By on February 3, 2014


A privacy advocacy group is reporting that European police forces are working on a remote stopping system to be fitted to cars at the factory that would allow authorities to deactivate any vehicle. Leaked documents reveal plans to implement the system by 2020. The idea is to eliminate the need for high speed chases or tire-spiking strips. The documents were leaked by Statewatch, a watchdog group dedicated to monitoring police powers, state surveillance and civil liberties in the EU.

The remote stopping project is said to be a priority of the European Network of Law Enforcement Technology Services (ENLETS) – a little known and somewhat secretive branch of a EU working group aimed at enhancing police cooperation across the EU.

The ENLET report, issued from Brussels in December said:

“Cars on the run have proven to be dangerous for citizens. Criminal offenders (from robbery to a simple theft) will take risks to escape after a crime. In most cases the police are unable to chase the criminal due to the lack of efficient means to stop the vehicle safely. This project starts with the knowledge that insufficient tools are available to be used as part of a proportionate response. This project will work on a technological solution that can be a “built in standard” for all cars that enter the European market.”

Other items on ENLETS’ agenda includes improved automatic license plate recognition technology and intelligence sharing. That agenda has reportedly been approved by the EU’s Standing Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security, known as Cosi, and that it has the support of senior British Home Office civil servants and police officers.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!


13 Comments on “Statewatch: EU Has Plans for Police to Remotely Stop Cars...”

  • avatar

    ONSTAR already has this.
    I don’t…

    If the government ever turns tyrannical, I’ll give those pathetic Taurus EGOboost driving State pigs a run for their money.

    • 0 avatar

      Another internet bad ass. If all the internet bad asses were as bad as they think that they are, half the population would be shot dead. Chill out dude. Nobody is going to take your hemi away.

  • avatar

    What is this, Slashdot?

    • 0 avatar

      You mean, like /. it has a tendency to run the same story several times?

      Yea, I can see the similarity.

      • 0 avatar

        This post augments Thomas’ earlier story, it identifies the source of the information, Statewatch, and has a link to their report.

        • 0 avatar

          * Neither of the stories has a link to, or even mentions, the other.

          * If you want to “augment” an already-present story, wouldn’t the natural way be to edit _that_ story?

          * Or wouldn’t it have been even better to mention the source to begin with, when you originally post the first story?

          It’s one thing to have several editors post the same story because the left hand isn’t altogether up-to-date on what the right is doing — CmdrTaco and Roblimo did it all the time — but quite another to squirm and obfuscate, in stead of just admitting “yeah, bit of a screw-up; that happens”.

          And preferably adding cross-links so readers can easily follow the discussion in both places. Not that this was such a biggie here, with the postings so close to each other in time and page-scrolling, and both discussions so unexpectedly brief for such a traditionally incendiary topic. But with longer discussion threads hanging off posts a little longer apart, it would become more important.

          Sorry, I’m coming off as negative as all Hell here recently (what with my harassing mr Baruth and quarreling with fellow-poster Landcrusher, over in another post), but this here really is intended only as a helpful hint. (Worth every cent you paid for it! ;-) )

        • 0 avatar

          That’s okay, because it proper /. tradition, I didn’t really read either article before posting my comment.

  • avatar

    I’m surprised we didn’t seen this tech long ago.

    • 0 avatar

      This is old technology in the EU. I owned a couple of VW’s that stopped running quite frequently, for instance.


      Sorry, wrong article…

  • avatar

    I want to hear from the people who say “If you’ve got nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about”

  • avatar

    I don’t think it’s designed for criminals, they’d be the first ones to disengage it. But you’d still have a fleet of cars that could be stopped in an instant and that seems like what they’re going for.

    • 0 avatar
      George B

      Criminals probably wouldn’t take time to disengage remote stopping on a stolen car. Instead they’d do something like the Lojack defense strategy of driving the stolen car a short distance to a different parking lot and waiting to see what happens.

    • 0 avatar

      How are they going to disengage it? It will be built into the main control module. Disable it and the car does not go any more.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ToolGuy: Static shock? Problem solved: sharksuits
  • Corey Lewis: Jaguar is bad about that. They’ll tell you it’s a Performance S with 310 horsepower, but not...
  • zerofoo: “and the lack of bullet trains and other public transportation alternatives is causing our freeways to...
  • sgeffe: As well as give you a static shock that could mess up your heart rhythm if you touched a metal piece of the...
  • ajla: How much furniture and appliances do you buy? I don’t think I’ve bought a big ticket item in the...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber