Being unable to replace a broken headlight yourself because you cannot reset the error memory of your car is bullshit don't you think?
I don't know if you follow the recent trends on car engineering, but things that a person with two left hands could have done themselves 20 years ago are now impossible to do on your own and — not because ot is hard, but because they essentially require digital access for many things.
And if you modify such systems and they are not bricked after you did it that probably means you know more about the system than the "professional" who just uses the tools provided by the manufacturer. If it is bricked, you are no danger to others.
Is it any different to un-bolting something like the ABS pump on your car to replace it with another?
On the one hand, that's an obvious and trivial operation - undo 4 easy to reach nuts securing the pipes to the pump manifold body, undo 2 bolts holding the assembly to the car body. Fit new pump and do up the fasteners. If you have the hand-eye co-ordination to line up a wrench on nuts and bolts and you have the minor strength needed to turn these then you're capable of the operation.
Except... now you've got air in a crucial safety system affecting braking and stability and no amount of bleeding the brake system will help. You need to actuate that pump while toggling each solenoid in a particular order to clear the air.
We wouldn't reasonably stop people being able to do this so why should i not be able to manipulate something i own via a computer instead of via wrench?
There are already sufficient laws in place to handle the scenario where i do something reckless with my freedom.
Wheel attached to the hub is also a safety critical system, isn't it? If not tighten properly it may lead to a fatal accident. Where should the industry put the line of serviceable vs non-serviceable (by non-professional) parts?
Because if you create an "accreditation" barrier to modifying hardware you own it'll end up being used for the cartelization of repair services rather than to improve safety.
I don't know how common it is (quite a lot I believe), but in my country (France), you need to provide a certificate of inspection guaranteeing that the car vital systems behave correctly when selling it.
For better or for worse, there are no such mandatory inspections nor certificates required when selling your car in the USA. Its a common trope/issue that people can often get misled by sellers when buying a vehicle, either by the seller clearing the engine codes or some other shady practice that would keep the car looking good until it drives off the lot
I'd be all on board with a law that mandates a vehicle inspection certificate if you want to sell a car. I think buyers would probably like that too. It would cut down on lemons. It would make the second hand car market more efficient.
Obviously that would require accreditation but the accreditation bar for inspecting a car will be much lower than it would be for fixing it.
Or, you could take a different approach and just make it illegal to fix your own car if you're not part of a government mandated car fixing cartel.
While it is not a law (in my area at least), I would not buy a car without a recent inspection.
I would support a law that requires a special, more in-depth inspection in order to sell a car. My area has a (kind of) similar law...if you are buying an R title vehicle from out of state, then you have to get an "enhanced" inspection, with pictures before you can register it. I like that law and I would support making the enhanced inspection manditory for all car sales...I would put the onus on the seller though, but that's just me.
These systems (brakes, airbags) have robust and trivial design, to eliminate any tendency to break on their own. As a side effect, replacing a replaceable airbag is something a layperson can do with a little to none room for screwup, unlike for example a repair of a non safety critical engine, where there is a lot of that room.
