WingNews logo WingNews
top | item 39459059

(no title)

rale00 | 2 years ago

> if kia makes a cheap car with crappy locks either don't buy it

Immobilizers were a standard feature on cars for decades. If you went to buy a car, no one was putting immobilizer on the list of features, and they certainly wouldn't let you try breaking the ignition lock on a test drive.

If they had advertised that their vehicles were insecure, then sure, it's on the buyer, but they didn't.

discuss

order

fargle|2 years ago

it'd be bad to advertise that they have in immobilizer or anti-theft when providing either nothing or a badly broken implementation (like you often see in IOT).

it's not negligence to simply not provide a feature they didn't promise to provide and weren't required to (in the US). it is simply not their responsibility in any way to ensure your car's safety from theft. if you assumed it was and that they provided a feature you wanted because everybody else usually does, then the negligent party would be you for not RTFM. except that's wrong here too.

nobody is negligent here. you do not have a social responsibility to have an immobilizer on your car to prevent it from being stolen. and neither does the manufacturer. having it locked is plenty to legally make it "breaking-and-entering". and even if you leave the keys in the car and the engine running, it's still grand theft and your insurance will indeed pay out, which they would not do if they could claim negligence. the criminals are 100% at fault here. and bad things can happen without someone being negligent.

arguing about anything beyond that is just a fight about how good that anti-theft system has to be. are you negligent if you don't have an armed guard on your car?

philistine|2 years ago

The problem with Kia cars not having immobilizers is wholly american. It is illegal to sell a car in Canada without an immobilizer.

fargle|2 years ago

funny thing is the part where this article is about a canadian car theft epidemic...