How police track your driving

[n2doc]

At a rapid pace, and mostly hidden from the public, police agencies throughout California have been accumulating millions of license-plate readings from devices placed atop patrol cars and feeding them into intelligence centers operated by local, state and federal law enforcement, the Center for Investigative Reporting has found.

With heightened concern over secret intelligence operations at the National Security Agency, the localized effort to track drivers highlights the extent to which the government has committed to collecting large amounts of data on people who have done nothing wrong.

A year ago, the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center — one of dozens of law enforcement intelligence-sharing centers set up after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — signed a $340,000 agreement with the Silicon Valley firm Palantir to construct a database of license plate records flowing in from police using the devices across 14 counties, documents and interviews show. The extent of the center’s data collection has never been revealed.

Law enforcement says license-plate reading has been a boon to its efforts to spot people wanted on outstanding warrants, recover stolen cars and even arrest murder suspects. Privacy advocates say the price is unacceptably high — millions of people who have done nothing wrong, having their movements recorded by the government.

http://blog.sfgate.com/stew/2013/06/26/how-police-track-your-driving/#13569-1


The Cancer is pervasive.

[Recursion]

1. What's "cancerous" about this?

Last edited Fri Jun 28, 2013, 09:02 PM - Edit history (1)

http://cironline.org/reports/license-plate-readers-let-police-collect-millions-records-drivers-4883

You're on a public road. What privacy are you expecting?

[Arctic Dave]

4. I am going to assume that the police in return let the public view and store their where abouts

by letting them view their GPS locators?

No? Why not? They have no reason for privacy whatsoever since they are on public roads being paid with public money. Correct?

[Recursion]

6. Probably the same reason they can have more powerful guns than we can? (nt)

[Arctic Dave]

9. What guns are those? Nt

[Recursion]

18. SWAT teams have honest to God assault rifles (nt)

[Arctic Dave]

44. For a nominal fee we can all have one.

As per RKBA.

[Recursion]

45. Nope

Assault rifles are limited to holders of Federal Firearms Licenses (which involves an extensive background check) with permission of local law enforcement and a $250 tax stamp, and the rifles themselves are limited to those in civilian hands in 1986 (I think there are a few thousand out there).

[Arctic Dave]

47. So I was correct, if you have the money you can have one.

So now that we settled that let's talk about the issue.

We need to be able to track these public assets,on public roads,being funded with public money. It's what's best.

[Android3.14]

59. What? No response?

Did Recursion fail to recur?
I always have to laugh when someone realizes they are defending the indefensible, and their response is to pretend they weren't doing it.
I have a cat that does that every time she falls off the back of the couch.

[Demit]

67. LOL!

I totally get the face-saving part, but I'll bet your cat never falls off the couch defending the police state. Admirable species.

[Recursion]

74. Enough money, a clean record, permission of local law enforcement

And you know somebody who's selling one.

So, no, we can't all have one. There aren't enough pre-1986 ones in the country.

[pkdu]

76. ....and "crickets" , well played . Nt

[oldhippie]

113. You're close, but not quite right ...

The stamp is $200, not $250. And it doesn't take a Federal Firearms License, just an approved application by the ATF, which is when you get the stamp. Permission from local law enforcement is NOT necessary if you apply as a Corporation or a Trust, but there is still the Federal background investigation by the ATF.

I currently have applications in for two silencers (ATF Form 4) and making two Short Barreled Rifles (ATF Form 1) and paid my $800 for the stamp applications. They were done under a Revocable Living Trust, so I didn't need local LEO approval, though I could have gotten it. I hope to receive the approvals in August.

I could use the same process to get a full auto assault rifle (and you're right about the pre-86 thing) but I really don't want a full auto. I can't see spending the money on the ammo.

This is all under Federal and Texas law. Some states don't allow it.

[pa28]

94. You know. I think that's an excellent idea.

They say you can never find a police officer when you really need one. Fortunately for us current technology could easily solve that problem by providing a real time map of the police presence we all pay for.

[Mojorabbit]

5. It is part of a larger puzzle of surveillance.

I am sad that you are ok with all of this
I am very glad that many people are not.
Peace, Mojo

[Recursion]

7. I'm "OK" in the sense that I have no illusions about turning back this clock

Private surveillance companies have this capability; I see no reason to keep this from the police too.

[TransitJohn]

17. 4th Amendment ring a bell?

Police are agents of the state.

[Recursion]

20. Doesn't remotely apply here

Police can observe in public all they want. That's actually kind of their job.

[TransitJohn]

25. Oh, okay.

I'm assuming that you've studied law. Because to my layman's understanding, it's at best unsettled in case law, and at worst straight up unconstitutional. They are doing far more than observing in public, they're data mining individuals' movements when they aren't under investigation for anything.

[jberryhill]

84. That's why all those cars are registered, licensed

...and have a metal plaque on them for identifying them.

They made me get one of those plates even though I wasn't under investigation for anything.

[HardTimes99]

11. Oy vey. On a seemingly 'progressive' board, no less - nt

[AnotherMcIntosh]

43. Ain't that the truth. n/t

Last edited Fri Jun 28, 2013, 01:03 PM - Edit history (1)

[markiv]

63. total surveilence and indentured servitude are progressive issues

(H-1b visas doubled in the senate bill passed yesterday)

at least they are NOW

wonder what will next become 'progressive'

reminds me of Orwell's 'Animal Farm'

There was a deadly silence. Amazed, terrified, huddling together, the animals watched the long line of pigs march slowly round the yard. It was as though the world had turned upside?down. Then there came a moment when the first shock had worn off and when, in spite of everything?in spite of their terror of the dogs, and of the habit, developed through long years, of never complaining, never criticising, no matter what happened?they might have uttered some word of protest. But just at that moment, as though at a signal, all the sheep burst out into a tremendous bleating of?
"Four legs good, two legs better! Four legs good, two legs better! Four legs good, two legs better!"

It went on for five minutes without stopping. And by the time the sheep had quieted down, the chance to utter any protest had passed, for the pigs had marched back into the farmhouse. Benjamin felt a nose nuzzling at his shoulder. He looked round. It was Clover. Her old eyes looked dimmer than ever. Without saying anything, she tugged gently at his mane and led him round to the end of the big barn, where the Seven Commandments were written. For a minute or two they stood gazing at the tatted wall with its white lettering.
"My sight is failing," she said finally. "Even when I was young I could not have read what was written there.
But it appears to me that that wall looks different. Are the Seven Commandments the same as they used to be, Benjamin?"
For once Benjamin consented to break his rule, and he read out to her what was written on the wall. There was nothing there now except a single Commandment. It ran:
ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS

[rhett o rick]

12. You seem to have a real problem with the concepts of "freedom" and "liberty". nm

[jberryhill]

15. Whose freedom or liberty to travel is being infringed?

Yes, people see you when you are out and about in public.

There's a guy who lives on the corner of my street who probably sees me every time I leave or come home.

How can I stop him from doing that?

If you want to, you can plant yourself on a corner and write down license plate numbers all day long. You have the freedom to do that, as does anyone else.

Should it be illegal for you to watch what is going on in public? If not, then why should what you can do be illegal for anyone else?

[TransitJohn]

26. None of your cases involve cops

that's the difference. Cops are agents of the state.

[jberryhill]

27. So?

A cop is allowed to do in public what any other person is allowed to do in public in relation to what they can look at, record, etc.

There is not some additional qualification on what they are allowed to look at or record which does not apply to anyone else.

[Recursion]

28. should cops also close their eyes when you drive past?

Seems inefficient. How about we only hire blind cops?

[jberryhill]

29. It reminds me of those threads on DU where....

...people post pictures of the protest they attended, and then complain that police were taking pictures.

[TransitJohn]

32. No, they should observe for law breaking. They shouldn't record and geotag my passing for data mini

mining purposes in the future. How can you not see the difference? You're being deliberately obtuse to score some weird point about how intrusion by cops is a-ok.

[Recursion]

33. Well they haven't kept it to that, ever

Cops are nosy. It's part of being cops. Plenty of cops run plates they see when they're in traffic for warrants.

Why do we have individual license plates if we are supposed to be able to drive anonymously?

[TransitJohn]

35. To make sure taxes were paid.

Plates show that your vehicle is registered. Nothing more nor less.

[Recursion]

37. Actually historically you're dead wrong; plates used to be your driver's license

The first license plates were also your driver's license; if you got behind the wheel of a different car, you had to switch plates.

They have always been about operator identification.

[TransitJohn]

40. So we're talking about plates' historicity now?

I'm confused about what you want to talk about except that data mining by johnny law on citizens who have committed no crimes is hunkey dory.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

49. You say "plates used to be your driver's license." No. At no time have my plates been my driver's

license.

It is factually not true.

[Recursion]

51. Plates used to be "one's" driver's license (nt)

[AnotherMcIntosh]

53. It's still bullshit. I've been driving for more than 55 years. It never happened.

It probably never happened to you either.

It's probably not in the experience of anyone posting on this board.

[Recursion]

54. Because driving started 55 years ago

[AnotherMcIntosh]

58. "deliberately obtuse to score some weird point about how intrusion by cops is a-ok". Exactly.

[markiv]

70. reminds me of this movie scene

[rhett o rick]

64. Illogical fallacies galore. nm

[jberryhill]

80. Would you care to elaborate?

[rhett o rick]

100. No. When you turn to logical fallacies then you dont want to discuss. nm

[rhett o rick]

111. You may love Big Brother taking care of you, but I dont.

Police can look at me all they want. I do not want them tracking me, recording where I've been, etc.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12528092

[jberryhill]

116. That wasn't the question

In what way do these cameras infringe your freedom or liberty to travel?

I was not asking for a simplistic personal characterization.

[Recursion]

23. Whose freedom or liberty do you imagine is being infringed?

Do I have some right not to be observed in public that I don't know about?

[frylock]

42. one day you'll wake up wondering what the fuck happened..

enjoy your sense of security in the meantime.

[HiPointDem]

124. they're pros. they don't care & will never care.

[rhett o rick]

65. Illogical fallacy. Didnt say anything about "being observed". Come back whey you want

a serious discussion.

[Recursion]

66. Yes, you did. This is observing people in public.

You said it shouldn't be allowed.

[rhett o rick]

73. I object to my movements being tracked, recorded and put in a computer. nm

[rhett o rick]

112. See this article.

You may love Big Brother tucking you in at night, I dont.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12528092

[Romulus Quirinus]

62. Recursion's not one of the bad guys.

I think he's just given up on the idea of going back to time before this was possible.

If we accept that premise, what other options do we have to balance the scales? Perhaps some form of radical tranparency, where everything is in the open and everyone, from the President down, truly lives in a glass house? How do you stop this kind of tracking, using technology?

[rhett o rick]

75. The police departments work for us. We can tell them they need to limit their blanket

surveillance of the public.

I agree that technology makes it easier for a tyranny to control us, but that's all the reason to fight harder.

[sofa king]

48. Because it is noting but a revenue stream.

First they'll tell you that it's awesome for catching murderers and the like. But what it really is is a revenue stream.

The spying effort is costly, and if it is not used to predict where speeders can be busted, where people run stop signs, where people park facing the wrong way on residential streets, and whose tags are expired, then the vanishingly small and mostly imaginary returns that are realized for intervening real crimes could never be afforded--but I caution you, the state's claim that's what it's for could be complete bullshit.

If you want to see how full of shit California is, just ask yourself how many murderers this system has apprehended. The real answer is almost certainly "none," or a very low number, and California was quite likely completely lying about the efficacy of the system right now. If one reporter presses them on it, they will probably admit that the traffic cameras provided corroborative evidence after the fact, but did not "catch" anyone.

So, in other words, California is going to use the surveillance system to force drivers to pay for an increased police presence, not on the roads or on the sidewalks where they are actually needed, but in some basement where they piece together your personal habits and figure out how to pay for themselves by busting you on your way to and from work. It's one step beyond the meter maids and traffic cops, neither of whom have a purpose higher than generating money.

Californians can easily but not legally end the problem by destroying the cameras, which are certainly too expensive to replace at an increased rate; they can also legally but not easily fight the surveillance state by simply contesting every possible case and gumming up the legal system until it grinds to a halt (successfully done by jaywalkers in Washington DC in the 1990s, by the way).

They're counting on the rule of law to apply only to you and not to them, but the law of economics knows no such rules. If you guys make it too expensive for them to spy on you, they will have to stop.

[kirby]

102. People like you...

Are the reason we have no privacy. When people accept these more and more invasive monitoring technologies, it ruins it for everyone.
Certainly there is a difference between a casual run in with law enforcement versus a constant state of surveillance and there historically has been different expectation if privacy. But now that people like you accept this, it redefines what is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Ultimately when the next big landmark privacy supreme court case come around, they will be entering quotes from people like you into the record as to how it is acceptable. Thanks!

[Recursion]

103. On what principle would you keep police from doing this? (nt)

[randome]

107. It's the 21st century and the new generation doesn't care about this shit!

Get with the program or not but stop standing in the way!

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Egalitarian Thug]

118. Exactly what you write on all of these issues, an obsequious acceptance of

the appalling course this nation is on.

You honestly don't have a problem with the ever-growing control over our lives.

[Fire Walk With Me]

132. Man astonished to find he'd been photographed 112 times by police license plate reader tech

http://cironline.org/reports/license-plate-readers-let-police-collect-millions-records-drivers-4883

When the city of San Leandro, Calif., purchased a license-plate reader for its police department in 2008, computer security consultant Michael Katz-Lacabe asked the city for a record of every time the scanners had photographed his car.

The results shocked him.

The paperback-size device, installed on the outside of police cars, can log thousands of license plates in an eight-hour patrol shift. Katz-Lacabe said it had photographed his two cars on 112 occasions, including one image from 2009 that shows him and his daughters stepping out of his Toyota Prius in their driveway.

That photograph, Katz-Lacabe said, made him “frightened and concerned about the magnitude of police surveillance and data collection.” The single patrol car in San Leandro equipped with a plate reader had logged his car once a week on average, photographing his license plate and documenting the time and location.

(More at the link.)

[think]

2. Palantir is the same private contrator that apologized for involvement in Wikileaks smear campaign

and for spying on Greenwald:

Palantir Apologizes For WikiLeaks Attack Proposal, Cuts Ties With HBGary
Andy Greenberg, Forbes Staff
2/11/2011 @ 8:03AM

It’s been a long week for security firm HBGary.

First the loose hacker group Anonymous retaliated against one of the firm’s employees investigating Anonymous by hacking into the corporation’s servers and spilling 50,000 emails onto the Web. Then a string of those stolen emails revealed a proposal by the firm and two others to launch a campaign of illegal cyberattacks and calculated misinformation against WikiLeaks and its supporters.

Now, just a few days later, one of those firms, Palo Alto-based Palantir, has publicly cut ties with HBGary and apologized for its role in the WikiLeaks response plan, essentially verifying the reality of that plan and isolating HBGary further....

~Snip~

"As the Co-Founder and CEO of Palantir Technologies, I have directed the company to sever any and all contacts with HB Gary.

Palantir Technologies provides a software analytic platform for the analysis of data. We do not provide – nor do we have any plans to develop – offensive cyber capabilities. Palantir Technologies does not build software that is designed to allow private sector entities to obtain non-public information, engage in so-called “cyber attacks” or take other offensive measures.

~Snip~

Furthermore, personally and on behalf of the entire company, I want to publicly apologize to progressive organizations in general, and Mr. Greenwald in particular, for any involvement that we may have had in these matters....

Full article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2011/02/11/palantir-apologizes-for-wikileaks-attack-proposal-cuts-ties-with-hbgary/

[backscatter712]

3. B-b-but it's LEEEEEEEGAL!!!

Never mind that the cops are acting like a bunch of creepers...

[Kablooie]

8. It should only keep data from cars that are flagged for a reason.

If the car is reported stolen or the driver is suspected of a crime it makes sense but its crazy, and wrong, to keep tons of data on everything it sees.

[Recursion]

24. Why? (nt)

[Kablooie]

41. If my car was stolen I wouldn't mind police using technology to help find it.

If the computer spots the stolen plate there is a reason to retain the data about that car.
The computer would have to be looking at all the random plates around it but it would only keep data on particular plates that were in it's database.
If a plate isn't in the the database the data could easily be erased.

This is essentially what a human officer does.
He scans all the plates around him but only focusses in on ones of particular interest.

It's simply a change of software design that would allow the permanent retention of only selected data.
I see no problem with scanning all visible plates as long as data is only preserved on the flagged ones.

Keeping all the data could allow, for example, a politician to access the database to track another politician to their mistress's house and expose him for political purposes.
This is a simple minded example but misuse of the data would be tempting for people who have access to the database but not possible if the data was selective.

[nolabels]

57. If they would be that dumb to be driving around with stolen plates ...

they should be arrested because who knows what kind of crazy stunt they might try next

[Kablooie]

69. Why do you think there's a TV show called "America's Dumbest Criminals"?

[Recursion]

78. Read the "Weird News" group here sometime

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1103

[treestar]

10. Cops are always looking for plates of cars that are stolen, etc.

So what? You are out on the street then. That's the point of having the plates. Only Libertarians object to car plates.

I remember being roundly scolded on DU for complaining that I got a red light ticket done by camera at an intersection! I thought that was Big Brother! Now it seems I would get sympathy on DU for that!

[rhett o rick]

14. There is a huge difference between scanning for a specific license and tracking

and recording where everyone goes. False equivalency. Same for a red light ticket. It's a one time event, and not tracking and storing personal data.

[Progressive dog]

13. Be afraid, be very afraid

I always cover up my plates before venturing onto public streets and those damn police keep giving me tickets for that.

[HappyMe]

34. All that's left to do

is to destroy ALL of your electronic gadgets, burn your car and move into a cave!


There is a cop that lives in this apartment complex. If I can catch him when he comes home, I'm going to ask about this.

[happyslug]

79. That reminds me of an incident during my Grade School Days.

In my grade school days, I had to cross a four lane highway to get to school. At the crossing was a female, unarmed Police officer (NOT a Crossing Guard, she was a Police Officer, he had the right to give tickets, and did). Don't speed through her intersection or ignore she hand orders to stop. Every so often she would ticket the wrong person and get fired (Most of the people she gave tickets to lived in the new suburban development up the hill from the intersection). but then all of the people in the old coal patch where I lived (and the School was located) protested and she got her old job back.

Anyway one day the township dump truck drove by to do some work on a side road. As they were working she jested to them that the Plate on the truck was completely covered with mud and no one could read it and she should give them a ticket unless it gets clean, The truck driver then walked over to the truck and rub his hand on the dirt and said "See, you can rad it now" and they both laughed and went back to their jobs, her making sure it was safe for the kids to cross the highway, his to keep the road clean.

[99Forever]

128. Nice condescending...

... police/authoritarian/surveillance state scumball propaganda you have there.

I prefer this higher law:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[Progressive dog]

129. I just tried to keep it simple and easily understood

but since you replied to something else, I've failed again. Drat

[99Forever]

130. Oh please.

Save it for the bootlicking sycophants and lapdog apologists, you don't impress me.

[bhikkhu]

16. I feel so violated!

You mean the police have been read my license plates? On public roads even!

[bobduca]

22. Yeah you shouldnt have anything to fear unless you are doing something wrong...

am i right my fellow Authoritarians?

[jberryhill]

31. Why do cars have individual license plates on them?

If a car is inspected and legal to drive on the road, shouldn't it just have a sticker or something?

Why does each one have an individually identifiable license number posted on a piece of metal which is required to be on the car?

[HappyMe]

38. The plates can be used to

identify somebody that did a hit and run, cars involved in gang activity, stolen cars.

If I see a hit and run and I call the cops saying that I saw a silver colored mini-van involved, it would be a needle in a haystack search.

[jberryhill]

85. "it would be a needle in a haystack search"

So, wait a minute.

You are telling me I have to pay to get one of those plates on my cars and into a database, and I have to display that plate at all times just in case I do something illegal?

Why not fingerprint everybody too?

[HappyMe]

87. I'm talking about what they are used for now.

[jberryhill]

88. They are used for finding needles in a haystack

[HappyMe]

90. If there were no license plates,

and you got mowed down by a silver mini-van they would have to look for every silver mini-van in a 50 mile radius.
If I see you get mowed down as it is now, I could say a silver mini-van with plate DF124. They can then find out who owns the van, and start looking there.

[jberryhill]

92. And they won't find that person either

If I run someone down with my car, and think someone else got the plate number, then I'm not going to go to the address where that car is registered.

And if that van was stolen, then so what?

So, they put out an APB for the plate number with, oh, the kidnapped baby in it. Maybe a cop sees it, maybe not. But a camera on the road is not going to miss it.

[HappyMe]

93. Okay.

What the hell do you want from me?

You asked up thread why we have to have license plates. I answered. I also said upthread that there is a cop in my apartment complex, and I'm going to ask him what the deal is with the OP.

Cameras outside of apartments, or in the vestibules in NYC and on some of the corners have caught rapists, some guy running around beating elderly women, robbers...

[Comrade Grumpy]

68. So the state can track our movements at all times?

Is that why?

I don't know about the legality of it, but I find it creepy. Yet another manifestation of the metastasizing surveillance state.

Maybe I should just do Big Brother a favor and chip myself.

[Recursion]

77. What does it take dor Americans to let their drug store purchases be tracked?

$1 paper towels every other Wednesday.

[Comrade Grumpy]

81. The drug store isn't the police.

Corporate data-mining is creepy, too. That's why I just make shit up for my Safeway card. Now Safeway knows this bogus person likes Triscuits and Jose Cuervo.

Where are you heading with this line of thought? If most people are okay with it, it's all right?

[Recursion]

82. It's significantly worse than the police

Where are you heading with this line of thought? If most people are okay with it, it's all right?

That defending privacy for a public that doesn't remotely believe in it is tilting at windmills.

[jberryhill]

86. "If most people are okay with it, it's all right?"

That is, in fact, the basis of the "reasonable expectation of privacy" standard.

[WillyT]

21. K & R !!!

[WovenGems]

30. Silly

As a cop I can call in any plate. No warrant needed. Right? So having a camera that reads plates then asks for info on that plate allows me to not waste my time or dispatches. I am not a cop but do employ logic and empathy to analyze issues. And what we have here is mountains being made out of mole hills.

[randome]

36. Much of this internecine warfare on DU results from a great disconnect in technology, I believe.

Technology makes it much easier to not only grab photos but to store, collate and search them.

And law enforcement is always looking for ways to make their jobs easier.

I think some of us are uncomfortable with the pace of these changes but the genie cannot be put back into the bottle. We need to live with this as best we can, set limits, sure, but also be aware that we will not go back to the way things were.

That's progress.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Uncle Joe]

60. Whatever "limits" are set only seem to be bent at best or broken altogether

with each advancement of technology.

The screws against privacy ever tightening.

Excuse my language but we are seriously heading to a fucked up world.

[randome]

89. I think we're headed for a very different world. Some can adapt, some can't.

I don't mean to disparage you or anyone else when I say that. In retrospect, I was lucky growing up without much in the way of role models because I learned to pick and choose and to be adaptable.

There are definitely lessons to be learned with how things operated in the past but none of us can stop how the new generation will shape the future. I have no problem whatsoever with my phone metadata being stored or pictures of my license plate being taken.

Can the technology be misused? Of course it can. Any technology can be misused. But technology cannot be stopped. If there's one lesson from the past that applies to today, it's that one.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[bvar22]

95. I welcome the new Totalitarian Overlords...

...and the Total Information Awareness Surveillance/Security Homeland Security State.


[font size=3]OMG... 1984 is an Instruction Manual![/font]

[randome]

96. 1984 was published in 1949. Its relevance to today is negligible, IMO.

I know some want to cling to it as some sort of Nostradamus-like 'Bible' of today. But you know something? It's been 1984 for decades now.

Every time society goes through a change, we hear that we are only fulfilling George Orwell's 'prophecy'. It wasn't a prophecy, it was a science fiction novel. A piece of entertainment.

I know that's sacrilegious among those who want to see the worst in life.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[bvar22]

98. Says YOU... with no support and a CLEAR agenda.

The Bill of Rights placing restrictions on our government was finally passed in 1791,
and anyone can see that those ideas are just too old to have any relevance for you either.


I still "cling" to the Traditional Democratic Party Values of FDR too, and these pre-date Orwell!

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be[font size=3]established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.
---FDR, 1944

By your rational, and that of the other "Centrist" Democrats,
these are outdated too.
Should we abandon them and embrace the New Lite Republicanism being preached by our Government?

I don't think so.
I won't go gently into THAT Good Night.


This is OLD too,
but is much more relevant than ANYTHING you have ever posted at DU....Says ME & Benjamin Franklin :
[font size=3]"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."[/font]

[randome]

99. I never said anything that's old is necessarily bad.

But after hearing decade after decade that we are one step away from a 'Big Brother' society, I tend to think the fears are overblown. The new generation will make of the future what they want.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[bvar22]

106. And I think the FEARS are entirely justified.

Would you say we are moving TOWARD a Surveillance/Security State,
or AWAY from one.

The "New Generation" will INHERIT what we give to them.

You talk as if we have crossed some threshold into a new paradigm
where Civil Liberties and protections from an intrusive government are no longer needed.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
The desire of the RICH & Powerful to dominate and control the 99% is nothing new.
It is as OLD as Mankind.
The only difference is that today, the RICH & Powerful have some new, very powerful tools to use.

If anything, [font size=3]we need to be Much More Careful WHAT we give to the "New Generation"[/font]
to make sure that they too can enjoy the protections from government that were given to US by OUR fathers and enshrined in our Constitution.

I am stunned that ANY legitimate member of DU would try to downplay how important this is.

[randome]

109. I think the new generation really doesn't give a shit about trivialies like license plates...

...and metadata. Of all the things in society to be pissed about, this is the stuff we choose to take up arms about?

Sorry, I don't mean to be antagonistic but I'm trying to express how insignificant this kind of stuff is -I think- to the newer generation that grew up with Facebook, 4Square, personal blogs, cellphones, GPS, etc.

I don't think it even registers on their radar. I'm 54 and I have 2 16 year old daughters. That doesn't mean I have my hand on the pulse of the nation or anything but my daughters are very socially aware. This is insignificant to them and to their friends.

Now if misuse or outright abuse turns up, we will all be up in arms and we need laws, rules and regulations to help guard against that.

But the rest of us -myself included- need to stop trying to apply 1949 novel plots to 21st century situations. This is not that world.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[bvar22]

114. It doesn't matter if the New Generation Gives a shit about Government Intrusion...

...and the erosion of our RIGHTS.
I DO!
..and thank gawd my fathers and grandfathers, and their fathers did too.
They WILL come to appreciate it,
or come to regret it if you have your way.

Again, I am stunned that any legitimate member of DU would try so hard to discount this concern,
but I'm NOT stunned that YOU do.

I am NOT OK with the government tracking my movements, and keeping files on my travels.
I used to be free to travel about the USA,
go where I wished,
and associate with whomever I chose without that concern.
I can no longer do so.

This WILL have a suppressing effect on any who wish to legally protest our Government's actions!
*Keystone Pipeline Protesters are already being labeled "terrorists" in the Right Wing Media.

*The police engaged in preemptive arrests of "possible" troublemakers in Minneapolis in 2008, who were then released without charges.

*OWS was targeted by nationally Co-ordinated, violent Militarized Police Suppression last year.

I do NOT trust our government to keep files on MY movements around the USA.
The Police are free to observe my actions in public for evidence of crimes.
The are NOT free to track my movements, and keep files on where I go and what I do.
THAT is protected by the 4th Amendment, among others.

It is NOT a little thing.
It IS a BIG step Over-the-Line!

[randome]

117. But no one IS keeping files on you. They aren't 'tracking' you...

...they're recording pictures of license plates. There are 300 million people in this country. Too many people, too much data.

Of course they could put all this data together, start a file on you, track your every movement but, you know something? We have laws against harassment that usually covers that kind of thing. If we need more laws, we need to make them.

I'm afraid we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this. In today's always on, 24/7 society, taking pictures of license plates seems to be about the least intrusive action they could take. In my opinion.

But this was a good conversation and I appreciate you taking the time to put your thoughts down. It always helps me clarify my own position when I listen to others' opinions.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[bvar22]

119. They WILL have the capability to backtrack through the files at any future date ...

...should I or anyone become a Person of Interest to the Rich & Powerful,
and use the data they have recorded to put together a log of my, or anyone else's travels,
and find out who and where our supporters or friends are.

THIS information, combined with the tracking data from phone calls
and reports from other sources can AND WILL be used to compile a fairly thorough log that WILL be used to attack ANYBODY they wish to discredit, disappear, punish, Teach a Lesson either in the courts, or through other means common to other Authoritarian Surveillance/Security States.

So YES. We ARE being watched, followed, AND our travels recorded for future reference.
Thank gawd my fathers and forefathers had the sense to protect ME from this kind of government over reach.

It is really sad that you are willing to throw this away for our children.
We have already ruined the Environment for them,
and left them THIS that our Party leadership calls a "Recovery".

76% of Americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck
http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/24/pf/emergency-savings/index.html


New Rule (Passed by Congress and signed by President Obama) signals Kiss of Death for Pensions
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100694955

Wealthy win lion's share of major tax breaks
http://www.boston.com/business/news/2013/05/29/wealthy-win-lion-share-major-tax-breaks/Ua0UyYle21EUXub7g1suCI/story.html

Half of America is in poverty, and its creeping toward 75%
http://www.alternet.org/economy/real-numbers-half-america-poverty-and-its-creeping-toward-75-0

Wealth gap widens as labor's share of income falls
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/wealth-gap-widens-labors-share-income-falls-1B6097385

As the Economy Recovers, the Wealth Gap Widens
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2013/03/11/as-the-economy-recovers-the-wealth-gap-widens

Top One Percent Captured 121 Percent Of All Income Gains
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/top-one-percent-income-gains_n_2670455.html

Corporate Profits Hit Record High While Worker Wages Hit Record Low
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/12/03/1270541/corporate-profits-wages-record/?mobile=nc


These things ^ do NOT happen by accident.
They take careful planning, preparation, marketing, buying the right politicians, message control, and the marginalization of any opposition.

In one sense, you are being smart.
The 1% is going to need all the Surveillance/Security Powers of Modern Police State to keep the New Generation in line when they find out what we how badly we have screwed them.



Again, I am STUNNED to find a anyone on this site supporting this.
You have NO credible position beyond giving the Government everything it wants to control the 99%.
Is there a line you will not cross?

[Skidmore]

39. You know, people need to get comfortable with the notion that they get the government

they pay for. If they don't want to pay taxes to support actual people doing law enforcement or provide good training for those people, they get this type of technology to take the place of paying salaries and equipping a force. We have a nearby city which went to the trouble to buy intersection cameras because another city had been so successful collecting revenues by ticketing those people who go through yellow lights and are speeding. It was good money and the city didn't have to have patrol cars parked under the overpass after the curve coming off of the rural area. Well this didn't pan out so well when the citizens showed up at council meetings demanding to know how the decision to purchase and install cameras had been made and demanded that they not be turned on. It went to a referendum during an election and citizens voted down the traffic surveillance. Those cameras are still off and the patrol men are still having to sit around the bend trying to catch speeders.

How about some efforts directed towards removing some of these bits of technology instead of everyone standing around with jaws agape being shocked. Who gives this permission? Who pays for it? Someone in local government does. Another instance when the convenience of technology goes in place without questioning or devising rules for its use.

[ieoeja]

52. Last I heard those cameras were increasing costs.

The first few months they increased revenues. But then people stopped running the lights where cameras were installed.

Ironically, that meant they were actually accomplishing the ends the officials used to justify the means in the first place.

Also, the cameras were priced at the same cost of three full time policemen so that the cost of the camera equaled the cost of using live officers. But the cameras could achieve greater volume and better coverage than a human being. Hence, the initial uptick in revenue.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

61. Unfortunately, it is the authoritarians that get the government that we pay for.

The government that many of us pay for still deliver violence of a whim and are ready to suppress free speech and otherwise violate Constitutional rights at the direction of other authoritarians.

More and more, the government that we pay for is treating the general populace as the enemy which has to be suppressed.

[ehrnst]

46. In a neighborhood where I used to live, we had an issue with Johns looking for sex workers

and accosting all the young women who walked or bicycled there. Some of them were in rather expensive cars.

Because the johns, and not the sex workers (who stayed on their corner) were the issue, we knew that telling the cops to chase away the women wasn't the solution.

A town councilwoman lived in the area, and she told us to write down the license plate numbers of those accosting us. She then took those plate # to the local police chief, who then sent postcards to the home address on those plates, warning them if there was another complaint from women in that neighborhood about him, they would issue him a citation.

The local press did a story on it, and boy did the harassment stop quickly.

Now - if the plate #s been caught on surveillance camera, rather than simply having us write the number, would that have been worse?

[Recursion]

55. Do you want that to be made public?

Really?

I can't do a reverse lookup on an arbitrary tag, but I know my wife's license plate number, for instance.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

56. It's creepy. It's menancing.

Even an animal such as a dog has enough intelligence to sense when someone is staring at it, that person is probably staring or putting the animal under surveillance for a purpose other than the animal's best interest.

In today's environment in which the police throughout the nation have an "us versus them" mentality, and where they have a para-military type hostility toward the general population, I fail to understand how any person who values civil rights would think of this as being in our best interests.

[secondvariety]

71. I wouldn't worry.

The cops can't find their ass with both hands, with or without a plate scanner. It sounds like a tremendous waste of money.

[pipi_k]

72. After reading the article...

what I come away with is that police aren't tracking people specifically. They are tracking their cars.

I understand that only images of license plates were being recorded...not photos of drivers.

If that's the case, then I have no big problem with it. Anybody could be driving my car...another family member....even a mechanic giving it a test drive after a repair.

[Historic NY]

83. They are used by repo companies & parking lot enforcement ........

they read out plates picking up the ones specifically germaine to there use. Banks put in information on cars to be repossessed and the repo companies troll for them. Parking lot use them to screen for illegal parkers, that are either ticketed or towed.

The police do use them to find wanted people, wanted vehicles, stolen cars, missing person, illegal vehicles. The same process used for decades thats been automated. Your premise they building a database is just pure idiocy. What good is a license plate here in any other country? Every state has its own license database called the DMV. Its not private and any citizen can get a plated check by them (DMV) its public record. Many new systems were built to bring the crime computer into the 21st century and onto the streets (police vehicle)from the old communications centers. In years pass the info was called in and then an operator punch in the names or numbers. What took minutes is now done in seconds. There has alway been a record of a plate number being run.

Any plate thats entered into the NCIC, the FBI that involved in a crime or is wanted is already imputed in the national database. If your worried about tracking then give up your easy pass (E-z pass or your cell phone) and don't travel on toll roads.

[hunter]

97. Automobiles were a facist's dream come true.

Driver's licenses and license plates serve as identification, "papers please" and 99% of the time most automobile users stick within a few minutes walking distance of a parking place.

Cell phones are the lower energy, less expensive equivalent, and they are now ubiquitous too.

I wonder if people who frequently "drop off the radar" and show up in unexpected places are somehow flagged?

If I flew into the USA from, let's say Central Europe, and there was no record of me ever having left the United States, would I get hassled by Customs & Border Protection??? Do all my entry and exit stamps, even the entirely covert electronic ones within the U.S.A., have to be in order?

I'm tempted to experiment...

[Recursion]

104. Oddly enough the govt still keeps no record when people leave the country

We're nearly alone on that; most countries also stamp your passport when you leave.

[hunter]

110. They have license plate cameras on the border.

And if you fly, they've got that too.

So I'd say maybe only for walking.

[Recursion]

115. They don't know when you fly

The airline checks your passport but doesn't record that anywhere, and there's no passport control on exit.

[Art_from_Ark]

121. The airline doesn't just "check" your passport

The passport is "swiped" and the data is entered. If you fly on an international flight, the government certainly knows it.

[Recursion]

122. Well, if they tell the Government, it's neither ICE nor State who hear it

And both would like to

[Art_from_Ark]

123. It's not "if" the airline tells the government

Just where do you think that swiped passport information goes?
As for your statement about ICE, it's just plain wrong.

[Recursion]

125. If ICE has it they are lying to State about not having it

Last edited Mon Jul 1, 2013, 07:07 AM - Edit history (1)

Believe me, people in Consular would give an arm to be able to know whether an applicant overstayed his last visa.

[Art_from_Ark]

131. Things have changed a lot in the past few years

Flying international to and from the US isn't anywhere near as fun as it used to be.

[Jenoch]

101. I think Minnesota has a law

limiting the data so the general public cannot access it. I remember reading something about private detectives using the data to track people. Also, auto leasing companies would use the data to locate cars they own in which the owners' stopped paying on their lease.

[Recursion]

105. I assume the PIs are bonded?

Or at least I hope they are.

[Jenoch]

108. I don't know what the situation is anymore.

I think the access to the is now limited to LE. If I were an auto leasing company, I'd be diseappointed because it sounds like it would make the job of auto recovery a lot easier.

[cantbeserious]

120. Unless The American People Put An End To The Surveillance Monster, It Will Soon Metastasize

eom

[liberal N proud]

126. When you leave your home, there is 100% chance you will be on camera

Unless you live in the most remote parts of this country.

[graham4anything]

127. I wish they had 2013 security back in the 1970s. Eton Paitz and others might have been saved.

and during the Son of Sam serial killings, most likely with the proper security then, it would have stopped at the first

perhaps even sooner.

as Benjamin Franklin said "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Ben was indeed correct.