Biden Wants a Government-Mandated “Kill Switch” in Cars


There’s a long list of things the government controls and regulates for our safety. You know, things like how we can be treated at work, a certain quality of meat to be sold, and airbags in our cars. For the most part, we understand that these rules and regulations are necessary and only serve to keep us safe and healthy.

However, it would seem that some things the government says are for our good can actually be used against us, should the situation arise.

Case and point is the introduction of government-controlled “kill switches” into automobiles starting in 2025.

And yes, you most definitely read that correctly. Under the guidance of Joe Biden and his administration, the federal government has hidden a small provision in their newly passed infrastructure bill that would require all vehicles to contain an “advance drunk and impaired driving prevention technology.”

According to page 403 of the infrastructure legislation, cars will now be able to “passively monitor the performance” of the driver to ascertain whether they may be under the influence of anything that could cause them to make poor driving decisions. If the technology decides that the driver is, in fact, “impaired,” it will either “prevent or limit” that driver’s ability to operate the vehicle.

Naturally, and even with good intentions, the bill says that the overall idea is to cut down the number of drunk or otherwise impaired drivers on the road, thus preventing accidents and savings lives.

And to be sure, it’s a noble idea.

There are several major issues with the plan, though.

One is that it means the government will be in constant surveillance mode for any and all drivers on the roads, perhaps monitoring much more than just our driving skills. So much for silencing the voices that tell you big brother is watching…

The second issue is that it could force drivers to do things that aren’t safe, potentially even deadly, without any say in the matter whatsoever.

As former GOP Representative Bill Barr noted, for example, let’s say a driver is, in fact, not drunk or impaired, but merely “sleepy.” But let’s also say that the current area they are driving in is dangerous to pull over on the side of the road to catch a few z’s – say in a particularly rough part of town or on a stretch of road with many blind spots for oncoming drivers.

And yet, because the car can sense that the driver is not at their best, it pulls the car over anyway and prevents driving until either another driver takes the wheel or that driver is not so tired. This, while avoiding an accident, at least that would find the driver at fault, could actually be putting said driver and any other passengers at great risk.

Basically, as Barr says, “The choice as to whether a vehicle can or cannot be driven – for vehicles built after 2026 – will rest in the hands of an algorithm over which the car’s owner or driver have neither knowledge nor control.”

The even sadder part of this is that it’s already been passed and signed over as law, thanks to the Democrats’ rushed push to get their infrastructure bill passed.

Now, to be clear, given that it’s quite hidden on page 403 of one of the most massive legislations to date, it would be rather easy to miss this as a lawmaker. Then again, their very job is to make sure that the laws getting put in place and passed are ones that are beneficial to the people of the United States.

And forgive me if I can’t quite see how this will be a good thing, at least in its current form.

Sure, it might save some lives and each one of those matters. But at what cost? Will then start allowing the government a window into our homes to monitor that alcohol isn’t being used irresponsibly there? I mean, when will it end?

As it stands now, the feds are already trying to control far more than our founding fathers intended. Do you think they thought it would be a good idea for our national leaders to tell us what shots we should be getting and how often?

And yet, the liberal left seems to think that’s the only route to take, never mind that people should have rights and free will.

I wonder how long it will take before a lawsuit is filed against this provision…