It's been very long established that nobody has a "right" to operate a motor vehicle. It's something you are permitted to do under the terms of a license, and it's fairly regulated (though not as much as in some other countries).
Then when I get to my car I can see the broken window and report it or at least know someone broke into my car. With remote entry law enforcement or ice can get in and out potentially without notice.
Just because police/ice/thieves/etc can break down my door and enter my house does not mean I am on board with giving any of them a key.
You do have a right to ownership though if it’s paid in full and you have the title. If I fully own my vehicle but someone else can control or disable it remotely then they are tampering with my personal property.
When it comes to brass text and if the chips are down, your right for vehicle ownership is HEAVILY skewed state-side if they don't want you to have one. Whether it should be or not, and regardless of how much an individual's mobility and freedom is reliant on them owning a car in modern America, it's still a de-facto "privilege" rather than a "right".
Correct me if I'm wrong but you and SoftTalker appear to be writing under the influence of some questionable assumptions.
The fact that the government can excuse and routinely do something while getting away with it doesn't mean that the getting away or the actions themselves are right or justified.
The discussion here is about the compatibility of government's actions with the spirit of the Constitution which doesn't provide an exemption for habituated wrongs.
Sure you do, in private nobody can be prevented. You need a license and insurance to drive on public roads.
Just now many people have a) private land and b) private land in sufficient quantity and state that you can actually drive a car on it?
How many recreational users have private land in sufficient quantities?
You’ll sometimes also see small communities with private roads that allow unlicensed vehicles, such as retirement communities, but they often have their own standards for what is allowed.
* anyone with a few hundred million in the bank.
If you are driving off-road, or completely on private property, you're not really driving the vehicle to "go somewhere" or commute or transport people/goods.
It isn't really feasible to use a vehicle for actual transportation without using public roads, at least in these United States.
So what possible cause or reason would any law enforcement have, for going into a vehicle like that and searching it? I mean, compared to someone driving on a public road and "going somewhere" while "carrying stuff" in there? Nearly none, right?
Related: 20 days until the Daytona 500!
Your take on “rights” if wrong to the point of insanity. You literally don’t know what rights are and should stop talking.