You you are WRONG, the cell phone companies hate this. They make a lot of money from theft. Every stolen phone means one more phone that get to sell to replace it.
You are
WRONG.
Every sale means the manufacturer gets to sell a phone to the cell phone companies to sell to replace it. SO WHAT? Unless you are implying either of these sources have something to do with thefts of cell phones, then WTF do they have to do with anything other than a potential lobby effort?
The point is that the CONSUMER should drive the features of cell phones. If consumers demand anti-theft features, they should only buy models that have it. This will send a message that those that don't have them won't make any sales. It should NOT be up to the government to try and legislate morality, anti-fat behaviors (by taking DIET soda away in sizes larger than x amount of ounces as they tried in New York right along with sugar soda, making no distinction less some lawyer try to sue them from the cellulite challenged angle or some other PC bullcrap), etc.
I'm not anti-government, however. Someone has to monitor human behavior when it can potentially affect other humans because you can't count on individual morality to do it. Thus, I think things that pertain to the overall public safety should be regulated and regulated well (e.g. banks and other money markets, food safety handling (I don't like e-coli in my ground beef) and drilling (yes, fracking DOES cause earthquakes. We had one epicentered dead-on the well in my state and I was one mile from it and it shook the building; the stuff they pump down there lubricates the plates and allows some to slip that wouldn't for thousands of years otherwise).
CORPORATIONS have proven they don't care about anything but money and that is because they are driven by shareholders whose ONLY concern is MONEY. They are soulless entities given the rights of human beings and that should change, IMO. Of course, it's also a reflection of society. Most people in society wold be just as evil, devious and treacherous if they were in the same positions as these people. Show me a
good person and I'll show you a veneer with hidden evil below the surface 9/10 times. Most people follow the law out of FEAR, not love of "good". It's why religions inevitably fail. They teach "Fear of God" rather than "Love of Good". But without morality and ethics, society will continue to be a place where people in live in fear rather than comfort.
The point is you can't trust anyone. People are self-centered and thus can only be trusted to do what's best for them. You are right that the corporations would prefer whatever avenue makes them more money and if that means less or no anti-theft features, they will run to it unless the consumer refuses to buy their products in which case they will go for the money once again and add the feature. American care makers did only the bare minimum to make sales until Japanese car makers came in and showed what QUALITY meant. The American market would have died off if they hadn't changed (and with the recent recession, all but Ford would have died anyway). However, I think the government did the right thing bailing them out, not for their sake, but for the sake of all the American jobs related to those companies that would have been lost. The effect would have been DEVASTATING and combined with the recession, there is little doubt in my mind we could have faced a true second Great Depression instead and those that did not live in those days truly have NO CLUE what that really means. It's not a bunch of people without jobs collective unemployment....
But tying cell phone thefts to "you MUST have that feature" is dangerous since it has NOTHING to do with handling or safety. It's petty crime that does exist and will always exist. Such a law opens the door to even more bizarre laws like forcing your car to carry a device that reports ANY speeding to the police (yes, that IS coming and it's only a matter of time; prepare to pay out your arse for speeding tickets for one 1mph over the limit since you are clearly a safety hazard; then one day you won't be allowed to even DRIVE period since you are more dangerous than a computer driving for you. Take all the life out of life; make people worry about cancer from every-day things like coffee mugs, take the fun out of life with things like driving; try and take ALL the danger out of life and we all end up living in a padded room for our own safety!) Frankly, California lives in another Universe of paranoia and pricey regulation. It's a small wonder they're in such massive debt out there. If they spent their money on desalination plants instead of coffee mug cancer labeling, maybe they'd be doing a little better during this drought.
