Congress Just Signed "The Four-Wheeled Patriot Act"

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Eric Peters via,

Whenever Congress does something unanimously (or nearly so) you can rest assured it’s in their interests, not ours.

The USA Patriot Act comes to mind.

Another is the Safely Ensuring Lives Future Deployment and Research in Vehicle Evolution Act – aka the SELF DRIVE Act – which was rubber stamped through Congress the other day. This is the law that exempts automated cars from the safety requirements that apply to autonomous cars – that is, the cars which are independent of government control and controlled by us.

Just as the Patriot Act was written, not to “fight terrorism,” but to make it easier for government to terrorize us, by circumventing or simply ignoring the Bill of Rights.

Same operating principle behind both.

There is irony – and malevolence – here.

Irony, because the same government that endlessly croons about “safety” – when it suits – is willing to back burner safety when it suits. If a car company dared to even suggest that it might be a good idea to install air bag Off switches in new cars (and it would be a very good idea, if safety is a concern, given how dangerous air bags are; not can be, but are) that company would be the focus of great abuse if not threatened prosecution.

Meanwhile, the SELF DRIVE Act will exempt automated cars from the necessity – under laws that apply to autonomous cars – of having things like steering wheels and brake pedals and other controls by which a human might intervene to save himself in the event the automated car makes a mistake.

It is presumed automated cars will never make a mistake, that their systems and technology are immune to defects, wear and tear and so forth.

You know. Like air bags are.

It’s not very “safe.”

And yet, it slid through Congress like shit through a goose.

It’s worth noting that no one is suggesting commercial airliners – which already have the ability to fly themselves, including take-off and landing – do so without human pilots standing by to step in just in case. Much less have cockpit controls removed and the now ex-pilots told to go watch a movie back in Coach.


Why is it acceptable to do exactly that with machines that are more dangerous, en masse, than airliners simply by dint of numbers? There are only a few thousand airliners flying on any given day.

How many millions of cars are out there?    

And the cars – the automated ones of The Future – will not be subject to the strict, FAA-style inspection and maintenance protocols that apply to airliners because it’s simply not feasible (leaving aside the money) to have millions of cars brought into a facility for close examination of all their critical bits and pieces, preemptively replacing many of them according to a specific time/mileage schedule as a necessary precaution against the inevitably increasing risk of a failure based on wear and tear.

No one mentions this fact.

Nor the fact that without some way for a human driver to assume control of the automated car when an inevitable failure occurs, whether from wear and tear or a defect or some other reason, the human will be utterly powerless to do anything to save himself.

And we will have no choice but to get in and hope for the best – because vehicle automation will not be a matter of choice. Stevie Wonder can see what’s coming. Automated car technology will be mandated; the SELF DRIVE Act being the preparatory groundwork. It standardizes things at the federal level; gives the federal regulatory apparat the power to nudge.

And malevolence?

Well, there is the obvious malice of exposing people to a known risk, of a piece with air bags; the deliberate thwarting of any way to reduce that risk – as by not allowing the car companies to install air bag Off switches – and by passing a law that will permit manufacturers of automated cars to build them without any controls which could be used to control them, in the event they go haywire.

Which they will.

Just like your smartphone or PC. Technology isn’t infallible; things wear out and break down. Exposure to heat and cold, to moisture and potholes jarring the works. What works fine today may not tomorrow – and one day, will not work fine.

What then?

But there is another layer of malice, a deeper cut.

Leaving aside the outright reckless disregard for Our Safety, the SELF DRIVE  Act – like the USA Patriot Act – is an outright attack upon ourselves. Upon our right to not be herded and tracked like the residents of an ant farm.

Has anyone stopped to think about the information an automated car would collect – and store and transmit? It would know, for instance, when you go to work each day – and when you come home. Where you stopped along the way – and for how long. The route you took – and whether you took a different route last Thursday.

It would, in brief, know every last detail about every movement you made that wasn’t made on foot. It will probably know who is in the car, too. There may be audio and video recording. We know this has already happened with smartphones and even “smart” home appliances such as “smart” TVs that listen in to our conversations and transmit them to . . . somewhere.

The authors and promoters of the SELF DRIVE Act cross their hearts and hope to die that there will privacy “safeguards,” that we have nothing to worry about. Three words ought to throw water on that: USA Patriot Act.

We were assured of its innocuousness as well; no worries! It was all for our – yes – “safety.”

It is of course too late now, as before. The thing got passed hurriedly and with very little media coverage, which might have made a difference and which probably explains the lack of media coverage.

When something important to them needs to get done, it gets done.

Perhaps the “Moms” will say something. The ones who marinate in “safety,” who have made it the driving principle of our beaten down, submit and obey American culture. But probably not. Because “safety” has never been the issue, just the window dressing. The excuse to achieve the true objective.

Which, by now, even Stevie Wonder can see.   

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
ZippyBananaPants's picture

I want a ride with Stevie!

knukles's picture

Honest Officer, the screen turned blue right before it veered off the road!
Stevie?  Oh, we left him back at the trailer park with the elderly Hello Kitty sisters.

Bigly's picture

I will never, ever buy one of those. Ever.*

*If I am blind and my license is yanked...maybe but probably still NO

Icewater Enema's picture

You won't get to choose. They will make you buy one. They will ban regular cars because humans can 't be trusted to make the same "intelligent" driving decisions as quickly as a computer. What I'm trying to figure out is how lawyers make money off of this. 

hedgeless_horseman's picture


Great article, Eric.  Thank you.

Kotzbomber747's picture

"...commercial airliners – which already have the ability to fly themselves, including take-off and landing..."

Bullshit. Aircraft can do autolands, but no automatic take offs.

Curiously_Crazy's picture

He also totally forgets that only major airports have the facility for a guided landing. Not to mention the need for someone to communicate with air traffic control - they have to be cleared for an approach, and are often vectored into holding patterns - there are countless variables on who gets to come in first and it's often not 'first come first serve'.

It probably wasn't the best analogy to use.

Excursionist's picture

Screw analogies and try this on for size..  let the free market prevail.  If no one buys vehicles lacking pedals and steering wheels, then automotive OEMs won't make 'em.  Simple.

Yeah, the Congress is a corrupt whorehouse.  Not news and certainly doesn't warrant a breathless post on a site with Libertarian leanings.

Farmerz's picture

Old people will buy them, when they can't drive themselves anymore.

PTR's picture

In the words of Boris K: If free market not assist sales goal of manufacturer, manufacturer use Congress lobby to encourage free market.

divingengineer's picture

Auto landing works with the ILS.

Moving and Grooving's picture

I had to check on auto takeoffs.


Apparently, it isn't allowed. Large airliners usually engage autopilot at ~500'.


The current autopilot systems are capable of executing the roll out from the end of the runway into the air, however, as demonstated by the large military drones like Reapers - they auto takeoff and land almost every flight. I gather it has to do with commercial airport congestion and prioritization of aircraft. As was noted by someone else, there are just too many variables in that environment.


So - you're apparently correct!




Green2Delta's picture

His articles are usually full of great information. Unfortunately it's usually on the depressing side for those of us that see the government noose tightening around our necks. 

new game's picture

fuk the future. looking grim. just too many fuking idiots everywhere. or is it, just plain and simple, too many fuking humans.

plez, bring the purge soooon. it is getting to the point where there is nowhere to get away,(hardly).

but I have a few in snota. i'll try the middle of a cedar swamp-LOL...

ok, that was my doom rant.

have a wonderfull snowflake free weekend...

Pool Shark's picture


Now, all you'll need to steal a car is one of these:

[Betcha Congress didn't think of that...]

tmosley's picture

>It is presumed automated cars will never make a mistake

No, it is assumed that humans have terrible reaction times and that AI does and will continue to make far fewer (and far less deadly) mistakes.

And, once again, can't turn off the bold font.

lil dirtball's picture

> can't turn off the bold font

It looks good on you and fits your maniacal style. It also makes your nonsense easier to spot. You should keep it.

tmosley's picture

Sadly, it only happens when I paste formatted text.

But nice non-argument.

Andre's picture

Sure. Like Garmin telling me to exit into a K-rail put up for road repair.

Take phones away from women, or automatically disable texting while a car's engine is turned on - THAT would be a safety feature.

Billy the Poet's picture

The guy who can't turn off bold on the merits of a machine driven life.

N2OJoe's picture

An oldie but a goodie:

At a recent computer exposition, Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated: “If General Motors had kept up with the technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon.”

In response to Bill’s comments, GM issued a press release stating: “If General Motors had developed technology like Microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics:

  1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
  2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
  3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason, you would simply accept this.
  4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
  5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive – but would run on only five percent of the roads.
  6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single “General Protection Fault” warning light.
  7. The airbag system would ask “Are you sure?” before deploying.
  8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna.
  9. Every time GM introduced a new car, car buyers would have to learn to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.
  10. You’d have to press the “Start” button to turn the engine off.
lil dirtball's picture

+1 Lol

Wait'll he can't find his 'wallet'.

Lost My Shorts's picture

If they ever unanimously pass the "Insuring Comfortable Rectums for the American People" act, run away quick.

swmnguy's picture

You mean the "ICRAP" Act?  Or is that "iCrap"?

Moving and Grooving's picture

'What I'm trying to figure out is how lawyers make money off of this.'


Someone will have to negotiate the insurance scams that will be performed by the insurance companies and the cops. Seems to me that our current lawyers will be perfect.

LotUnsold's picture

Perfect for insurers.  No accidents and no payouts so the compulsory premiums go directly to the guys at the top.  

This is too easy to decipher.

sleigher's picture

"You won't get to choose. They will make you buy one."

If it comes to that then it is time.  EMP guns whatever it takes.

BrownCoat's picture

Icewater Enema,

No fault insurance cut lawyers out decades ago.

OpTwoMistic's picture

If I am not driving.  I do not need insurance.  Thanks.   

yogibear's picture

Someone just has to release some tinsle out the window to make the system shut down.

The radar gets confused.

Heywood Jablomi's picture

good. i fucking hate the way people drive. you are all fucking babies. time to take away your driving privileges. take that, fucking cunts.

Cynicles II's picture

Always tracked and monitored. Location always know. No more freedom to drive where one wants, no driving in the desert or in the forrest etc.

More oppression, more tyranny

RichardParker's picture

I suppose we will still be able to use a bicycle to maintain privacy...

Ignatius's picture

You mean the one that comes with the irremovable helmet, training wheels, built-in GPS and the mile-counting auto-tax?

swmnguy's picture

What are local units of government and law enforcement going to do without all the revenue from drunk driving, idiocy, speeding, cell-phone collisions, etc.?  That's what worries me.

Ignatius's picture

That faggot's only been here for 5 weeks.

Troll Probabilty Index is off the charts.

swmnguy's picture

Well, as long as they hire somebody as reliable as, say, Equifax, to secure my information, I don't mind if the Corporate State has all my information.

peddling-fiction's picture

The men you call "babies" are getting mad at your ilk.

You might shut your pie-hole as the safest way to continue see us drive.

Honk, honk.

Hari_Seldon's picture

Since that would include YOU I'm assuming you forgot the sarc tag.

peddling-fiction's picture

I know how to drive, even rally, but I do not have a car now, nor drive now.

No sarcasm about what I am conveying.

Whether people drive well or not is mostly subjective, unless obvious.

This is about freedom and not walking meekly to hand in your car.

cheeseheader's picture

Friend drives for Lyft (and maybe Uber?), and says the gps is not good w/in 30 yards--like in an apartment complex.  She drives around and around looking for her rider.  Also, it takes her way around the block to make a simple U-turn....Sure, self-driving cars will be greatest thing after sliced bread.

I still think .gov wants us all to be squeezed into high density housing in the cities to make it easier to 'look' after us.




peddling-fiction's picture

Think Japanese pod motels, or youth hostels.

tmosley's picture

I'm with you brother. I'm on the road maybe an hour a day, and not ONE day goes by that I don't see a half a dozen instances where someone takes an utterly pointless risk that either damages their vehicle (like driving fast through floodwater) or getting someone killed (too many ways to list).

Scuba Steve's picture

I hope your little kid get smashed into a million pieces with a Elon test car some day in the future ... a pox upon you bitch.

But I digress.

Stormtrooper's picture

Can't imagine any other course of action for the Convention of States now other than to send a proposed Constitutional amendment to the state legislatures for ratification which abolishes the three branches of the federal government and returns all powers of governance to the 50 separate and sovereign states.  D.C. is a hopeless, unrepairable mess.

Cynicles II's picture

If this were even possible it would be done by pen.

Sounds swell until another bigger state wants your (states) shit, they have more people, better army etc.

any_mouse's picture

The Federal system worked out well for the South. It was not about Slavery. It was about Federal overreach that nullified the Constitution.

If you like your deep state, we are all stuck with it.

JuliaS's picture

Remember how Germans restored the rule of law by voting Nazi's out of the office?

... me neither.