> an ICE car isn't anywhere close to as dangerous as an EV I fundamentally disagree with the premise that just because something is dangerous that the owner of

> an ICE car isn't anywhere close to as dangerous as an EV I fundamentally disagree with the premise that just because something is dangerous that the owner of said property is 'disallowed' from operating on it. I can own a house, and do all the electrical work myself. That's 120v AC for you North American households, or in rare situations 240v AC for certain appliances. I serviced an electric range just two months ago. If you understand how something works, what the requirements are to repair it, then you should understand the caution you must take when repairing those objects. I work on my own vehicle all the time. Yes, it is a gasoline powered vehicle. But the brakes on both an electric car and gas car must work. Something which is an easy repair and maintenance item is an object of which I know numerous drivers who would dare not touch, "because I don't want to break it". Which, is absolutely okay for those who would not want to work on it. But when someone who has the skills, knowledge, and abilities to work on a vehicle is told "no, you can't touch this brake because it requires a special RFID screwdriver to remove" That's the crux of the argument. If something so dangerous is refrained from the owner being enabled to even inspect or maintain/repair such an object, then it's likely that said consumer item is not for consumers, and shouldn't be sold.