You'll want a kill switch if your new car gets car jacked with a baby inside. Then you'll scream for its use.
#19 | Posted by LauraMohr

What if it's not my baby? And my car is my baby? That someone would kill switch to take away? And perhaps they'll kill switch me too?

But yes, let's give every miscreant who can scrape together a couple bucks the ability to stop cripple our cars whenever they please.

In Donald Trump's second impeachment trial in 2021, the Senate fell 10 votes short of the 67 required for conviction.
#24 | Posted by donnerboy

He was no longer in office and they thought he was out of politics for good. That's not the case this time around, and the American people have made it clear they don't care about Trump's crimes when they elected him in 2024.

IMHO, there's only personal downsides for Republicans if they removed him from office. And we know the vast majority of GOPhers holding office have no principles. Thus the crickets when Trump breaks every law in the book.

It depends upon the specifics, but if this tech allows someone with a control to remotely disable a car on command, I see no possible way this could present a danger to the driving public.

Because criminals would have no way of obtaining such a switch to pull people over in the night on a deserted road to do criminal things to them.

Also, no chance that China would cripple our cars to gridlock our roads when they invade Taiwan in a few short years.

"Illegal alien school superintendent Oleads guilty"

What's an Olead? Is it like an Oface?

"Trump Dumps on NATO Dead in Afghanistan"

And if Republicans don't hold the Senate he is likely to be convicted.
#16 | Posted by donnerboy

Nah, need two-thirds for a conviction. No chance of that.

Trump knows no one can touch him because GOP has no bawlz. Anyone with principles was drummed out of the party years ago when Trumptard won the presidency the first time.

Good call on confirming the murder part.
#20 | Posted by A_Friend

You sure do get worked up about stuff. Wonder how you're going to handle the next 30 years Trump SCOTUS rulings. Like when they would bend over backwards to make sure no cop ever sees the inside of a prison cell.

Jill Stein 2028!

Imagine you are standing in front of my SUV and I suddenly accelerate forward to toward you. If you had the capability to shoot, would you?
#16 | Posted by visitor_

To avoid injury? And you're standing a few inches from the car? Shooting the driver won't make the car magically stop on a dime. Seems to me that stepping out of its way would be the best way to avoid getting hurt.

Policing is a different issue, though. Not just about protecting my well-being.

Thanks for confirming that for everyone, censored.
#15 | Posted by A_Friend

I just calls them like I sees them.

It was a Good shooting.
#5 | Posted by visitor_

Technically true. He hit his target.

And here I was, only trying to school you and correct your absurd assumptions. My bad, sweetheart.
#31 | Posted by A_Friend

Alrighty, I guess that's been enough wrestling in the mud with you for one day.

#26 Sorry, sweetheart. You didn't post a thing about what Ghandi might do today.

You seem to have more faith in the possibility of spontaneous rehab for sexual predators than I do.

It was a pleasure schooling you and correcting you on what you posted.
You're welcome.
#29 | Posted by A_Friend

I posted link to an article about the type of man Gandhi was and you got your panties into a twist over it. No idea why, but whatever floats your boat.

Live in the now.
#23 | Posted by A_Friend

The "now," is a front page post entitled "What Would Gandhi Do?" I just posted some examples from people who have looked into exactly what Gandhi might do.

Curious: Were you spanking yourself when you wrote that?'Cause it certainly looks like you really, really liked posting that.
#18 | Posted by A_Friend

The paraphrase from one of the many writers commenting upon Gandhi sexually exploiting his vulnerable cult members troubles you? Because it reveals Gandhi to be a lech?

He did not have sex with them.

He did not have sex with them.
#8 | Posted by donnerboy

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."
- William Jefferson Clinton

>Gandhi Was a Racist Who Forced Young Girls to Sleep in Bed with Him
It's a hit piece. It's not wise to try and judge him by today's standards.

And old man sleeping naked in bed with grandniece has been slightly frowned upon since the time of the Targaryens.

Yes, the guy was weird.

Justice Department 'not investigating' Renee Good Killing

This means Trump's DOJ won't dig up her corpse in a couple weeks to put it on trial for attempted murder of the ICE agent.

Sounds like a reasonable compromise where everyone wins!

Whatever you allow your government to do to others, they will eventually do to you.
#8 | Posted by TrueBlue

Joke's on them! I can't cook!

What would Gandhi do? The author of this article has some thoughts: