Back in the old days before LoJack they had a kill switch between the battery and the starter. Why not make a panic button for the Prius on the dashboard for something that kills the connection to the Electric motor dead cold. Maybe have a separate key sorta like the ones you use to activate nukes.

The Prius already has emergency kill... Apparently hitting the brake pedal will kill the engine as well.

Also, the deal with the ignition switch is that you can't turn it far enough back to lock the steering wheel while the vehicle is in gear. You should be able to turn it back far enough to kill the engine though. You will lose power steering and brakes, but you really should be able to make due without them.

That still doesn't stop them from killing the vehicle, either by hitting both the gas and the brake, putting the car in 'Park' (which puts it in neutral), hitting the kill switch, etc.

There may be problems going on, but that doesn't make it totally Toyota's fault that their customers aren't smart enough to know basic safety procedures like this before driving. Then again, maybe if some more Prius owners crashed and burned, we'd have less holier-than-thou people walking around, thinking they're so awesome because they're "saving" the environment by driving their hunks of junk.

Except it was probably a media stunt. Kind of funny how once the cops got to him, he was able to shut the car off. A car that wasn't affected by any of the recalls.

You don't lose the ability to steer. You cannot turn the key far enough back to lock the wheel if the car is in gear. You lose power steering, but that won't stop you from steering.

If your ignition is off and you turn the steering wheel the steering lock engages so you can't turn. Turning off the engine also reduces the braking ability hugely having no servo assist. Unless American cars are different to others and don't have steering locks?

Though I guess having almost no brakes or ability to turn is better than smacking into something at 90mph

Also, if your power assist brakes are in working order, you should have enough reserve vacuum in the system after the engine is killed to get a couple full applications of the brakes before the assist goes away. With my car, I can pump the brake pedal 2 full times with no noticeable increase in resistance, and 1-2 more times after that before the pedal is rock hard.

Also, as Arthur said, there's a difference between ignition off and steering lock on. Even if the accessory position isn't between lock and on, there's still an in between area where the ignition (should) be off, and the wheel still unlocked.

You wouldn't, if you were in the "stuck pedal" scenario, but he's just explaining that you have plenty of brakes even with the engine off.

I'm not sure. I know the wheels of cars I've driven lock if the ignition is <= 'off' position (if turned). In most cars, the key can't be removed unless in the 'off' position. The few cars that have allowed it in > 'off' position (I think they've all been Ford's thus far) have felt like junk to me.

Disclaimer: I am a little drunk, but maybe I can confirm that tomorrow, at least with my '95 Grand Prix.

I remember what my big brother told in late 70's. He drew a VW beetle and he heard some strange noise from front wheels. He suspected the bearings and to hear better he turned off the engine while the car was rolling. But since that's not what one does on regular basis, as a reflex he pulled off the key from the lock. And that way locked the steering. He panicked but managed to put it back and unlock the steering before anything happened. So even the good old Beetle had what I would consider normal behaviour of the ignition/wheel lock. The steering remains unlocked until you remove the key. Unless you got those extra knobs you have to push. Or push the key itself down.

BTW, did Saab 99 have a steering wheel lock? I remember the ignition lock was strangely placed near the gear stick and hand brake. And you couldn't remove the key before putting gear on reverse. So a thief couldn't drive away the car without breaking the lock, but the car could have been towed away if someone just kept the clutch pedal down.

Speaking of Saab, I think it's admirable when they reuse the model names.
{"name":"RightFront.jpg","src":"http:\/\/static.allegro.cc\/image\/cache\/1\/e\/1e443ed361aa15691dd9f16a6b0653af.jpg","w":600,"h":429,"tn":"http:\/\/static.allegro.cc\/image\/cache\/1\/e\/1e443ed361aa15691dd9f16a6b0653af"}
Saab 95, 1963.
3 cyl. 2-stroke!

{"name":"saab%2095%20nya.jpg","src":"http:\/\/static.allegro.cc\/image\/cache\/3\/a\/3a99a99aa393d3a548f0336ede0a5a31.jpg","w":480,"h":178,"tn":"http:\/\/static.allegro.cc\/image\/cache\/3\/a\/3a99a99aa393d3a548f0336ede0a5a31"}
Saab 95, 2009.

Ok, I think they try to use 9-5 instead of 95, but it's very commonly called Saab 95. When I hear Saab 95, I think of the funny uneven sound of a 3 cyl. 2-stroke engine. And lots of blue smoke. Is this the reason Saab went down? They should have reused number 96 instead, which was a bit improved model with a 4-stroke V4.

"9-5" != "95". Around here even colloquially they're different. The 95 is "ysivitonen" ("nine-fiver") while the 9-5 is "ysiviis" ("nine-five").