SIGN THE PETITION
SIGN THE PETITION
We the People, in order to protect our privacy, our national security, and our inalienable rights, declare that we want complete anonymity and autonomous operation of our vehicles. We call on Congress to pass the Vehicle Autonomy and Security Act of two thousand twenty-six. This bill would ban automatic tracking, telemetry, and remote control in all new vehicles sold in the United States, including American-made cars. It would also require vehicles to remain fully operational without cell service, internet, or manufacturer servers, and protect owner rights by preventing manufacturers from making basic driving dependent on subscriptions or accounts. As private property purchased with personal funds, these vehicles are protected under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, securing our right to exclusive use, privacy of movement, and due process against government interference without a warrant or strict due process.
If you believe Americans should have the right to own and operate their vehicles without unwanted tracking, data collection, or remote interference, stand with us. Sign the official petition on Change.org and help us show lawmakers how many Americans support vehicle privacy, security, and true ownership.
OUR PROPOSED BILL
OUR PROPOSED BILL
Two bills already introduced in Congress—H.R. 6734 and H.R. 6687—address important concerns surrounding vehicle-generated data, privacy, and an owner's ability to control how their information is collected, accessed, or sold. Our proposed legislation takes those ideas further. We modified and expanded the concept to focus not only on data privacy, but on true vehicle autonomy—requiring new vehicles sold in the United States, regardless of where they are manufactured, to remain fully operational without cellular service, internet access, or manufacturer servers, while restricting automatic telemetry and remote control. The goal is simple: if you buy the vehicle, you should be able to drive it privately and independently. You can view our proposed bill, along with the two bills currently introduced in Congress, below.
SIGN THE PETITION
JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Modern vehicles are becoming less about freedom and more about control. By 2027, every new car is expected to be mandated to include driver-facing cameras that constantly monitor you behind the wheel. These systems are being marketed as “safety features,” but many people see them as a major invasion of privacy. The idea that your own vehicle could watch your face, track your behavior, and potentially decide whether or not you are “fit” to drive raises serious concerns about government overreach, data collection, and personal freedom.
What starts as a feature meant to prevent distracted driving could quickly become something much bigger. These systems may eventually be capable of preventing your car from starting if the software believes you are tired, distracted, emotional, or otherwise unfit to drive. That’s a slippery slope. Once control over your vehicle is placed into the hands of automated monitoring systems, where does it stop? Americans have always valued independence and the freedom to travel without constant surveillance. Many people believe this crosses a line.
But together, we can try to stop it.
If you believe this issue deserves attention, put your name, email, and an optional comment in the form below. Together, we can make our voices heard.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Most people have no idea how much information is being collected about them every single day. Here’s what’s really happening:
1. Your Digital Footprint
Every time you use your phone, drive your car, shop, or go online, you create data. An active person can generate tens of thousands of data points each day. Over time, companies can build profiles with millions of data points about you.
2. The Power of Inference
Companies don’t just collect what you tell them. They use artificial intelligence to make very accurate assumptions about you. This is called “inference.”
They can often figure out your health conditions, financial situation, and daily habits — not because you told them, but because they connected thousands of small clues.
3. No Warrant Needed
If police want to search your home, they need a judge’s warrant. But companies can buy detailed information about your life from data brokers with no warrant at all. Much of this information is more personal than anything they could find in your house.
Why This Matters
This level of monitoring affects your privacy, your freedom, and even your ability to live without being constantly watched or judged. We believe this deserves more transparency and stronger protections.If you're unsure whether your insurance company is tracking your vehicle, now may be a good time to review your policy and ask questions. Do you have a tracking device plugged into your vehicle? Did you download an app that monitors your driving? Were you automatically enrolled in a telematics program when you signed up for coverage? These are questions every driver should consider.
To help consumers take action, Harry has drafted a simple letter that can be sent to your insurance company requesting clarification about any tracking programs associated with your policy. The letter also notifies the company of your intent to remove any tracking device and requests documentation showing when and how consent was provided. Whether you ultimately choose to participate in a tracking program is your decision, but it's important to make that choice with a full understanding of what information is being collected and how it may affect your insurance coverage.
You can find Harry's sample letter below and modify it as needed for your own situation.
HB4948 is now sitting on Governor J.B. Pritzker’s desk awaiting his signature, and if signed, Illinois would join several other states that have already adopted Intelligent Speed Assistance programs for certain repeat speeding offenders. Under the bill, drivers with multiple qualifying speeding convictions could be required to install a state-approved speed-limiting device on every vehicle they own or operate and would be prohibited from driving vehicles that are not equipped with the technology. One issue the legislation does not appear to account for is the impact on classic and antique vehicles. Many vintage cars were built decades before modern vehicle electronics existed and may not be compatible with currently available speed-limiter systems. As a result, owners of classic cars who become subject to the mandate could find themselves effectively unable to legally drive their vehicles, not because the cars are unsafe or illegal, but because there may be no practical way to equip them with the required technology.
Recognizing this gap, I developed a potential solution specifically for pre-1996 vehicles and other classics that may not be compatible with existing speed-limiter technology. Rather than simply pointing out a problem, I wanted to propose a practical path forward if these mandates are going to become a reality. The provisional patent for the concept is included below and is available for anyone interested in exploring or implementing a compliant solution for older vehicles. If lawmakers are going to require speed-limiting technology, there should also be a viable way for owners of vintage and classic cars to continue operating their vehicles legally.
This video is intended for entertainment and consumer awareness purposes only. I am not an attorney, privacy expert, security professional, or representative of Walmart. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this video are simply my interpretation of information contained in Walmart's publicly available privacy policy and other publicly accessible sources. Nothing in this video should be considered legal advice, professional advice, or a definitive statement about Walmart's practices, technologies, or intentions. I am just a car guy reading through a privacy policy and sharing my thoughts, observations, and questions with my audience. Viewers are encouraged to read Walmart's privacy policy for themselves and draw their own conclusions. Any errors, misunderstandings, or omissions are unintentional and reflect my personal interpretation of the material. This video is protected opinion, commentary, criticism, and discussion regarding matters of public interest.