Comment Re:Eventually milage will taxed/charged. (Score 1) 238
This isn't about proper allocation of taxes, it's about the government collecting information on you. This is like the "gun show loophole" argument with gun registrations.
...
The reason that gun owners oppose a government database of gun ownership is that every time these databases were built they were followed by attempts to take the guns from the people in the database. EVERY TIME. If there is a recent example of a database that has not resulted in an attempted confiscation then that only means it has not happened yet.
Is there an expectation of this tracking of cars to be used to take everyone's car? Not likely. It is likely to be used as evidence against people in violation of nearly every one of the ten amendments that make up the Bill of Rights.
For starters, totally agree with your points that this is about gathering data. Furthermore, it will probably like most things in 'Merka be administered by some sort of unaccountable Public-Private Partnership which will provide the data to the Government and also sell it to data brokers to improve ad targeting. And of course law enforcement will want to root around in it, and they will be allowed to do so without warrants, because "where you go on public roads is public data," just like they get away with widespread deployment of license plate readers.
That said, dragging gun-confiscation into the argument triggers the Slashdot Fox News Filter, but since it's already triggered... Illinois, where I live, has required FOID cards for quite some time, and recently strengthened the law to enhance background checking on private sales and to improve the CONFISCATION!! of guns from people whose cards get revoked due to criminal convictions (or presumably due to the failure to pay their annual bribe to the administrative state). The state hasn't been particularly interested in confiscating guns from people who follow the prescribed procedures to possess and register one in the state, though there's a good argument that the state having a list of people with guns might lead to the state wanting to extort those people for an annual payment under the threat of confiscating their guns. As is typical of regulation, it does tend to burden law-abiding folks more than it burdens criminals.
The Illinois measures probably won't do a lot to stop gang shootings, since people who know they shouldn't have guns don't much care about regulations and will find places to get guns, as long as lots of guns exist within the country. But tightening requirements for legal purchase and possession might help reduce the number of random nutjobs who shoot up their workplace or a school, because THOSE people probably have no idea where or how to get a gun illegally and wouldn't dare set foot in the neighborhoods where one can be had for $50 on the street corner. Thus we can address the scary thing that doesn't happen very often but garners headlines and affects suburban white voters, and then once we have that taken care of we can address the Sandy Hook that happens every day in Englewood and Austin. But that will have to be addressed in different ways.