In 2007, Canada started requiring all vehicles to have a cheap, effective anti-theft device. The U.S. didn’t. Now, it is paying the price with a surge in Kia and Hyundai thefts.

103 points

“In 2005, Transport Canada, a federal agency, decided to do something about it. Starting in 2007, it declared, all passenger vehicles sold in Canada would require an engine immobilizer, a basic anti-theft device that uses an electronic signature in the key to unlock the engine. If the key isn’t present, the car can’t be started. This prevents hot wiring and other old-school, brute force methods of stealing cars.”

Saved you a few min.

permalink
report
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Mvp

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Article says it simply never occurred to the US that it should require immobilizers.

permalink
report
reply
27 points

In what people call the greatest nation in the world, thousands of regulators simply never thought of the idea of an immobilizer which is something that was already available on a lot of cars. Sure.

More likely is that auto manufacturers bitched that it would make cars too expensive and it should be voluntary while donating to some legislators campaign.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

They probably wanted to make it an add-on charge that they could add 1000% markup on

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Well they still could, but that would invite attention and regulation.

Maybe they don’t mind them stolen so their customers take the insurance payout and buy a new one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

To be fair, immobilizers were standard at the time. Every manufacturer was already using them because using an immobilizer is just common sense. So making a law requiring them to use immobilizers would be like making a law requiring people to wipe their asses. It would have just been seen as useless because everyone is already doing it and who in their right mind would suddenly just stop wiping their ass. It’s only fairly recently that kia and huandai have suddenly lost their minds and decided to walk around with shit covered asses. Also from what I’ve seen every judge that has looked at the issue is already ruling against them because not including an imobilizer is so willfully stupid that it’s gross negligence.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

No, every other car maker has them, has had them for decades.

Its like not putting a padded seat in your car. Its so stupid that you wouldnt even think to make a law about it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

That would require US politicians to ignore various lobbies (and their $$$) and focus on consumer protections. Don’t see that happening.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

It would require politicians to actually do something, literally anything, that wasn’t motivated by money or meta-political pageantry. Far too much to ask.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

I mean, maybe it’s because engine immobilizers have been standard equipment since 1998, and Hyundai/Kia are the only marques that chose to buck the trend? My family’s Mercury had an immobilizer… in 1995.

permalink
report
reply
45 points

Because it allows car makers to save $5 on each car and pass the savings along to their bank accounts.

permalink
report
reply
15 points
*

This is what blows my mind. Like, cars cost tens of thousands of dollars. No one is going to balk at an extra $5 bucks for this feature. If nothing, it’s worth the cost to the manufacturer in PR terms. Now Hyundai/Kia have a bad reputation for car thefts. I’m sure avoiding that would have been worth the $5.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 22K

    Posts

  • 552K

    Comments