Mandate for 'kill switches' in smartphones fails in Calif. Senate
Source: Los Angeles Times
Despite support from law enforcement including LAPD Chief Charlie Beck, a measure that would require smartphones to have enabled "kill switches" failed in a close vote Thursday in the California Senate.
With the telecommunications industry, including Microsoft, lobbying hard against the bill, it failed on a 19-17 vote, two votes short of the tally needed for passage. It was granted a chance to come up for another vote in the future.
... This is an issue we need to address, said Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), who introduced the bill. By not doing so, the crime is only going to continue to escalate.
But amid heavy lobbying against the measure, a group of Democrats, including Sens. Ricardo Lara of Bell Gardens, Norma Torres of Pomona and Jim Beall of San Jose, joined most of the Republicans in voting down the bill.
Read more: http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-mandate-for-kill-switches-in-smart-phones-fails-in-cal-senate-20140424,0,202971.story
ErikJ
(6,335 posts)Big biz wins again.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Oh! ...now I get it.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Or is it about crowd control?
AllyCat
(16,135 posts)I worry about law enforcement and others being able to just stop everyone's phones in a protest, or stop someone who is not posting things they like, or whatever the cause they want to stop. Yeah, phone theft would be great to stop, but I just don't think bricked phones will stop thieves. What makes me think this is about phone theft is who was fighting the bill (computer/phone sellers). But the first thing I thought of when I saw the title of the OP was "then someone could stop a whole group's phones from working with the touch of a button".
KansDem
(28,498 posts)Would that also stop the ability to take photos or shoot videos with these phones? If so, that would be a police department's dream come true...
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)All technology and technology solution are dual-edged. The kill switch can be used to genuinely bring phone theft to screaming halt. Or they can be abused by the government as you suggest.
So do we or don't we?
On the third hand, the government can shut your phone down now if it wants to. If a "disturbance" took place the government can shut down the cell towers in the area, the sledge hammer approach; or they could simply monitor the meta data passing through the towers and start jamming select lines they suspect of "unauthorized" activity, while keeping a white list official numbers that would go through.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)In fact my phone has that already.
When law enforcement is pushing for the ability to have a kill switch on phones, well I don't trust their motives. Not with how often they've been caught on camera phone acting badly.
I also find it interesting that there is more interest in a phone kill switch than gun control. Apparently bringing guns to a protest (if you are white and conservative) is a-okay. But phones with recording abilities, oh noes!
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)thanks for the food for thought.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)It's about the theft insurance that is now sold by the phone makers/sellers. If the phones have kill switches, the insurance sales will plummet. How much is this insurance, and is it something you need to pay to renew each year?
I don't have a phone, so I don't know. But apparently it's a big revenue source.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)K&R
''But it was alright, everything was alright, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.'' ~George Orwell, 1984