In general, sure. Exceptions are not unheard of, though.
If I buy an abandoned house full of booby traps, or some property contaminated by toxic waste, or a wrecked car, I probably won't be able to use it "for what it's for" as is.
These things are still "mine" in two senses:
1. a property rights sense — nobody can just cart them away! That would be theft!
2. the sense that I have the legal right to do whatever I want to them in the process of fixing them up. I can take a wrecking ball to the house and build a new house. I can take apart the car and replace parts of it. Nobody has a legal right to stop me from doing these things.
But nobody's obligated to help me do that fixing-up, or to give me the money to do it. It's my responsibility, if I want the thing to work. For these sorts of items, you go into the purchase knowing that the purchase itself is only the start of what you'll have to pay to get a working product out the other end.
If Tesla is guilty of anything, it's false advertising: implying that they're selling you a car, when they're actually selling you a willfully-misbehaving robot that would have to be modified to turn it into a car.
But make no mistake — you own that willfully-misbehaving robot. Just like you own the wreck, or the waste dump.
-----
Given an entirely autonomous robot (like a self-driving car), though, there is an interesting edge-case, which (thankfully) has not come up yet in the real world: the product you "own" might be programmed to get up and leave on its own.
You have, as the owner, the legal right to stop it from leaving. You might even have a legal right to demand the robot's release and return, if someone else picked it up. (Weird pet-ownership and/or slavery vibes from this sentence.)
That, however, might conflict with another consideration. E.g., if Tesla or another autonomous-robot company gets slapped with a government-mandated recall notice, they might be legally obligated to summon your car back to their factory, at least for repair.
The edge case — the part current case-law doesn't yet cover — is the following: if you've disabled their ability to do that, and then your car later explodes because it didn't receive the mandated servicing... are you liable, because you disabled the recall summons? Even if the government never explicitly mandated you to stop using the car and send it over to them?