in on police radio frequencies. I always felt this was madness to make it illegal rather than adopt encryption. Thankfully they are now encrypted.

I thought I heard something about UK police using a channel hopping routine similar to how Bluetooth works... if you know the channels used at the time, you can still listen in and piece the conversation together... do they still use it, or did they change to a new method?

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#72

Post by mihaaly »

parineum wrote: post #30
mihaaly wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel it a bit ironic arguing about "devastating effect on victims, who need their vehicles to go about their everyday lives" while the lock of homes including brand new ones are from the last century, somehow not the same worry about the place where people live. And in a car based society - more like forced outside of London which has usable public transportation - made itself so vulnarable to the use of cars for b…

Or they are just exaggerating the consequences so they can pass a silly law that let's them say they did something next time they run for office.

Yepp. Pretension is the norm.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#73

Post by _trampeltier »

TheChaplain wrote: post #69
_trampeltier wrote: post #14

"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.

Car theft is not only a unnecessary cost for the victim, but the whole process it starts demands a significant amount of tax payer money.

Car keys are so crap and easy to copy, that's the real crime.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#74

Post by woodruffw »

yorwba wrote: post #54
woodruffw wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That threat already exists without the new law, since car theft, like all theft, is illegal. Car thieves already don't believe they'll get caught. Make a specific kind of car theft extra special illegal and they still won't believe they'll get caught. 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;…

I’m not saying this particular law is good or makes sense; I’m responding to the faulty conclusion that laws don’t make sense at all.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#75

Post by superkuh »

mingus88 wrote: post #62
zmgsabst wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like what?

https://www.fcc.gov/general/jammer-enforcement

Um, your link does not support your implied claim. It is only illegal to actively transmit and interfere. None of the equipment is illegal to own. The entire idea that radio equipment would be intrinsically illegal to own is some sort of misunderstanding or confabulation.

I guess you're thinking about the, "It is also unlawful to advertise, sell, distribute, import, or otherwise market jamming devices to consumers in the United States."

But this means what it says. It doesn't mean you can't own devices that can generate and transmit arbitrary signals on arbitrary frequencies. I means you can't advertise, sell, distribute, import or market devices to consumers explicitly saying they're for jamming. That's pretty clear and does not make ownership of devices illegal.

This UK law really is unprecedented and very stupid. It is not a continuation of a status quo anywhere.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#76

Post by superkuh »

HeatrayEnjoyer wrote: post #17
superkuh wrote: post #4

So this is a change from the status quo where actually transmitting an interfering signal is illegal to one where having a device that might theoretically transmit an interfering signal is illegal? It sounds like ordering all pencils be made illegal because they can be used to write threats. I can see why they might want to make this change but I can't see how it can feasibly be defined and enforced without making ev…

Radio equipment restrictions are as old as radio itself. Go into cellular telecommunication or, god forbid, radar, and you will find a great number of things you are not allowed to possess or sell, with very severe punishments for violation.

I am into radio communication and radar and I think the only thing I'm not allowed to do is sell high power traveling wave tubes, etc, to foreign nationals. I, myself, within the country am unrestricted in equipment ownership. I am, of course, highly restricted in what frequencies I can use in actual practice.

Please give a concrete example of radio equipment that would be illegal for me to own.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#77

Post by superkuh »

creativenolo wrote: post #58
_trampeltier wrote: post #14

"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.

Wow the other comments on this thread are all ironic, exaggerated, and misleading. 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.

When you are being attacked by a government prosecutor these "up to"s matter very, very much. It allows them to force the acceptance of inappropriate settlements by waving the (very real) possibility of these "up to"s in your face if you try to actually have your case heard in a court.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#78

Post by seanmcdirmid »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #41
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The equivalent argument would be banning something that makes murder really really easy without much training or willpower. Killing with a knife is hard, and just not very accessible (if you doubt me, try going hunting for deer with a knife instead of a rifle). The equivalent would be some device that made killing really easy, eg something that supported point and shoot. Like, if someone invented a ray gun that you c…

Like power tools ? They make opening a locked doors very easy. Or regular non ray guns ? They make killing super easy. And you definitly don't need those for most people. But oil as well, I mean it makes arson so easy and you can burn entire houses with people inside.

You need to think about accessibility more! All of your other techniques just aren't that effective, which is why they aren't used for much murder very much. Burning a school down vs a gun to rack up mass casualties? The fire alarm would go off and that is that. The same with using a power tool like a drill to kill someone, you can do it if you try really hard, but your chances of success aren't very high.

Anything that makes the deed "easy" is simply going to make it easier to perform and hence performed more often. It isn't rocket science, and it isn't binary! Yes, you can kill someone with your bare hands, or use an ice pick, or whatever, but not easily, like you could with a gun.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#79

Post by creativenolo »

superkuh wrote: post #77
creativenolo wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow the other comments on this thread are all ironic, exaggerated, and misleading. 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.

When you are being attacked by a government prosecutor these "up to"s matter very, very much. It allows them to force the acceptance of inappropriate settlements by waving the (very real) possibility of these "up to"s in your face if you try to actually have your case heard in a court.

From your language, it’s clear you’re not talking from the perspective of the UK’s different legal systems.

They may matter like you say in other systems, but they are not the same in all systems.

Re: Electronic devices used for car thefts set to be banned

#80

Post by creativenolo »

rich_sasha wrote: post #64
throw9494949 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In UK it is a crime to silently pray at your own home. It is a different culture, court decides who is a criminal. There are no civil liberties or constitution like in US!

This is ridiculously untrue. Please do not spread Musk disinformation. First statue of Liberty, Magna Carta, predates the US itself by more than half a millennium.

I know. Also, twisted in this comment I think.

The Musk headline was loosely tidied to someone arrested (whilst) praying *outside* and ignores the context of what was happening at the time, and for the many hours before the arrest. Minor details like that.

Happy to live in a legal systems where these devices are banned, and we can cross the road freely.

Post reply on HN