I have a question for all of you lawyers, and anybody else who opposes this idea for that matter. You adamantly oppose any sort of electrical shock inside of the car. Which, as was previously said, would require the criminal to admit to breaking and entering to receive said shock in the case of a lawsuit. The alternative being mentioned over and over again is to use piezo sirens at 100db+. At 115db it takes 30 seconds or less for permanent damage to occur and I know there are sirens capable of higher db's than these. This is not to say that the sirens can't cause instant damage to anyone. The time is just an averaged number.
My question is how a siren or many sirens which is likely the case, which can cause permanent hearing loss as opposed to a shock that only causes soreness, a better choice as far as a lawsuit? In this country's sad state of a legal system, I would think the thief with permanent hearing damage would be much more likely to win in court.
I think the way to do this is to put the electrodes at the places that you would grab to rip off an interior piece. This would locate these points well away from normal occupancy of the vehicle. That removes any chance you could accidentally hurt yourself or an innocent in the event that the system didn't work correctly.