|
Liberal logic at work (Page 4/5) |
|
MidEngineManiac
|
AUG 29, 07:40 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by fredtoast:
Should we also do away with all fire code regulations because it is our responsibility to make sure our home does not burn down and the fire departments responsibility to p[ut out fires. Do away with all health department codes for restaurants because it is our responsibility to make sure our own food is safe and doctors responsibility to cure us of food poisoning?
|
|
YUP !
I am aaaaaaallllllllllllll in favor of removing every-single-last warning label and letting Darwin sort things out.
Stupid is supposed to hurt.
|
|
|
MidEngineManiac
|
AUG 30, 06:32 AM
|
|
It aint just Chicago..... https://torontosun.com/news...ue-to-vehicle-thefts
And Freddy, when you ***** about the profit motive, you seem to be forgetting there is one and only one reason these jackwads are stealing cars. And it AINT to take granny to Sunday brunch.
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
AUG 30, 07:46 AM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by MidEngineManiac:
It aint just Chicago..... https://torontosun.com/news...ue-to-vehicle-thefts
And Freddy, when you ***** about the profit motive, you seem to be forgetting there is one and only one reason these jackwads are stealing cars. And it AINT to take granny to Sunday brunch. |
|
I would expect the insurance company to want to compensate itself... but I blame this phenomenon more on viral social media more than anything else.
FIRST ... there are a lot of cars that, like the KIA / Hyundai, can be stolen in that same manner. But social media has picked the KIA... and so it becomes a thing that people specifically target. SECOND, I blame the local governments in these areas for not properly managing crime with their police force, but also creating the conditions that have led to unemployment and teens with nothing better to do with their time, and THIRD, I blame KIA for not (more) quickly trying to rectify this.
I mean, you could solve this really fast by signing an agreement with a GPS / vehicle tracking company, and including all cars with a GPS tracker that the user has access to. They're like $20 bucks a device, and the service is as cheap as $20 bucks a month... and I'm sure the company could work with them. Even if the car owner doesn't want it... the theif won't know if they have it activated or not...
|
|
|
fredtoast
|
AUG 30, 08:15 AM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by jdv:
Fred, Is it against the law to steal a horse? Is it against the law to steal a car? |
|
Yes it is.
|
|
|
fredtoast
|
AUG 30, 08:17 AM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by MidEngineManiac:
And Freddy, when you ***** about the profit motive, you seem to be forgetting there is one and only one reason these jackwads are stealing cars. And it AINT to take granny to Sunday brunch. |
|
I am against car thieves. You are the one supporting them.
So what is your point?
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
AUG 30, 09:48 AM
|
|
From the Toronto Sun:
quote | One way [that Ontario] drivers can lower their [vehicle insurance] premiums or have the [vehicle insurance] surcharge removed is [by installing] an anti-theft device such as a steering wheel lock or tracking [device] in their [vehicle.] |
|
So "it aint just Chicago," but it supports the "Liberal logic" of the people who are backing this lawsuit against the Korean automaker on behalf of the city of Chicago.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-30-2023).]
|
|
|
Jake_Dragon
|
AUG 30, 10:13 AM
|
|
|
|
MidEngineManiac
|
AUG 30, 10:20 AM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
So "it aint just Chicago," but it supports the "Liberal logic" of the people who are backing this lawsuit against the Korean automaker on behalf of the city of Chicago.
|
|
You dont see a difference between the free consumer choice in Ontario (install a tracker, drive something else, pay the 500, switch insurance companies) and FORCING the manufacturer (and all consumers) to do it and pay for it for you ?
No difference at all ?
More liberal logic at work.
The kind of logic that resulted in us not having simple, cheap reliable cars anymore.[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 08-30-2023).]
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
AUG 30, 01:38 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by MidEngineManiac:
You dont see a difference between the free consumer choice in Ontario (install a tracker, drive something else, pay the 500, switch insurance companies) and FORCING the manufacturer (and all consumers) to do it and pay for it for you ?
No difference at all ?
More liberal logic at work.
The kind of logic that resulted in us not having simple, cheap reliable cars anymore. |
|
"FORCING" the manufacturer?
If the city of Chicago's lawsuit prevails, the manufacturer will have a choice between providing satisfaction to the city of Chicago on this matter, or whatever their other option(s) would be. I don't know about their other options. Maybe they would choose to stop providing vehicles for the U.S. market that do not include an anti-theft immobilizer as standard equipment.
Unlike MidEngineManiac, I am not going to prejudge this lawsuit.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-30-2023).]
|
|
|
MidEngineManiac
|
AUG 30, 01:50 PM
|
|
Thats really easy done if those 2 manufacturers have a brain between them.
Simple software/TOS update to "ban" the use of those vehicles inside the city of nutbars (ANY city of nutbars)......In compliance with the lawsuit
Then when allllllll those hundreds of thousands of customers start bitchin they cant use their cars in the city of Loonie-land, tell them to go sue the city. The manufacturer just complied.
aaannndddd FUUUCCCKKKKK YYYOOOUUUUUU city ! There is your G-D satisaction.
(Really ???? a city thinks they can dictate standards to the entire globe ??? or that a global manufacturer can be bother building special editions just for them ??? Entitled lefties are gettin dumber by the day)
Balls in their court. Deal with a few hundred car thieves, or deal with hundreds of thousands if irate consumers.[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 08-30-2023).]
|
|
|
|