ACLU Objects To License Plate Reader

[HOCP4ME]

I didn't read the entire thread, but to everyone saying that the police knowing where everyone goes is bad:

First off, what are the police going to do with that information? Do you really think they're going to sit and look at some monitors while saying "ooh, citizen #5,234,836 just went into the grocery store... hey, check this out, citizen #200,056,187 just left the coffee shop... look at this, some guy named Bob just went to the bank...etc."? Under most circumstances, the police aren't going to care where you are.

Unless, of course, the police are looking for you.

But, if the police are looking for you, they don't need the system. They can just call you or visit your house or workplace. Police wouldn't even bother tracking your license plate when they can readily contact you in so many other ways.

That is, as long as you're not hiding from the police.

If you're hiding from the police, you are almost certainly a criminal.

If you are a criminal, you deserve to be tracked and found.

To sum all that up in one sentence: The tracking data collected by this system is useless to the police unless you are a criminal running from the law, in which case you deserve to be found.

If you're not a criminal, the system doesn't affect you, period. Unless, of course, the system gets your stolen car back or makes your community a nicer, less crime-ridden place to live.

Oh, and about other people hacking into the system and getting the data. If you say the license-scanner is a bad idea because people can hack into it, I say the Internet is a bad idea because it contributes to a huge amount of identity theft, and I say the telephone is a bad idea since people can (quite easily) tap into your conversation and trace your calls.

 

[zedmanauk]

It is called prevention, most police forces are reactive to a situation, but with modern technology if we can STOP a crime would that be better than letting a few people hurt or maybe die then stop them?

That's very Minority Report of you. Maybe we should analyze people's genes, figure out who's likely to commit a crime and throw them in jail beforehand too. Or put ankle bracelets on everyone, not just criminals. And have random searches on the street. After all, if it saves a few lives who cares how many freedoms we have to take away. </sarcasm>

 

[Technoob]

I didn't read the entire thread, but to everyone saying that the police knowing where everyone goes is bad:

First off, what are the police going to do with that information? Do you really think they're going to sit and look at some monitors while saying "ooh, citizen #5,234,836 just went into the grocery store... hey, check this out, citizen #200,056,187 just left the coffee shop... look at this, some guy named Bob just went to the bank...etc."? Under most circumstances, the police aren't going to care where you are.

Unless, of course, the police are looking for you.

But, if the police are looking for you, they don't need the system. They can just call you or visit your house or workplace. Police wouldn't even bother tracking your license plate when they can readily contact you in so many other ways.

That is, as long as you're not hiding from the police.

If you're hiding from the police, you are almost certainly a criminal.

If you are a criminal, you deserve to be tracked and found.

To sum all that up in one sentence: The tracking data collected by this system is useless to the police unless you are a criminal running from the law, in which case you deserve to be found.

If you're not a criminal, the system doesn't affect you, period. Unless, of course, the system gets your stolen car back or makes your community a nicer, less crime-ridden place to live.

Oh, and about other people hacking into the system and getting the data. If you say the license-scanner is a bad idea because people can hack into it, I say the Internet is a bad idea because it contributes to a huge amount of identity theft, and I say the telephone is a bad idea since people can (quite easily) tap into your conversation and trace your calls.

I agree with the idea that what is being done here is no big deal, but not for the same reasons.

You might be interested in this very well written law review article on the "I have nothing to hide" fallacy.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565#PaperDownload

 

[theDreamer]

That's very Minority Report of you. Maybe we should analyze people's genes, figure out who's likely to commit a crime and throw them in jail beforehand too. Or put ankle bracelets on everyone, not just criminals. And have random searches on the street. After all, if it saves a few lives who cares how many freedoms we have to take away. </sarcasm>

Incorrect, examining genes is only a minority of a percent to look at someone, so do not even look into that.

I used the term prevention in the method that if we know someone has committed a crime or we have proof of pre-planned operation we can track them and prevent them. They have not committed the crime, but planning certain things are illegal.

 

[Farva]

Perhaps the ACLU should go to Italy and England because both those countries have it implemented (okay, they can't, but it would be funny to see them try to enforce this) . Is it scary? Perhaps. It is a good idea? Absolutely. If you ever were able to run from a cop, they can easily track you down with this system. Plus it allows the police to watch the road instead of driving and typing and the same time. Which do you think is safer?

lol @ ACLU. Always protecting the criminals.

Well, you do know what the ACLU stands for right? America's Communist Lawyers Union or American Criminal Lawyers Union

 

[kmeson]

They have not committed the crime, but planning certain things are illegal.

Thought crime?

 

[HOCP4ME]

Thought crime?

thinking something bad about the government != planning to ruin and/or destroy innocent people's lives

 

[kmeson]

thinking something bad about the government != planning to ruin and/or destroy innocent people's lives

I don't want to get too far off track here, but at what time is a crime committed? For example planning a robbery but at the least moment a change of heart, perhaps while talking with a pastor or watching the sun set on a beautiful day. Plans without intent aren't harmful. Plans without means aren't harmful but perhaps more nefarious.

My point is you have to be careful about criminalizing thought.

 

[soulman901]

Only Kyle is the Law around here.
Thank you for taking care of the flamers.
SoulMan901

 

[JethroXP]

I don't want to get too far off track here, but at what time is a crime committed? For example planning a robbery but at the least moment a change of heart, perhaps while talking with a pastor or watching the sun set on a beautiful day. Plans without intent aren't harmful. Plans without means aren't harmful but perhaps more nefarious.

My point is you have to be careful about criminalizing thought.

Plans are intent. It becomes criminal at the point which some action is taken to facilitate the crime. For example, writing about robbing a bank is not a crime, that can be a legitimate work of fiction. Writing about robbing a bank, and then purchasing a ski mask (in July), duffle bag, and ammunition might cross the line.

Or a better example, the FBI has an informant who tells them a group of Islamic men are talking about blowing up JFK airport in New York. That is not a crime. But when they start mapping the airport, buy chemicals for home-made explosives, and conducting rehersals, that absolutely is a crime, it's call "Conspiracy to commit" and is well documented law. No thought police involved. You don't have to wait to be victimized before arresting someone for a criminal act.

 

[Nemesis999]

I don't want to get too far off track here, but at what time is a crime committed? For example planning a robbery but at the least moment a change of heart, perhaps while talking with a pastor or watching the sun set on a beautiful day. Plans without intent aren't harmful. Plans without means aren't harmful but perhaps more nefarious.

My point is you have to be careful about criminalizing thought.

TITLE 18 > PART II > CHAPTER 227 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3559
the term “serious violent felony” means—
(i) a Federal or State offense, by whatever designation and wherever committed, consisting of murder (as described in section 1111); manslaughter other than involuntary manslaughter (as described in section 1112); assault with intent to commit murder (as described in section 113 (a)); assault with intent to commit rape; aggravated sexual abuse and sexual abuse (as described in sections 2241 and 2242); abusive sexual contact (as described in sections 2244 (a)(1) and (a)(2)); kidnapping; aircraft piracy (as described in section 46502 of Title 49); robbery (as described in section 2111, 2113, or 2118); carjacking (as described in section 2119); extortion; arson; firearms use; firearms possession (as described in section 924 (c)); or attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit any of the above offenses; and...

Conspiracy to commit a crime is a crime, and has been for a long time. What does this have to do with criminalizing thought anyways? Them having records of your license plate doesn't suddenly give them the power to pull warrants based on your thoughts. You'd still have to break the law, it just gives them more information once you do.

 

[Nemesis999]

This falls into the same category as the pictures on Google maps. People bitch and moan about invasion of privacy, but, when it comes down to it, this is nothing more then recording publicly observable information.

 

[theDreamer]

Please do not misquote me. I stated, "certain" things that are planned are illegal.
The one true freedom we have is what we have in our mind, if you want to think about crazy things go ahead. Yet when someone starts to draw plans, or gathering materials, it is better to be prepared then to just let him continue his plan and react.

Back on topic, this idea is not illegal.
Now about the storage of information being wrong, how so? You have done nothing wrong? So what, just because someone has not committed a crime does not make them free of being watched. Not I do not mean "watched" in terms of 24/7 video surveillance, but if you are in public you are free to be viewed by anyone, including the government.

Horrible example, but here it goes:
~So you have committed no crime ever, so does that mean we do not need video cameras in stores to watch you? Do they black out whenever you get in front of them because you do not steal, or have not ever?

So are you going to be mad that stores and other business save there videos of their businesses so to have for records?

 

[w1retap]

Nothing the American Communist Lawyer's Union does really surprises me anymore. This really isn't a big issue. It is very minor compared to some of the things they file lawsuits "against" or "in support of".

 

[stabilep]

I believe that since you are on public roads you have no expectation of privacy at all. The reason for logging where plate was last seen seems clear to me. Lets say a black mustang drives by a squad car the scanner logs it as usual and remembers the plate number and where it was when it saw this plate. Then 10 minutes later an alert goes out all cars look for a black mustang with such and such plate number suspect is believed to be involved in a pair of shootings. This is a very real situation. The police can now say vehicle was known to last be heading down highway 13 southbound. Good now all cars can head in that direction and follow the road south. This is much better then hoping that a car randomly happens upon a squad car and that the squad car can see their plate number and compare it to the alert.

Same thing can happen in a kidnapping of a child. They know the guys plate because lets say the kidnapper is the divorced father of the child and has lost custody. In his grief and confusion he decides to kidnap the child. A report is made and a plate number is put out because the police know who it was. Well they weren't looking for him 20 minutes ago when the incident took place but they can now still figure out where that vehicle was last seen. And try and figure out where the suspect is going. That seems to me to be a pretty useful thing and IMO worthwhile for a computer to know that I was on Highway 13 at a given time. Hell the guy who i flipped off on highway 13 probably knows I was there too or the guy in his house taking pictures of the highway at that time or the new copter recording the traffic jam I am stuck in with my plate on TV for all who are watching to see and record.

 

[nilepez]

Only criminals and potential criminals have anything to fear from teh government

Exactly, so why does it matter if they mark your car on where it was on a "public" street? It does not matter, especially seeing as most likely they will never ever acquire that data again or bring it up.

You already do register with the state, it is called a drivers licenses, and it has your address on it. Oh no, now they know here you live in a government computer.

WOW. you seriously deserve neither liberty nor security.

FYI, my statement was over-the-top saracasm. Perhaps you should do a bit of study on the founding fathers. They absolutely didn't trust the government, even though they created it.

 

[nilepez]

What the ACLU (fine people who perform a very necessary function in our society) is actually objecting to here is the efficiency of the means to check the status of the license plates, not the checking. And that's where they fail.

What I object to isn't the efficiency. It's the keeping that info in perpetuity.

 

[theDreamer]

WOW. you seriously deserve neither liberty nor security.

FYI, my statement was over-the-top saracasm. Perhaps you should do a bit of study on the founding fathers. They absolutely didn't trust the government, even though they created it.

What the heck are you talking about? Way to be rude & inappropriate.
I know the history of the founding fathers, they did not hate government, they hated the power that government gained by just giving itself more and seizing whatever it pleased. Which is why they created the form of government that they did.

 

[nilepez]

And if it was as difficult to get a license in the US as it is in Germany, I'd agree with revocation of speed limits in many places. However, in the US, a pulse is good enough to get you a license (a requirement they seem to waive down here in Florida) and most people are way too stupid to cope with high speeds. A society that, by and large, can't acknowledge something as simple as that the left lane is for PASSING, simply isn't ready for unregulated roads. It sucks, but what can you do?

You don't have to be German to drive on a German highway. And it's pretty common to drive through Germany on the way to someplace else (says the guy who's driven through a half dozen times, but never had Germany as my starting point or destination).

 

[nilepez]

That's very Minority Report of you. Maybe we should analyze people's genes, figure out who's likely to commit a crime and throw them in jail beforehand too. Or put ankle bracelets on everyone, not just criminals. And have random searches on the street. After all, if it saves a few lives who cares how many freedoms we have to take away. </sarcasm>

It's a lost cause. Using their logic, we should all be implanted with devices that can track and monitor us so that police can determine if we're doing anything wrong (or might do something wrong down the road). They're willing to give up liberties for the illusion of security and protection from things that might happen, but probably will not.

 

[Moofasa~]

What the heck are you talking about? Way to be rude & inappropriate.
I know the history of the founding fathers, they did not hate government, they hated the power that government gained by just giving itself more and seizing whatever it pleased. Which is why they created the form of government that they did.

He's alluding to a Ben Franklin quote, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".

Granted I have only read this post of yours, but it does not appear that you know your American History too well. The reason the founding fathers created this specific form of government was that they were afraid of giving all the power to one man (for obvious reasons) and they were also afraid of giving all power to the (common) people (they believed they lacked the intelligence to maintain a stable government). Therefore they created a government that was in between these two extremes, not for the reasons you stated above.

While your reasons may describe why our country first revolted against Britain, they are not the cause of our current government. You seem to have forgotten that we started out with a confederacy for a short period of time, but only switched to a federation after it became painfully obvious that our country lacked a strong enough central government.

 

[HOCP4ME]

You might be interested in this very well written law review article on the "I have nothing to hide" fallacy.

Thanks; I'm now in the process of reading it.

Horrible example, but here it goes:
~So you have committed no crime ever, so does that mean we do not need video cameras in stores to watch you? Do they black out whenever you get in front of them because you do not steal, or have not ever?

So are you going to be mad that stores and other business save there videos of their businesses so to have for records?

Actually, that's a good point. When you step into a store, the store's owners reserves the right to watch you and store your video tape; no one disputes that. So, let's apply the same logic to license plate scanners: when you drive on the roads, the roads' owner (the government) reserves the right to watch you and store your license plate info. What, you trust big business more than the government?

Nothing the American Communist Lawyer's Union does really surprises me anymore. This really isn't a big issue. It is very minor compared to some of the things they file lawsuits "against" or "in support of".

I don't like the ACLU either, but let's not get ad hominem here.

WOW. you seriously deserve neither liberty nor security.

FYI, my statement was over-the-top saracasm. Perhaps you should do a bit of study on the founding fathers. They absolutely didn't trust the government, even though they created it.

You know, the US government is much more trustworthy than a lot of people think. The government is not going to use license plate tracking for anything other than law enforcement, even if they could think of another use (I cannot at the moment; knowing the exact location of 300,000 people is not much different than knowing the general dispersion pattern of 300,000 people.)

Still don't want to trust the government? Name one time in the past thirty years when the government has misused any sort of data whatsoever.

 

[HOCP4ME]

What I object to isn't the efficiency. It's the keeping that info in perpetuity.

Keeping the data has other legitamate uses, such as alabi-checking.

 

[jmackay]

Actually, that's a good point. When you step into a store, the store's owners reserves the right to watch you and store your video tape; no one disputes that. So, let's apply the same logic to license plate scanners: when you drive on the roads, the roads' owner (the government) reserves the right to watch you and store your license plate info. What, you trust big business more than the government?

I doubt those store owners store all of those video tapes for days or months, let alone years.

People don't have a problem with them storing it temporally, but keeping it for a long time turns into tracking people. Like others have said, why don't they just imbed us with chips so they always know where we are. Its ok because if we don't do anything there is no downside right?

Still don't want to trust the government? Name one time in the past thirty years when the government has misused any sort of data whatsoever.

WMD? Or are you talking about things like this (Just a quick search of hardocp's news):

Thousands of credit card numbers were stolen from a state government Web site that allows residents to register their cars and buy state permits, authorities said Friday.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MTY2NzksLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=

A security firm is reporting that hackers have stolen information from the U.S. Department of Transportation and several U.S. corporations

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjY5NDcsLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=

There are plenty more stories that I've read about where websites get hacked and lots of data (SSN and more) gets leaked out.

 

[Technoob]

What I object to isn't the efficiency. It's the keeping that info in perpetuity.

Info on the status of your license and registration is already kept indefinately. Not sure what the objection is here.

 

[Ockie]

I doubt those store owners store all of those video tapes for days or months, let alone years.

Depends on the type of store. I know some who stores for months.

People don't have a problem with them storing it temporally, but keeping it for a long time turns into tracking people. Like others have said, why don't they just imbed us with chips so they always know where we are. Its ok because if we don't do anything there is no downside right?

The reason people don't store tapes for long is nothing to do with tracking, it's all to do with money. Right now hard drives are being used more than ever, so stores are starting to save their videos on there indefnitley, especially the new bluray video recorders, it's making a lot of things possible for a cheap price.

Chips is a whole diffrent argument, not even remotley the same. When it comes down to chips, even I have a problem with that. When it comes to national ID cards or something I am FORCED to carry with me, then I have a problem with that.

This is just a public domain, using existing public information, using existing police technology, and just automating the process. Think about a program that would scan your plate, check your speed, and issue you a ticket, all the cop has to do is hand you the ticket.... what would be wrong with this picture?

WMD? Or are you talking about things like this (Just a quick search of hardocp's news):

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MTY2NzksLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=

Lets see, WMD's or License plates... hmmm... I don't see any problems with using this as a relation whatsoever. (Rollseyes)

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjY5NDcsLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=

There are plenty more stories that I've read about where websites get hacked and lots of data (SSN and more) gets leaked out.

Lets see, financial data, private information.... and other sensitive information... hmmm... perhaps you should know, that this information is not public... nor is plate information. lol.

Comparing publically obtainable information vs comparing it with private sensitive data, not even the same thing. I have a problem with sensitive information, but public information is just that... public!



For the record, I am making my own log here, lets see if you guys can deciper my life and who knows what..
Picked up at 6ish this morning
Dropped off to the back of my building around 7
Went to the company mail station
Went to work
Walked over to other building
Walked back to primary building with laptop


Now, let's see, in none of those cases I saw a cop, so the plate recordning wouldn't have even captured me, in the other cases, the information is just so useless or I'm not using a plate or I'm being driven somewhere (imagine taking a cap for example). What does this information hold? Nothing. Perhaps for crimes, it would be GREAT to have it logged. I don't plan on committing any crimes, so I am all good to go... so if I am ever to be accused of something I didn't do... I can simply say "check your logs" and be cleared.

 

[jmackay]

Ockie next time please read what I am replying to, its much better if you don't take my sentences out of context, thanks.

He was saying the government never misused information, I gave examples refuting that argument by showing when the government manipulated information or that information was stolen by hackers.

How would you like it if some hacker or stalker stole all of the travel information for people, what about thieves, easy to know who is going where if they have access to everyones travel information.

Also what if that chip in your head only turned on when you left your house, is it ok then?

I am forced to carry a license plate on a vehicle I own, otherwise I will be breaking the law.

We have too much government oversight as is, we have already lost the internet (look up all the crap about AT&T's secret data storage centers).

I agree that this could help catch people, but storing the information for a long time is just a disaster waiting to happen.

This is just a public domain, using existing public information, using existing police technology, and just automating the process. Think about a program that would scan your plate, check your speed, and issue you a ticket, all the cop has to do is hand you the ticket.... what would be wrong with this picture?

Nothing is wrong with that, people shouldn't speed. What I think is wrong is having it keep the license, date/time, location and whatever else stored somewhere for years.

 

[Ockie]

Ockie next time please read what I am replying to, its much better if you don't take my sentences out of context, thanks.

LOL

He was saying the government never misused information, I gave examples refuting that argument by showing when the government manipulated information or that information was stolen by hackers.

And I said that it's a complete diffrent story and to use it in your agenda on this subject is false.

How would you like it if some hacker or stalker stole all of the travel information for people, what about thieves, easy to know who is going where if they have access to everyones travel information.

I think you are forgetting about one minor problem. It doesn't record whereever you go, it records where you are AT at the time it takes a picture as the cruiser drives past your car.... you could be in the middle of a highway, broken down on the side, or not even driving the car.

You could take a bike, walk, run, carpool, or take a cab/bus.... how is that going to accuratley detirmine where you go?

If you park in the garage the chances of a cop car with this equipment passing you as you enter your garage is going to be slim... for all that matters, you might have passed the house!

Also, a hacker can go to the public records and find where you live, heck, if you post online he can already start getting ideas using common network tools. A hacker doesn't have to wait for a cop to drive around, take some pics, upload it into the network, and then hack the information... he can simply follow your credit card... or heck, go obtain public records of where you own property... doesn't even take a hacker to do this.

Also what if that chip in your head only turned on when you left your house, is it ok then?

I don't get this logic, the fact that something tracks you wherever you go vs something that takes a snapshot of your location in time and only when the cruiser with the appropriate cameras passes you.

This is not a consistent tracking tool, it's a spot tracking, you know how inconsistent and useless the data would be? I could drive for days without passing a cop, much less one with a camera system that is rare.

I am forced to carry a license plate on a vehicle I own, otherwise I will be breaking the law.

I'm not even going to bother commenting on this one. lol

We have too much government oversight as is, we have already lost the internet (look up all the crap about AT&T's secret data storage centers).

Not really an oversight IMO, the cruiser doesn't have to map your locations as it sees you, it may even never pass you in such a way.

Secret Data Storage centers? lmao... go to the NSA and they can show you (well, they wont) that they have been doing this for decades.

I agree that this could help catch people, but storing the information for a long time is just a disaster waiting to happen.

Like possibly clearing peoples names? Possibly nabing terrorists? Criminals? Pedos?

Nothing is wrong with that, people shouldn't speed. What I think is wrong is having it keep the license, date/time, location and whatever else stored somewhere for years.

It keeps a simple entry, for starters, no one knows if it's even encrypted or kept offline or even kept for a month (maybe they consider that long periods). People are freaking out over a simple solution that has proven itself very sucessful up in Canada... which just happened to be one of the most laxed governments. It proved itself sucessful in saving THOUSANDS of lives in London.

 

[Gambit]

True. Little known fact: every day, thousands of germans die because most of the autobahn has no speedlimit </sarcasm>.

I (obviously) see the sarcasm... keep in mind though, the autobahn *DOES* have a speed limit in some parts.

It is called prevention, most police forces are reactive to a situation, but with modern technology if we can STOP a crime would that be better than letting a few people hurt or maybe die then stop them?

Yes, preventing a crime is always better than reacting to one. However, preservation of our rights should still be held above that. The government should not be infringing on our rights for any reason, even if they say it's for our own safety.

 

[Gambit]

People are freaking out over a simple solution that has proven itself very sucessful up in Canada... which just happened to be one of the most laxed governments. It proved itself sucessful in saving THOUSANDS of lives in London.

I don't see how people trying to provide Canada's lax govenment not doing anything as a case in point on how it won't be used poorly here.

For instance, you're saying "it's been proven successful in Canada, which has a laxed government" ... well yeah... they have a lax government. Now if instead it was "it's been proven successful in Canada which definitely does *not* have a laxed government", that would have more meaning. In the current statement, it just means that the government is too laxed to do anything... so me a government that's willing to abuse the system (but doesn't), *then* I'll agree.

 

[HOCP4ME]

WMD? Or are you talking about things like this (Just a quick search of hardocp's news):

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MTY2NzksLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MjY5NDcsLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=

There are plenty more stories that I've read about where websites get hacked and lots of data (SSN and more) gets leaked out.

I asked for an instance when the government misused information. You gave me instances when hackers stole information and then misused it. The government is not misusing the information here; hackers are.

You might say that the government facilitated the misuse of the information since it was stolen from them. That is not true, however, as hackers can and do get the information available at government websites from other sources, such as banks, online stores, and citizens' computers.

Furthermore, license plate tracking data is not going to be available at any government website. Since the data does not need to be accessed by anyone other than law enforcement (unlike credit card numbers and band account info), it can be kept much more securely.

 

[Gambit]

You might say that the government facilitated the misuse of the information since it was stolen from them. That is not true, however, as hackers can and do get the information available at government websites from other sources, such as banks, online stores, and citizens' computers.

I agree... but if the hackers got the information from the government it doesn't matter where else they can get it from; the government still didn't secure it well enough.

 

[derone]

This is just one more step to complete fascism.
Government run for corporations.

zeitgeistmovie.com

Frank Zappa


The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theatre. (1977)

 

[w1retap]

This is just one more step to complete fascism.
Government run for corporations.

zeitgeistmovie.com

Frank Zappa


The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theatre. (1977)

 

[AlTio]

The privacy concerns are not unfounded, people that want to limmit their governments ability and power over themselfs have genuine reasons...

Once these "infrastructures" are in place, they will lobby some new legistlation that makes your daily life required per capita... or proquo? or whatever status quo that they design... like little machines you will be forced to go to work in fear of being scanned at the wrong time of day in the wrong place etc... If you don't clock into work, it may be "LAW" breaking and issue a warrant to activate the scanners to find where you are located....or you have an instant ticket if you drive on the far side of town, to enjoy the scenery, you are scanned, they issue a warrant for wasting resources based on the "route" because of the demand on fuels and polution concerns by the epa... The unforseable things that these technologies can facilitate an overpowering overcontrolling government... This is why we are encouraged to protect our constitution and uphold our first amendment with our second ammendment... Tools like this are very good for tracking down cars at a time and place quickly, if it aids in the capture of a criminal that might have otherwise escaped to maybe kill one of your kids etc... This system has been in place at intersections for about 10 years, but they won't admit in using it to log traffic habits of individuals untill it lands them a big PR snatch like all the sudden these peoples habbits chaged and they decided to tail them and found them to be scary drug lords and were arranging a major drug deal, or some terrorist plot or whatever bigtime PR thing makes it into a "wow" i'm sure glad that was being done!!!!! or it will be some ursurped parrental unit proclaiming to not have had enough people watching after her unsupervised children because she was too busy working her 9-5 in order to afford to feed/clothe and provide shelter for their family... yeah.. you got that right, people too busy to watch their own kids, their kids don't get involved in discussions like this... it's not allowed to be curriculum "unless it's insite into how to evade potential arguments against implimentation" why all this law about what people are doing in their cars....it's just one more automatic thing that prevents some american from being hired in lue of paying for a machine.. It's anti-job... Why not make everyone police officers and have sanctioned events where people can let loose without killing eachother or breaking someone elses prized possessions... why not pay officers a commission asside from their salary for aiding in criminal persecution... private contracts that encourage the officer to do a better jop at convicting actual criminals... penalties for errors too...and not have so many restrictions on life that are designed to "proliferate revenue"

 

[GoldenTiger]

Yes, preventing a crime is always better than reacting to one. However, preservation of our rights should still be held above that. The government should not be infringing on our rights for any reason, even if they say it's for our own safety.

100% correct... people who agree to these kinds of monitoring schemes should not be living in America. They would likely feel more at home in China or South Korea. Doesn't ANYONE remember why this country was founded in the first place, and what our founding fathers gave their lives, their very souls to help secure for future generations?

 

[w1retap]

100% correct... people who agree to these kinds of monitoring schemes should not be living in America. They would likely feel more at home in China or South Korea. Doesn't ANYONE remember why this country was founded in the first place, and what our founding fathers gave their lives, their very souls to help secure for future generations?

A license plate scanner on public roads does not interfere with any rights. Nor do video cameras looking for criminals in public places.

 

[GoldenTiger]

A license plate scanner on public roads does not interfere with any rights. Nor do video cameras looking for criminals in public places.

Not the point. The point is that it collects it into a database for future reference without you ever having done anything, and could be (ab)used to track your movements, habits, and whereabouts.

 

[nobody_here]

Let the plate hunter hunt. Unless you stole a car, using a car that belongs to a felon, or you are
using a license plate that is also being used by a criminal, you have nothing to fear.

agreed, i mean come on guys...."privacy" and "rights" i think has nothing to do with this when you consider you put the plate on the outside of your car and drive it in public....if you want your plate to be private, keep the car in the garage....

these ACLU freakos need to find a good cause and stop with the henny penny bullshit, privacy comes into play when i walk into my home, restroom, etc.....i dont think anything you do in or outside of a car on public streets is something that can be considered private....what do we do next? sue people for looking at me as i drive by?

 

[Celsius]

The bill of rights is under attack every day. With each monitoring with each new law we lose a little bit more freedom. It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them and tragedy of our day is the climate of fear in which we live and fear breeds repression.

I'm an ACLU member. If it was not for them so much would have been lost. Nude artwork would have been taken down because it offended someone. Books would have been burned because they offeneded someone.

I have been in countries where there is no freedom no speech, no voting, no rights to protect you.

The sole purpose of the ACLU is to protect the bill of rights. My god its the most American thing you could do as a citizen to protect the very rights that all Americans would fight for.

Every American has the same rights. To the policeman to the sex offender. The same rights. The same playing field.

How would your life be without those rights? I've been to china and iraq get a taste of life without freedom.