Mandatory GPS tracking involves using GPS technology in all vehicles to monitor driving behavior and improve road safety. Proponents argue that it enhances road safety and reduces accidents by monitoring and correcting dangerous driving behaviors. Opponents argue that it infringes on personal privacy and could lead to government overreach and misuse of data.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Yes
@B4QM5BG3mos3MO
There is an inherent right to privacy that all Americans possess, and that would be severely infringed on with gps tracking.
@B5XPM8FIndependent5 days5D
Yes, but only if the enforcement thresholds are high, and warrants are required for using the data beyond traffic enforcement
@B4WYC6R 2mos2MO
Yes, but it should be only after a person has been convicted of things like DUI, DWAI, or reckless driving resulting in injury and will be a fee imparted to the vehicle owner/operator
@B4C6FCD3mos3MO
No, that can easily lead to danger and/or control. The only application I can see for this is if the person has caused an incident beforehand.
@B4D6KHP3mos3MO
No, for the sake of privacy, the 14th amendment, the constitution, freedom, federalism, weak government, and checks and balances.
@9V8GHCH9mos9MO
Yes, only to people with a history of reckless driving, drunk driving, or any kind of driving that puts others at risk.
@B4MLZLP3mos3MO
No, but every vehicle should include gps to track and track statistics locally by the owner/operator.
No unless there is a valid reason for a person to need vehicle tracking, such as repeated offenses of unsafe driving behavior.
@B4LF4V73mos3MO
No, we should leave government forces to control driving behavior manually in order to do their job.
@B4KLCSB3mos3MO
no this would be a violation of privacy but if people choose to allow it then I don't see the issue with it
@B4GLDS33mos3MO
No, while this would help safety it could easily be hacked or seen and be used as a way to locate people that should not be found by that person. while this would protect the roads it could endanger people at risk of hate crimes, rape, or murder,
@B4CSJFP3mos3MO
Yes the government should enforce mandatory GPS tracking in all vehicles to monitor driving behavior and improve road safety with limitations because then the government might end up misusing it's power and misuse of data which invades people's privacy.
@B28T4S46mos6MO
No, make it a voluntary program offered by private insurance companies that then share data with the government
@B25JYKN7mos7MO
I think that It'll be helpful but not really a good thing, the reason why I say this is because it would be safe but some may feel uncomfortable with why the government has to track their car.
@B5TJ2883wks3W
No, and get rid of all forms of transportation in order to allow for maximum environmental protection, we must walk
No, but regulations should be put in place requiring more in-vehicle monitoring systems designed to prevent dangerous driving behavior.
@B5DT9MKIndependent2mos2MO
No, but I think that insurance companies should be allowed to make this a requirement for individuals with poor driving histories or new drivers.
@B5D5WXN2mos2MO
Hell no, all that does it allow the government to control our movement for various corrupt or evil reasons. Too much liability, uncertainty, and lack of trust.
@B5BSVK22mos2MO
yes, only for new car models: alowing cars to still exist without the need of gps unless its needed to be instald.
@B55LWJC2mos2MO
No, but only for reckless drivers or known violent criminals for a short time (maybe like a year or so) to ensure they have rehabilitated
@B54JYWP2mos2MO
No, that's would be extreme government overreach. We don't need to live in more of a surveillance state than we already do.
@B4V42QN2mos2MO
No!!! i would NEVER EVER buy a car that tracked my every move just so i can have bluetooth read me my texts or listen to radio. not only that the SECOND YOU DO THAT INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL RUIN IT BY GIVING A PENALTY IF YOU REFUSE OR DONT HAVE A QUALIFYING CAR. THE INSURANCE CO.S WOULD BE VIVIOUS IN RATE HIKES
@B4S4QRZ2mos2MO
No, the government may not use GPS tracking on private vehicles absent probable cause and a warrant or warrant exception.
@B47J7W23mos3MO
Government should utilize red light cameras and speed cameras at the vast majority of intersections if not all and spread out along roadways in general
@B46DVW4Independence3mos3MO
I feel you should not force it on to pepole because there is still maps that can be used and you should not be driving if you cant get from point A to point B
@B44J6843mos3MO
I think those that have had traffic violations, and or DUI's in the past should be monitored for public and road safety
@B425TCL4mos4MO
It should not be mandatory, but if someone volunteers, that should be taken in court as evidence of responsibility in future cases regarding traffic violations. The federal government should not have access to the databases unless they get a warrant for an individual under investigation for federal crimes
@B3ZZFXY4mos4MO
No, because I feel like the government wouldn't just use it for mandatory GPS tracking but something else
@B3ZZ6YXProgressive4mos4MO
While I personally believe GPS is very helpful for driving, I do not believe it should be mandatory for cars to have installed.
@B3TSP9M4mos4MO
To me it's in the middle, a lot of people may disagree with this for privacy concerns but honestly if it'd going to stop accidents and make roads safer for everyone, then yes.
@B3TQX3M4mos4MO
Vehicles should have GPS but not be tracked by the government unless there is a necessary cause and warrant.
@B2CFNRW6mos6MO
I think it is a good idea, but the invasion of privacy is a bit much. Also, some people cannot afford cars with GPS built-in.
@B2BTHJH6mos6MO
Yes but only certain people should have access to the GPS tracking and use the information only with intention of improving road safety.
No, this is extremely inappropriate instead the government should increase enforcement, update laws, and increase communication
@B25PB2F7mos7MO
absolutely not because it would end up being used to track citizens and sketchy things i would never approve of that.
@9ZZLH2M7mos7MO
Yes, but only to individuals who have recently been arrested for things like a DUI or carelessly driving etc
@9ZZ88637mos7MO
If the driver has a substantial history of getting into crashes then this should take place, but not under any circumstances
@9ZYGGG57mos7MO
while it is important to improve road safety, I don't feel that this is how we should go about doing it.
@9XVK4HZ8mos8MO
I believe that if the government does use this kind of GPS tracking, it should only ever track the speeds people drive, and their accident rate rather than more personal information.
@9XV48ZY8mos8MO
Yes, but they should only be allowed to track the speed limit, not where they are going or what they are doing.
@9XV39GX8mos8MO
Not in all cars however if someone is caught and or in a accident they should have it in there car to watch there driving
@9XJCPDF8mos8MO
Only for people who are new to driving or those who have a history of reckless driving, drunk driving, or any kind of driving at puts other people at risk.
@9X7MRZZ8mos8MO
I don't appreciate the invasion of privacy, but I believe in we should monitor driving behavior and improve general road safety.
@B5KS4B61mo1MO
No, the government does not need to be tracking people unless they are a person of interest, suspect, or otherwise similar in an ongoing investigation.
@B3ZKJBVIndependent4mos4MO
No, I think this is a violation of our rights, but maybe exterior cameras that can tell if the person is driving safely or not.
@B3Y3W234mos4MO
the government shouldn't be looking at the info, but it could be useful for improving road safety and scientific research
@B3XGKTX4mos4MO
Yes and no, not for regular people but for those who have a history of drinking and driving or have a criminal record of kidnapping or speeding.
@B3LYKST4mos4MO
Yes, for GPS tracking but only in case of accidents or breakdowns in which the driver doesn't know their location
@B3HRN6V4mos4MO
Yes, only if the data gathered is ONLY used and HANDLED to improve road safety. It should be a personal choice instead of mandatory.
@B3GT2Q94mos4MO
I think they should when you hit a certain age. In terms of getting older and when you are a young driver. From ages 23-50 you could be driving on your own.
@B3D9CQD4mos4MO
no and yes because it can help people who are kidnapped or people who stole cars instead of wating for someone to look for it or them.
@B362FJ84mos4MO
I think GPS tracking should be in the vehicles of people who have already been convicted of driving crimes, like DUIs and Hit and Runs.
@B2TF7BX5mos5MO
i believe that this idea is a great idea but if you could have a way to exactly specify where the person is so that there aren't any misunderstandings for where you are in the world
@B2RVR3N5mos5MO
depends on how its used, as long as a person is not monitoring the driver than its ok and instead it should just record and only check if necessary directly from the device
@9WXG3RT 6mos6MO
No, only for people with a history of distracted, reckless, drunk or any risky driving, or with a history of drug/alcohol addiction.
@B2FXGFQ6mos6MO
They should require patrol cars to have their lights on when they're sitting by the side of the road watching for unsafe driving instead.
@9WXG3RT 6mos6MO
No, only for people with a history of distracted/reckless/drunk or any risky driving, or with a history of drug/alcohol addiction.
@B2CFW696mos6MO
A certain amount of monitoring is necessary but too much is overkill, there is a safe zone that I'm not entire sure about.
@9ZWRCQX7mos7MO
I know that quite a bit of people in favor of this proposal mean well, but I do not support increasing the government's surveillance capabilities.
@9ZRT2QM7mos7MO
Only people with a history of repeated traffic violations like drunk driving or reckless driving should be force to have mandatory GPS tracking in their vehicles.
@9ZQPHSH7mos7MO
Maybe with stipulations that GOD tracking can not be used in a court unless a suspect is provided with a warrant that informs them their tracking can and will be used in a court. It is illegal to track someone’s private travel by advanced technology. Illegal search and seizure. Make it an option for citizens and have an incentive to allow tracking. Say 2000 reduction in the cost of a vehicle as an example.
@9ZPYRW87mos7MO
a standard but not required feature is how it should be done and it best set to be used as a way to locate crashes and those in danger/missing
Maybe, it would have to be extremely clear as to what data they have and it should get rid of any data when the drive was proved to be safe, only tracking the incidents.
@mathomas156Libertarian 8mos8MO
The government should support GPS tracking in all vehicles to monitor driving behavior and improve road safety.
@9ZH9WGQ8mos8MO
only on cars onde by people who are big fat dumb ideot drivers who disobey almost all of the laws or usesd by trucking companies or delivery trucks so that the company can check in and see were the truck is or what its doing
@9ZF634Z8mos8MO
NO, but the parkways should be able to detect and report driver vehicles that are reckless and weave in and out at exorbitant speeds
Maybe they could try another way to improve road safety instead of tracking. Tracking, even if it's the government, it's dangerous
@9YGB5KQ8mos8MO
yes because so many people go missing and get killed and i think that would help with narrowing down suspects
@9XWXKTC8mos8MO
The Government should add GPS tracking in all vehicles but only to monitor driving behavier and they shouldn't be allowed to use that information for anything else. They shouldn't use it to track people either.
@9XW3KFN8mos8MO
Yes, while also having some sort of privacy regulations to prevent the government from misusing data.
@9TQCWVN10mos10MO
yes but there should be a limitation because there's people who test drive or perform top speeds at undisclosed locations with wide open space whether its under supervision or testing their ability with safety precaution on standby.
@9TQ7KLJLibertarian10mos10MO
No but the government should mandate safety installments like interlocking devices and vehicles that will not operate without a fastened seatbelt in order to drive.
@9TLY29N10mos10MO
No, I don't think so because they can track anyone but I also say yes because everybody today is terrible at driving
@9TLK5L710mos10MO
I don't think it should be enforced, but I do believe that it is beneficial to use an Apple Maps or Google Maps.
@9TKP68C10mos10MO
Only when tracking a specific driver that has committed significant traffic violations and as sentenced by a judge.
@9TJP4FQ10mos10MO
No, and the Government should never be allowed to track its citizens without a warrant and probable cause.
@9THYMBN10mos10MO
Yes, but only for people that have been convicted of severe traffic violations such as DUI, reckless driving, etc.
@9TFGV6210mos10MO
Yes, but it should be dormant and only accessed in case of an emergency like a kidnapping or accident.
@9TC8HMF10mos10MO
There have been a number of numerous occasions where I have experienced people looking at their phones when they are passengers sitting next to their drivers and I don't think that GPS tracking would do much, here. People will still find a way to drive recklessly no matter what.
@9TB39ZQ10mos10MO
No, but it is fair if the government utilizes the data from GPS applications that the public opts to use and agrees to that platforms terms and conditions of usage.
@9SSYWCF10mos10MO
No. It should incentivize insurance companies to offer drivers low rates if they do so. But not GPS tracking, just monitor driving habits.
@9SST7D310mos10MO
Yes, but replace GPS tracking with a system that is more aligned with tracking car status and driving patterns, not position on a map.
No. If a vehicle is to be monitored, there needs to be some kind of warrant or documentation required. Government overreach is too much a risk.
@9SRB9N210mos10MO
yes but only on electronic vehicles because of all the new threats they pose such as hacking, ethanol fires, electrical failures
@9SR4GSF10mos10MO
Only on individuals with a record of incidents, as well as young drivers (under age 25) and elderly drivers.
@9SQ8GLB10mos10MO
No, but provide incentives for allowing free installation of one, such as insurance discounts. Also allow citizens to opt out at any time with free removal of device.
@9SP3BC410mos10MO
I feel like it depends on the person. For example, if they have a history of drunk driving or multiple tickets that are unpaid, they should be tracked just in case they are speeding or drunk driving.
@9NJZFDB1yr1Y
Only if someone is a repeat offender of distracted driving, impaired driving, or reckless driving.
@9MYP55X1yr1Y
No. Because they could get hacked, and someone might want to control/manipulate in a negative way.
@9MYMGYN1yr1Y
No. This is too "big brother". However, if the driver CHOOSES to have GPS monitoring by their insurance company in return for lower rates, that would be acceptable and voluntary
@9MVP66L1yr1Y
Yes, but only for drivers who’ve gotten into accidents or speeding down the streets
@9MVGZBJRepublican1yr1Y
There are other ways they could improve road safety. The Govern does not need to invade our lives.
@rosetintedarcher 1yr1Y
No, but speed limiting should be added to vehicles and cameras used
@9MV76VC1yr1Y
No, only in government-owned vehicles like police cars
@9MV4XT61yr1Y
Only if the person has a record for recess driving
@9MNJ8V51yr1Y
Yes but the government track every vehicle, but shouldn't actively track data. Also the government shouldn't tell people.
@9WLSHXY8mos8MO
I don't they should do it to monitor behavior but use it for emergencies like if someone were kidnapped or speeding, things that would put people at risk
@9WF2SXX8mos8MO
They have somewhat of an understanding of road safety based off of lisence plates and traffic lights.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
