Slashdot Mirror


Tagging Devices To Aid In Car Chases

kthejoker writes "ABC News is reporting that a company called StarChase has invented a device that will allow police teams to 'tag' cars involved in dangerous chases. The device is the size of a golf ball, can be launched via an air-powered shooter attached to police vehicles, and uses a "highly efficient" glue to stick to cars. From there, it transmits its GPS position to a central monitoring station."

394 comments

  1. Wicked Idea by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its like the spiderman toys we all used to throw at windows and doors.
    Am I the only one who could never get them to stick to friends backs?

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:Wicked Idea by FyRE666 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't see why they don't fashion some sort of electrical disruption device, like those trident things out of "2 Fast, 2 Furious" that the cops just shot into a car. Not only were they effective (unless the drive manages to somehow lean out of the window far enough to reach the back of the car and prize the 2 foot spear out of the bodywork while travelling at 100mph), but they look cool too.

    2. Re:Wicked Idea by doctormetal · · Score: 2, Funny
      I don't see why they don't fashion some sort of electrical disruption device, like those trident things out of "2 Fast, 2 Furious" that the cops just shot into a car. Not only were they effective (unless the drive manages to somehow lean out of the window far enough to reach the back of the car and prize the 2 foot spear out of the bodywork while travelling at 100mph), but they look cool too.

      If the car is driving at a high speed and all electronics stop functioning, the car becomes uncontrollable and a crash will be unavoidable, which almost certainly means someone will die.
    3. Re:Wicked Idea by VagaStorm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      1. Fiering a spear on a car doing 100 mph in trafic is rather dangerous.
      2. Why would you need a spear when you could just use a microwave gun http://www.abcnews.go.com/Technology/FutureTech/st ory?id=538452&page=1

      This leads me to belive this devise is realy most usefoull in cases where you whant to follow the car without stoping it.

    4. Re:Wicked Idea by hungrygrue · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow, have you ever driven a car? Do you have the slightest clue how your steering or brakes work? I would suggest that you find out. Why, exactly, would you ever begin to think that the car would suddenly become "uncontrollable", regardless of what speed it is traveling just due to a failure of electronics? If you suddenly have no ignition and therefore no spark, your engine will die. That's it. If your headlights were to be lost as well, that would rather suck if you were traveling at high speed on a country road with no street lights - but that has nothing to do with the vehicle becoming uncontrollable, that just means that the driver can't see where the hell he is going. You steering is not electrical or electronic at all, I don't care what you are driving. Once your engine stops, you will no longer have a power steering pump, which means that you won't be able to whip around a corner with one finger on the wheel, but you will still be able to steer and bring the car to a safe stop. The same goes for brakes, you won't have power assist so you will have to use some muscle and push that brake peddle down, but you will still be able to stop/slow the vehicle.

    5. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, I'm going to bet you've never experienced an abrupt engine failure at 100mph. Either that or your definition of "safe stop" is a little different than average. Not to mention that full power steering vehicles are sometimes drive-by-wire now and anti-lock breaking systems to not work efficiently without power.

      I've got a question, how much time do you have to react in your car when you are suddenly engaging a dead engine (regardless of your control apparatus) before you swerve into a wall when you are going 100 miles per hour?

    6. Re:Wicked Idea by Xymor · · Score: 1, Insightful

      actually my car has a EPS ( Other cars with Eps ) and think of the impact of this in honda's autopilot car so, this idea could prove to be very dangerous indeed.
      Besides that there's a lot of critical eletronic-systems already very much in use such as ABS eletronic-breaks

    7. Re:Wicked Idea by keraneuology · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is a device already deployed (though not widely) that is placed in the road and has what is essentially a wire sticking straight up. When the car drives over this gizmo the wire delivers a hefty spark to the car disabling it. I couldn't find a link/photo in 10 seconds of google so I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader. But it is already out there and works on newer cars. (Older cars without electronic fuel injection, power windows and LCD TVs (and yes, I'm trying to be mildly funny here) aren't are vulnerable to a simple spark and are harder to stop).

      --
      If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
    8. Re:Wicked Idea by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      The same goes for brakes, you won't have power assist so you will have to use some muscle and push that brake peddle down, but you will still be able to stop/slow the vehicle.


      And how fast will you be able to stop? Will the driver panic because they've never experience non-power brakes before and don't know what's going on? (possibly thinking the brakes don't work and stop applying them). I've never driven a car without power brakes before, and I don't even think anyone has made such a car for a LONG time. If you create an unusual situation like this you could very well create an accident. This is especially true when someone is already nervous enough to run away from the cops.

      --
      AccountKiller
    9. Re:Wicked Idea by wolff000 · · Score: 1

      With newer cars when you lose electronics you are dead in the water as everyone has said. Hell have you ever had a power steering pump go out on a brand new car? Obviously not because you can hardly turn the wheel at all forget about any kind of real navigation. Brakes are just as bad, there is so much controlled by the chips that they do next to nothing without power. I didn't even touch on the fly br wire systems that are completely dependent on electricity.

      --
      WTF?
    10. Re:Wicked Idea by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Modern brakes are designed to be used with a power assist.

      When your electrical system crashes, the alternator dies, which means the vaccuum pump won't be working, which means you'll lose hydralic pressure.

      Standing on the brake pedal without the power assist is like standing on a rock. Someone going 100 miles an hour while trying to evade the police is probably going to end up wrapped around the nearest immovable object if you kill their power steering/brakes at the wrong moment.

      Any situation where using one of those giant electric spears is safe, means that you could have used spike strips to blow out their tires.

      Running from the police is a lot harder these days. If you really want to get away from the cops, buy a motorcycle. Even the dinkiest motorcycles can out-accelerate and out-corner a Police Interceptor Crown-Vic.

      And a motorcycle makes a harder target for their little sticky GPS bundle of love.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    11. Re:Wicked Idea by Thagg · · Score: 2

      The "brakes" and "accelerator" in my car (a white 2004 Prius), are in fact, drive-by-wire. A computer meltdown could make things interesting. My car is nicknamed "Snowcrash" in anticipation of this possibility. Now, Toyota claims that the brakes have a kind of mechanical hydraulic reversion with a computer failure, and I trust that they have thought of, and prepared for, at least 99% of the failure modes.

      Even in conventional internal-combustion-only cars, the transmissions are becoming significantly more complex and electronics-driven.

      Thad Beier

      --
      I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
    12. Re:Wicked Idea by ohsoot · · Score: 1

      My first car was a 1981 honda accord hatchback. It didn't have power steering. (it did at one point, but it was broken long before I bought the car) Let me tell you power steering is practically useless. The only time I could even tell I didn't have it was when I was turning the steering wheel while stopped, which you aren't supposed to do anyway. Now power brakes were very noticible. My car had trouble maintaining an idle so when I put in the clutch the engine would frequently stall, unless I gave it gas. Now I was 16, a new driver, and had my car stalling out at ~50 mph while I was shifting from fourth gear to fifth gear. It wasn't that big of a deal. I coasted put it in neutral and restarted the engine. No sweat. What was worse was when I was slowing to a stop, put in the clutch, and the car stalled. Then braking got tough, but it wasn't that difficult either. Presumably the police wouldn't disable the cars electronics while the car is approaching a traffic light, most likely after he goes through a light, but even if they did it shouldn't be a big deal.

    13. Re:Wicked Idea by blanalex · · Score: 1

      Hmmm yeah... most gasoline engines today don't have a vacuum pump, they simply use the vacuum of the engine for the power brakes. However, if you have a diesel engine or a [turbo,super]-charged engine, the car might have an electric vacuum pump. Now, braking without the brake booster (power brakes) is feasible, but it takes more effort.

      Also, remember that if the ECU is killed and that the engine is not running on its own, the transmission is most likely still in gear. The wheels will make the engine turn, creating vacuum for the brake booster and hydrolic pressure for the power steering (unless the car has an electric hydrolic pump, which is becoming more common in modern engines).

      --
      #DEFINE QUESTION (2b)||(!2b) -- William Shakespeare
    14. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or get yourself a good lightweight car with all wheel drive (or at the least, really wide tires.. something with a large cross section to hug the road on corners ala porsche) and get off the highway. the faster you ditch the cops, the better the chance of survival. imho, if the helicopter is already on you, you're caught.

      it may also help to have a common looking car (i.e. prelude, debadged s4, wrx, etc) and intimate knowledge of side roads. i want to see a police interceptor crown-vic keep up with you when you're taking 45mph corners every 10 seconds (hint, they won't)

      please reply, i'm interested in continuing this discussion

    15. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      power steering is not useless. it aids steering greatly especially on windy roads/tracks. going from hard lock left to hard lock right is much faster when the engine is helping out. most pro drivers prefer cars with power steering without the ps fluid. you get the rigid pinpoint steering with some assistance. the best of both worlds, if you may

    16. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2003+ Mecedes E/S/SL all use electronic brakes. There is no mechanical connection between the brake pedal and the brakes. BTW, there have been complaints by owners of the brake system failing, so Mercedes is scrapping this technology from 2007+.

    17. Re:Wicked Idea by Dausha · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Once your engine stops, you will no longer have a power steering pump, which means that you won't be able to whip around a corner with one finger on the wheel, but you will still be able to steer and bring the car to a safe stop. The same goes for brakes, you won't have power assist so you will have to use some muscle and push that brake peddle down, but you will still be able to stop/slow the vehicle."

      I beg to differ in one regard. You are seriously underestimating the effects of power assist. By way of example, I would suggest you go out to a large, empty parking lot, accelerate to about 35MPH or so, and turn off the car. Now, you will retain some power assist, but only until the brakes have been used. Simulate some turns. You will find that the brakes become essentially unresponsive before you stop, although you will retain some turning.

      About twenty years ago, when I was a teenager, I would screw around with my car by finding out what would happen if, for example, the engine died. I got pretty good after a while. There was a hill about a mile from my house that I could speed up on and then turn off the car (shifting into neutral)--and coast all the way to the garage. Of course, that meant I had to climb two hills, and conduct several turns. I had no brakes, but by the time I got to the garage I was only going about 5MPH, so I could get it to stop.

      Every once in a while I remind myself of the essential helplessness we have in modern US cars by doing what I suggest to you above. When I had a '69 VW Beetle, it was no worries--just an overpowered go-cart. Now nowdays.

      --
      What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
    18. Re:Wicked Idea by Arvoshift · · Score: 3, Informative

      Okay, I think you have the wrong idea about how cars actually work. Vacuum assist is via manifold pressure - you have about 4 more "pumps" of the pedal before it all goes and if you leave the car in gear, you still have some manifold pressure. In an emergency braking situation, you should be down-shifting and braking at the same time, it eliminates the inertia of the drivetrain (if you really want to get into it, look into pascall's theory). Power Steering is a belt driven hydraulic pump, it will still work if you move your engine into a lower gear when it cuts out although it is far less effective. As for engine cut out, I had a holden genini in full race trim, if you have ever experienced points bounce, you'd know how uncontrollable a car can become when you miss with 12.5:1 compression. As for Automatic transmissions, most are electrically powered hydraulic, I know the EL falcons didn't like high tension power lines, they would downshift on the freeway and get confused from the RFI. I am a qualifed engine rebuilder, Mechanic and Panelbeater studying Mechanical Engineering. I know what I am talking about. That's not to say you don't, I just make it a policy to never assume that others have overlooked something so simple as this.

    19. Re:Wicked Idea by yabos · · Score: 1

      There's usually enough left in the brakes to stop if the engine shuts off. I blew a brake line and I could still stop even though the brake pedel was to the floor(since there was a huge leak in the hydrolic system). There's actually enough pressure still in the system at first so that you could stop if you wanted to. Power steering also only helps you at low speeds where the friction of the road makes it hard to turn the wheels.

    20. Re:Wicked Idea by totallygeek · · Score: 2, Funny
      Someone going 100 miles an hour while trying to evade the police is probably going to end up wrapped around the nearest immovable object if you kill their power steering/brakes at the wrong moment.



      The problem? Sounds like a great crime deterrent to me.

    21. Re:Wicked Idea by yabos · · Score: 1

      If the engine stalled while shifting at 50mph, why not just put it back into gear and bump start it? Once you did that the engine would be running again.

    22. Re:Wicked Idea by Vellmont · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, though car designs vary a lot, so I'd still wonder if some cars would lose braking power right away. I'll have to try shutting off my engine sometime in an empty parking lot sometime and see what happens with my brake power. I'd imagine you're right though, since I wouldn't think car manufacturers would design a car to lose brake power when the car stalls, for instance.

      There's also the hybrids to contend with if you were actually able to do make this sci-fi device. What happens to a hybrid when you lose, or fry the computer?

      --
      AccountKiller
    23. Re:Wicked Idea by Panaphonix · · Score: 1

      Go to jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.

    24. Re:Wicked Idea by Panaphonix · · Score: 1

      Standing on the brake pedal without the power assist is like standing on a rock.

      Would it help if you pumped the brake pedal?

    25. Re:Wicked Idea by LootenPlunder · · Score: 2, Funny

      spiderman has these, i think he calls them spidey tracers or something. batman has them too. this is just the next step in the slow transformation of law enforcement officers into super-heros. they can already see in the dark, stop bullets, crash through skylights, and see through walls. in about 10 years fat men with moustaches in skin-tight rubber suits will be known as police officers instead of fetishists.

    26. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      question: how many people do you know who actually know what the word downshift means, let alone how to actually do so?

    27. Re:Wicked Idea by glitch23 · · Score: 0

      Running from the police is a lot harder these days. If you really want to get away from the cops, buy a motorcycle. Even the dinkiest motorcycles can out-accelerate and out-corner a Police Interceptor Crown-Vic.

      I agree but one problem with your statement. I don't think it would be easy to buy a motorcycle and ride it at the same time they are driving the car they stole assuming it's a police chase due to a stolen vehicle. Or if they stole merchandise they won't be able to haul too much using a backpack and motorcycle. Now if they *stole* the motorcycle then they have a good escape vehicle *and* they are on top of their stolen merchandise at the same time. I just hope they can ride it good enough to come out alive and not behind bars (as long as it isn't mine that they steal).

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    28. Re:Wicked Idea by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1
      No, it won't do a thing in that situation, except occasinoally release what little pressure you are putting on the system compared to what it normally has. That will make it take even longer to stop.

      The only time that is useful is on situations like on ice, when the brakes can make the wheels stop turning even though the tires are still moving across the surface of the road. Pumping the breaks allows the tires to start turning again so that you can get some traction to start breaking (instead of sliding) again.

    29. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No production vehicle is drive-by-wire. All steering wheels are connected mechanically to the wheels.

    30. Re:Wicked Idea by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1

      Heh, if you think that, why don't you try turning off the ignition of your car when you are cruising down the highway sometime? But, don't try it if there is someone behind you: unless you can get the gears into neutral pretty quick, you will find yourself in trouble.

    31. Re:Wicked Idea by Jaknet · · Score: 1

      As it happens I have had sudden power loss resulting in the engine cutting out at various speeds (dodgy fuse box wiring that took ages to trace). Your engine stops being powered thus your car starts to slow, but due to the momentum the engine keeps turning over. It is less noticable that sticking the brakes on lightly. Also due to the drag of the non running engine it alone will bring you to a controlled stop even if your brakes fail (just not a quickly obviously). In some cases depending on speed etc the slowing of the car is not much worse than just taking taking you foot completely off the pedal.

      You can always simluate this "carefully" by just turning off your ignition whilst driving....please only try this in a straight line incase the steering lock engages

    32. Re:Wicked Idea by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Back in college a friend of mine tried to run on his bike twice. Was caught twice.

      You are right that you have better odds, but the cops have a lot more resources including air support.

      Scary when you think how they are getting better technology while still living under limits on their power designed before those improvements.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    33. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My car is designed so that if the engine dies, there is still pressure in the system for 3-4 pedal presses. This is specifically to avoid the problem you describe where a car runs out of gas or something comes loose at highway speed. Now this isn't to say that some crankhead is going to realize this and make the one long, steady brake press recommended in the manual.

    34. Re:Wicked Idea by alienw · · Score: 2, Informative

      How about you learn how cars actually work before you start spewing bullshit? There is no "vaccuum pump" in a car, the vaccuum is provided by the engine. Just in case you don't know, engines have available vaccuum only when you let go of the throttle. The brake booster stores vaccuum so your brakes don't cut out when you accelerate. Killing the engine will not immediately kill power brakes, there will be plenty of power to stop. Power steering will die, but it doesn't take much power to steer a moving car.

    35. Re:Wicked Idea by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      [ Bo and Luke Duke fasten a Trampoline lightly coated in wax to the back of the General Lee, and go looking for Roscoe ]

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    36. Re:Wicked Idea by Yocto+Yotta · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm out of the advances-in-power-steering loop, but the last time I let my leaky rack and pinion run dry, my car not only sounded terrible when turning the wheel, is smelled like holy burning rubber hell. Exactly what style of racing are these pros participating in?

      --
      A B A C A B B
    37. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I've also found that once you get 5 stars you can steal the warthog. That makes it far more difficult for the police to follow you. Alternatively, you can sneak into the military base and steal the tank; it really cant be called a high-speed chase after that. For some added fun, turn the chase camera on and watch yourself from a static position.

      Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about GTA.

    38. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wouldn't be so glib if you were the nearest unmoving object.

    39. Re:Wicked Idea by Yocto+Yotta · · Score: 1

      Sorry, this was a reply to Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 05, @08:49AM (#14646109). Sorry for the confusion.

      --
      A B A C A B B
    40. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose using a rocket propelled grenade on any speeders would deter speeding too, but is it really a good idea?

    41. Re:Wicked Idea by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Someone going 100 miles an hour while trying to evade the police is probably going to end up wrapped around the nearest immovable object

        regardless of what you do.

      It's all about the timing. If you can get them to stop moving when there's nobody else around, even if it results in them crashing, then I think it's perfectly acceptable to do so. Especially if it prevents them from getting into an area where there are more bystanders that they can kill when they eventually do wipe out.

      If you've ever watched any videos of car chases, or talked to people who have been involved in high-speed pursuits, a very high percentage of them seem to end in bad accidents. I don't know what the statistics are on bystander injuries, but a system that could lock the steering and render the car uncontrollable -- even if it was guaranteed to cause it to crash -- would still be useful, if it could be used to end the pursuit quickly and far away from uninvolved people.

      As far as I'm concerned, once you've decided to begin a high-speed chase, your life is forfeit. By driving 100 MPH down a street and doing any of the other sorts of things that people do when they're running from the cops, you endanger other people. When you show that much disregard for the lives of others, the police have a responsibility to do whatever it takes to stop you, regardless of whether you live through it or not.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    42. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AFAIK, SOP for motorcycles isn't to catch them (although it's nice when it happens) but simply to chase them until he/she makes a mistake. It also reduces paperwork, as there won't be much left to book at that point.

    43. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only time I could even tell I didn't have it was when I was turning the steering wheel while stopped, which you aren't supposed to do anyway.

      If I turn the wheel while stopped, will I get a ticket?

    44. Re:Wicked Idea by slacktide · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Who modded this fool insightful?

      Vacuum assist brakes have NOTHING to do with your electrical system. In 95% of cars, they get vacuum from the engine manifold. What this means is that as long as the engine is turning, regardless of whether it is firing or not, you have vacuum. The other 5% (mostly on turbocharged cars) get vacuum off of a vacuum pump which is mechanically run off of the engine. Again, nothing to do with the electrical system.

      Now, have you actally ever DRIVEN a car with a broken vacuum assist? I have, and while you do need to apply more pressure, the car never approaches being out-of-control.

    45. Re:Wicked Idea by bxbaser · · Score: 1

      "If you really want to get away from the cops, buy a motorcycle. Even the dinkiest motorcycles can out-accelerate and out-corner a Police Interceptor Crown-Vic."

      And if you want a better survivability rate in a police chase do not use a motorcycle.
      Police have a tendancy to bump motorcycles to get them to stop.

    46. Re:Wicked Idea by hazem · · Score: 1

      Power Steering is a belt driven hydraulic pump, it will still work if you move your engine into a lower gear when it cuts out although it is far less effective.

      We're talking about a situation where someone is running from the cops. It's probably not the time most people will be thinking about how to downshift to keep their power-steering.

      I know in my car, as soon as the engine dies, the steering stiffens a lot and the breaks require a lot of pushing to work. Killing a car at high speed with other drivers around is simply asking for trouble.

      Spike strips work because they clear the road of other drivers. But killing a car in motion is not likely to happen on a cleared road and could lead to dangerous situations.

      I think cops won't be inclined to do this simply from a liablity situation. Most people in the US would file very large lawsuits against the police departments if they are injured in a car crash caused by the police essentially disabling the breaking and steering functions of a perp's car.

    47. Re:Wicked Idea by wtansill · · Score: 1
      Fair enough, though car designs vary a lot, so I'd still wonder if some cars would lose braking power right away. I'll have to try shutting off my engine sometime in an empty parking lot sometime and see what happens with my brake power. I'd imagine you're right though, since I wouldn't think car manufacturers would design a car to lose brake power when the car stalls, for instance.
      The only way you would immediatly lose power braking assist with a dead engine is if the vacuum diaphram on the power unit was ruptured. But if that was the case, you would have a massive vacuum leak to start with which would disrupt the airflow through the intake manifold. The engine would not run well enough (possibly not at all) to allow you to successfully flee the gendarmes in the first place. Secondly, even if you exhaust the vacuum reservoir that provides power assistance to the breakes, the mechanical braking system is still intact and you should still, with some effort, be able to stop the car. I was once a mechanic, and was a Bendix-certified brake technician back in the day.
      --
      The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
    48. Re:Wicked Idea by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      The brakes are not drive-by-wire. Under current DOT regs, the brakes must be mechanical. In addition to the normal hydraulics, the Prius has regenerative braking which is essentially running a generator off the driveline to recover some energy when braking - it is by no means essentil to stopping the car.

    49. Re:Wicked Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... if this guy was unconscious in the driver's seat... or if it were a six-year-old driving... or if the accelerator were somehow stuck down, their lives would be forfeit as well? If the high-speed chase is occurring at midnight on a rural interstate highway, with zero traffic?

    50. Re:Wicked Idea by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter; the sudden loss of power steering and breaking could possibly cause the driver to lose control causing a potential crash, which the law enforcers who used the EMP would be responsible for.

      The driver could be killed; other innocent people could be killed in the event, either because of a crash, or because they relied on some medical device which the EMP caused to fail... so much for serving and protecting society.

      Or there could be lots of injuries and pain resulting in a due cause of action for a claim against the enforcement agency that authorized the dangerous practice of shorting out vehicle electronics while they were in use.

      There might be some instances where it could be used safely, like at some moment the fugitive's not travelling high speed, on a fairly deserted road, but there's still an inherent danger. Not to mention, that it might not be all that effective, and something like an EMP could result in costly collateral damage by shorting out vehicles or sensitive electronics not belonging to the target, and the potentially disruption and interference with radio communication when an EMP is used, could also be a problem, I suppose.

    51. Re:Wicked Idea by mysidia · · Score: 2, Interesting
      See the article EMP Protection, in particular:
      Another "myth" that seems to have grown up with information on EMP is that nearly all cars and trucks would be "knocked out" by EMP. This seems logical, but is one of those cases where "real world" experiments contradict theoretical answers and I'm afraid this is the case with cars and EMP. According to sources working at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, cars have proven to be resistant to EMP in actual tests using nuclear weapons as well as during more recent tests (with newer cars) with the US Military's EMP simulators.
      One reason for the ability of a car to resist EMP lies in the fact that its metal body is "insulated" by its rubber tires from the ground. This creates a Faraday cage of sorts. (Drawing on the analogy of EMP being similar to lightning, it is interesting to note that cases of lightning striking and damaging cars is almost non-existent; this apparently carries over to EMP effects on vehicles as well.)
    52. Re:Wicked Idea by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Umm... actually, my car DOES have a vacuum pump. Go look up "volkswagen diesel vacuum pump" on Google ;)

      Also, plenty of turbocharged gassers have vacuum pumps as well. (FWIW, my car's naturally aspirated, but still has a vac pump. Diesels kinda need them.)

    53. Re:Wicked Idea by rtb61 · · Score: 1
      Well I have driven a car when the power breaks and power steering failed, it is quite a shock (the car was an automatic and the engine died at speed, being reasonably strong it still took considerable physical effort and a bit of wild cornering), of course that was not at high speed, at high speed, well you just go spearing off in what ever direction you were going because you just don't have the time to do anything about it (time being the killer, the faster the less time you have to react).

      When you have power steering and breaks all the ratios have been altered to minimise travel, so when the power goes the physical effort is a lot greater than a car with out power steering and breaks. PS diesels kind of bugger up the idea anyhow. Not to mention, don't just consider the reckless driver, think of passengers in the car and innocent bystanders (law enforcement would be liable for any incedent that resulted).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    54. Re:Wicked Idea by mindbooger · · Score: 1

      Wow, have _you_ ever driven a car? Know what happens when you're at the limits of traction in a corner and you suddenly chop the throttle and don't have the option of applying further power?

      Unless it's a FWD econobox that was pushing (understeering) like a pig right up until it happened, it's called a spin -- and it certainly fits _my_ definition of uncontrollable (at least unrecoverable).

    55. Re:Wicked Idea by wtansill · · Score: 1
      I suppose using a rocket propelled grenade on any speeders would deter speeding too, but is it really a good idea?
      Got my vote!
      --
      The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
    56. Re:Wicked Idea by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

      My first car was a 1981 honda accord hatchback. It didn't have power steering. (it did at one point, but it was broken long before I bought the car)

      That's a safety issue. If the car is equipped with power steering, the power assist should be working. The geometry of power steering systems is often slightly different than that of a manual steering vehicle. Furthermore, if the reason it failed was a worn assist valve, it's not impossible that the assist valve can wedge into a position where it allows fluid to one side of the rack, causing the steering wheel to be pulled (stronger than you are!) in the direction in which the valve is stuck. In short, loss of steering control.

      Let me tell you power steering is practically useless. The only time I could even tell I didn't have it was when I was turning the steering wheel while stopped, which you aren't supposed to do anyway.

      Dry steering (steering when stopped) is an excellent way to wear flat spots onto tires, and in cheap underbuilt cars (like Honda products in general - exceptionally well assembled but still very underbuilt), the extra stress wears tie-rod ends noticeably and can even warp the front clip's sheetmetal. Don't do it at all unless you've got a solid full-frame vehicle and a new set of tires on order.

      OTOH, power steering is very helpful in slow-speed maneovers, like parallel parking. Though it's not as important in small cars. My own 1976 Dodge Ram (fullsize pickup truck) doesn't have power steering, and urban driving was hell until my arms bulked up. I could have swapped a power steering box into it, but I kind of enjoy tossing the keys to a more delicate friend and asking him or her to move it for me - a touchy gas pedal attached to a 4-barrel 400CID (6.6L) V8 was the first surprise as the rear wheels started to sing, lack of power steering was the other.

      Now power brakes were very noticible. My car had trouble maintaining an idle so when I put in the clutch the engine would frequently stall, unless I gave it gas.

      Carbureted Accord. Point an unlit blowtorch over all the vacuum lines; if the engine revs up, you've found a cracked hose or something. Check your idle speed screw, set your idle mixture with an exhaust gas analyzer or at the very least with a vacuum gauge on the manifold. Check the carb float. If it was a mixture or float issue, your gas mileage would probably also have improved substantially. None of these repairs would take more than 1/2 hour and a few basic hand tools, even on a pain in the ass car like an Accord.

      Now I was 16, a new driver, and had my car stalling out at ~50 mph while I was shifting from fourth gear to fifth gear. It wasn't that big of a deal. I coasted put it in neutral and restarted the engine. No sweat.

      Why not just put it into the desired gear and pop the clutch? The forward momentum will spin the engine, the starter motor will spin the engine. Either one will make the engine start again - this doesn't require taking your hands off the shifter and steering wheel.

      What was worse was when I was slowing to a stop, put in the clutch, and the car stalled. Then braking got tough, but it wasn't that difficult either.

      When the engine stalls, it's no longer producing vacuum on the intake system. Since the power brakes are operated by engine vacuum, the power brakes will stop working soon after the engine stalls. You should have fixed the stalling problem.

      Presumably the police wouldn't disable the cars electronics while the car is approaching a traffic light, most likely after he goes through a light, but even if they did it shouldn't be a big deal.

      I don't think these taggers actually disable the car, simply provide for letting the police cars fall back, reducing the speed of the chase, and still allowing them to find the perp later.

      Disabling a car's electronics at any time during a high speed chase could be extremely dangerous, especially in a car with power steering and an intoxicated driver. The driver might not recognize or be able to respond to the changes in the car's handling and braking after the engine stops running, and might therefore be unable to control the car for the last few seconds.

      --
      Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    57. Re:Wicked Idea by 70Bang · · Score: 1



      In reading everything, there are lot of issues. (mostly people arguing mechanics)

      Just out of curiosity, how often or how fast have those who are making commentary actually done so [legally], aside from practicing in parking lots?

      There are a lot (echo) lot, lot, lot of issues in achieving & maintaining any degree of speed with any desired degree of safety, even when you know of or control many circumstances. It was bad enough spending many hours killing (pun intended) idle time in high school and college as an EMT and only worrying about yourself (as opposed to remaining within a worthwhile distance from targeted prey). Some of this can be reduced on the ambulance side if you look at the issues of knowledge of the situation, both getting to the victim as well as transporting them to the necessary location. Is there a need for running signs & siren when someone has reported a broken ankle? And is it then necessary to run lights & siren (and likely, speed) when you're pretty certain your patient is going to survive the trip without driving more than the speed limits? I know some were|are taught, "once you've got your patient stablized, the need for lights+siren+speed is an indicator of your ability to control the situation? as in "I'm in over my head -- not a personal failing -- and need to get the patient to a location capable of handling them in the fastest means possible". aside: You'd be surprised the effect the siren can have upon some patients - some adults hear it and think, "I'm going to die" and you can watch their vital signs diminish as a result of that fear. ("Don't be bothered by this - we're going to turn on the siren to reduce someone jumping out in front of us") For kids, it's "Hey! Want to hear the siren?"

      Don't get caught on top of an ambulance during a parade. That's when they speed up so you can't jump off, close the windows, lock the doors, then comes the siren. The bystanders love it. It's not fun.

      I DO NOT envy this aspect of the worklife of law enforcement on this issue[1]. I know they become accustomed to it to a certain degree and have considerably training (I knew the driver on my team was going to miss that car by six inches, but the other driver and those of us on board, didn't), but I can only imagine the complexity of vehicle pursuit to be exponentially beyond that of the things I experienced. There are obviously situations where they do get in over their heads without realizing attention to it - hopefully, those are still the exception. With all of the factors involved, I'm glad there's an "auditor" to make the decision for all-out pursuit, but how that position makes the singular decision without {nearly} complete knowledge of everything there goes right over my head. Of course, we probably don't ever hear about the times chases are halted because of a change of circumtances. I think most people presume the chases are like First Blood (now known as Rambo I). "See the criminal...pursue the criminal."

      I suppose the police could depend upon the tv helicopters covering the chase, permitting them to ease back?

      [1] Gunfire is included on the "Not wanted" list for Christmas. At the sound of gunfire, this chicken went into hiding. I'd only come out once I knew things were under control. I've always been a good shot but do not wish to become involved in being on the other end. I had a partner walk into a house for a severe domestic dispute call and didn't remember the cops hadn't arrived first...one, two, maybe three, steps into the door, turn to look at the wrong end of a gun barrel. I'm not certain which bodily orifice began an outflow first (on my part).

    58. Re:Wicked Idea by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      Sure, no problem - have done it multiple times. No trauma, no quick grab for the gearshift, no worries, just continued to drive along. You on the other hand have obviously not tried this or you'd know there's no issue with doing this - yes even in an automatic. In a stick you just turn the ignition back to run and the car runs again, in an auto you shift into neutral and restart the car before placing it back into Drive.

      What exactly did YOU think would happen??

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    59. Re:Wicked Idea by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine that part of the reason a modern car proves resistant to this is the fact that the engine computer is ALREADY hardened against EMP! Why? Because high energy ignitions wreak havoc on them if they aren't. Multiple grounds, EMI resistant cases, epoxy surrounding the boards for vibration resistance, and on and on. Figure these things need to roll 100K plus miles before needing work and yeah they pretty much harden them up pretty good....

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    60. Re:Wicked Idea by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      So... if this guy was unconscious in the driver's seat... or if it were a six-year-old driving... or if the accelerator were somehow stuck down, their lives would be forfeit as well? If the high-speed chase is occurring at midnight on a rural interstate highway, with zero traffic?

      If it really was occuring on an empty interstate highway then the danger to others is more limited, obviously, and thus I think the police should use more restraint in stopping them.

      However, if they were driving down that empty stretch of highway towards a more urban area, or if the highway was about to end and become surface-level streets, with traffic lights and other drivers and everything else, then I think it's entirely defensible for the police to use any means necessary to stop the car, even if doing so kills the driver as a side-effect.

      The fact that their accellerator might be stuck down or that they might not know what they're doing (which would be the case if they're six years old, or mentally incompetent, or asleep) doesn't change the fact that they're putting the lives of other people at risk. That's unacceptable, and it's the job of the police to always put the lives of bystanders above the life of the person who's putting them at risk.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    61. Re:Wicked Idea by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Well, lucky for us then that those EMP spears don't exist.

      Personally, I think the racers on Fast And Furious were confused about what those spears were doing. They didn't disable the electronics, they just turned on all of the video screens and monitors and caused their stereo and amplifiers to run at full volume, thus making the alternator pull most of the power from the engine just to run the electronics.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    62. Re:Wicked Idea by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1
      That's fine, as long as you don't panic, and there is no one directly behind you ;)

      There is also a difference between, say, running out of gas when the engine will splutter and choke for a few seconds, versus it simply stopping.

    63. Re:Wicked Idea by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      Umm, wrong. An engine doesn't simply "stop" because it has run out of gas or power has fried it. In fact did you know when you let off the gas in a modern EFI car the injectors cease firing while you coast? Yup, no gas and the engine still turns over just fine! When RPMs drop to about 1K RPMs gas begins firing again to prevent a stall or if you depress the gas pedal a bit they again fire to provide fuel and move you down the road. Shut off the power to the ignition while driving, same thing. You think this device frying your electronics is going to do something flipping the ignition switch wouldn't? There's nothing electrical going on that has to occur in order for the engine to turn FREELY. Put a wrench on the snout of the crank and with some effort you can turn the motor over unless it's in park - WOW and with NO electricity! Compression will make it an effort but a 3K+ lb car has plenty of momentum\mass and WILL turn over that motor - especially in the higher gears.

      Running out of gas or losing the ignition is no big deal, the engine continues to turn if it's a stick and you slow via engine braking. If it's an auto then the engine just stops and you continue rolling - NO biggie. You see there's no actual physical solid connection between the motor and transmission - there's a fluid connection via the torque converter and even if it were solid like a clutch with a stick it would simply mean that the engine would continue to turn over. Oh and yes I know about lockup torque converters, see stick shift comments and that connection would likely die anyway since it needs electricity to energize it.

      Honestly, it's always so damned funny to read comments whenever something auto related is posted to /. as there's always a zillion guys out there that just KNOW how a car works and have to tell everyone they're right - and are so far out in the weeds it's not even funny. Cracks me up to read all about how an electrical failure is going to kill your brakes or steering. 99.9% of the cars out there won't be phased by this since both systems are hydraulic in nature. Even the drive by wire vehicles have mechanical backups because umm OEMs are NOT stupid and KNOW they would have their ass sued off if something fritzed and killed someone. Yet the "experts" persist! Turn a wrench sometime guys, maybe read a good book or magazine and learn about this stuff. The information is all over if you care to look and learn.

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    64. Re:Wicked Idea by Pyrrus · · Score: 1
      When your electrical system crashes, the alternator dies, which means the vaccuum pump won't be working, which means you'll lose hydralic pressure.

      no, no, NO, no. If you kill a car engine (thus stopping the alternator), the battery should still be functioning. In any case, electric vaccum pumps are only needed on diesels. Gasoline engines generate a vaccum when the throttle plate is closed and the engine is running (either under it's own power or because you are rolling in gear), which sucks air into the cylinders and creates a vaccum behind the throttle plate. Brake pedals have a vaccum assist that helps, but is by no means neccesary. I once backed my van out of my driveway and down a hill after somehow failing to start the engine, and I managed to stop it before I hit the parked car ~15 feet behind me. The brake pedal was quite a bit stiffer, but it still worked.

      Now hydraulic pressure has nothing to do with the electrical system. The pressure comes from pressing on the brake pedal which moves a piston and displaces hydraulic fluid. In addition to the (somewhat limited) brake capacity, engine braking can also scrub off speed.

      as for power steering, the faster you go, the less difficult it is to steer. My dad's old van had no power steering, turning the wheels at low speed (say, parking) was a BITCH, turning when the car was motionless was pretty much impossible, but at city speeds it was pretty managable, and at highway speeds I couldn't even notice the lack of power steering.

    65. Re:Wicked Idea by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

      No, the nose comes down and you slow down. I'm not sure what kind of messed up car you're driving, but most any car deccelerating through a corner is simply going to decellerate - not suddenly spin around. Might wanna get your suspension setup tweaked by someone who knows what they're doing before you head back out to the local autocross - maybe you'll stop coming in last...

      Never mind that people trying to evade police aren't good enough to actually drive cars at their limits. Ever watch "Craziest Chases Caught On Tape And Played Over And Over Again" type shows? Those drivers are idiots.

  2. Does Parker own the patent? by aussie_a · · Score: 3, Funny

    Shouldn't Peter Parker own the patent to this device? If so, I wondow what the police will be paying in licensing fees.

    1. Re:Does Parker own the patent? by Mad_Rain · · Score: 2, Funny

      The device is the size of a golf ball, can be launched via an air-powered shooter

      Hhhmmm. The only person safe from this device: Tiger Woods!.

      ...well, and Chuck Norris, but that goes without saying.

      --
      "What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
    2. Re:Does Parker own the patent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fsck. Who says police have to shoot these things? They can't get off their donut asses. I say, put these shooting machines on the road itself, like on the freeway. When they detect ANY car exceeding the speed limit, it shoots it, and the police are notified. They then have an accurate record of exactly how much the speed limit was crossed and where. Put the shooters in the road. :-) Stupid speeders. hehehe. When will they learn.

    3. Re:Does Parker own the patent? by mblase · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't Peter Parker own the patent to this device?

      Heh, gives a whole new meaning to "prior art", doesn't it?

      But you see, Spider-Man's tracers didn't use GPS; they generated a signal that was only detectable by his "spider-sense". So the patent is unencumbered. Besides, J. Jonah Jameson has already asserted that Spider-Man has no legal identity.

    4. Re:Does Parker own the patent? by magarity · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't Peter Parker own the patent to this device? If so, I wondow what the police will be paying in licensing fees
       
      I always wondered why Peter Parker was always whining about his lousy finances. In Spider-Man merchandising alone, he should be rolling in cash. Then there's the endorsements... SERIOUS bank!

  3. Re:Ok... by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Keeping up with a car in a highly visible chase scenario might be the most dangerous way to handle a criminal with a deadly weapon.
    Better to let them think he has outstarted the police and hopefully back off a little bit.
    High tensions and a rush hour road or pedestrian town centre don't generally mix.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  4. Liability by Ghoser777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the police pursue a criminal in a high speed chase and someone else gets hurt as a result of it, the police have a good chance of being sued. The tagger would help tremendously in this department, as it encourages the person being pursued to ditch the car at some point instead of flying around the roads like a maniac.

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    1. Re:Liability by pnewhook · · Score: 1, Insightful
      If the police pursue a criminal in a high speed chase and someone else gets hurt as a result of it, the police have a good chance of being sued.
      Wouldn't it made more sense to sue the fleeing criminal? It's their actions that would have caused the bystanders injuries.
      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    2. Re:Liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Great, let's encourage them to ditch the tagged car, and steal/carjack another to continue their escape.

    3. Re:Liability by i_am_not_a_bomba · · Score: 1

      "If the police pursue a criminal in a high speed chase and someone else gets hurt as a result of it, the police have a good chance of being sued"

      Why not concentrate on the fact that someone innocent has been hurt or killed? Isn't that enough? Is the only way to create the appearance of value in the minds of people to attach an economic value? Is it only useful if it can reduce the potential for litigation? WTF is wrong with western society right now?

      Offtopic, there is plenty of times that the cops just need to back off a little and risk losing the joyrider, speeder, etc but ensure the safety of those around, when they push on irregardless (often fueled by testosterone) and an innocent person dies then it's perfectly reasonable for the cops to be held accountable *as any normal person would be if their direct actions resulted in killing or maiming someone, even if well intentioned*. And before the twits come, yes, as with anything there are exceptions blah blah blah.

    4. Re:Liability by Ghoser777 · · Score: 1

      You're talking about how it should be, while I'm talking about how it is. I totally believe the blame should fall on the the criminal, but think about it from a purely selfish, financial standpoint - who would you rather sue, the two bit criminal with no money to his name, or a department of the city that has money to burn? From that standpoint, it's a no brainer.

      --
      James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
    5. Re:Liability by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1
      Wouldn't it made more sense to sue the fleeing criminal?

      In many cases the criminal may be found to be acting irrationally because he's mentally ill or on drugs. If so, the police should be liable because they know what's likely to happen if they start chasing someone who's acting crazy. In the case of mental illness, the criminal is unlikely to be effectively held liable anyway.

      The ability to sue the police over this is a good thing, because there are already too many high speed chases that put innocent bystanders in danger. The risk of lawsuits forces police to find alternatives such as this which help catch the criminals without putting more lives at risk. Lamenting about how the criminals are the only ones responsible doesn't change anything. There have always been reckless criminals loose in society, and there always will be. Only the police have the ability to change the methods that are used to apprehend criminals.

    6. Re:Liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't it encourage the criminal to run out, smack the transmitter off, and get back in? If they were out of site, the cops would think the perpatrator was on foot and the car was stationary, havn't you seen ?

    7. Re:Liability by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      "Money to burn" - that's our tax dollars you're talking about there.

      You don't see many drug dealers driving a Ford Focus do you? They're usually driving stuff like BMW or Lexus - I think they have plenty of money. But for the average pickup truck driving moron that ends upon Cops, yea unfortunately you're probably right.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    8. Re:Liability by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      While I agree that the police should be held responsible in cases of negligence or endangering the public, I don't believe the average police chase constitutes this.

      Preventing the police from chasing criminals just means criminals will deliberately engage in a police chase because they know they are guaranteed to get away. Next the police will be prevented from drawing their gun in a crime because they may inadvertently hit a bystander while shooting at the criminal.

      Just like out of control children of parents that refuse to discipline, criminals do what they do because they think they can getaway with it.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    9. Re:Liability by dcam · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it made more sense to sue the fleeing criminal?

      You don't understand the first rule of suing someone. You sue the person with the deepest pockets. Who do you think is more likely to be able to pay up, the police department or a criminal?

      --
      meh
    10. Re:Liability by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      Hmm lets see... the police department with the budget cuts or the fleeing drug dealer in his $200K Lexus?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    11. Re:Liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about the class actions over paint job damage? Eventually enough tag damage will occur, wrongful or not, that suits will happen. More taxpayer money out the window to fight and pay off.
            Besides, what about various groups that do keep large guns in their vehicles. Do you actually think that if they see a muzzle pointing at them that they aren't going to respond with bullets? Whether it's a police car or not, you can only depend on yourself for your own survival.
            Police officers are taxpayer paid busy bodies who deserve to get shot like anyone else when they stick their nose where it isn't wanted. I've seen enough sports like behavior in policeman to understand the law is just an excuse to keep us down and give them something to do. So much for land of the free.
            Keep it simple stupid. Don't chase unless imminent danger warrants it, which is often rare. People do know how to drive, individualisticly, stop harrassing them for minor infractions, just leave them alone. It would definitely save alot of lives, and damage to lives.
            People aren't perfect by any means, stop holding us to a standard that is unattainable. Police are no angels either. Mistakes happen, people die, that's being human, can you handle that.
            It's a miracle their aren't more deaths given shitty designed roads, worse designed cars, and just crappy methods of existance and the few choices we have in this existance.
            Driving is a privilege? Right, when the state provides my car, insurance, roads, and license without input from me. Until then, its my right by ownership. And in a country as large and decentralized as the U.S., a survival right. Want proof, walk 50 miles to work in zero degree weather. (forced by ecomonics out of my control, goes with limited choices)

    12. Re:Liability by dcam · · Score: 1

      Police departments have insurance.

      --
      meh
  5. useful in a practical sense too by joe+155 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it could well help avoid fatalities in road chases, the police can then hang back and not push too hard on the person they are chasing, this should help take some of the tension out and reduce the risk of the criminals trying something stupid and killing people, police helicopters can then be called in to keep track and the people in the car can be arrested when it stops (or if the tyres are blown out in a safe place)

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
    1. Re:useful in a practical sense too by keyrat+rafa · · Score: 1

      This can already be done using only with the helicopter. The police helicopters already follow the perps much better than the cars do, and without any accident risk.

    2. Re:useful in a practical sense too by lxs · · Score: 1

      Of course, when you've strayed far enough away from the people chasing you that they need GPS to track you, you probably have time to stop the car on the side of the road, knock the tag off with the jack or any convenient rock and throw it in a ditch, or in the back of a passing pickup truck.

    3. Re:useful in a practical sense too by wealthychef · · Score: 1

      The GPS does not mean the police stop following you. It is not fool-proof. It is intended to to REDUCE the chance that you get away, hopefully while reducing a need for a high-speed chase.

      --
      Currently hooked on AMP
    4. Re:useful in a practical sense too by ccmay · · Score: 1
      it could well help avoid fatalities in road chases

      I don't care about fatalities in police chases, when it's only the perpetrator. They should be machine-gunned from helicopters as soon as it's safe to do so.

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    5. Re:useful in a practical sense too by NormalVisual · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True, but not every enforcement agency has access to a helicopter, not every helicopter is equipped with FLIR (making them less useful at night), and in any case helicopters are very expensive to maintain and operate, so I'd think this would be of interest from a financial perspective in addition to the tactical benefits.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    6. Re:useful in a practical sense too by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      it could well help avoid fatalities in road chases, the police can then hang back and not push too hard on the person they are chasing, this should help take some of the tension out and reduce the risk of the criminals trying something stupid and killing people, police helicopters can then be called in to keep track and the people in the car can be arrested when it stops (or if the tyres are blown out in a safe place)

      Yeah, but every time I steal a car and get into a high speed chase with the cops, I outrun them (I steal fast cars) and then ditch the car on the side of the road.

      In other words, you have to tag the _person_, not the car. Also, don't most cars have license plates on them already? I don't see where a GPS tag will do much more than a license plate.

      On a related note, I overheard someone talking this morning about how they were pulled over by the police while driving a rental car, and the cop addressed him by name. He had already ran the plates and found out the driver of the car before talking with the guy.

      This crap terrifies me (aka terrorism), and I'm going to rent my car from a phony business that I'm going to start with a foreign "owner" of the company. I simply do not feel safe on the roads anymore driving a car that is registered in my name.

    7. Re:useful in a practical sense too by juan2074 · · Score: 1

      . . . because we no longer believe in innocent until proven guilty?

  6. Why Only Police? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Make these available to everyone. When you see someone being an idiot or asshole driver, not just the aggravating ones, but the really stupid ones you pull this out, and tag them. After about 3-4 "tags" the cops can pull them over and give them a "asshole" ticket. Even better would be if these tags had a memory in them that recorded the time and GPS coordinates of the event you tagged them for. Maybe even allow selection of event types such as speeding, reckless driving, drunk driving, blocking traffic, too slow, etc. But I guess this would be handing over the cops job to the citizens and you know we are not law enforcement trained so we wouldn't know a violation, and a lot of innocent people would be getting "harrassed"for something the didn't do ;)

    1. Re:Why Only Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      see earlier "First Mod" post for LA civilian traffic use

    2. Re:Why Only Police? by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 1

      That's a pretty good idea, like a driving moderation system kinda like /.

      One hit wouldn't mean anything, but two or more should get the attention of the cops.

      Hmmm ... heck, just a website were people could complain and enter a license plate would be good enough. If the site sees the same plate several times, they should intervene. Mind you, the complaint needs to be verified to reduce potential abuse.

      --
      Wearing pants should always be optional.
    3. Re:Why Only Police? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lets run through your scenario.
      Your driving down the motorway/freeway minding your own business, driving carefully at around the speedlimit and some speed freak comes tearing past and undertakes you.

      You take out your Tag rifle and aim it at the car in front.

      Lean out of the window and take aim, but whilst you are doing this you swerve and take out 3 cyclists also minding their own business.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    4. Re:Why Only Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Ten seconds after such a thing gets into the hands of the public it'll be stuck either to someone's forehead or a dog's butt.

    5. Re:Why Only Police? by VIPERsssss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That would never work. You'd have too many people tagging that "asshole because he's richer than me" porche driver and the "holier-than-thou" prius driver and the "gas guzzling enviro-hater" SUV driver just because they don't like a particular $STEREOTYPE. I'd probably be safe in my $500 sable, though.

      --
      We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion.
    6. Re:Why Only Police? by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 1

      You are insane. Does your car drive itself whilst you are getting this gun out and aiming it at the other car?

    7. Re:Why Only Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a hell of a big swerve...why would cyclists be on the motorway? :P

    8. Re:Why Only Police? by chigun · · Score: 3, Funny

      More interesting would be the meta-moderation of such a system.

      --
      swanker than you
    9. Re:Why Only Police? by 70Bang · · Score: 3, Funny



      if originality == 0
      {
      Gallagher brought this up years ago as a way to save money with the cops. They'd only have to watch traffic driving around and if someone had|has enough of a quota of "a%%holle" markers, pull them over & write a ticket under the premise "if they're driving [1] that many people mad, there's something wrong with them.
      }

      [1] paronomasia intended.

    10. Re:Why Only Police? by kalel666 · · Score: 1

      If you get enough tags, they send you to -1, Troll School.

      --
      I HAVE CUBIC WISDOM THAT TRANSCENDS AND CONTRADICTS ONE DAY GODS
    11. Re:Why Only Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A driving moderation system like Slashdot's.. What is the equivalent of the groupthink and censorship that exists here out on the road? How do you emulate getting modbombed by a /. editor?

    12. Re:Why Only Police? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      I knew I had heard this idea (or similar)before. Thanks for reminding me it came from one of the most brilliant comedians of the last 20 yrs.

    13. Re:Why Only Police? by smoker2 · · Score: 0, Troll
      Your driving down the motorway/freeway minding your own business, driving carefully at around the speedlimit and some speed freak comes tearing past and undertakes you.
      For them to undertake you, you must be in the wrong lane.
      Keep Left (UK), Keep Right (US)

      You take out your Tag rifle and aim it at the car in front.
      The device is fixed to the vehicle.

      Lean out of the window and take aim, but whilst you are doing this you swerve and take out 3 cyclists also minding their own business.
      Cyclists are not permitted on the Motorway (UK), I'm not sure about the US regulations. They certainly won't be in the outside lane.

      Anything else you want to clear up ?

    14. Re:Why Only Police? by falsified · · Score: 2, Funny

      Haven't you ever shot a weapon from your moving car before?
      I swear, people these days...

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    15. Re:Why Only Police? by Billosaur · · Score: 1
      Hmmm ... heck, just a website were people could complain and enter a license plate would be good enough. If the site sees the same plate several times, they should intervene. Mind you, the complaint needs to be verified to reduce potential abuse.

      Here in Joisy, you can report people by dialing #77 on your cell phone... 'course we prefer the old-fashioned method of following the joik home and havin' a little "chat" with 'em...

      --
      GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    16. Re:Why Only Police? by keraneuology · · Score: 1
      What, you don't want to mount quad gatling-style tag guns to your vehicle? Just think... when polly prissypants is cruising down the road drinking coffee, applying makeup, yaking on the cell phone and throwing cigarette butts out the window where they are blown back into your car you could tap a button and plaster 5,000 GPS tags/minute on the back of her hummer.

      And for those guys in the 4x4's who think that weight + traction = immunity to the laws of inertia or the engineering limits of modern braking systems during ice storms, you could apply so many GPS tags that the weight of their vehicle increases 500 fold, thereby a) improving their tracking and b) forcing them to slow down.

      --
      If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
    17. Re:Why Only Police? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Citizen Judges?

      Hell No!

      Imagine what would happen if a Grammar Nazi or a Troll worked their way into the system. ...Not to mention all those relegious stay-at-home women who have too much free time and spend it complaining to the FCC.

      Wait a second... that might be a good idea. Judgemental people + lots of free time + assholes. I see potential.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    18. Re:Why Only Police? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      $500 sable
      Goddamn slow as hell Sunday driver.

      Nobody is safe from the $STEREOTYPE :O)
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    19. Re:Why Only Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just put GPS data transmitters into every car, and let the local police monitor the data coming from all the vehicles on a highway? Or better yet, equip every car with a cell phone uplink so whenever you speed, it sends this information directly to the police and your insurance agency.

    20. Re:Why Only Police? by LouisZepher · · Score: 1

      "...Imagine what would happen if a Grammar Nazi or a Troll worked their way into the system..."

      Worse yet, imagine a GNAA judge.

    21. Re:Why Only Police? by Quixote · · Score: 1
      but whilst you are doing this you swerve and take out 3 cyclists also minding their own business.

      Yes he makes mistakes. Don't we all?

    22. Re:Why Only Police? by HTL2001 · · Score: 1

      you may want to read the "Designing a MMORPG Feedback System" article from a few days back. You'll see why this is a REALY bad idea (I know your joking, but someone is bound to take this seriously)

      --
      By reading this, you have given me brief control of your mind.
    23. Re:Why Only Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about calling the police and giving them the license plate number?

      Who are you to enforce your own driving rules upon other drivers? Maybe you're doing 40mph on a 75mph freeway, so to you it'll appear that I'm a maniac.

      And anyway, the vigilante idea is a bad idea no matter the context. Just call the cops if you feel I'm a danger to the other drivers. And it'll be safer for everyone if you talk on your cell while driving instead of shooting stuff at me while driving.

      My $.02

    24. Re:Why Only Police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just penalize them by feeding the information into the insurance agencies as well? :-> Believe me, I've thought about this idea for about two years. Now that we have internet connected PDAs, it *WILL* become a reality.

    25. Re:Why Only Police? by LootenPlunder · · Score: 2, Funny

      tire irons are good for so much more than changing tires. sigh... makes me nostalgic.

    26. Re:Why Only Police? by Alsee · · Score: 1

      I'd probably be safe in my $500 sable, though.

      I hate those sheep who just want to dissapear into the crowd and not be noticed by anyone. I bet your car is grey... no wait... better yet BEIGE. Yeah, I bet your car is a nice safe and bland color like beige.

      Prick!

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    27. Re:Why Only Police? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Then mount the gun near the bumper with a camera and wire it up to it pops out and retracts as needed. In the car there's a screen that combined with image analysis identifies the nearby cars. All the driver has to do is glance down and select which car to fire at and the system does the rest.

    28. Re:Why Only Police? by krysolid · · Score: 1

      Yes, but to complete the cycle install a video surveillance system into every car that overwrites the last hour of data continuously. When you see someone doing something illegal that your cameras have picked it, it downloads the video into the device and sticks it to the offending car, as well as ids you so you can be a witness.

    29. Re:Why Only Police? by krysolid · · Score: 1

      regrettable, but it's called collateral damage. ;-)

    30. Re:Why Only Police? by EZLeeAmused · · Score: 1

      Huh? How is a fancy fur coat going to make you safe?

      --
      Some see the vessel as half full; others see it as half-empty; We pour it out on the floor and laugh
    31. Re:Why Only Police? by starman97 · · Score: 1

      If they tags cost something like $50, I doubth that'd happen.
      You'd have to be pretty pissed to blow $50 just to tag an SUV for the hell of it.

      --
      Starman97@Gmail.com (bring it on spammers)
    32. Re:Why Only Police? by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm sure that'll be cheap for deployment throughout every police force.

    33. Re:Why Only Police? by diamondsw · · Score: 1

      "Damn smelly exhaust" - TAG!

      --
      I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
    34. Re:Why Only Police? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm planning on buying the package that puts the tagging rifle in a gimbaled gun turret on the hood, like an Apache gunship, and it's controlled by a eye-tracking device mounted to the driver's helmet.

      I figure the way people drive around here, it's going to need to have a pretty high cyclic rate, and is going to have to use belt-fed ammunition, too.

      What, you don't wear a flight helmet when you drive?

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    35. Re:Why Only Police? by spongebue · · Score: 1

      Problem with that is, it could easily be used for things other than tagging bad drivers. Want to get back at your ex? Just tag her (or his) car a couple times, and off you go!
       
      Hey... that gives me an idea :) ... wait, too bad it isn't released yet.

    36. Re:Why Only Police? by damiam · · Score: 1

      If tags cost $50, nobody would ever tag anyone for any reason.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    37. Re:Why Only Police? by SaDan · · Score: 1

      A $500 Sable, eh?

      Screw blowing the money for the pop gun and sticky ammo, I'd just "tag" them with the car!

      And, yes, I drive an equally disposable vehicle. 1988 Honda Civic LX with over 280,000 miles on the odometer. I've been tempted to "tag" a few people with it in the past... :-)

    38. Re:Why Only Police? by honestmonkey · · Score: 1

      I wonder if anyone here realizes (yourself included) that you've stolen this idea form Gallagher (the "comedian"). His idea was suction darts. Once someone got enough, he was pulled over by the cops "for being an asshole".

      --
      Everything you know is wrong, Just forget the words and sing along.
    39. Re:Why Only Police? by honestmonkey · · Score: 1

      No, no, he said it came from Gallagher, not a comedian. Gallagher is a boring, unfunny hack.

      --
      Everything you know is wrong, Just forget the words and sing along.
    40. Re:Why Only Police? by fossa · · Score: 1

      You'd have to design it with "instant-retaliation". Every time you mark a driver, the driver's score goes up one point, but your score also goes up one point. This would discourage people from blindly marking everyone they see. Only cars that had been marked [hopefully] independently would exceed the threshold for a ticket. This system would still be vulnerable to a coordinated attack where a band of trolls each mark the same target. This might be mitigated somewhat by changing the 1-1 retaliatino ratio.

      You could also have a meta moderation that was simply based on the rate at which you doled out marks. If you exceed a certain rate (say, two standard deviations above average), then your marks are ignored.

    41. Re:Why Only Police? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      Dupe! Someone said this earlier in the thread. I didn't say it was an ORGINAL idea,just an idea. I like Gallagaher so I was probably subliminally influenced by his work.

    42. Re:Why Only Police? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      I was talking about well-to-do civilians

    43. Re:Why Only Police? by Walkiry · · Score: 1

      > If tags cost $50, nobody would ever tag anyone for any reason.

      You severely underestimate road rage.

      --
      ---- Take the Space Quiz!
    44. Re:Why Only Police? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      After about 3-4 "tags" the cops can pull them over and give them a "asshole" ticket. Even better would be if these tags had a memory in them that recorded the time and GPS coordinates of the event you tagged them for. Maybe even allow selection of event types such as speeding, reckless driving, drunk driving, blocking traffic, too slow, etc.
                Hmmm, there's the kernel of a good idea in there, but with problems. Someone else mentioned (and was modded up for) pointing out that fast/ flashy/ offensive cars might well become targets simply because they're fast/ flashy/ offensive. So a simple "tag count" metric might not work too well.
                However ... GPS + memory + battery + glue in a package that's cheap enough to throw away if you're moderately pissed off has some interesting implications. Since GPS includes technologically "for free" highly accurate time keeping, then a device that sticks to the car and simply records position and time every couple of seconds for [function of battery and memory size] would record the time and place of the vehicle's every speeding violation (over- and under- speed), as well as high accelerations and decelerations (accidents, crashes, or cut-ups ? ; general moving traffic violations). And of course, since it's outside the vehicle and evidently not the proporty of the driver, then there shouldn't be any legal objection to the police retrieving the "lost property" and reading it to establish the owner ...

      [Scene : asshole in car is pulled over for some asshole-like behavior.]

      Policeman : "Engine off, keys out, show me your paper work!" (different countries, different paperwork) ... "Got to do a vehicle check over the radio. Oh, and by the way, someone has stuck a tracker on you. While I check the vehicle for defects, on the probable cause of your asshole-like behaviour 5 minutes ago, my colleague is going to read the tracker.
      [10 minutes later]
      Policeman : "OK, asshole. You've one tyre which is marginal road-legal, so we're going to ticket you for that. Your behaviour on the road this afternoon has been highly reprehensible, and we're going to caution you for that. But the tracker you've been carrying for the last week indicates you jumped 3 red lights, were speeding on this that and the-other occasions, so we're going to book you for that. AND you violently decelerated at the same time and place as a granny was hit-and-run at closing time last Friday. So on the basis of that, ASSUME THE POSITION, ASSHOLE."

      The one thing not mentioned so far is ... how are the cops going to know the "tracker" is there? And will they be able to read it? Open standards needed there, and a modicum of wireless? But that would make it easy to "sweep" your vehicle if you plan to be an asshole this evening.
      Interesting ideas, but they would need a lot more thinking out. Probably it would be easier to mandate the installation of a police-readable GPS in all new cars, then arrest everyone in an old car for not carrying proof of their good driving.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    45. Re:Why Only Police? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      ...Probably it would be easier to mandate the installation of a police-readable GPS in all new cars... Already happening, all the US cars the last 3? yrs have a black box that is readable by the police. It records speed, braking, engine settings, etc. for about 1 month of data. Not sure if it has GPS or not, probably in the newest ones. There has been some discussion of this "invasion of privacy" here on /. within the last 6 months or so. It takes a subpeona and probable cause to read the box, such as being suspected of a hit & run, etc.

    46. Re:Why Only Police? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      I'd love to do something like this with a voting system. The way I see it working is: you vote someone as an asshole, and the system registers your vote against them and also a vote against you for being a pissy person. When any car exceeds five votes, the car turns off. (Or gives a 30 second warning.) Your asshole vote is signalled in both cars by a light or something so you know how many asshole points you have left. If you're consistently voting assholes that other people vote as assholes, you get more points, and vice versa. And, to prevent gangs from going out and blowing all their asshole votes shooting other cars down, probably something to detect collusion, some population-hooked system for detecting if the same group of people are asshole voting and dropping their asshole points as a deterrent.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  7. This article is a year old! by sotweed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Surely there should be some real experience to report by now, rather than just a press release from the manufacturer...

    1. Re:This article is a year old! by kthejoker · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the "2005" is just a typo, it just appeared down their wire over the weekend.

    2. Re:This article is a year old! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Accually that "February 05" does not mean "February 2005" it means "February fifth."

  8. Re:Ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Why can't they just keep up with the car to begin with?"

    Ask that to the realtives of people who are killed every year due to stupid fucking cops living out their Dukes of Hazzard fantasies on city streets.

  9. Why unglue when smashing will work? by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Interesting


    Regardless of whether fleeing drivers realize they have been tagged, it's unlikely that individuals could unglue the dart.


    Delicate electronics don't tend to survive being hit with a hammer. You don't have to get it off the car, all you have to do is disable it. I'd be curious to see how smash proof this thing is.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Troed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm much more interested in if the police help owners of erroneously tagged cars remove the "super glued" device again, without leaving any marks whatsoever on the paint job.

    2. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If the criminals have to stop to smash it from their rear bumper then surely its job is done.

      I see win-win with this device in most scenarios.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    3. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 1

      I'm sure if it's fired at the back bumper you don't have a hope in hell of removing it without stopping and reversing at a wall or getting out the car and pulling it off yourself.

    4. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Tx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the criminals have to stop to smash it from their rear bumper then surely its job is done.

      I see win-win with this device in most scenarios.


      The device would be pointless if the police are right behind them anyway. OTOH if the cops are far enough behind to make a GPS tracking device useful, the perps will be able to take 30 seconds to stop and take a bullet/boot/brick to the thing. I'd say the GP poster makes a fair point.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    5. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Vellmont · · Score: 1


        If the criminals have to stop to smash it from their rear bumper then surely its job is done.


      How? The whole point of this thing is to not pursue them and pick them up later. If they stop for a minute, smash the thing to bits, and continue on then you've lost them.

      --
      AccountKiller
    6. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Pandamonium · · Score: 1

      I'd be curious to see how smash proof this thing is.

      And I'd be curious to see you dangle out of the car at high speed, crawling over trunk with one hand trying to maintain a grip and in the other a hammer to smash the damn thing. Sounds like you could make it as a stuntman in the next Indiana Jones movie if you can do this :-)

      --
      Time...line? Time isn't made of lines! It is made of circles. That is why clocks are round.
      -- Caboose
    7. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also if it hits paint which is the most likely area of a car for something to hit its going to come off easily no matter what. The only thing holding the thing on no matter what strength glue it is, is the bond between paint and metal. And thats not strong. It's like when your sister glues your hand to the car because she caught you with the cat and you think the superglue is going to bond you to the outside of the car but you find the paint comes off in the shape of your hand. You're free even if the glue has held onto the paint.

    8. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by stunt_penguin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh yea,

      1. Get out of vehicle
      2. Fetch hammer from trunk
      3. "PUT YOUR HANDS ABOVE YOUR HEAD WHERE I CAN SEE 'EM"

      The point of the technology is to stop high speed pursuits from becoming more dangerous- by ensuring that the suspect cannot get away, police vehicles can back off a few hundred meters and wait for the driver to stop of his own accord/come to his senses/run out of fuel. The moment he stops, the police wil be on him in seconds and he'll be arrested.

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
    9. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Vellmont · · Score: 1

      Did you not understand that the point of this is to NOT pursue the suspect? It only takes a minute to stop the car, smash the thing to bits, and continue driving.

      --
      AccountKiller
    10. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by rumbi · · Score: 1

      > Delicate electronics don't tend to survive being hit with a hammer. You don't have to get
      > it off the car, all you have to do is disable it. I'd be curious to see how smash proof
      > this thing is.


      Well, I don't know just how delicate this *can* be if it's to survive smashing into a speeding car fired from a gun... (scenario: policeperson tags the car as it approaches)
      I guess it would be tough enough to not be easily destroyed.

    11. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by thedletterman · · Score: 0

      It's as easy as stopping a mile down the road, playing smash smash, getting back in the car and going home. I for one am not a fan.. I drive a really fast car, and I drive it really fast. Normally, the police won't bother to put their donuts down to chase. I can't count how many speed traps I've hit on I-75 going over 120 MPH... now all they have to do is mount a stickyball launcher to a portable radar in the bushes to tag my car as I blaze past... sucks.

      --
      Any fool can criticise, condemn, and complain, and most fools do. - Benjamin Franklin
    12. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by seann · · Score: 1

      helo chopter

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
    13. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 1

      Are you for real?

    14. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Blapto · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hello seann.

    15. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Daengbo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sounds like a personal anecdote to me. Hmmmm. A cat, you say?

    16. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Somegeek · · Score: 1

      I bet you don't have to worry in this particular scenario. It's one thing for a police car to tag you when they are traveling at your speed right behind you. It would be much harder to tag a moving object at that speed when you have little or no warning and the device would then have to plot an intercept trajectory, launch the dart at a point in space ahead of you, and have the speed to catch up to you before you get out of range. Doesn't seem to likely. Now when the CHP get small high speed UAVs that they can launch from their car... But dude, I hope you check your tires very carefully - a blowout at that speed is not pretty.

      --
      And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
    17. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have any clue whatsoever? That short period of time is enough for cops to get a significant lead on the person they are chasing.

    18. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by aXis100 · · Score: 1

      30 seconds is 500m+ at safe speeds.

      I'm sure that even with this devices, there will police in pursuit, albeit at a safe distance. That's the point - they can hang back a bit an not loose the car. Im sure that in 30 seconds they could definitely catch up and deal with the hammer weilding criminal.

    19. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or in a high speed chase when the ninny just scrapes it off when they broadside another driver. Or even worse, it somehow gets transferred to another car. The glue would have to be all around the sphere, and thus it would be able to stick to something else. Especially if it hit a taillight or mirror or something, those can just come off and then when someone else runs it over, they're being tracked now.

    20. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by s4m7 · · Score: 1

      It's like when your sister glues your hand to the car because she caught you with the cat Much like that, yes, except that in the instance of a car chase, it's much less likely that your sister will need therapy or that you will be reported to animal control.

      --
      This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
    21. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by d3ac0n · · Score: 1

      I can't count how many speed traps I've hit on I-75 going over 120 MPH... now all they have to do is mount a stickyball launcher to a portable radar in the bushes to tag my car as I blaze past... sucks.

      Translation: I'm an irresponsible, immature person with more engine than brains. I don't like that the big bad Po-leece might be able to ruin my fun by enforcing the law. Wah!

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    22. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      I think the point of this is so that the cops don't have to keep in such close pursuit of a vehicle, which is what's really dangerous.

      With a tagging system, a police car only has to get really close to the offending vehicle once or twice, to peg it with a tag or two, and can then back off and track it. I think the theory is that the offending driver will probably slow down and not drive quite so crazily this way, and the police can attempt to set up roadblocks further ahead, or otherwise corner them, without engaging in a close-quarters, high speed pursuit.

      I know several areas where the police have a "no pursuit" policy in effect, because they've determined that it's just more dangerous to chase people around at high speeds, than it is just to let them go, file their license plate number, and hope that they get tracked down and picked up later. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but I understand the reasoning behind it.

      Ending a chase by setting up a roadblock with a tire-puncture device is definitely the preferred method, as opposed to the more traditional ram-the-rear-quarterpanel at high speed one, from the perspective of risk of injury to officers and bystanders, and a tracking device would make this a lot easier.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    23. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      I think the idea here is not to make the pursuit completely unnecessary, but to make the type of close, dangerous pursuits that sometimes happen when the police are trying to stay close to a fleeing driver less common.

      The scenario would work something like this -- the perp starts fleeing, and the cops get close enough to paint it with a few trackers. Then they back off to a comfortable distance; maybe just enough to keep the car in sight, or even a little further. I don't think they'd just go home for donuts at this point, though. They're still in their cruiser, following along behind.

      If the perp stopped to remove/smash the trackers, the cops -- who are still in a car -- would easily overtake them. Decelerating to a stop from 60MPH, getting out of the car, finding and destroying the trackers, all takes a significant amount of time. Even if the cops were hanging a quarter of a mile or so back, I doubt they would have much trouble catching up and doing a 'felony stop' (when they pull around the pursued car so that it can't easily drive forward and away). At that point, the pursuit is pretty much over (or it continues on foot, which is common but usually short-lived).

      At any rate, if you have to make the pursued vehicle stop, and the driver get out of the car and smash/remove/disable the trackers, that's a big advantage. The police almost always have the upper hand in pursuits -- they have communication and the weight of numbers -- and the few seconds gained by causing the other car to stop seems like it could be pretty decisive.

      Especially if you know that the other car is going to stop to remove the trackers at some point (i.e., if the trackers become common knowledge), you could easily just wait for that to happen, and then move in. It's the cars moving at high speed that are the real risk in pursuits, if you can make them stop their car, then you can move in and use more conventional tactics (like, say, shooting them) without risking a lot of bystanders.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    24. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Flunitrazepam · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's like when your sister glues your hand to the car because she caught you with the cat

      finally a metaphor i can relate to

      where'd you grow up, idaho?

      --
      1) Your analysis is based on bad assumptions so your result is way off. 2) You're a sick bastard for fucking a horse.
    25. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by mlush · · Score: 1
      Delicate electronics don't tend to survive being hit with a hammer. You don't have to get it off the car, all you have to do is disable it. I'd be curious to see how smash proof this thing is.

      I think a hammer would be going a fit far I suspect it would be possible to block the GPS signal with a yfew layers of tinfoil.

    26. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most glues have a solvent that can easily remove them. To be a fast setting contact glue like this, it's probably similar to superglue, which you can wash that off with warm water!

    27. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by Guru2Newbie · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm not taking off my tinfoil hat for NOBODY!

    28. Re:Why unglue when smashing will work? by stienman · · Score: 1

      It's GPS and covered in glue. Carry a small square of tinfoil with you and slap it on when yo get tagged - if you notice the tagging, anyway. It will negatively effect both the GPS reception and the transmission back to police.

      -Adam

  10. This fills a need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Car chases careening through L.A. mowing down pedestrians like wheat aren't just the stuff of action movies. They're actually a significant danger.

    And for as long as people have been saying, "Chasing people down residential streets at 80 miles an hour is dangerous, for Pete's sake!" the standard reply has been, "Well, we can't just let them go."

    Now, maybe they can let them go, and the Bigger-Dick Theory of Car Chases can finally be put to bed. Stick them with a tracking dart, surprise them when they're sleeping. Just like Batman. Except with less bats.

    1. Re:This fills a need by pete19 · · Score: 1

      ...surprise them when they're sleeping. Just like Batman. Except with less bats

      If some arsehole steals my car and chases people down residential streets at 80mph, I'd want the police to use more bats! Apart from that, I agree with you.

      --
      There is nothing more practical than a good abstract theory.
    2. Re:This fills a need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This idea is rubbish, principally because you're implying theres some permenance in the relationship between car and driver. Most likely, the car will be ditched the second the cops back off, and the person looses them on foot. This tool is to aid in reducing speed, not to abandon chases and resume them.

    3. Re:This fills a need by Somegeek · · Score: 1

      I bet that the majority of highspeed chases are not preplanned events that the driver has been planning and preparing for. The average guy racing away from the cops is not going to be thinking clearly about what his best course of action is, or he wouldn't be running in the first place.

      --
      And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
    4. Re:This fills a need by eipgam · · Score: 1

      Uh, they've always been able to let them go. Police in the UK will sometimes just back right off if it gets too dangerous, and they've never had these sticky balls. They either leave it to the Police helicopter, or if that's unavailable they pull back until the fleeing driver calms down and rejoin (or if it's really dangerous just stop completely). I think this is a good example of the different attitudes between US and UK Police forces, perfectly illustrated by those US Police video programmes that all seem to have "Sherif John Burnell" hosting. US cops are happy to shunt a car from behind and have it smash into some nearby houses ripping the front off, calling the maneuver a success.

    5. Re:This fills a need by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Car chases careening through L.A. mowing down pedestrians like wheat aren't just the stuff of action movies. They're actually a significant danger.

      I was in traffic in downtown Montreal a few years back, during a car chase (bank roberry). The car the police was chasing actually cut right behind me to get onto the sidewalk, where it was indeed careening with people running out of the way until it got to the next corner, where there was a panhandler in the way.

      The driver stopped to a screeching halt and yelled at the guy to get out of the way, but faced with an uncooperating hobo, he backed up a bit, went around the homeless drunk and resumed his high-speed escape.

      This gizmo sounds pretty neat, but maybe the "mowing down pedestrian" problem isn't one that can be solved by technology.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    6. Re:This fills a need by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Funny, I always tought that that was what helicopters and closing the streets were for...

    7. Re:This fills a need by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 1

      Just like Batman. Except with less bats.

      But then what's the point ?

  11. Re:Ok... by ScottyLad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > "Why can't they just keep up with the car to begin with?"

    As mentioned above, high speed pursuits are extremely dangerous,and usually the police will want to back off if they are in a built-up area and they can track the perpetrator via other methods without aggravating them further.

    >"but chance are the cost makes it very impractical."

    As opposed to, say, smashing a patrol car or two, before slamming in to some unfortunate motorist who just happens to be crossing an intersection, America's Greatest Police Chases stylee?

    "Besides, why should the police get all the fun toys?"

    Because they're funded by the taxpayer to use all available resources in the fight against crime - so they have a budget for technoloy like this if it's going to prove cost effective (for example in reducing pursuit collisions).

    --
    Philosopher (n) - a wise person who is calm and rational; someone who lives a life of reason with equanimity
  12. what if car is stolen ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    this will help tracking car but not the person in the car. if police stop chasing person because they think they can track using gps signal, person can leave the car ( if car is stolen ).

    1. Re:what if car is stolen ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On NPR they discussed this technology. The police spokesman could not stress enough that this is NOT fire and forget technology. You fire it, then back off from hot pursuit, but still shadow/parallel the car so if it stops, e.g. with the bad guy about to flee, then you still have to swoop in and capture him.

      This tech. probably won't save manpower, and may even require more, but that's not the point.

    2. Re:what if car is stolen ? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "this will help tracking car but not the person in the car. if police stop chasing person because they think they can track using gps signal, person can leave the car ( if car is stolen )."

      Thus ending the high-speed pursuit. However, I do agree with another poster that said something along the lines of "Great, motivate him to hijack another car."

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  13. Re:Ok... by Phantom+Zmoove · · Score: 1

    I guess this will have to do until they release the gun that shoots the car stopping beam.

    (sigh)

  14. Car chases? by IncorrigiblePunster · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am going to have to disagree with this plan. Yes, it might make running away from the police futile. Yes, car chases will be over more quickly. But I cannot and will not deal with the loss of "World's Wildest Police Chases" because some guy who had a spiderman sticky toy when he was 9 invents a spiderman sticky toy that ends police chases. It's not right.

  15. 'high-speed pursuits' my backside by 99luftballon · · Score: 1

    This is going to be worse than useless in such circumstances. If the police are going to be in a position to use this they'd surely be able to use spike strips to take out the tires. If a foot officer saw a stolen car and was in a position to tag it but is it worth carrying the weight. Shades of Snowcrash loogie guns.

    The only thing this would be useful for is surveillance, and there are better devices out there.

    1. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 2, Informative

      Can you lay a spike strip from behind a car?

    2. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by 99luftballon · · Score: 1

      If it's got to the stage of firing this thing from a moving vehicle then you'd already know where the car was and could head it off. Besides, once the driver sees the tagging the car is useless and would have to be dumped, which may lead to more dangerous chases as they attempt to escape.

    3. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spike strips require you to get in the path of the car. At the speed the car is going at, you'll need to predict quickly where the car is going and get there first. And that's if you're lucky enough to have the driver in an area where his possible routes are limited (ie, he doesn't turn to some side street, avoiding the spike strip completely.)

      If this device is light enough that it doesn't have to be vehicle mounted as the article says, it could be fired at the car from a overpass should the police not be able to get in an oncoming position that spike strips would require.

      Not to mention, blown-out-tire -> less controllable car -> greater danger risk. As commented elsewhere here, with this, the police can back off from the criminal, cooling the situation and lessening the hazard to the public. They can still maintain a visual via helicopter.

    4. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by goldspider · · Score: 1

      That's the whole point; cops wouldn't have to continue a dangerous chase once the suspect's car is tagged.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    5. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides, once the driver sees the tagging the car is useless and would have to be dumped, which may lead to more dangerous chases as they attempt to escape.

      on foot?

    6. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by 99luftballon · · Score: 1

      But they still have to be there to catch the driver(s) once they try and dump the car. That requires either visual contact or you'd have to use a helicopter to track them, in which case why bother with this device?

    7. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by smoker2 · · Score: 1
      Can you lay a spike strip from behind a car?
      Nothing travels faster than the speed of light - I believe Police have radios these days (and more than 1 car).
    8. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      I think most criminals don't try to "outrun" a helicopter, if they even notice it is following them. Hence they'll pay more attention to the road. This is as opposed to a car chase, where the criminals are spending all their time looking in their rearview mirror, right until they hit grandma.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    9. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by LouisZepher · · Score: 1

      "...Nothing travels faster than the speed of light..."

      With the exception of bad news, which obeys it's own laws. If this were true, being caught by the police would be bad news (for the suspect), and thus, they'd be apprehended before the chase was even started.

    10. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by glitch23 · · Score: 0

      This is going to be worse than useless in such circumstances. If the police are going to be in a position to use this they'd surely be able to use spike strips to take out the tires. If a foot officer saw a stolen car and was in a position to tag it but is it worth carrying the weight. Shades of Snowcrash loogie guns.

      To make spike strips useful you have to deploy them IN FRONT of the vehicle. You can shoot this ball of fun from BEHIND the vehicle (partner in the passenger seat of the police car could do it) and as long as you were close enough or it shot faster than the chased vehicle was moving (and most likely it was actually faster) it would catch up to the vehicle and stick to it. Basically, the new toy can be used from anywhere and you don't have to worry about deploying the spike strips ahead of the criminal, not to mention the spike strips don't always stop the vehicle.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    11. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by ctaylor · · Score: 1

      A police officer once told me: "You can outrun my Chevy, but you can't outrun my Motorola." I thought it was humourous. Fortunately, this was at a social setting and he was just making small talk.

    12. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by BlueStrat · · Score: 1


              Can you lay a spike strip from behind a car?

      Nothing travels faster than the speed of light - I believe Police have radios these days (and more than 1 car).


      Which brings up something I'm surprised I've heard no criminal(s) attempt: R.F. jamming. With a nice powerful broadband R.F. power amp and R.F. white-noise generator, any pursuing police would have to back off, maybe to a point over the horizon from the jammer/target vehicle before radio communication would be possible, leveling the playing field quite a bit for the criminals vs. the authorities.

      If one were clever, jammers could even be strategically pre-placed along the anticipated get-away route, and/or near repeater towers for police/cellphone services in smaller towns.

      Of course, this assumes pre-planning and technical skills of the sort that's rare among most criminals.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    13. Re:'high-speed pursuits' my backside by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Please tell me you're kidding. The spike trips are very dangerous at high speed, and require you to get in front of the fleeing car.

      No, my concern for this technology is its ubiquitous use to tag innocent people. If all a cop has to say to explain why they're tracking you is "oh, we missed this other guy and hit your car with that tracer", then we're just plain going to see abuses of the technology. And given current federal policy of secret illegal warrantless wiretapping and secret prisons in foreign countries where torture is allowed, there's really no place to go with complaints about such abuses unless you have the resources to get it pursued by your state police, or to get Congress interested.

  16. vehicle tracking by DarkClown · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I recently did work at a company that sort of competes with onstar - the field is referred to within the industry as 'telematics' apparently. Anyway, it was kind of interesting, drivers could put their cars into a theft recovery mode' where in addition to reporting gps it would also kick the cell phone on in a stealth mode where operators could hear what was going on in the car and coordinate with law enforcement. One time when I was there one of these was going on and the operator was on the phone and could hear the siren as the police approached, and was able to tell them 'no, it sounds like you're getting further away from them' when the cop car took a wrong turn or something. Pretty neat.
    Apparently the legal department of the place spent the majority of their time fighting off law enforcement from getting info from the service to track suspected drug dealers or whatever for agency requests.

    1. Re:vehicle tracking by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      Yes I've heard of these. One company sells a product called Boomerang. Sounds great.

      However would it not be easier to tie the theft signal directly into the engine management computer to kill the engine ( modern cars simply don't function without that computer) and look the doors? Should give the police long enough to find the car with the GPS before they break out.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    2. Re:vehicle tracking by DarkClown · · Score: 1

      yeah, i believe that's been discussed, but there's the issue of what impact that could have on other motorists.

    3. Re:vehicle tracking by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      I an EMP pulse weapon, sort of a Taser on steriods would be the way to do this. That way the the cops could see if the coast was clear before trigging the device.

    4. Re:vehicle tracking by pnewhook · · Score: 1
      I an EMP pulse weapon, sort of a Taser on steriods would be the way to do this. That way the the cops could see if the coast was clear before trigging the device.
      Well tasers and emp systems are completely different; tasers use high voltage while emp uses an electromagnetic pulse.

      Tasers tend not to work too well on cars as the metal frame acts as a Faraday cage protecting the electronics. And a small emp gun is simply the work of hollywood -possible but not practical and doesn't exist in the form you are thinking about.

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
    5. Re:vehicle tracking by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      Didn't the FBI recently get in trouble for hijacking OnStar in vehicles they were spying on? So obviously it is doable. Besides the easier solution is to mandate that ODB-III have remote shutdown abilities as well as radioing the cops when you're exceeding the speed limit. Why do vehicle computers even allow speeds in exess of 75 mph (the max legal speed in the US)?

  17. exposives... by elbenito69 · · Score: 1

    Replace the electronics onboard with some C4. Much more fun.

  18. WWSD? by EtherealStrife · · Score: 1, Funny
    I guess this answers the age old law enforcement question...

    What Would Spiderman Do?

  19. I'm pesimistic by DongleFondle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems to me that anyone willing to engade in a long hi-speed pursuit is just the sort of person that this will NOT be effective with. I understand wanting to avoid long pursuits. In fact, in my city, as a matter of policy, police officers will not engade in a pursuit with motorcycle in the downtown area. The combination of speed and the crowdedness of the streets are simply not worth the risk.

    Also, think about the nature of the pursuits they are wanting to avoid. We've all seen it on cops. Driver takes off going way in excess of 100 mph on city and neighborhood roads. If the cops are lucky, they can radio ahead to other police officers and setup road blocks or put down tire strips. But the suspect always either nails the cops with his car and keeps going, or blows his tires out and keeps going along right on his rims shooting sparks every which way. Sometimes, the cops will perform that move where they catch up to the fleeing car and ram it on a rear fender which sends the driver spinning out of control. Sometimes this works. Sometimes they spin out and hit people and just keep on going. Sometimes they even get the suspect trapped between two cruisers and run at the driver, pistols drawn. And sometimes the drivers just smash their way right out of this almost killing the police officers in the process.

    Yeah, I understand the need to want to curtail all of this dangerous activity. But what the last thing you always see from your airial police-cam? The driver gets out and starts running. My guess, if the person fleeing is desperate enough to get involved in a high speed pursuit, then they are also probably going to run after they ditch their car. If the cop is hanging back, I seriously doubt they are going to catch them.

    1. Re:I'm pesimistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They won't ditch the car if they are running because they have a few kilos of coke in the trunk... the idea isn't to not chase them when it is safe to do so, but to not lose them once you've lost them, and to not have to decide if you should chase them through the elementry school parking lot.

    2. Re:I'm pesimistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The episodes are Cops you see are the ones where they (typically) catch the bad guy. And I see a lot of re-runs of Cops (:

    3. Re:I'm pesimistic by Somegeek · · Score: 1

      The danger that they might get away on foot is less important than the value of saving lives by safely ending the high-speed chase.

      --
      And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
    4. Re:I'm pesimistic by bear_phillips · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you are over estimating the intelligence of criminals. I like to watch COPS too. It drives me nuts when the cop stops a guy for a routine traffic stop then I see: Cop: "Can I have permission to look in your truck: Guy: "Uh, Uh, yah sure" Cop: "Looky here, a pound of drugs" Guy: "Uh, I don't know how it got there. Its my friends, uh I its not mine"

      --
      http://www.windmeadow.com/
    5. Re:I'm pesimistic by kpang · · Score: 1

      The police are remarkably effective at catching suspects on the ground when they have a general idea of where they are. They set up barracades, contain a perimeter, and send out the hounds. Granted, there's always the risk that a ground chase ends up with the criminal turning some civilian home or office into a fort that the SWAT team ends up having to lay seige to, but this threat existed with the current "chase him until he gives up" technique too so that's a push imo. At least this way they won't have to engage in 100 mph chases down residential or crowded streets and can afford to back off a bit without worrying that the suspect will get too far out of reach.

  20. Re:Ok... by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 0
    Keeping up with a car in a highly visible chase scenario might be the most dangerous way to handle a criminal with a deadly weapon.
    Depends what you're chasing them with. Another car, maybe yes. A helicopter, no.
    --
    Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  21. Mod parent funny by stunt_penguin · · Score: 2

    Cause too many people are taking him too seriously :D

    --
    When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
  22. Great for Jail Breaks by syntap · · Score: 1

    They can just stick these on the sides of inmates' heads, and if they try to scale a wall or dig a tunnel and escape, they can just go find him. The best thing is they only need the dogs for the last three meters or so.

    1. Re:Great for Jail Breaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How 'bout this: attach a collar to prisoners that contain some sort of explosive that blows their head off if they pass a certain perimeter distance.

      Man, that'd make a great movie... oh wait...

    2. Re:Great for Jail Breaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it would work better if they stick it in their heads. The only problem is that the criminals could just wrap a wet towel around their head and stick a big claw up their nose to pull it out.

  23. Re:Ok... by canuck57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The best is still a chopper with night vision, so when the perp leaves the car they can be followed. After all, the value is in getting the criminal.

  24. Not So Easy by Old+Spider · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's not a bad idea at all. A hand-held launcher has one huge flaw: while you are chasing a suspect's car you are also likely speeding through the streets with the other vehicle, attempting to avoid obstacles and pedestrians, talking to other officers, trying to keep up with where you are so you know what to tell the other officers, and bouncing around inside your car. Now try tagging someone with one of these trackers at the same time. Not only would you be unlikely to make the shot, but you'll also be putting your life and quite possibly other people's lives in further danger.

    With this device another officer at dispatch could remotely aim and fire the vehicle-mounted device. However, using pre-installed GPS devices are far less costly to the police force and probably a bit more reliable, but this tracking ball is a great back-up in case someone didn't comply and someone else stole that particular vehicle.

    Then again... there are such things as helicopters. ;)

    1. Re:Not So Easy by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would presume that this would be fired by an assitant officer in the passenger seat?

    2. Re:Not So Easy by Old+Spider · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The article doesn't say anything about that. However, I would advise against having a partner in the vehicle. You see, the reason the police in the US stopped using partners like that is because having two people in a hightened state (the adrenalin rush) causes them to experience a sort of tunnel vision. They become less inclined to keep sharp on the situation and instead fall prey to group hysteria. The obvious solution was to keep other officers out of a squad car so that officer can concetrate and keep things 'icy'. If you've ever watch the television show 'COPS', notice how the officers are reacting after a big chase. They're hyper and need time to calm down. Imagine how much more difficult it would be in a patrol car when two people are like that. Driving the vehicle as safely as possible under those circumstances would be greatly reduced.

      That's not saying police officers aren't trained to handle that kind of excitement. They certainly are, but removing an extra source of distraction keeps officers in a vehicle from losing control over themselves and ultimately the situation.

    3. Re:Not So Easy by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 1

      That's a strange theory. In the UK, as far as I'm aware, the Police are pretty much required to have a co-pilot with them in the car, for various reasonings, including the general safety that comes from splitting an intense situation between 2 people, and the 'witness' you have to anything either of you do.

    4. Re:Not So Easy by Old+Spider · · Score: 1

      In the US the police vehicles are often equipped with cameras and on one occasion several years ago (when I had been naughty) I notice the officer was recording our conversation via a belt-mounted transiever of some sort. It was probably just his CB, but when I didn't lie to him like he wanted me to he turned it off. Police helicopters in the US definitely have cameras. With these devices there's normally plenty of evidence in favor of the officer and if the officer needs backup he can easily get it.

      On the psychological aspect, one officer is less threatening to a suspect than two or more. That can easily calm a suspect down, giving that person a sense of control. When things are threatening to the suspect, the suspect is more likely to do something drastic. A police officer can be much more effient this way, often relieving an otherwise tense situation. This is especially helpful in resolving domestic disputes.

    5. Re:Not So Easy by kpang · · Score: 1

      My guess is it would be fired by a prepositioned police officer standing on the side of the road, the same way they get runners with spike strips or when they want to shoot out the tires. Given the manpower devoted to stopping a car chase, it's pretty easy to extrapolate where the runner may go (usually it's just a straight line as they run on a highway) and dispatch a few officers to be ready and waiting. The stickyball method would be pretty advantageous over spike strips and shooting out tires here too since the officer would not have to place himself in immediate danger throwing out like he would when throwing out a spike strip and would not have to be a crackshot like he would when shooting out the tires on a moving vehicle.

  25. Not a silver bullet by spiritraveller · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The idea that this will end high-speed car chases is seriously far-fetched.

    If a policeman relies on this device and stops chasing the guy, the common criminal will simply ditch the car and get away.

    The reason cops chase people is so the bad guy doesn't get away. Maybe it will help in situations where the police can't help but lose sight of a car in a chase, but how often does that happen outside of the movies?

    1. Re:Not a silver bullet by massivefoot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think people are taking an over simplified view of this. Just because police cars have dropped back does not mean the suspect is no longer being persued. In the UK it seems to be standard practise to call in a helicopter to follow the car. This device would simply make it easier for the police helicopter to distinguish the car from others around it, and would also allow for the possibility that officers lose sight of the car before a helicopter arrives.

      Yes, the criminal will most likely ditch the car eventually, at which point he will still be visible to the helicopter pilot, who will be able to direct police cars back towards the suspect.

    2. Re:Not a silver bullet by spiritraveller · · Score: 1

      My point is that police will not fall back... at least not American police. Cops in rural America don't usually have helicopters at their disposal.

      And truth be told: American cops like to drive fast. Cowboy culture, know what I mean?

    3. Re:Not a silver bullet by dodobh · · Score: 1

      /me drives down to London, hops into the tube and dodges the helicopter.

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
  26. Re:Ok... by c0007031 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I also think that if this weapon starts to be used a lot, the fugitives will also escape into dense cities, undergroung parkings, etc because they know GPS devices cease to function there. Anyone has an idea of how the data of the device is transmited back to the police... maybe that is another thing to work around...

  27. Re:Ok... by Orangejesus · · Score: 2, Informative

    in a lot of cities there are ordinances that the cops can't chase motorists under various conditions, like over 20mph over the speed limit. It's pretty common actually, the idea being that in high speed chases even more people get injured.

  28. Costs? by tod_miller · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are joking right?

    This is basically cheap ass battery and GPS unit that is so over produced today they are cheaper than peanuts. By Peanuts I mean slightly premium quality ones, that may costs 30$ a unit.

    And glue, well, that isn't exactly expensive, add on some air based cannon, not very expensive at all.

    Of course, the whole process of development is expensive, so you should be glad when such development that your taxes goes into comes out with something that can reduce get aways, dangerous chases and crime.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  29. And this neat vaproware item will fail to work. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Just like the kiddie trackers and other GPS devices. they will stop working t he moment they are in a building of any size and with a metal roof or lots of stuff between the sky and the reciever.

    Solution? when you get enough of a lead, stop and either yank the damned thing off, wrap it in tinfoil, pull into a all metal trailer, etc....

    The GPS in phones always made me laugh. The ones in Nextel phones suck horribly taking upwards of 10 minutes to get a fix and do not work indoors.

    All these startups are trying to jump on GPS as if it's the new hotness. and every signel device I see can not overcome basic problems with recieving a semi-weak signal from sattelites overhead.

    My high end hand held GPS has trouble holding on to 12 sattelites in dense tree cover, some really low end reciever mated to some other electronics is not going to do anywhere as well. Espcially something the size of a golf ball that will have a transmitter withing millimeters of the GPS recieving antenna swamping the recievers in the gps as well as not having a way to right it's self so the GPS antenna is aiming at the sky.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:And this neat vaproware item will fail to work. by smoker2 · · Score: 1
      Espcially something the size of a golf ball that will have a transmitter withing millimeters of the GPS recieving antenna swamping the recievers in the gps as well as not having a way to right it's self so the GPS antenna is aiming at the sky.
      Where does it say it needs to find its position ?

      It only has to transmit a signal, which is located using satellites. Aeroplanes have a positioning system that transmits a signal so that ATC can locate them, no gps needed on the plane.

    2. Re:And this neat vaproware item will fail to work. by dracocat · · Score: 1

      12 Satellites?

      What exactly are you using your GPS for? You dont need 12 satellites unless you are trying to intercept some sort of ballistic missile or something at high speeds. 3 satellites would be enough to find a point in a 2 dimensional plane; 4 if you need to know how high up the parking structure the car is.

      A little background

    3. Re:And this neat vaproware item will fail to work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually 5, we live on a sphere and the timing needs to be synced by the device.

  30. Cool by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

    The next step in the development is, of course, to deploy a lil' spider-bot to crawl under the car and disable it by cutting a fuel line or drilling a hole in the fuel tank.

    Also, it might be useful to put a small UV strobe on this type of device, to make tracking by helicopter much, much easier (as if spotting someone doing 120mph in a 50 zone wasn't easy enough) as CCDs will pick up UV light without any modification. I could imagine that helping if the suspect fled to the cover of trees. That said, it just occurred to me that a lot of choppers have IR vision as well, which makes things easier than any strobe. D'oh.

    Of course, my opinion of people who drive like this is that police choppers should be armed with Hellfire missiles, and that this little beacon should be used to just take these people out with one, but that's just my opinion. Fuckers.

    --
    When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
    1. Re:Cool by NoMercy · · Score: 1

      Of course, you could just tell the guy in the chopper where the car is, since it's got GPS...

    2. Re:Cool by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

      Yea but if the car is at a set of traffic lights among 20 other similar cars, the GPS co-ordinates, with say 15M accuracy for a tiny device like this, would only point out which group of cars the supect is. Extra information is always good, especially in a case like this.

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
  31. The logical answer to that: GPS jammer by gd23ka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Okay... that just makes the case once more for the GPS jammer, a device that emulates GPS signals and fools every GPS receiver in its vicinity into thinking it is located near the south pole. Of course the car is still trackable by triangulating the location beacon. Of course a GPS jammer like that would be a dangerous thing to have and I'm thinking of here is what if someone happens to put that on a plane. I fly myself so that's a scary thought.

    1. Re:The logical answer to that: GPS jammer by c4ffeine · · Score: 1

      a GPS jammer like that would be a dangerous thing to have ... what if someone happens to put that on a plane

      Correct me if I'm wrong here, but aren't planes massively redundant in every way possible? I'm under the impression that pilots can work just fine without GPS. If worst comes to worst, they can probably just do it visually.

      --
      "73% of quotes on the Internet are made up" -Ben Franklin
    2. Re:The logical answer to that: GPS jammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone puts that on a plane the GPS starts working incorrectly. The pilots are not going to think that they've been sucked through a wormhole to the south pole; they'll just turn the damn thing off.

      There are multiple forms of redundant navigation on even the Cessna 172s I trained in. A commercial airliner will not flop out of the sky because you haxxored the GPS satellite network and told it up is down and black is white.

    3. Re:The logical answer to that: GPS jammer by gd23ka · · Score: 1

      An obviously false GPS reading will indicate to the pilot that the GPS is on the blink. But what about if it's just twenty miles off? Oh okay, there are still radio beacons and for really spectacular results you would have to manipulate an airport's ILS (remember the movie with Bruce Willis?) and people do tend to look out the window every so often but ... hey how about hijacking ships at sea that way? (Now that could work if you could make ships run onto sand banks and the like).

  32. Stick one on every pol.ice car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want to know where my cops are.

  33. It's not like when we were kids! by Blue+Mandelbrot · · Score: 2, Funny

    When we were kids we used to throw snowballs at passing cars. The kids of tomorrow will be throwing sticky GPS tracking devices at cars.

  34. Not every city has a helicopter... by m0ng0l · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I kept seeing a recurring theme throughout the posts on this device (and I haven't read the article yet), in that police should chase the criminals with helicopters. Great idea, but a lot of cities and towns don't have, or can't afford, or don't have the facilities for a helicopter.

    There are also many ways in which a helicopter can be either avoided, or at least forced to drop far enough back to give you a better chance to lose it. Going near a major airport comes to mind. A city with many tall buildings (downtown New York or LA comes to mind) would make the helicopter less effective.

    The way I could see police using this device, is tag the car, then "let" them get away/out of sight. Using the GPS, keep a group of patrol cars in a "box" around the suspect, and eventually, he/she will stop somewhere. At that point, move in. Best case, everybody wins. The cops get the criminal, the vehicle is minimally damaged, and few if any civilians get hurt. Worst case, the cops get the car back in good shape, and again, few if any civilians get hurt. Truthfully, I believe the cops would much prefer fewer chances of civilian injuries versus getting the criminal in custody, and not just because of the lawsuits.

    Likely, most chases start when the criminal does something to attract the attention of the police, who then do what they are supposed to do: try to catch them. The problem with backing off, is that once the chase is on, they get fixated on stopping them. It seems a (very loosely) similar situation would be when one is working on a project or program, and is cruising along, try to stop... One big difference, which I'm sure someone would point out if I don't, is writing code isn't going to hurt anyone.

    Stop and think for a moment, too, what would happen if the police *never* chased. Why bother doing anything even remotely near the speed limit? Streets are too corwded, hit the sidewalk at 60mph... Traffic signals would be less than "suggestions"....

    At least if people think there's the possiblity of a cop, or several cops, chasing, and likely stopping them, they're more likely to simply pull over. With the obvious exception of criminals....

    --
    Do you see the FNORDS? I refuse to post anonymously, as I am fireproof!
  35. Won't the police need spider-sense by MECC · · Score: 2, Funny

    Won't the cops need spidey senses to use it?

    --
    "We are all geniuses when we dream"
    - E.M. Cioran
  36. Tag people by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Funny

    If everyone has a tag, then you can just track people directly. Even when they are on foot.

    Wouldnt we be so much safer if the government knew where everyone was , at all times?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Tag people by iggy_mon · · Score: 1

      i'm scared that you got modded "+4, Funny".

      lines tin foil hat with lead

      --
      --iggy_mon - www.ananonymouskiller.com - Die Trying -
    2. Re:Tag people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, plans are underway.

    3. Re:Tag people by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Considering that i was joking.. i think a +4 funny is good :)

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:Tag people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The *dedicated* 5.9GHz band ?!?

      I don't effing think so... 5650-5925 MHz is allocated in the US to the Amateur Radio
      Service, on a *secondary* basis to the [federal] Government Radiolocation Service. The
      WAN stuff and cordless phones, etc. are tertiary, and on a NON-interference basis, to
      the allocated services. I'm sure the FCC could figure out some other portion of the
      microwave spectrum that would serve the need better - not much would be needed, it would
      be low-powered and transient (how long would the watch battery in the golfball power the
      transmitter and the rest of the electronics anyway?), so it just might be feasible that way.

    5. Re:Tag people by iggy_mon · · Score: 1

      i agree, it was a fair mod (+5 right now ;^).

      one of the paranoias of hard core christians is that the bible says noone will be able by or sell anything in the time of the beast without the mark of the beast. having implants triggers that fear in bible-thumping people.

      not that it matters much...

      --
      --iggy_mon - www.ananonymouskiller.com - Die Trying -
  37. The Gallagher Stupid Dart! by zogger · · Score: 1

    Does anyone remember that idea he had? I probably got some details wrong, but it was something like this: Everyone gets a dart gun that shoots a dart that sticks to another car, it says "stupid". Get enough stupid darts from driving like a lamer and you aren't allowed to drive any more. The original moderation/karma system.

  38. Dumb criminals by Quizo69 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Let's see now. How about this for a hypothetical situation:

    Criminal/drug dealer type buys expensive car with his ill gotten money. Said person then proceeds to install a GPS TRACKER in his expensive car so if it gets stolen, the company can track it and return it to him and he can take the person who stole it to court???

    I guess this is why criminals continue to get caught - because by the sounds of it, most of them are stupid enough to voluntarily put TRACKING TECHNOLOGY in their own cars. Makes it easy for police to build a social network map of the criminal's associates and market now, doesn't it?

    In reality, SMART criminals would work like this:

    Buy aforementioned expensive car. No need to install expensive tracking device in case it gets stolen, because the thief would soon find themselves trying to play Harry Houdini with concrete slippers encased around their ankles....

    Nice and quiet, no need to involve law enforcement, and everyone ends up happy (well, except for fishfood boy).

    Only in America.... land of the stupid criminal mastermind!

    1. Re:Dumb criminals by DarkClown · · Score: 1

      right, but many vehicles come with the technology standard and its service is enabled only by subscription - the service vendor relies on the dealer to pitch this service or to even educate them that it is installed and available.
      so, mr. bad-guy may not even know that he's buying this, but if there's a cell phone installed in the car he's really 'lojacked' anyway....

    2. Re:Dumb criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the service is always enabled, unless you pull the fuse. You do not get to use it's functionality if you don't pay the subscripption but they can still track/listen in on you. snf

    3. Re:Dumb criminals by dourk · · Score: 1

      Crooks need to watch the Sopranos. First thing Tony does is have all the shit pulled out of his new Caddys.

      --
      Wake up.
    4. Re:Dumb criminals by typical · · Score: 1

      Criminal/drug dealer type buys expensive car with his ill gotten money....Buy aforementioned expensive car. No need to install expensive tracking device in case it gets stolen, because the thief would soon find themselves trying to play Harry Houdini with concrete slippers encased around their ankles....

      I hate to break this to you, but a drug dealer is just some guy that, y'know, happens to sell drugs. Drug dealers don't have mysterious tracking powers that put the police to shame and allow them to locate their stolen cars.

      --
      Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
  39. Chases dont just 'materialize' by i_am_not_a_bomba · · Score: 1

    With a dozen cars screaming down the road, once it gets to that stage (where there is enough cars to head it off, lay spikes, etc) the chase would have gone on for far to long and have put dozens if not hundreds of lives in immediate mortal danger.

    Being that a chase will usually start when a single patrol car tries to stop someone and they take off, the moment the runner floors it, shoot this sucker and thats it. No need for a dozen cars hurtling through populated streets at rediculous speeds chasing someone of unknown driving ability and unknown state of mind (except absolutely pumping with adrenaline, thus ensuring tunnel vision and criticaly poor decision making abilities).

    The greatest benefit? Innocent people wont die because the police where trying to arrest someone.

  40. Theo Van Gogh, Paris Riots, cartoon furor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Anyone still think Muslims are reasonable? All this over a fucking cartoon. Fucking barbarians... http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060205/D8FIK3M81 .html

  41. Spear Not Such A Wicked Idea by Somegeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The potential for someone getting hurt with an electrical disruption device (especially a 2 foot spear!) is much higher. This is passive so it doesn't involve any risk to those in the fleeing vehicle. If someone is driving at 100mph it might actually be more dangerous to just shut their vehicle off and have them lose control at that speed. Plus, it wouldn't have any affect on pre-computer vehicles, (ok so not a lot of those speeding around....)

    --
    And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
  42. what happens if the criminal panics..... by techmedic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What happens if the criminal panics?? More specifically, what will happen if the criminal thats being chased looks out his window and sees the cop aiming what looks like to be a gun at the car? Granted it would be pretty unrealistic to expect the officer to pull right up, point the thing out the side window and shoot while driving along side, but even so, one of three things could happen. The criminal can shoot back (very doubtful but who knows in a car chase). Or the guy can panic, loose control of the car, sending it into who knows where, or he can go at even faster speeds trying to lose the cop. Or he could just stop and the chase would be over ;) Its pretty obvious that these darts have to be shot discretely.

  43. Re:Ok... by Somegeek · · Score: 1

    A little dart is going to be a LOT cheaper than a helicopter. Even the LAPD only has a limited number of copters.

    --
    And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
  44. undigested article by novus+ordo · · Score: 1

    A little more information:

    "Each StarChase unit can fire two GPS tracking devices in case the first one misses or does not stick to the vehicle. The GPS device consists of a battery and a radio transmitter embedded in an epoxy compound. The tag affixes to the suspect's vehicle and transmits its location via satellite to police headquarters where it is superimposed over a map displayed on a computer. The GPS tag activates at impact. It transmits the car's exact position via a wireless modem. An encrypted cellular backbone delivers continuous position updates to the StarChase server that pushes location-based information to authorized users through a password-protected Web portal. The delay between the transmission and the refresh-picture rate from the Web server is about two to three seconds. The system uses data transmission encryption to ensure security."

    --
    "You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
  45. RC car and an EMP by Midnight+Warrior · · Score: 1

    I've kind of thought that a highspeed RC car could launch, use military technology for tracking, get under the car and attach itself with a bunch of hard drive magents. Either use that as the GPS device (which eliminates the whole impact debate here) or emits a small, localized EMP. Yes, I know that EMP takes a lot of energy, but nothing a couple of really large capacitors could be revved up to handle. Few people are likely to initiate a chase in any vehicle that doesn't have a computer nowadays, so the only weak spot would be diesels.

    For the critics who complain about what an RC car would need for resources, they are forgetting that two things are in its favor: the vehicle only needs to run at full speed for about 2 minutes (>2minutes is a failure), and its carrier is already travelling at full speed. Heck, for that matter why not make it a hovercraft and avoid all those pavement anomalies.

    P.S. This counts as prior art. :-)

    1. Re:RC car and an EMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      diesels run via computers too, it would shut down the injectors for them and turn them off also.

    2. Re:RC car and an EMP by EnglishDude · · Score: 1

      I remember watching a technology program on TV (Tomorrow's World?) several years ago and they showed a gizmo on wheels that mounted under the police car at the front, on a small ramp, with 2 metal foil triangles folded down and away safely. And when the police car was behind the car the police car was chasing, the policeman pressed a button and the gizmo fired something like a rocket motor and launched itself off the ramp and on the road, the 2 metal foil triangles popped up - one each end of the gizmo (front and back) and the gizmo went under the car in front and zapped the car with a high voltage current and destroyed the electronics of the car and brought it to a halt. As the gizmo on TV was a prototype, it didn't work. I've never heard about it since, so it probably didn't work out in the end, but it did exist before, so you can't claim prior art ;)

      Have tried and googled for a solution but couldn't find it. Sorry!

  46. It wouldn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You tag my car, I run your sorry ass off the road and shove your gun so far up your ass you'll shoot darts out your nose evey time you sneeze.

    1. Re:It wouldn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...well, I was only going for a funny, because I remembered that "prior art" schtick of his, but as long as you are feeling macho about it with the anonymous threats, I sure hope you have a big car, because I drive a dump truck as my "daily driver". I don't work in a cube farm, I work on a real farm and do large scale "terraforming" mostly. If I am not driving the truck, I usually am driving a large diesel tractor or loader with some weight to it. You can *try* and "run me off the road" in your pimped out rice mobile I guess, have fun! Your in dash MP3 player and tom tom and wing should make it easy for you!

  47. Does anyone else think... by Jeian · · Score: 1

    ... that hitting a moving car from another moving car would be, uh, rather difficult?

  48. Jammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time for a competitor to come up with a cheap portable GPS jammer

  49. Shoot back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The cops start shooting at you with anything at all for whatever reason their little pea brain has, that gives you the right to shoot back.

    If you are ever involved in a high speed car chase, common sense should tell you you can't outrun a cop car which has a souped up engine, souped up radiator, bigger gas tank, and when they are interconnected out there with radios and a central dispatch. You can learn alot from the discovery channel.

    This is what you do.

    First, you jam them across the radio band with a white noise generator connected to a transmitter you have wired to your beefed up car electronics system. If you're not driving with one of these, you're a sitting duck for any police action against you. They will pull you over, they will search you, they will plant evidence on you, and you will suddenly find yourself doing 10 to life. Pigs have more access to 'drug evidence' they can plant on you than you could ever imagine. In the end, it comes down to your word against theirs, who do you think a jury will believe. I thought so. The only person who will protect you is you yourself. This is life or death.

    Second, you site your automatic weapons on the son of a ****** that is chasing you from the rear seat while someone else drives. Slow down, let them catch up to you, and then aiming straight for the driver you let him have it with the full clip. If that don't kill the SOB it sure as heck will convince him to back the f off. If you can't get the driver, the tires and the radiator are secondary targets.
    Remember to lead your target.

    If you don't have someone else in the car or a weapon, you have to follow Boella's (sp?) Dicta, which says you should always, always, turn and face your enemy at all times. In this case, the bogie is already on yoru tail. Speed up real fast, get him going real fast with lots of inertia, and then slow down, closing the gap, so Piggie thinks he's being supercop and has you now. Then slam on the brakes real hard so he smashes into your rear end. You will be expecting it, he won't.

    Now most amatuers at this point would speed up and try to run for it again. No, that gives him time to speed up and go back into supercop mode. You do what any motherbear would do protecting her cubs. You turn and fight. That's right, swing your car around, and start ramming the SOB. Forward, backwards, forward, backwards, slam in to him, aiming for the weak points in his combat vehicle.. the driver side door first, the radiator second. Once you've beaten him black and blue, then you can leave. Get a good distance a way, ditch the car out of site, and get yourself a fresh vehicle.

    You will want to return and pick up the original car later, as it may trace back to you with prints, etc. So its good to stash it down some logging road in the back woods.

    Or, you can continue to live in your fairy land, that the police are there to serve and protect, and not a police state out of control, only interested in protecting power and fear and slander upon you. And that a defense lawyer, which should be the most honorable profession on earth, meant to be the last stand against the overwhelming power of the state... hasn't been undermined or sold out yet or has no clue how to really defend anybody in court, irregardless of how expensive they are.

    The only one who will protect your rights are you. You have to fight like a pyscho Indian, and yes, its to the death. Why this is? Because for the last 20 years nobody has stood up for civil rights, and everything that was fought for in World War 2 against fascism and police power has been eroded away and is now gone.

    Oh yeah, and when you stash your beat up car, assuming the "paintball golf ball gps unit" is still attached. Stop by an airport, find a plane that is about to take off, and stash it on somebody's carry on. Or if you can't find that, watch for one of those ninja bikes, and when he stops for gas, tag him with it, he should give them a run for the moeny. Or barring all t

    1. Re:Shoot back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You, sir, are an idiot.

    2. Re:Shoot back by iggy_mon · · Score: 1

      My daddy named me Sue for a reason.

      do you have pretty blue eyes?

      shudders I think i need therapy now
      :^)

      --
      --iggy_mon - www.ananonymouskiller.com - Die Trying -
    3. Re:Shoot back by dukeisgod · · Score: 1

      Real Stories of Grand Theft Auto? You can't be serious.

    4. Re:Shoot back by paddleonward · · Score: 1

      Is that you Ted?

    5. Re:Shoot back by shadowbearer · · Score: 1


        Hell, no. That's the funniest damned rant I've read in days. ;-)

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    6. Re:Shoot back by ndansmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You should submit this article to eHow. I am sure many people would find it quite helpful.

    7. Re:Shoot back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, have no sense of humor.

    8. Re:Shoot back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. RFTP, it was Sue.

    9. Re:Shoot back by Duct+Tape+Jedi · · Score: 1

      please tell me I'm not the only one that is scared by the fact that somebody modded the parent "informative"

    10. Re:Shoot back by jeko · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah, to be 18 again. Good times.

      --
      He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
    11. Re:Shoot back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take it, and learn from it, then you won't have to be afraid anymore.

    12. Re:Shoot back by Benaiah · · Score: 0

      You forgot to say what to do when you have pissed of enough cops, SWAT will get on your ass. So the next step is to drive around back alleys looking for some molotovs and SMG's. But dont kill too many SWATS or the FBI will come after you and the Military. Then youll need to find a rocket launcher then a tank respectively.

      Or you could just not steal cars and stay within the speed limit.
      Your Choice.

    13. Re:Shoot back by dodobh · · Score: 1

      No one ever threatens an independent nuclear power.

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    14. Re:Shoot back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we found how should really be thrown in the cell.

  50. Del.Icio.Us by sheepcentral · · Score: 0

    I was just thinking that del.icio.us could be used to extend this service with the tagging and all. Social traffic policing. Where democracy meets dangerous drivers.

  51. license plates by idlake · · Score: 1

    We have license plates for this purpose. You read the number and can report it later. Many commercial vehicles also have 800 numbers on them that you can call to report dangerous driving.

    1. Re:license plates by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      LOL. I see a lot of trucks in my area with the last 4 digits blanked out. You think the trucking companies are going to do anything on a "citizen" complaint? They got to get the frieght from A to B fast. I think the 800 #'s are just to make us think the Truckers give a damn. Calling a plate # in to the police is just as useless, unless they have an traffic officer nearby they will not respond. Most big cities have cops that are traffic and others as patrol, so not any officer will respond (unless you see a crime).

    2. Re:license plates by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      Where I live (Florida), law enforcement doesn't do too much if you report a car misbehaving, but if it was a truck they'd be all over him. We have state DOT agents that are primarily dedicated to keeping over-the-road trucks legal, and they take their jobs *very* seriously.

      On the two occasions that I've called trucking companies about drivers, one was totally useless and never returned my call, and the other kept in touch for a week as they tracked the driver down, and he was fired at the first opportunity. My favorite non-trucking call was when I was driving on I-10 east of Tallahassee, and came across a marked Mississippi state cop that was riding in the left lane 10 mph under the speed limit, holding up traffic for a half-mile behind him. A Florida trooper pulled him over to have a chat with him shortly thereafter. :-)

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    3. Re:license plates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That may be the case. However, to the degree that police enforce citizens calls, license plates are sufficient; attaching sticky balls doesn't improve the situation.

    4. Re:license plates by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      They have special units here in TX too, but they are woefully undermanned. With I-35, the NAFTA Highway splitting TX N - S and I-20 and I-10 E-W we got a lot of trucks. Last time I called DPS they said they would forward my call to the locals nearest me as they didn't have the manpower to handle all the calls. I've never tried the trucking company 1-800-#, but with so much stuff in my area coming/going to Mexico there are a lot of independant/small firms that don't have 1-800 #'s,and as I said I've seen them blotted out of the trailers from firms that do. YMMV.

  52. pictures? by immorak · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I would like to see some pictures of this if anyone has any!

  53. When the Legal Deparment Finally Loses? by derrickh · · Score: 0, Troll

    But what happens when the legal department loses it's first case? Here's a likely situation. The government decides it needs protect us by listening you talk to your friends in your car. You know, just in case you're a terrorist. And since the GPS is always on, why not have your car's location get tagged whenever certain 'key phrases' are overheard. Of course, this will have to be done without alerting the driver or passengers that they're being listened to and tracked, otherwise the terrorists will never talk openly. While we're at it, better make this tech mandatory...i mean 'standard' on all new vehicles.

    It's already being done on phone calls, this would be the next logical step.

    D

    1. Re:When the Legal Deparment Finally Loses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cell phones AND land lines. Even the internet.

  54. Re:Ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A bullet is cheaper still.

  55. Remote control cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe new car computers should start to incorporate GPS systems, remote kill, with celular linking - not just 3rd party/aftermarket add-on stuff, but actually part of the computer code itself, disabling it or the associated hardware/sensors renders the car completely inoperable. That way say, when the vehicle is registered (and linked to a license plate), the police officer has the ability to control said vehicle, either by remote kill or severly limit operability (say like tell their onboard computer to limit said cars' top speed to 25 mph or so...).

    Then again, false plates/stolen plates could be a problem: Sammy and Sally in $SOMEOTHERSTATE driving to $DESTINATION some day all of a sudden can't go over 25 mph and they have no idea why, on a major highway going warp 3, thusly killing a gazillion people in the accident they're going to cause... But then we could scrap the current license plate system and make it a permanent part of the car at the factory like the VIN.

    1. Re:Remote control cars by MikeWasHere05 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      That's a great idea!

      How about we let the government implant us all at birth with a chip that has our Social Security number and the ability to stop us from moving. This way if we're convicted of doing a felony (because the justice system never fails) they can just stop us from having the ability to run away from people! Or maybe have us walk towards the nearest re-education center.

  56. Similar idea, more effective payload by RhettLivingston · · Score: 1

    The method being proposed does not prevent the chase. It only allows the police to hang back a little because they have to be close enough to not give the criminal a head start on a foot chase.

    Someone running from the police at high speed is wielding a deadly weapon against the public. Use of lethal force is unquestionably justified, but the police can't just shoot at these folks in most situations due to the danger of missing and hitting a civilian.

    Why not just replace the payload on these things with a radio controlled explosive device that is chemically rigged to have a short lifetime after arming? The concept would be to fire a few of them at the car and use a directional antenna to command the ones that actually attached to explode whenever the car is in a relatively safe (for others) location. If the device armed upon being fired and became chemically inert around an hour later, the danger of civilians being hurt by devices that missed would be minimized.

  57. Saw this on a TV show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They use one of these in episode 8 of Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex to track and follow some criminals who are getting away through crowded down-town traffic. Nice to see some things from Sci-fi coming into reality.

  58. How effective can this be? by MeAndMyX-ActoKnife · · Score: 1

    Too bad most of the time it's a stolen car..and most of the time the perp ditches the car as soon as they lose the police.

    --
    Tune out.
  59. Redundant by eyepeepackets · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Why develop such a device when we already have 50 caliber machine guns and automatic grenade launchers and shoulder-launched anti-armor rockets?

    Remember: If you are nice to such people then you will end up with more such people. The best approach is to take them out of the gene pool at the very first opportunity, so don't jail 'em, kill 'em!

    There really is some merit to the Chinese method of "two strikes and you are dead" providing it isn't abused for political purposes. No point of keeping some whacko sociopath locked up at the cost of twenty grand a year, just whack 'em and be done with it. If they give you the opportunity on the first go 'round, well, take it -- that's what opportunity is all about.

    To those who suggest rehabilitation, please reference the recividism rates in the U.S. Rehabilitation as a correctional concept is a huge failure and needs to be brought to a meeting with reality.

    --
    Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    1. Re:Redundant by brxndxn · · Score: 1

      So everyone that runs from the cops should be shot and killed? That seems highly logical since we know that ALL cops are perfect and enforce the law perfectly every time. Also, even though the Constitution guarantees it, we should just circumvent all the wastes involved with a criminal trial.

      --
      --- We need more Ron Paul!
    2. Re:Redundant by eyepeepackets · · Score: 1

      "So everyone that runs from the cops should be shot and killed?"

      If someone runs in such a manner as to threaten the health and safety of others then yes, kill 'em fast and sure.

      "...we should just circumvent all the wastes involved with a criminal trial."

      No one ever has the "right" to endanger others in such a manner as a vehicle driven recklessly at high speeds. In doing so, the perp is telling the society around them that he has no regard for lives or property. Such people deserve no regard other than what it takes to remove them as an immediate threat.

      Cheers.

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    3. Re:Redundant by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Given a significant percentage of bad/incompetent cops, I'm sure people will have a hard time of deciding whether to run and be blown away, or not run and be blown away.

      There needs to be a well thought out and publicized official "Rules of Engagement" that makes it clear what cops and citizens are recommended to do in _practical_ situations when they interact. And all cops and citizens should follow it to avoid misunderstandings or things escalating.

      --
    4. Re:Redundant by paddleonward · · Score: 1

      Do you see how you divided society, citizen-cop ? Citizens have to follow the rules, cops do not. Some people like to feel (imagine) that they are protected by "law enforcement", some..., wait a minute! Where are the animal cops! Maybe they have the rules-of-engagement worked out already.

    5. Re:Redundant by TheLink · · Score: 1

      I don't know what your point is.

      It is obvious that cops have different rules from normal citizens. They are authorized to use deadly force under some circumstances.

      I'm proposing a rules-of-engagement to govern the interactions between citizens and cops so that many unnecessary problems can be avoided.

      The normal laws don't cover everything. It's like the difference between corporate policies and standard operating procedures in a department.

      I'm sure the cops have their own SOPs however there doesn't appear to be a publicized one for cop-citizen interaction.

      Just because both cops and citizens have a big bunch of rights and powers, doesn't mean there can't be recommended ways of exercising recommended rights to smoothen most common interactions.

      An example:

      A citizen is walking slowly up and down a dark street at night.
      A cop finding that suspicious could challenge that citizen.

      There are valid and legal reasons for a citizen to behave in that manner, and there are many legal ways a cop could challenge that citizen, and many legal ways a citizen could respond to that challenge.

      However, not all the possible ways are good or safe.

      I recall someone here complaining about a cop for challenging him for "behaving suspiciously" when he did something like that, and he responded kinda sarcastically, and the cop then said something to the effect that the cop was keeping an eye on him. But I think the cop was just trying to do his job - how else could he challenge someone he thinks is a burglar or someone up to no good?

      Now if the cop showed his suspicion in a "proper way", and the citizen is familiar with the procedure, no offence should be taken by the citizen, and there wouldn't be unnecessary rudeness. A burglar challenged in that way would still be at least slightly discouraged from breaking into a house whilst the cop was still about ;).

      Another example is - what is the recommended way to take out your wallet or whatever it is, in order to show the cop your ID? After all if it is done in the wrong way and the wrong moment, you could get shot because the cop thinks you might be pulling out a weapon. So perhaps the recommended procedure is to NOT show your ID unless explicitly requested. If a cop thinks it is unsafe, the cop should apologize and request you to get into a position where the cop can safely retrieve your ID.

      A possible way to challenge a suspected fake cop is to request that the cop summon backup over the radio. Of course the citizen should then be forced to stand in a neutral+safe position till backup arrives. And the cop should remain at also a fairly neutral distance away.

      If the fake cops provide the whole stuff - fake "HQ", sirens etc, you're probably in deeper shit than you can cope (since if you were prepared for that you wouldn't bother waiting for the fake backups to arrive).

      --
  60. RF Jamming by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So you just have a jammer in the car before you commit a crime. Problem solved.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:RF Jamming by zoloto · · Score: 1

      How about not committing the crime? What happened to that as an option?

    2. Re:RF Jamming by has2k1 · · Score: 1

      You are a hard core criminal dude. Not committing the crime is not an option.

    3. Re:RF Jamming by zoloto · · Score: 1

      since when do people not have options like this? there is always a chance to change.

  61. It wouldn't take that long by HangingChad · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Some of you suggesting the perp could just stop and pull the sticky thing off should realize that when they stop, they'll have about 30 maybe 40 seconds, tops. That's a Chinese Fire Drill. Dispatch will know right where they are in real time and will be able to put units along their route. It won't stop the chase, the cops will just be able to drive at a more sane speed. Certainly it will give them a chance to ditch the car and flee on foot but I don't think they're likely to kill many people on foot.

    Tag 'em and bag 'em may not sound glamorous but I for one welcome our new sticky dart, GPS tracking overlords. It'll be safer for everyone.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  62. I don't know... by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    You steal a car, are careening down the highway with cops tight behind, then you hear a dull *thud* from the trunk and the cops stop chasing you.

    What are you going to do?

    a) Bring the obviously tagged car back to your hideout / chop shop

    b) Pull over very quickly at a 7/11, run out and shoot the tracking device, jump back in and speed off. All of which is possible because the cops stopped chasing you.

    Seems to me like even with this thing they willhave to maintain at least a close distance to make sure they don't disable the thing.

    1. Re:I don't know... by laffer1 · · Score: 2

      c) Figure you're being tracked, pull in to a 7/11 and steal another car if you can't get the tracking device off or don't have time too. They just encouraged carjacking.

    2. Re:I don't know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no no. Stick the tracker onto another car, then you shoot Apu and take his car.

    3. Re:I don't know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pull over very quickly at a 7/11, run out and shoot the tracking device, jump back in and speed off.

      Yeah... we're talking about people who can't shoot someone in the face from three feet away. This particular feat of marksmanship would more likely play out like this:

      "Shit we've been tagged!"

      *stops at 7/11, shoots at tracking device* *BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM*

      "Damn! The bastards got our gas tank and drive shaft!"

  63. Just get apple to make them by technoextreme · · Score: 1

    They sure as hell know how to build stuff that survives being run over with a car let alone a hammer. Plus they will be so stylish everyone will be getting into high speed chases just to have one on their car.
    http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/nano.ars/3

    --
    Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
  64. Sometimes they shoot people by QuincyDurant · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..and I'm not sure they pay to dig the bullet out. I wouldn't worry about your cockamamie paint job.

  65. Wireless plates by alexmipego · · Score: 1

    Well, the concept can't be that new...

    I would implant a chip on each car plate, but if people knew that the black market would provde us with "non-wireless-plates" again...

    Anyway, this seems a good option, since most of that cars use fake plate numbers and things like that. Even the system in UK that uses cameras all over the place couldn't follow those cars with 100% precision.

    But if you saw the moview "2 Fast 2 Furious II" you'll know that with some gym they can remove that things in movement... if the thing is too attached to the car with some chemical thing, in no time they will some with a new car painting tecnology that will make the device not to attach itself...

    No perfect or defenitive solution I gues...

  66. Why try to hit the car with anything at all. by Cygnusx12 · · Score: 1

    Just build a receiver in the transmission to shut the damn car off. It's the simple.

    It doesn't need to transmit anything, it doesn't need to step on privacy rights, it just needs to shut the car off.

    No high speed chases. No spike strips. All vehicles in the area of the signal (emergency vehicles excluded of course) are simply shut off.

    Of course the true hard cores will find away around it, but aern't THOSE the folks the stop spikes (and other more forecful methods) are made for?

    Your run of the mill stolen car, joy riders, or divorced dad on his 5th DUI (and the bulk of your chases) wont be removing it.

    Insurance companies could underwrite the cost of installation in existing vehicles.

    1. Re:Why try to hit the car with anything at all. by KillerBob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are times when stalling the car would cause more damage than good. On a crowded street, it could very easily cause an accident, and get people killed.

      Quite aside from that... what about manual transmissions? And what happens when somebody figures out how to do it? No. Way too dangerous an idea. Far and above, the safest thing to do in a "high speed" chase is tag the car and break off the chase. Let them think they've gotten away, so they can slow down to a more sane speed, and then pick them up when they stop for gas, food, or some other kind of rest.

      --
      If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
  67. Because surely... by bradleyland · · Score: 2, Funny

    Because surely, standing on the side of the road wailing on your car with a hammer is an effective means of avoiding pursuit.

  68. Will not work by failedlogic · · Score: 2, Funny

    As we've all grown up in the virtual crime world of Grand Theft Auto, as soon as our car gets 'tagged' by law enforcement, you just have to go and steal a new car!

  69. Actually, I have lost power steering. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    You can hardly turn the wheel when you *aren't moving*. At highway speeds it's much much easier to turn the wheel without assistance. So easy in fact that some systems ADD resistance to make the steering experience more consistant. A system with ABS breaks in which the ABS has failed becomes a system with regular hydraulic brakes. Which on a dry day is no different from the ABS system anyway. If there are traction issues, you're simply going to have to learn to pump, and learn fast.

    Cars are not like fighter jets. They are designed to fail gracefully.

    Ok, if you have a complete fly-by-wire system, I can see how you'd get into trouble, but even electric steering is actually electric-assisted-steering. We should resist attempts to put full drive-by-wire systems in cars though.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    1. Re:Actually, I have lost power steering. by gmack · · Score: 1

      If we ever did go completely drive by wire a saftey can be added that engages the breaks if the system goes down.

    2. Re:Actually, I have lost power steering. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had the belt that drove the power steering pump break just as I was approaching a curve in the road, which was less than 30 degrees. My speed was about 100-110 mph, and I just barely kept from hitting the divider wall. So, don't count on the system always failing gracefully. If the belt hadn't broken and it was just the engine cutting out, then it might've been easier to steer.

    3. Re:Actually, I have lost power steering. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im sure that an example of this mechanism would be the brakes on a trailer...of course that's if the trailer breaks free from the towing vehicle. The breaks engage to bring the trailer to a stop, although I bet it wouldn't be to pretty.

  70. A smarter system by Deadstick · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...would be a 20mm cannon. That way when the cop misses the fugitive car and hits a pedestrian, the pedestrian won't be around to file the lawsuit.

    rj

  71. how is this +4 insightful?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you complain the parent post appears to have been from someone who has "never driven a car," but I wonder if you've ever driven a car in anything close to the circumstances you describe.

    modern braking and steering systems are designed dependent upon the motor running.. without the power steering pump and power brakes, your steering/braking ability will be negligible. but.. the worst issue is the fact that the car will probably still be in gear, which means with a dead motor, either the motor will have to turn, or the wheels will lock.. best case, this will explode the motor/transmission, but more likely, the wheels will completely lock. as someone who actually has driven a motorcycle on several occasions when the motor suddenly dropped out, i can tell you for certain that when your drive wheels lock suddenly, most drivers would not be able to recover control of the vehicle.

    1. Re:how is this +4 insightful?? by hungrygrue · · Score: 1

      You think that the engine will lock due to an electrical failure? I would love to see an explanation of that one. I don't know of any engine with a "throw rod now" button. If you are still in gear, then yes the engine will still be turning as you coast to a stop. Of course, as long as the engine is turning then you also still have power brakes and steering as well.

    2. Re:how is this +4 insightful?? by karnal · · Score: 1

      This isn't a flame... but you do realize that most people nowadays haven't ever driven a car with a "rod"?? :)

      I'm gonna cringe when I have to change out the timing CHAINS (2) on my Grand Marquis.... Pushrods are so much easier...

      --
      Karnal
    3. Re:how is this +4 insightful?? by hungrygrue · · Score: 1

      That is not what is meant in this context. The "rod" that will be poking through the side of your engine block when you decide to run at 6,000 RPM with no oil for an hour is the CONNECTING ROD... That thar thing that ties your piston to your crank. The only engines that you will find without these would engines without pistons, ie an electric motor or a wankle or other rotary engine. Nice try, though.

    4. Re:how is this +4 insightful?? by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      No rods? Then what pray tell is it that pushes the PISTONS up and down? Few of us are driving rotary Wankels.

      Surely you have the pushrod used to actuate valves from rockers off of a cam confused with the rod attached to the piston? Many cars no longer have pushrods as they are overhead cam (as opposed to cam ni block) and actuate valves directly from the cam using a rocker or follower....

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    5. Re:how is this +4 insightful?? by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah - and what do pushrods and chains have to do with one another? Suggest checking yourself into a clinic on automotive basics ;-)

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
  72. Re: police, Big Mother by paddleonward · · Score: 1

    The cops didn't care about the car. Say you want your stolen car back, OK, but the cops just want to beat the shit out of the person who did not do what they wanted them do do. Eventually the world will be one old lady with lots of money and everyone else a cop. I guess that would make her "GOD". If my family member was killed as a "bystander" in a shot out or chase, I would ask the old lady to terminate those in charge down to those involved. Using the same method.

  73. the power steering in many recent GM cars... by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    Like the Vette, Malibu, etc. are all electric. Like hydraulic power steering there is a mechanical linkage in there too, but it doesn't work as well as the power steering. So if the power steering were to deactivate from the EMP you would lose much of your ability to steer. If the EMP instead cause it to malfunction, you might lose all your ability to steer.

    Come to think of it, EMP a new Vette (C6) and you won't be able to unlock the doors from the outside. That'd provide an interesting situation once the car actually came to a stop.

    Beyond this, if you are one moment doing 80 and suddenly lose power steering and power brakes due to your engine stalling, you're going to increase your chances of running over something you didn't intend to hit, at 80mph. Lawsuit time.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:the power steering in many recent GM cars... by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      Once again, DOT regs require the car be controllable in the event of an engine failure. It might require more steering effort (mostly at slow speed - even drive a nonpower steering car?), more braking effort and distance to stop.

  74. Anti-Tagging Preparation by Whatsitfor · · Score: 1

    So now that we know if the "new" methods used by law enforcement, it's time to add another prep to the plan:

    Criminal - "Hmmm. Time to go buy a case of "PAM Cooking Spray" to spray the car before I rob the next bank."

  75. does that circle include places to hide? by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    You talk about helicopter-less chases. I just don't see how this works without a helicopter. If you don't have a helicopter, all you'll do is recover the car. The criminals will be gone. I guess that's better than nothing, but it's only slightly better than if you don't have this device at all (you don't get the car or the criminals).

    As to the idea of holding a circle around the car, if the criminal drives fast, you have to move the circle fast. That means the cops are still driving the same speed as the speeding car, only now there is an area several blocks across with cars whizzing around in it.

    And how big is this circle? I think the smallest circle you could hold without cars actually driving in reverse on the front side and without the criminal seeing you do it (and thus driving extra fast and dangerous, thus defeating the purpose) is probably a 3 block radius or so. That's gonna take a lot of cars and encompass a lot of houses and other places to hide. Criminals will just ditch the car in a neighborhood where they know some people or places to hide, and then disappear into a house. You won't find them.

    Really, the chopper with IR sensing is key.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
  76. Not this ship, Sister! by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1
    Are they away?
    They have just made the jump into hyperspace.
    You're sure the homing beacon is secure aboard their ship? I'm taking an awful risk, Vader. This had better work.

    - - - -

    Not a bad bit of rescuing, huh? You know, sometimes I even amaze myself.
    That doesn't sound too hard. Besides, they let us go. It's the only explanation for the ease of our escape.
    Easy...you call that easy?!?
    They're tracking us!
    Not this ship, sister!

  77. Yes but the question is. . . by NetRAVEN5000 · · Score: 1
    . . . can they tag a person racing on a goped with it?

    (It's a pretty sweet video - a guy on a goped races a 2001 Trans Am with a 150hp shot of nitrous. . . and wins.)

  78. He's getting away! by Panaphonix · · Score: 1

    Don't worry chief, we tagged that car "getting away".

  79. Russian helicopter technique by r00t · · Score: 1
    I like what the Russians do. There was a special Cops episode filmed over there. The bad guys had a van full of caviar. The helecopter machine-gunned the van's engine.

    This is much safer than what we do here in the USA. Here, we shoot from ground level. Sure, we shoot low to get the tires, but the bullets could easily miss or bounce. Vertical shots have a superior backstop and a better target. The helicopter is probably more stable than a swerving cop car too, allowing for more accurate shots.

    Why the heck don't we authorize this over here? Some FAA thing or a DoD power grab?

    1. Re:Russian helicopter technique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the USA, firing a weapon is considered use of deadly force. Deadly force is used only when necessary. Only rarely is someone driving a car, despite speed and behavior, considered so dangerous that deadly force should be used to stop the car.

    2. Re:Russian helicopter technique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In the USA, firing a weapon is considered use of deadly force. Deadly force is used only when necessary. Only rarely is someone driving a car, despite speed and behavior, considered so dangerous that deadly force should be used to stop the car.

      Actually, they already use "deadly force" to stop some cars. I was watching a show on Discovery about "the pick" (a maneuver where you pull up slightly along side and turn into the suspect's car), and they said that it was considered deadly force. So I suspect the machine-gun-from-helicopter is not used because of PR problems, not legal problems. This is the same reason that the police no longer use electric batons (aka, cattle prods); the police really liked them as a relatively nonviolent way to stop a suspect (better than shooting or pummeling him), but there was too much of a fuss over the similarity to cattle prods.

    3. Re:Russian helicopter technique by fluffy99 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the little known Constitutional Amendment called "freedom from cruel and unusual punishment"? Somehow I don't think attempting to murder a fleeing suspect is an appropriate law enforcement response.

    4. Re:Russian helicopter technique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean the PIT maneuver.

    5. Re:Russian helicopter technique by CoachS · · Score: 1

      I think you're watching too much TV.

      1) Cops in the USA do not shoot out the tires of fleeing suspects. They're not allowed to shoot at moving vehicles except under the most dire circumstances. And they certainly don't do it from a moving cop car.

      They use spike strips or other similar techniques to try and take out the tires. Not bullets.

      2) What you're suggesting is having roving gunships flying over major cities and opening fire with large caliber automatic weapons in heavily populated areas. Aside from the inherent Stalin-esque quality of that it's extremely difficult for a moving helicopter to hit just the engine on a moving vehicle. As often as not they'd end up wounding or killing some or all of those inside the car.

      -B-

      --
      Perhaps the world's greatest tragedy is that ignorance is not impotence.
    6. Re:Russian helicopter technique by instarx · · Score: 1

      I like what the Russians do. There was a special Cops episode filmed over there. The bad guys had a van full of caviar. The helecopter machine-gunned the van's engine.

      Why the heck don't we authorize this over here? Some FAA thing or a DoD power grab?


      The thinking is that helicopters are always unarmed so that criminals do not shoot at them, news copters, or rescue copters. Also, bullets fired at helicopters could kill innocent people miles away.

  80. "GPS Position" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who gets annoyed by this? Why don't they just say "lattitude/longitude".... or just "coordinates"

  81. carjacking by r00t · · Score: 1

    Sure. Now, instead of driving his own car, the crook has to carjack to get a fresh vehicle. Nice...

  82. or.. by AkA+lexC · · Score: 0

    for repeat offenders, a golf-ball sized grenade..

    YEEHAAAW!

    Am i seriously the only one who isnt interested in whether or not 90% of these people live or die? (the 10% are-like in the article- innocent passengers)

    --
    -AlexC
  83. Isn't this slashdot? by Khaed · · Score: 1

    Where re the posts complaining about privacy invasion?! Where are the "OMG Bush is stealing our freedom" posts?! The sky is falling! A technoligical government advance hasn't brought on a horde of posts complaining about how they should need a warrant to do this!

    1. Re:Isn't this slashdot? by chucks86 · · Score: 1

      First, this was designed by a private company, not a government organization, so this isn't considered a "technoligical government advance". Also, Bush didn't force the StarChase to develop this technology, nor did he force the LAPD to test it. Second, you don't need a warrant for probable cause, and I would certainly think that someone running from the police counts as such. Third, your privacy is not protected in your vehicle. Finally, as previously stated, Bush had nothing to do with this story, and your mentioning him is way off-topic.

      --
      Help a poor college student. Send a couple cents via paypal to chucks86@gmail.com
    2. Re:Isn't this slashdot? by Khaed · · Score: 1

      Except for where I'm mocking the typical slashbots. You took my post as serious. It was not. I thought including the line about the sky falling was obvious. I woke up in a snarky, sarcastic mood.

  84. Good anti-idiot idea by Animats · · Score: 1
    Crooks who get into car chases are generally idiots. After all, it usually happens because the crook screwed up. Most of the time, the chase ends when the idiot hits something.

    My favorite dumb chase were the kids who had a moderate-speed chase for many miles up US 101 to San Francisco. The CHP just followed them, not trying hard to pull them over. The kids exited 101 at the last San Francisco exit, and turned into an alley. The alley led down a ramp and into a building. At which point, heavy doors closed behind them. They'd driven into the loading ramp of SF's main jail.

  85. ^bump^ by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

    Oops, you're right http://auto.howstuffworks.com/power-brake.htm/prin table

    I confused the brake booster with a vacuum pump.

    I can only imagine that if the engine died while still in gear, you'd get a hell of a lot of engine braking.

    Either way, I don't think the results would be all that safe in the end.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:^bump^ by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      Depends on the car. I've had the engine stall while driving down the road in an older car, and it kept rolling along at about 25 mph until I stood on the brakes hard enough.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  86. GitS already had this by randomErr · · Score: 0

    This is old news, Ghost in the Shell had this years ago. Can't reality catch with anime already?!

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
  87. Re:Ok... by Alsee · · Score: 1

    The best is still a chopper with night vision, so when the perp leaves the car they can be followed. After all, the value is in getting the criminal.

    I thought the value was in getting the criminal... on tape.
    For the next episode of World's Wildest Police Videos.

    What's the value in actually catching the criminal? Then you just have to spend money on a court case to prosecute him. That's a net loss, unless it happens to be Michael Jackson or OJ Simpson or someone with major merchandizing opportunities.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  88. I could be wrong... by jd · · Score: 1
    But I think a variant of this pre-dates Spiderman. "Sticky bombs" - grenades that used an impact adhesive of some kind to stick to vehicles - are a fairly old idea. It sounds as though somebody has refined the idea, improved the glue so that it's much more effective, and used a radio transmitter rather than an explosive charge.


    There's no question that Spiderman would have used impact adhesives - he would want the web he launched to stick specifically to what he wanted and not to anything else. This would be an effective way to achieve exactly that. It would be interesting to know what ways such glues ARE used - both in the Real World and the Comic Book Universe.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  89. Re:Ok... by hackstraw · · Score: 1

    The best is still a chopper with night vision, so when the perp leaves the car they can be followed. After all, the value is in getting the criminal.

    Another Republican ideal. Spend millions of dollars on helicopters with night vision in order to catch a teenager that boosts a car. Oh, and we'll lower your taxes too.

    Personally, I believe that legislators should make it a severe felony to evade the police regardless of whatever they are suspected of. Its easy to get a conviction once caught, and maybe the fear of prison will make people think twice about evading the police. As it is now, its not much of a crime, and basically worth the risk of getting caught or killed and/or killing bystanders.

  90. A hell of a lot simpler by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

    Would be to just make traffic cops work on commission. Hell, they could be independent, non-employees, for that matter. Make it licensed, and require some conviction rate.

    When have you ever seen some fucktard, turning left at an intersection, trying to sneek through a yellow, who cant clear the intersection and blocks the whole fucking thing ever get a ticket? Never. Commission traffic cops could retire in a day off asshats like that alone.

  91. Put a sheen on your 'shine. by Pinback · · Score: 1

    Dang. Now it is going to be illegal to cruise the 'hood with your car coated in nonstick spray. Pam sales are going to be way down.

  92. It might work, but ... by cwsulliv · · Score: 1

    it'll be a bit difficult to hit the car once the driver tromps on the gas pedal and takes off. So a policeman will probably have to tag every car he's intending to pull over, "just in case".

    If the glue is as good as the news release claims, then every poor slob who gets stopped for any reason will be faced with a large bill for repairing the damage to his car's paint job.

  93. Great! by joshjoneswas · · Score: 0

    So, we tag them with the GPS golf ball.... then call of the pursuit so they slow down and the maniacs don't kill anybody... And then we watch them on a GPS map.... sounds great...

    But what happens when they get out of the car and run or switch cars?

  94. Pursuit Management Task Force said no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked with a funder to develop a similar vehicle tagging system. However, I told the funder that the fleeing vehicle tagging system was already nixed by the "Pursuit Management Task Force", making it one of the lowest priority systems for federal funding. It would've been a huge flop had a bunch of money been poured into it. How somebody else comes along claiming history does not exist is either a fool or great salesperson.

    I dumped the project upon finding this report: http://www.justnet.org/pdffiles/pmtf.pdf

    which concludes about tagging system that:

    "Tagging systems have their drawbacks as well. Unless aided by helicopter or
    other air support tracking, it is easier for suspects in a tagged vehicle to elude capture. If helicopters are readily available, the need for tagger/tracker technology is significantly mitigated. The deployment system requires a high degree of accuracy; anytime a projectile is launched there is some degree of hazard. Finally, tagging systems do not cause a fleeing or reckless vehicle to stop; unsafe or dangerous acts by the driver continue unabated until the driver decides to stop or the vehicle otherwise becomes disabled.

    Because of these drawbacks, tagging systems are seen by the PMTF to have
    limited potential for significantly impacting police pursuits."

  95. Respray by benow · · Score: 1

    If you dive into a respray booth when in high persuit, they'll be sufficiently confused and stop the persuit...

    Ahhh, grand theft auto... obviously realistic enough to get some politicians and parents panties in a knot... or maybe it just challenges the 'work or starve' mentality.

  96. Keep it simple stupid... by canning · · Score: 1

    Kiss - Keep it simple stupid.

    The genius in this idea is in it's simplicity. Sure the idea is dated and millions have thought of it but these guys had the guts to exectue it.

    The bottom line is anything will help. I think this is a winner.

    --
    I love the smell of Karma in the morning
  97. Transitional object by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most, if not all new cars are equipped with gps spy equipment. These stories are just to get people to say, "Hey, let's use OnStar to track criminals!!!" When in reality the plan all along was to track everybody, not just criminals. You can see this technique used all day long on television. The real goal of these stories is encouraging people to forget 4th Amendment protections and learn (or be forced) to accept 24/7 tracking and tracing. The original Star Trek series introduced us to what was planned to come: flip style communicators, scanning, asking the computer where somebody is, etc. Once tracking and tracing is a reality you can then move to a cashless system because with track and trace identity is always known. God help us.

  98. Canadian RCMP do not chase motorcycles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative


    If you really want to get away from the cops, buy a motorcycle.


    RCMP in Canada will not chase speeding motorcyles; the chase with an untrained driver is likely to end up in death, and they're not going to be able to keep up. A speeding ticket isn't worth a death sentence for the driver of the motorcycle.

    Makes me wonder what they do in the US.

    For what it's worth; it is a myth that police cars are fast. The interceptors are only fast on freeways, where you are unlikely to gain the speed differential needed to escape. They're very heavy. If you are in a sports car with performance tires, and know something about driving, you can outrun a police car very easily on a secondary road. The only question is if they can radio ahead to have someone block the road. Most areas do not have enough police coverage to do this.

  99. Use Giant Magnets Instead by Ranger · · Score: 1

    Why not outfit a large helicopter like a Chinook with a giant electromagnet? They could just hover over the car and lift it right off the street. And if the people in the car get unruly they can shout down with a bullhorn. "Don't make me drop this car!"

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  100. George Carlin by hawk · · Score: 1

    wasn't it George Carlin who proposed issuing darts to drivers, so that you could shoot them at obnoxious drivers, and anyone accumulating three "*** darts" would automatically have his license revoked?

    hawk

  101. F*CK THE POLICE! by Wikipedia · · Score: 0

    Just kidding. They can take away my 1929 ford when they pry it from my cold dead hands

    --
    P2P Anonymous Distributed Web Search: http://www.yacy.net/
  102. Unlikely by Bilbo · · Score: 1
    First, as a gazilion of other people have already said, if you stop to get out of the car and try to remove/disable the device, you've probably already been caught.

    Second, recall that this thing is designed to be shout of a high powered air-gun, slam into the back/side of a speeding car, and stick there. I kinda sorta expect that it's not what we would describe as "delicate" electronics. More likely, at least three quarters of the mass of that golf-ball sized package is impact absorbing material and reinforcing. Stick that up against a rather flimsy backing of sheet metal (as opposed to a concrete floor), and hitting it with a hammer (assuming you even have one handy) will only dent the body panel it's stuck to.

    --
    Your Servant, B. Baggins
  103. Glue? by HermanAB · · Score: 1

    Hmm, if they have to shoot a glue ball - how about firing a "highly effective" gob of glue in front of the car and glueing it to the road? With the car firmly stuck, the chase is over.

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
  104. Yeah . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's like when your sister glues your hand to the car [. . .]

    I hate it when that happens.

  105. Booth by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    I am related to him... My grandmother's maiden name was "Booth" and we are from Memphis...

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  106. Get it to stick by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    I feel your pain dude....When I play spiderman with my girlfriend I can only get it to cling to her face for a few minutes... Then it usually just drips off. Oh well... ;-)

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  107. Solution: Meta-tagging by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every month or so, certain priviledged drivers would be given tags to tag other taggers. When they someone tag a driver unfairly, they can throw a tag on top. These tags might have the values "unfair", "green eyed monster", "tree hugging hippie", and so on.... ;)

  108. You know you play too much WoW, when... by Cappy+Red · · Score: 1

    You know you play too much WoW, when you read this story and think: "Hey! It makes the car appear on the minimap! I wonder if it also puts a large red arrow above it and prevents it from stealthing!"

    --
    This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
  109. I disagree by jesterzog · · Score: 1

    Why, exactly, would you ever begin to think that the car would suddenly become "uncontrollable", regardless of what speed it is traveling just due to a failure of electronics?

    I know of at least one person (through my girlfriend) who died because her friend in the passenger seat thought it'd be a fun joke to lean across and turn the keys off in the ignition. The sudden unexpected loss of electronic brakes and power steering caused the driver to lose control, and drive off the road. I know of another person who had a serious accident because his mentally disabled passenger thought it'd be funny to pull up the hand brake and stop the car on a high speed road along the side of a hill. I personally nearly had what could have been a serious accident when I lost power steering as the car I was driving stalled in an awkward part of a road. I feel quite fortunate that I noticed quickly enough that the car wasn't responding as I'd expected it to, and was able to recover.

    Even if you can still force the brakes or the steering, suddenly and dramatically changing how the car will react is asking for trouble. Sometimes a driver will be able to stop safely, but don't be surprised if it results in a serious accident.

    1. Re:I disagree by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      Brakes aren't electronic unless it's a hybrid or some other newly minted car with weird controls and even then there are hydraulic or mechanical backups - even on drive by wire. If this person really did lose control in this manner (friend of a friend of a friend - checked Snopes??) then it was their inexperience that killed them not some oddity of the car's behaviour. Let me guess, it was some teen right? No years behind the wheel and they probably freaked out over this? Pretty stupid.

      My girlfriend used to think this was a big deal too and we talked about it while driving down the road once. I was driving and to prove a point I reached down and flipped off the ignition - she freaked! For about 5 seconds till she realized that duh, we were fine and the car was coasting normally at highway speeds. Flipped it back to "run" (stick shift) and drove on normally having lost just a little bit of speed. No scary steering, brakes were fine (vac from motor...), and it was a no biggie once she realized the thing wasn't going to explode. She felt pretty silly about it as will you if you ever bother to try this and realize your thoughts of imminent doom are misplaced. ;-)

      In an auto it's a little more involved. There's a fluid connection to the engine that won't be strong enough to turn over the motor for a restart and the silly thing won't crank in gear. (lol) No biggie, slip it into Neutral, turn key to crank, start motor, put it into Drive. Wow, pretty traumatic huh? Brakes will get spongy, steering will be heavier but fine unless stopped. The twit who suggested you'll flat-spot tires somehow or need a special frame (!) is on drugs. The car can even be driven without power steering even if it has power steering from the factory, the steering will just be heavier. Brakes are the least safe but you know what - I'd rather the cop decide when to screw the car up and maybe crash it then wait for the jerk to lose it on his own. Most high speed pursuits end in property damage and many end in death, better to let the cop decide where and when to throw a wrench in things than wait until the moron loses it on his own.

      Honestly I'd be most worried about electrocuting the passengers than I would be the moron behind the wheel losing control. He's going to lose it anyway, might as well choose where....

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
  110. Car 57? by mbbaker · · Score: 1

    My feeble mind remembers car 54 not car 57.

  111. Launching device by mulhall · · Score: 1

    "The device is the size of a golf ball, can be launched via an air-powered shooter attached to police vehicles..."

    In other news, Police Drive for New Recruits:
    http://www.ok-golf.com/images/facilities/golf-rang e.jpg