I never made the argument "that the crime would not have happened if Uber cars had undisableable GPS". You were the one that claimed that it "would only be use

I never made the argument "that the crime would not have happened if Uber cars had undisableable GPS". You were the one that claimed that it "would only be useful as evidence to follow up on after an alleged crime took place". I don't know whether it would be useful in that manner. I was simply pointing out that if it is useful in that way then it would act as a deterrent. In other words, I found the combination of the two sentences prior to my comment to be incorrect: that something could be used as follow up to a crime happening without affecting the likelihood of the crime happening. I was not commenting on the specifics.